Today, NDI Chairman Madeleine Albright gave remarks at the Community of Democracies’ Democracy and Security Dialogue, held at the Brookings Institute in Washington, DC. The Community of Democracies is an international organization of more than 100 democratic states that drives the global democracy agenda through common action. For the occasion, Brookings, the Community of Democracies, and the Institute for Security Studies released a report co-authored by Secretary Albright and Former Tunisian Head of Government Mehdi Jomaa: Liberal Democracy and the Path to Peace and Security.

See below for Secretary Albright's full remarks:

 

My thanks to Strobe Talbott and Brookings for hosting us here today – and thanks to all of you for coming. It is good to see many friends up here on the stage and in the audience.

I also want to thank the Community of Democracies and its leaders who are here with us today. This includes Tom Garrett, who was recently appointed Secretary General, and Maria Leissner, who held that position when this dialogue was launched just over a year ago.

Ted Piccone of Brookings and Cheryl Frank of the Institute for Security Studies in South Africa also deserve special recognition.

Together, they guided this project to completion – authoring not only the report being released today, but dozens of case studies and briefing papers that will greatly enrich policymakers’ understanding of these issues.

Finally, I would like to thank my partner in this effort, Former Tunisian Head of Government Mehdi Jomaa.

The experience he brings as a leader during Tunisia’s transition to democracy is invaluable, and I am grateful to him for co-chairing this dialogue.

Over the past year – with support from the U.S. State Department, the National Democratic Institute, and others – participants in this dialogue have explored the links between democracy and security.

While members of this audience might find those connections to be self-evident, the truth is that many in Washington and elsewhere still do not believe that democracy should be part of the foreign policy conversation. They see little connection between fostering democratic practices and the hard-headed pursuit of national interests.

These attitudes have taken hold in some circles as the sense of euphoria that greeted the end of the Cold War has dissipated.

The financial crisis, and growing gaps between rich and poor, have fueled anger and deepened doubts about the capacity of democracy to deliver on its promises.

Recent progress in a few key countries and regions has been overshadowed by renewed authoritarianism in Russia, democratic backsliding in places such as Turkey, the rise of illiberal populism in Europe, democratic breakdown and state failure in authoritarian Venezuela, and the collapse of order in parts of the Middle East and North Africa.

History’s direction does not seem as obvious as it did a quarter of a century ago, when many felt that the expansion of democracy was inevitable. Yet we know that international stability is still influenced greatly by whether freedom finds a foothold in nations where democratic forces are being repressed.  

The research conducted through this dialogue provides ample proof, backed by data, that democracy is more than just another form of government; it is also a powerful generator of international security and peace.

What we found makes clear that while democracy may not provide a guarantee against aggression, it is the best political insurance available.

Governments that are publicly accountable rarely start wars; while regimes that run roughshod over their own citizens are often indifferent to the rights of their neighbors.

Moreover, in today’s world, destabilizing conflicts erupt more frequently within societies than between them. Here again, democracies have a clear advantage, because they embrace pluralism, encourage tolerance, and enable citizens to pursue change in a lawful and peaceful way.

It is no coincidence that the hotspots most likely to harbor terrorists and generate waves of refugees are in areas of the world that are nondemocratic. Meanwhile, democratic nations are more likely to support timely international action to fight violent crime, trafficking, and disease.

So over the long term democracy does provide stability, but the research offers a warning: democratic transitions, in the short term, often lead to increased disorder and instability.

Political liberalization may open new avenues for grievances to be heard, but those still trying to control the levers of power are all too often unwilling or incapable of implementing meaningful change.

Corruption, which is the cancer of any democracy, can exacerbate the situation – locking in economic, political, and social advantages for a few at the expense of a broad social contract that benefits all.

All this means that countries stuck in the messy middle of incomplete transition or illiberal democracy are especially vulnerable to conflict and violence.

Advocates for democracy should not be deterred by these findings, but they must not ignore them either.

What the findings make clear is that small-d democrats need to understand and respond to the legitimate desire of people everywhere for social order and economic growth.

I have been in many arguments about which comes first, economic or political development.

The truth is that they go together, because people want to vote and eat.

We in the international community need to invest in making democracy deliver in transitioning countries – not only because it is consistent with our ideals, but because it is in our interests for democratic transitions everywhere to succeed.

This is where the Community of Democracies has an essential role to play, for it brings together democracies new and old to share best practices and help each other meet common challenges.

The principle of democratic solidarity is powerful, and we are reminded of this fact each time the community comes together, as it will this week at the State Department here in Washington.

Around the world, governments band together for reasons of geography, economy, history and religious faith – but there can be no better grounds for supporting one another than a shared commitment to freedom.

For that reason, the Community of Democracies deserves the enduring and high-level commitment of our leaders – not just at periodic meetings, but in our everyday policies and actions.

We need to remember that building democracy is never easy, and it is never fully accomplished.

It is something to be worked toward, step by step, country by country, day by day.

It can be noisy, inefficient, and at times exasperating; but it has also been tested over and over again.

Nevertheless, its resilience should never be taken for granted.

At the first gathering of the Community in Warsaw, Polish Foreign Minister Bronisław Geremek emphasized both the value of freedom and its fragility.

“The emergence of democracy,” he said, “was the most important development of our century.”

But he also reminded us of another twentieth century lesson, which is that the tides of freedom will always be opposed.

Today, it is this warning that is on our mind. And going forward, it must be on the minds of not only democracy and human rights activists, but the broader national security community here in the United States.

Because it is no coincidence that the principal threats to the safety and security of American citizens emanate from authoritarian regimes such as Russia, North Korea, and Syria – where the brutality of Bashar Al-Assad enabled ISIS to take root.

The United States must consider this reality when it makes foreign policy decisions.

It is sometimes necessary to make alliances of convenience with countries that do not share our values. But even when we make such arrangements, we should never forget our long-term interests and our obligation to stand behind the home-grown champions for democracy and human rights.

What our dialogue makes clear is that democracy and human rights must always be a pillar of our national security strategy and a part of our agenda, bilateral and multilateral.

The word “democracy” cannot be left out of our foreign policy – shedding our support for it would put in jeopardy our long-term economic, political, and security interests.

Moreover, without this commitment, U.S. foreign policy would lose its moral compass, its most compelling claim to global respect, and ultimately, the support and understanding of the American people.

We must never forget that freedom is perhaps the clearest expression of purpose ever adopted, and it is the Community of Democracy’s purpose.

Like other profound human aspirations, it can never be fully achieved. It is not a possession; it is a pursuit. And, as today’s event makes clear, it is the star by which the United States and its democratic allies must continue to navigate in the years to come.

Thank you all very much, and I look forward to our discussion.

# # #