260713873
TA: Mehlka Mustansir
Professor: Dr. Rex Brynen
Course: POLI 227
POLICY MEMORANDUM: LEACOCKLANDIA
The fall of the repressive authoritarian rule under Brynenimmad Reksitan’s regime has been succeeded with the election of a coalition of our centrist party The People’s Party of Leacocklandia and the Allied Worker’s Society Party. The election results are a testimony to the Leacocklandian populace’s demands for a nation that is secular, democratic, economically stable and one that prioritizes the welfare of it’s people.
Leacocklandia would undergo a process of transition that would, in the coming years, confront different problems such as the economic as well as financial aspects of changes that the country desires and varied socioeconomic challenges, and work towards its democratic consolidation.
OVERCOMING THE KLEPTOCRATIC IMPACTS OF BRYNENIMMAD REKSITAN’S DISCRIMINATORY FISCAL POLICIES
The fundamental catalyst that propelled the citizens to engineer a Revolution against Reksitan’s authoritarianism was the deteriorating economic situation of the country. If the democratic transition doesn’t accompany stark economic amelioration, the consequences would be extensive distrust in democracy. If there aren’t substantial structural and fiscal reforms that aim at achieving desirable levels of economic development, then the government could face political disillusionment among the masses.
Brynenimmad Reksitan formulated regulations and signed 27 decrees announcing new authorization requirements in 42 sectors and new restrictions to foreign investment in 36 sectors. These restrictions disproportionately benefited all of his family firms. The very legislative frameworks that allowed these firms to acquire a large share of our country’s wealth remain largely robust. Dismantling these authorization and restriction barriers to domestic and foreign investors that benefit a large proportion of privileged Leacocklandians must be of key priority to the Finance Ministry; the investment climate has been characterized by hampered growth and unemployment. Removing restriction barriers that benefit the elite are essential to create avenues for upcoming businesses and to facilitate the creation of jobs. The success of emerging democracy in Leacocklandia depends principally on whether this novel democratization can also materially improve people’s lives. When citizens see improvements in economic opportunities and living standards, they would create a powerful feedback loop that would help consolidate democracy.
EXPANDING THE SOCIAL SECURITY NET
Expansion and restructuring of the social security net would not only improve the lives of the poor, but also make them more supportive of the government. In this regard, redirecting social spending that has been allocated to the demands of special interest groups can be a tangible improvement. To accomplish this, an important yet politically difficult step is the elimination of expensive and inefficient subsidies, such as the ones for fuel that impose significant costs on government budgets and distort investment incentives and economic growth. Such subsidies should be replaced by targeted cash transfers to those hurt the most by rising prices.
Brazil is a case in point, it’s transition to democracy was consolidated in large part by socially inclusive growth, which generated widely shared benefits. Throughout the 1990s and early 2000s, Presidents Cardoso and then Lula da Silva managed the impressive jujitsu of unleashing new talent and investment through anti-inflationary, anti-monopoly economic reforms, while simultaneously increasing social spending on the poor and middle class. Brazil used two main strategies to improve the well-being of the poor: First, they used conditional cash transfers that efficiently targeted that the neediest while encouraging positive behaviour such as keeping kids in school and promoting health education amongst parents; second, they used universal provision of social and economic rights (health care, education, and labor protections) to include marginalized groups.
REGIONAL RELATIONS
Another crucial issue is that of fostering effective coalitions with our neighbours Redpathonia and Ssmuwindia. Leacocklandia and Redpathonia are both countries with strong potential economic capabilities that need to be productively utilized. Creation of bilateral trade deals between these two would create meaningful demand for human capital and lead to the creation of jobs to curb the unemployment that a large segment of the population faces. Our demographic dividend needs an outlet that would facilitate its translation to a pool of employed workers contributing to the bourgeoning of the agricultural, industrial, tertiary, knowledge, technological and political powerhouses of our economy.
Ours is a country abundant in chromite, pyrite, antimony, limestone and iron resources. In terms of energy, we are net exporters of electricity and coal, while oil and gas are crucial energy resources that we are compelled to import in large quantities.
As a country that predominantly imports oil, the rising petroleum prices in the global markets are a source of undesirable inflationary pressures and higher expenditures for the government that could lead to a considerable decline in the country’s foreign exchange reserves.
In terms of resources, Ssmuwindia is rich in both oil and gas, but lacks iron for its industry and has recently projected a demand for limestone which means that negotiating a bilateral deal with Ssmuwindia could create a market to export our iron and limestone.
Forging a multilateral association among all three nations could be a longterm goal for our government in order to establish a cultural, military and economic presence regionally and globally. The approach towards our eastern neighbours needs to include robust policies to bolster statehood along with economic development and foster energy and transport connectivity. The basis for external action should not lie in creating a new mini-region, but building stronger tailor-made bilateral ties with these countries; for instance, we must work with Ssmuwindia in order to create, develop and protect a possible Eastern Gas Corridor. On the ground, us three countries could coordinate our democracy- related assistance more closely as well as compare notes on security assistance.The importance of regional cooperation is exemplified by the archetype model of the Economic Community of Western African States, which was founded on the ideal of collective self-sufficiency for its 15 members. ECOWAS functions on a regular platform with four pillars: Peace and Security, Developing Infrastructure, Policy harmonization (to facilitate trade) and Good Corporate Governance. During negotiations, countries place emphasis on helping member states understand that adhering to the supra-national level will bring benefits at the national level.
