A Hybrid Defense of Democracy

It is a fact that the European model of democracy is seriously threatened, including militarily, which is why we must strengthen our deterrent capabilities. It is also a fact that our model of democracy is not threatened only militarily, so even greatly increased investment in defense capabilities cannot protect us against other threats that could lead to our democratic system collapsing from within without anyone firing a single shot at us.

At this year’s Bled Strategic Forum I took part in a panel entitled “The Collapse of Democracy: Are We There Yet or Well on the Way?” There is, of course, nothing wrong with provocative titles and topics at such events. Quite the opposite: they make it harder for participants to escape into a comfortable exchange of platitudes and circular back-patting.

The trouble is that the title was not only provocative but actually reflects the state of mind among many defenders of democracy in today’s Europe and world. Of course we still defend and believe in democracy, yet at the same time we increasingly behave as though it has already kicked the bucket, and we are completely powerless about it. Look, that’s just how it is, what can we do, we’ll just have to adapt. We will administer the last rites through appeasement, flattery and normalization of those who have put democracy on its deathbed. Not that there is anything wrong with diplomacy and dialogue. The world’s problems cannot be solved only among well-meaning, like-minded enlightened souls. To resolve crises and stop wars, one must also talk and negotiate—above all—with those who have the power to do so, even though today many of them are people we rightly can’t stand. But not in just any way and not at any price. I know many will choke on this, but here it would be good to remember the words of former US Secretary of State Madeleine Albright, who often stressed that diplomacy and negotiations must be firm, principled and anchored in values, not merely in concessions. In other words—not only realpolitik, but also moralpolitik.

But before we start talking about how to defend it, let us look at what we would be defending in the first place. Democracy is like chewing gum—an elastic concept. Like freedom, tradition, culture and honesty, everyone claims it and everyone interprets it in their own way. Democracy is not only elections. They have those in Iran too. They are not free and fair, but their outcome is sometimes less certain than in some other countries that consider themselves democracies. The model on which, after the war, we built in Europe the longest period so far of (relative) stability, peace and economic success is based on the rule of law and on the constitutionally and legally guaranteed protection of human rights and political freedoms. It protects individuals and social minorities against the arbitrariness and abuse of executive power. It requires consistent respect for the independence of the judiciary and for the freedom and independence of the media and civil society. We used to call this model liberal democracy, but the term has somehow gone out of fashion. The right doesn’t like it because they break out in pimples at any mention of liberality, and the left because they mistakenly associate it with neoliberal economics, which puts the freedom of capital above the freedom and rights of individuals. Which is a pity. A foggy understanding of what kind of democracy we stand for benefits only those who, in the fog, sell us all sorts of things that have little in common with the European model of democracy, or are even in contradiction with it.

The relationship between liberal and neoliberal economics is in fact very important. A functioning liberal democracy requires a high level of social security. In other words—people must have material proof that democracy is able and willing to recognize and take into account their legitimate expectations regarding social rights, employment, the health system, education, the environment and security. There is probably no need to explain that these goals are not a priority of neoliberal policy—quite the opposite. When things go wrong with social rights and an ever larger share of the population finds itself in economic and social hardship, support for democracy is quickly replaced by uncertainty and fear of the future, and these negative emotions are then exploited by authoritarian populism in its efforts to seize power and reshape society and the world we live in. No more international law, no more respect for human rights, no more solidarity and humanity, no more freedom—only a naked and unbridled demonstration of power, internally and externally.

A functioning liberal democracy also requires investment in a democratic environment—through education and other forms of support for active citizenship and civil society. Democratic institutions cannot function without citizens who have the knowledge, skills, opportunities and motivation to participate actively and help shape democratic policy, not only at elections. There is no democracy without quality and independent media that enjoy public trust. Nobel Peace Prize laureate, the Filipino journalist Maria Ressa, rightly says that the moment there is no longer agreement on facts in a society, there is no more democracy. This is a situation we already face. Instead of an information environment in which citizens have access to quality, fact-based information, we face the disinformation chaos of social media, which did not arise organically and by chance but as the result of deliberate demolition with clear (and very undemocratic) economic and political interests. Nor will the solution come by itself, but only through effective support—including economic support—for quality media and through education for media literacy.

There is no citizen trust in democracy without the ethics and accountability of politicians who invoke democratic values in their work. The duplicity, indifference and helplessness that much of Western politics displays toward events in Gaza prolong the suffering and dying of Palestinians while undermining trust in and support for democracy.

Democracy today is in crisis not only because its enemies threaten it militarily from outside, but also, and above all, because through the inconsistency, ineffectiveness and duplicity of politicians whose mouths are otherwise full of democratic values, we have created ideal conditions for the spread of discontent, fear, anger and division, which undemocratic forces from inside and outside skillfully stoke and exploit to tear down democratic society and its institutions in Europe.

No, democracy is not yet dead—and we must stop the defeatism and apathy that are only grist to its opponents’ mill. On the other hand, it will not recover from this serious crisis by itself, nor can we defend it with rifles, drones and tanks alone. In today’s world, increasing our defense capabilities is unfortunately essential. But if we fail at the same time to recognize and address the deeper causes of growing civic dissatisfaction with democracy, we will not be safe. So we cannot and must not strengthen Europe’s defense capabilities only through investment in weapons, but also through a substantial increase in investment in education, social security, environmental protection, digital and AI regulation that is consistent with democratic principles and guarantees respect for them, economic development, and the media. All this is so important from a security point of view, too, that it should count toward the investment efforts NATO demands of us. And then we would have no trouble reaching five percent—and well beyond. If democratic politics can manage this and at the same time prove that it is able to act more courageously, decisively and ethically on the most important questions in today’s world, then we can be less pessimistic about the future of democracy. As far as I am concerned, I remain a very worried optimist.