China and the Argument for Stopping the Push for Democracy

            Democracy, what constitutes it and what states are considered democracies is something that cannot be defined in precise terms. To many international relations scholars and politicians, democracy is the key to successful state. Many countries, such as the United States, practice a strict policy of promoting solely democracy abroad. The United States has even gone to great lengths to remove heads of non-democratic states in order to set up a democratic government in its place. However, these governments never last very long. While almost all of the world’s current successful and powerful states practice democracy, the growing success and power of China provides support to the argument for abandoning the push for democracy abroad.

            Although democracy has proved to be successful in many states, it does not necessarily guarantee that a state will not fail. History has shown that some democracies work while others do not. The reasons for why some democracies work and others do not are varied. In a Washington Post article, Lindsay Benstead found that in a survey of six Arabic countries, twenty-seven percent of those surveyed believed democracy to be the best form of government but ultimately unsuitable for their country. Countries that were declared unsuitable for democracy were found to have significant economic and political instability. Political stability and economic growth are important for a successful state, but it is not necessary to be a democracy to have them. China, whose communist party remains in power, maintains economic and political stability due to its focus on economic growth.

            In addition, the consistent failure of many Middle Eastern nations to produce a successful democracy has fostered a growing dislike of democracy. In order for a state to be successful, a majority would have to approve of the form of government. Successful states are essentially popular states. Therefore, when nation building, the United States should be less concerned with a establishing a democracy and instead should focus its efforts on laying the foundation for a stable government the citizens are in favor of.

The current foreign policy of the United States has failed to influence unstable states abroad or lay the framework for a successful democracy in other nations. Proponents of this policy argue that democracy is the most peaceful and successful form of government and U.S. efforts should be focused on establishing democracy in the Middle East in order to mitigate ideologies and prevent extremist groups from rising. Such proponents are right to be concerned about establishing stable and secure states in the Middle East, but are wrong to believe that democracy is the only way to do so. Such concerns should actually take precedence over democracy when building nations abroad because it would increase the likelihood that the established government is effective.

            In conclusion, the United State’s push for democracy abroad is a misguided policy for establishing stable, successful states. All efforts with regards to nation building should focus on laying the framework for a government that is stable, secure, popular, and economically successful, not instituting a form of government that the nation has already rejected.