Globalization's Paradox: Creating Democracy in Libya and Beyond

Democracy is a great idea, in theory. But any great idea is predicated on the ability of its major proponents to institute the theoretical into the practical. This is currently the situation in parts of Africa and the Middle East, at the moment certain countries across the region believe that democracy will bring salvation. Believers in this idea argue that democracy will be the vehicle through which a new era of prosperity will emerge. Democracy they profess, will progress their country into the 21st century. It wont.

History of Democratic Reform

The idea of 'Self determination' was first proposed in Paris 1919, at the peace conference that cemented the end to World War One. In essence it refers to the idea that countries have the right to determine their method of governance and sovereignty- free from external influence- as they see fit.
People across the world believe that countries like Libya to be advocating this notion at present. Unfortunately this belief is misplaced. Any revolution invariably has elements of self-determination. This is not the situation unfolding across Asia minor and parts of northern Africa.
All to frequently many analyst and on lookers mistake democratic revolution with the benefits of capitalism. The difference is clear, the former a political ideology whilst the latter is an economic system. The two paradigms currently co-exist in most of the prosperous and developed countries of the world,  and as a result it is easy to become susceptible to the idea that with one, automatically comes the other. But it should be noted that each system is distinct and exists separately from the other. The American template of a capitalistic-democracy varies greatly from the Canadian hybrid model, which varies distinctly from the systems seen in the UK, Germany or Japan.

An international effort to bring capitalism and democracy to the former Soviet Union after the fall of the Berlin wall ended a dismal failure. The results were disastrous, the message clear. Capitalism cannot be introduced into a country that has no prior entrepreneurial experience.  In order for a country to evolve into a functioning capitalistic society, at bare minimum, the population must be minutely aware of basic entrepreneurial concepts. After 40 years of autocratic rule by Muammar Gaddafi, Libya is ill-equipped, unprepared and incapable of transforming it's pseudo fascist economy. Capitalism cannot be forced upon a population that has yet to identify with any formal experience associated with this economic model.
Democracy on the other hand is predicated on voting public's ability to understand political ideas. In the absence of a politically educated populous, democracy in most instances, becomes less functional then dictatorship. People need, at very least, to be remotely aware of simple political processes. In the event that an uneducated voting public engages democracy prematurely, the possibility can lead directly to a quasi-feudal state, where there are multiple factions, vying for pieces of fractional power, using charismatic means to gain support. Historically, this situation devastates the legislative process-even more so then if a dictator simply enforced stability- to the point at which the government doesn't just become ineffective, it becomes stagnant and unable to contribute to the progression of society.

Timing is Everything, Whats at Stake

In a few years, possibly a few decades, these countries (and others that will follow in their revolutionary footsteps) may finally realize the benefits of the political struggle.  In the interim, while these countries figure out how to create a functioning society, tailored to their own needs, the possibility that social instability, unemployment and chaos will spread- increases exponentially. A country looking to reinvent itself will seek new allies and new partners amongst the international community. The current international system is undergoing a wave of change and it is unlikely that post-revolution Libya will find the support necessary to finally join the international economic order in any meaningful sense, aside from demand for its oil wells.
Much more importantly for Libya, is the question of where new leadership will come from. After 40 years of dictatorial rule, the Libyan populous has no formal political or legal experience. Unlike other democratic models, Libyans have no experience running a bureaucracy, few if any qualified judges who can comprise a legitimate supreme court, and little to no experience analyzing and creating legislation.  A quick transformation to a functioning federal or national government is necessary in Libya to avert civil war. The possibility of civil war in Libya increases for each day a legitimate government is not in place. Libya is extremely fragile and ripe for more conflict as proponents of Gaddafi's old regime will dual with revolutionaries expecting sweeping change.

External Forces

Normally, revolt in nations such as Libya would not garner international attention. However, the growing fear- which was realized by investors this past week- is that the revolutionary fever could spread to much more significant economic players on the international scene. Libya  produces 2% of the world's oil supply, the sheer fear of those taps being turned off-even temporarily- led to a 300 point dip in the stock market in New York last week. Similar drops were felt in most countries with sophisticated financial institutions.
The global economic recovery is extremely fragile. The world can ill-afford any regression in economic performance or progress at this junction. The reasons are simple, the consequences profound. Governments have no alternative left, Federal Banks are out of options, Interests rates across the world can go no lower. There will be no money to throw at an economic regression this time, if the global recovery fails, modern civilization could face a dire future.

Consequences of Revolt

The UN and nation specific sanctions placed on Gaddafi and Libya over the weekend have been misinterpreted as support on behalf of the international community. In fact, the sanctions and calls from the international criminal court for crimes against humanity are the exact opposite.

From an international perspective, there can be no more revolutions. At least not in oil producing countries. Egypt was allowed a free pass as their major contribution to the international community is overseer of the Suez Canal. Libya has oil. The message to prospective revolutionaries and current regimes is clear. Maintain the status quo until the global economy is back on its feet, or suffer the consequences. Gaddafi and his family have seen there international finances frozen (lost forever). If he survives the onslaught from revolutionaries he will surely be made an example of at the international criminal court, if he does not,  its not hard to imagine what a populous that has suffered 40 years repression will do. Furthermore, which ever leadership emerges in Libya will be at a significant disadvantage.
Aside from supporting UN sanctions, the Canadian government has forced all Canadian companies working with or in Libya to seize all transactions with the Federal Bank and the Government of Libya. Suncor has been shut out-temporarily- of its 3 billion dollar oil investment in Libya, as has SNC Lavalin, who had a number of outstanding contracts in Libya. The companies are allowed to continue commercial operations. It is very likely that any further planned investment in Libya from other multinationals will be cancelled until a legitimate stable political environment emerges. Without foreign investment, the new Libyan regime will be hard pressed to get the economy up and running and will be hard pressed to employ the vast peoples affected by the revolution. Without a functioning economy or foreign investment the country will be fraught with unemployment, drain any federal reserves and possibly revert to chaos.
If the goal of the international community was to aide in the development of democratic change in Libya, sanctions would have been imposed solely on Gaddafi and not on the country. The sanctions would also have been instituted within hours, at very least a day or two after the uprising began, not moments before its conclusion.

Long Term Outlook

Now, at the exact moment when global economic morale is incapable of dealing with any regression, the fate of contemporary development hinges on the trajectory of a few. This is it. If further revolutions lead to a significant fluctuation in the price of oil and oil remains artificially high for any period of time, the global recovery will fail. If the recovery fails, millions of people worldwide will find themselves unemployed.  Globalization has been the key driver through which the international economy has been able to grow over the course of the last two decades. During this process of interlocking and aligning national economies; nations have lost the ability and economic independence to isolate themselves from external disruptions and fluctuations. The Egyptian, now Libyan revolutions have provided the world a glimpse of what is to come if revolutionary sentiment spirals out of control into other, more significant international players.