Beyond Sovereignty: Collectively Defending Democracy in the Americas (review)

Multilateral institutions and national governments are embarking on assistance programs, economic sanctions, peacekeeping missions, and even military actions, with the stated objective of supporting democracy in Latin America. However, it is unclear which of these efforts have actually worked to promote democracy, or in which situations international pressure and support can be most helpful. This collection of essays reviews the experiences of international institutions in supporting democracy and offers recommendations for the future. Nonetheless, while it fills a large gap in the current literature, Beyond Sovereignty: Collectively Defending Democracy in the Americas does not claim to be an exhaustive analysis.

Beyond Sovereignty is divided into four parts. Part One discusses the theoretical aspects of supporting democracy abroad, while the rest of the book is dedicated to the application of theories. Each author assumes two basic premises: that international actors play a secondary role to domestic actors in democratization efforts, and that they nonetheless make important contributions to democracy building.

Which international actors support democracy in Latin America? The authors are careful to stress that they are reviewing only the role of international institutions and non-governmental organizations—not foreign governments. The book addresses the roles of the United Nations (UN), the Organization of American States (OAS), the multilateral development banks (World Bank and Inter-American Development Bank), international non-governmental organizations (NGOs), and the international donor community.

In his chapter, Larry Diamond analyzes where Latin America stands today with respect to democracy. He skillfully lays to rest the popular rhetoric repeated by both Presidents Bush and Clinton, that all of Latin America save Haiti and Cuba has become democratic. Diamond highlights the anomaly of Mexico and creates a new category of “semi-democracy” to capture appropriately those countries that appear democratic in structure but are authoritarian in practice. Moreover, Diamond describes the more complex problems of consolidating and deepening democracy, citing Peru, Venezuela, Colombia, Argentina, Brazil, Haiti, and the Dominican Republic. He concludes, “if we take the definition and actual performance of democracy seriously, it is impossible to claim that the Americas are overwhelmingly democratic today, or that the broad political trend has been democratic in recent years.”

The remaining chapters explore efforts of specific international institutions and groups to promote democracy. The authors thoroughly examine the range of activities in which these actors are involved. While this is an informative and important review, the reader may be left asking: how can activities among institutions be better coordinated, and can these institutions maximize their potential to promote democracy?

In her chapter, Kathryn Sikkink describes the evolution of non-governmental organizations into an innovative force in democracy-building and human rights advocacy in the region. She traces the process from its origins during the period from 1973 to 1981, to consolidation from 1982 to 1990, and finally to retrenchment after 1990. Two issues should be kept in mind while reading Sikkink’s analysis. First, Sikkink’s discussion focuses only on human rights-based NGOs, neglecting the recent growth of smaller, US-based NGOs which specifically carry out democratization and electoral programs. As a result, Sikkink ignores some of the debates between NGOs that see democracy-building as competing with, or detracting from, an urgent human rights agenda and those that see it complementing human rights advocacy.

Second, Sikkink clouds the distinction between NGOs that are external actors—the subject of the book—and those that work internally, domestic organizations. Internationally-based NGOs, such as Amnesty International, the Lawyer’s Committee for Human Rights, and Americas Watch, often work best in partnership with domestically-based NGOs. These partnerships make it difficult to distinguish between the impact of domestic and external actors on the democratization process. This is an analytical challenge not only in this chapter but in others as well. External actors can influence domestic opinion and actors; therefore, in some ways, they become hidden catalysts in what appear to be exclusively domestically-determined agendas.

Joan Nelson and Stephanie Eglinton discuss how multilateral...