Demagoguery of Democracy
Solidarnosc took shape in Poland twenty years ago, first as a labor union, later to play the key role in bringing about changes in Poland and elsewhere in the world, changes that now seem irreversible. Over the two decades Poland has changed, and so have Solidarity and the rest of the world. The conference of foreign ministers dubbed For the Unity of Democracy and the first world democratic forum, held simultaneously in Warsaw, must have been intended to demonstrate that democracy has become a common denominator for many over the past twenty years, and that for others it is still a target to be reached.
In reality, both gatherings seem to have registered the main change in postwar history, the creation of a unipolar world system with democracy being its watchword.
Over the past two decades the United States has apparently become that single pole striving to determine the world order and its rules. Small wonder that Secretary of State Madeleine Albright should be the main rapporteur in both cases.
Democracy appears to be a rather arbitrary notion. According to Adam Michnik, editor of Gazeta Wyborcza and one of the living symbols of those significant transformations in Poland, democratic countries somehow readily cooperate with dictators while in power and then promptly pounce on them when out of office. Somehow, for the sake of democracy, sanctions are undertaken against Cuba and Iraq, hurting none of the dictators. The same people would first advocate a dialogue with Erich Honecker and then demand his arrest. Finally (and the subject was practically avoided at both conventions), a military campaign was launched against a sovereign country (Yugoslavia) in the name of democracy. Belgrade statistics point to a death toll of some 2,000 civilians, killed for the sake of democracy, of course, along with over 300,000 non-Albanians driven out of Kosovo.
Nor was it surprising that Paris should oppose the conversion of democracy into a religion (although France has until now demonstrated its individual opinion without sounding any discordant note in the choir); or that Russia would not send its minister to attend the forum, while claiming the status of the second pole of power; or that no criticism would be voiced on the part of delegates from the “new democracies,” Ukraine included. Being completely dependent on such democratic games, they simply had nothing to say, although it is not always easy to understand why some not overly democratic regimes are supported by the US and others are not. Or why the so-called protection of democratic values often proves a banal confrontation of interests where the stronger side gets the upper hand, and which often enough turns out frank demagoguery.
Well, perhaps such are the rules of the game — and no one can guarantee that they are kept equal for all players.
