A realist's road to democracy

When the Berlin Wall fell on Nov. 9, 1989 -- 25 years ago -- liberal democracy appeared triumphant over authoritarianism, and the West poured resources into Eastern Europe to speed what seemed an inevitable process toward democratization and the development of market economies.

The road to reform was difficult, with such major obstacles along the way as the Balkan conflicts. For the most part, though, progress remained the pervasive narrative, marked not only by successive states joining NATO, the Council of Europe and the European Union, but also by the promising revolutions in Georgia, Ukraine and Kyrgyzstan. Democracy also started to gain a foothold in other regions, from Brazil to Indonesia, and the Arab Spring brought hope that the Middle East would follow suit.

Today, however, as democratic progress is tested by Russia's rollback of hard-won freedoms and as conflicts flare up from Donetsk to Damascus, the world's 25-year democratization effort is under siege.

Critics question the impact of the assistance and whether it was folly in the first place. Policymakers divert resources to the challenges posed by the Islamic State and Ebola epidemic. Reflecting the mounting democratization fatigue, the U.S. Agency for International Development's funding to promote democracy, human rights and good governance has plummeted 38 percent in five years.

Columnist Richard Cohen has argued the "charming" U.S. belief in democracy and our efforts to promote it abroad have "landed us in no end of trouble." A better approach, he urges, is a "realist's vigilant cynicism," or an appreciation that what works for us may not work for others, and that democratization risks unleashing forces we cannot control.

The anniversary of the fall of the Berlin Wall demands sober reflection about our democratization efforts -- what works, what doesn't and why. In democratization assistance, we can always get smarter. And indeed, we have seen the assistance community respond to its critics by developing more effective strategies that emphasize bottom-up approaches, local buy-in and sustainability of reforms. We need to continue to evolve in our approach, to better understand the drivers of reform and the role that international assistance can play.

That said, let's not confuse fatalism with realism. Just because something is hard and may take a long time doesn't mean it's not worth doing, nor does it mean that the efforts of individual reformers are not critical and worth supporting.

A clear-eyed realist knows that bringing about democracy, rule of law and respect for human rights is both a long-term endeavor and profoundly in our interests. A full 225 years after our Bill of Rights was adopted, our work to secure these principles in the United States is far from done. On issues ranging from domestic violence to excessive police practices, we need only read recent headlines to know that persistent challenges remain.

Reformers the world over are at different places on the same path, and they need our support and assistance, not because it satisfies some American fantasy about a well-ordered world, but because good governance is also the key to solving other contemporary challenges. Health threats such as Ebola get the upper hand where the government's ability to respond is weak.

Destructive terrorist forces draw recruits from among those disenfranchised by authoritarian regimes, and they thrive in ungoverned spaces. Resurgent autocrats are emboldened when civil society is weak and the international community is conflicted about its democratization agenda.

In recognition of this reality, let us mark this anniversary with a true realist's take and recommit to steadfast support for others on the path to democratic freedom. Rather than a "realist's vigilant cynicism" concerning democratization, what's needed is a "realist's vigilance" in pursuit of democracy and the rule of law.

William C. Hubbard is president of the American Bar Association. He wrote this for McClatchy-Tribune News Service.