IMPLEMENTING AN AMALGAM OF FAIR ELECTIONS WITH AN AUGMENTED SCOPE AND REALITY OF POLITICAL FREEDOMS FOR THE PEOPLE OF LEACOCKLANDIA
Multiparty elections that follow a legal framework are almost universally perceived as an obvious precondition and institution for any state that is deemed democratic. However, this idea fails to take into account that while multiparty elections are necessary for the essence of democratic governance, they are not in themselves sufficient.
Comparing the cases of Belarus, Ghana and Venezuela puts this into a perspective that can steer the policy path of Leacocklandia.
President Alexander Lukashenko of Belarus, dubbed “Europe’s last dictator” had his grip on power tightened in 2004 when a controversial referendum abolished the Constitution’s two‐term presidential limit. On September 29th 2008, Belarusians had the opportunity to cast their ballots in elections for the 110 member House of Representatives, the third such contest held under the 1994 Constitution. Citizens had a choice of candidates, five dozen representing five opposition parties, competing alongside 183 independents. On election‐day, however, pro‐Lukashenko deputies swept the board, taking 100% of the seats. The result generated scattered street protests in Minsk, but there was no “color revolution”. Instead, long after the Soviet era had faded in neighboring Poland, Latvia, Lithuania, and Ukraine, the election consolidated Lukashenko’s rule. Despite the periodic holding of elections, Freedom House, which rates all countries of the world annually on their record of political rights and civil liberties, continues to give Belarus its lowest ratings on these measures.
A team from independent Office for Democratic Elections and Human Rights (OSCE) investigated into the election and found that Lukashenko restricted opposition forces from using elections as an effective mechanism to challenge Lukashenko’s rule, ensured that the state controlled the appointment of members of the Central Electoral Commission administering the process and jailed and repressed opposition leaders. Opposition parties faced severe legal limits in their capacity to organize and nominate candidates. All outdoor campaign rallies and meetings required prior authorization by the state, and state‐owned newspapers showed a marked pro‐government bias.
Despite all this, the Belarus elections are striking in that the voter’s turnout was unexpected; 75% of the electorate voted and this is symbolic of the people’s
Belarus exemplifies a country wounded with widespread abuses of human rights and a lack of any effective checks on executive power exercised by the president and the state bureaucracy, but one holding periodic multiparty contests following legal processes.
Yet, there is one thing about Belarus that is striking, and that is the voter turnout; despite an election that was not marked by freedom of fair choice for the people, the fact that three-quarters of the registered voted in the election is symbolic of the people’s desire for democracy.
Contrast this with the multiparty elections held in Ghana, 3 months later. The simultaneous parliamentary and presidential elections in 2008 were fought between major parties under peaceful, free and fair conditions and news coverage that reflected diverse views and perspectives. The existence of predominant parties means that peaceful power rotations from the government to opposition parties is rare but the triumph of the democratic processes in Ghana showed otherwise. The New Patriotic Party (NPP) stepped down after two terms in office, and the opposition National Democratic Congress (NDC) came peacefully to power. On the 2008 Freedom House measures, Ghana for the first time received the highest ratings—equivalent to those of Costa Rica, Greece, or Japan. The Ghanaian elections were judged by both domestic and international observers to be a considerable success, yet Ghana as a country faces grave social and economic challenges, ethnic and social divisions that are longstanding, as well as the risk of military coup. It is one of the poorest countries in the world, where one-third of the population lives below $1.25 a day.
Somewhere in between these starkly contrasting cases of these 2 countries with differing contexts in which elections take place we find a country such as Venezuela. On December 3rd 2006, Hugo Chavez was re‐ elected as president, receiving 63% of the vote. Turnout was a healthy 75% of the electorate. But democracy is Venezuela is still in a contentious position. In 2007, Venezuelan authorities shut down the popular television station RCTV, generating student‐led protests that continued for some months. However, when President Chavez tried to push through an extensive revision of the constitution that would have both consolidated and extended his power, voters narrowly rejected it in a referendum. Thus, Venezuelans in recent years have used the democratic institutions available to them to both support and constrain Chavez in varying degrees. The Freedom House ratings of Venezuela on the political rights and civil liberties indices, falling midway between those recorded by Belarus and Ghana, reflect this ambiguity. Venezuela is, in its terminology, “partly free”.
The contrasts between Belarus, Ghana, and Venezuela explicate some of the major contemporary challenges familiar to the issue of employing elections as one of the tools for consolidating democracy and strengthening democratic governance in Leacocklandia.
The case of Venezuela is interesting because while the closure of the TV station tells a lot about the work Venezuelan democracy needs, but the rejection of the president’s proposed constitution is the example of a powerful tool in the hands of the people to constrain governmental power. Leacocklandia needs to gradually introduce referendums to extend the participation of people in not just electing governments but also in the political decisions of the country.
The Ghanian case is an example of a country with grappling socio-economic issues and deep-rooted poverty, yet one that is an inspiration to Leacocklandia in terms of strengthening its parliament, judiciary, and public sector bureaucracy