“Democracy” and the Bush Administration
by Jody Williams, Nobel Laureate for Peace (1997)
Editorial and other writers across the United States have expressed indignation at the Bush administration’s stance on attempts to deal with the global proliferation of small arms. Speaking on 9 July at a UN conference trying to grapple with the issue, John Bolton stated flatly that this country would not be party to any agreements that infringe upon US citizens’ right to bear arms.
Having helped create the International Campaign to Ban Landmines (ICBL), which fueled the negotiations of the 1997 Mine Ban Treaty – another international instrument that the US refuses to join, it probably comes as no surprise that I share the indignation. But what seems to be falling through the cracks is the fact that not only is the US hostile to the negotiations on small arms, it is also trying to block the open participation of citizens in the discussions – and that causes me dismay.
A big concern to many in the ICBL -- and some of our government friends who really do care about the civil society-government partnership that we have forged to deal with the global problem of landmines -- has always been that some governments would try to make sure that that model was not replicated to resolve other issues.
But I guess it should be of little surprise given the arrogant isolationism of this new administration and its hostility to almost every international treaty whether already negotiated or in the process of negotiation that the US also used the small arms conference to attack that very model of government-citizen partnership that we established with the ICBL – and do so in the name of "democracy."
At the United Nations, Bolton told the countries and nongovernmental organizations and agencies (such as Human Rights Watch, UNICEF, OXFAM, Save the Children….) assembled there that the United States of America does "not support the promotion of international advocacy activity by international or nongovernmental organizations, particularly when those political or policy views advocated are not consistent with the views of ALL member states. What individual governments do in this regard is for them to decide, but we do not regard the international governmental support of particular political viewpoints to be consistent with democratic principles. Accordingly," he concluded "the provisions of the draft Program that contemplate such activity should be modified or eliminated." (emphasis added)
In other words, the Bush administration is saying that NGOs – and the citizens who are members of such organizations -- should not be allowed to express their views on issues under negotiation -- particularly, as Mr. Bolton notes in so many words, if such views "offend" any single country (such as the U.S., for example). This administration is trying to re-establish the tyranny of consensus that we were able to avoid in the ban treaty negotiation process and through government-civil society partnership in that process. And the administration is saying that the rules of procedure of the negotiations should be changed to silence our voices.
In so many words, the Bush administration is saying that governmental support for citizens having a point of view and expressing it is not "consistent with democratic principles." Am I alone in feeling that I've fallen through the looking glass and the jabberwocky is talking gibberish?
The International Campaign to Ban Landmines (ICBL) is about more than just landmines. Even if we only were able to get rid of this indiscriminate weapon and help landmine survivors around the world, it would be a significant contribution to a better world. But, the Campaign has done so much more than that and has become a powerful example of what ordinary citizens can do when they work together and express their views. It is also about the model of civic action itself and the empowerment that we all have gotten by working together for a common goal. For that, in part, we received the Nobel Peace Prize.
In its announcement of the 1997 Peace Prize, the Norwegian Nobel Committee said, among other things, "the ICBL, in making up a network through which it has been possible to express and mediate a broad wave of popular commitment in an unprecedented way.....has grown into a convincing example of an effective policy for peace." In concluding, the Nobel Committee noted that as "a model for similar processes in the future, it could prove of decisive importance to the international effort for disarmament and peace."
Apparently, the Bush administration recognizes that our model could prove of decisive importance and wants to stop it now. I hope many if not all of you share my outrage at this attempt to take away our voices – and those of people all over the world -- and that you will raise your voice now, while you still can, to express your own outrage that the "world's greatest democracy" is advocating such undemocratic principles.
