[Music] well hello I'm McGowan and welcome to Cadogan Hall in London for an intelligence squared debate or on democracy that's a word which means many things to many people around the world different nations different leaders political systems they talk of being democratic when what they want and mean can sometimes be anything but take North Korea's elections in recent days a 100 percent vote for Kim jong-un in the Democratic People's Republic of Korea calling a referendum at breakneck speed as in Crimea this weekend does not necessarily mean democracy as it should be and compared the faltering economic growth of the world's largest democracy India with that of China whose own version of democracy has really guaranteed rapid economic development but not with universal suffrage so the motion for this debate democracy is not always the best form of government and we have an excellent panel for you here tonight arguing for the motion martin Jake's author of the global bestseller when China rules the world and rosemary Hollis professor of Middle East Policy Studies author of the recent article no friend of democratization Europe's role in the genesis of the Arab Spring against the motion Ian Bremmer American political scientist founder of Eurasia group and leading global political risk research and consulting firm and also an Bri chef Schenker welcome member of the Ukrainian Parliament the verkhovna rada very close to the former Prime Minister Yulia Tymoshenko so dramatically released recently from prism and acting prime minister arseniy yatsenyuk ladies and gentlemen your panel here in cagin all now the opening statements from the panel is speaking first for the motion martin Jake's a senior fellow at Cambridge University author of the global bestseller when China rules the world he is also a visiting professor at Ching hai University in Beijing and fellow at the transatlantic Academy in Washington DC please welcome Martine Jakes let me start by saying what this motion is not about we are not proposing that the UK and other developed countries should abandon democracy that would be a nonsense and fly in the face of our history and our tradition rather what we are arguing is against the Western mantra that democracy is the right and appropriate system for all countries whatever their circumstances after 1989 and the collapse of Soviet Communism the Western author doxy was that democracy was the universal panacea first of all let's take Russia there was a widespread expectation and belief that Russia would develop a western-style democracy under western-style free-market over the years it's become clear not only is that not true but what we've witnessed is the reassertion of Russian history roughen Russian traditions and Russian culture and with that the emergence of an authoritarian state or take Iraq you may remember that the United States in conjunction with Britain invaded illegally Iraq in the name of democracy what's happened does that that democracy has it worked it certainly hasn't or take Egypt the litmus paper test of the Arab Spring where democracy briefly sprung into life and has been killed off by the reassertion of military power or take China China in 1990 was still an extremely small economy and since then we've seen what I would argue is the most remarkable economic transformation in human history and it's been presided over not by a western-style democracy but a different system all together the fact is that democracy is not universally appropriate and applicable in all countries regardless of history and culture and circumstances above all the democracy fits all mentality ignores the fundamental historical and cultural differences between the developed countries and the developing countries the level of a country's economic development is a critical issue let me remind you that not a single Western country was a democracy at the time of its economic takeoff the crucial problem facing development countries home remember to eighty-five percent of the world's population is economic takeoff industrialization the shift from the countryside to the cities just as it was for us in an earlier era please bear in mind too that developing countries frequently have to contend with very different circumstances to those that face the West in the nineteenth century a dominant highly competitive west bent on pursuing its own interests often at the expense of the developing countries my final point concerns China the last 30 years we've seen a most extraordinary achievement a country of 1.3 billion people 20 percent of the world's population growing at 10% a year one twentieth of the size of the United States economy in 1980 now over half the size of the American economy 600 million people taken out of poverty China no western-style democracy but an extraordinary competent state over time I believe democracy will grow but it must grow in its own way and according to a country's own history culture and circumstances democracy will come in many different forms shapes and sizes they may learn from us that they will not be like us thank you very much Martin Jake's there speaking for the motion Martin thank you very much indeed let's go to the first speaker against the motion Ian Bremmer political scientist consultant specializing in global political risk author of every nation for itself winners and losers in a g0 world please welcome in Bremer thank you very much one of the good things about not writing a speech is it doesn't bother you when you just want to respond to some of the points that your colleague makes right at the beginning the first point so why should we tell a country to support democracy as a system when we didn't support democracy in earlier stages of our developments a very good question why should we tell a country to respect human rights when we didn't in an earlier stage in our development why should we tell a country not to engage in slavery when we didn't do that at an earlier stage of development that's a hard argument to swallow right it doesn't feel good look I completely understand that it is actually not fashionable to take this side of the argument but at the same time the notion of by the people and for the people intrinsically feels right to us running a country being in having that kind of power being invested in anyone but us is problematic we don't trust anyone with that sort of power except maybe the Canadians we don't trust individuals to run it without checks and balances without legitimacy without the ability to throw them out if they do a bad job or when they appoint their son since it's rarely their daughter we don't like it that's that's one reason I think that we should pay attention to what we think deep down on that second point to Martin rush and authoritarianism no question Yeltsin came in short-term efforts at democracy failed I'm sure we all agree that Putin's authoritarianism isn't much better for Russia all right it's not true Putin's very powerful he's very rich he uses every mode of conveyance I've ever seen in my life any any transport any animal he's all over it he looks good to some people but but the fact is that he's enriched himself on the backs of at the expense of the Russian people the brain drain has been phenomenal the capital flight has been huge Egypt democracy what a failure there was no democracy in Egypt the military ran the country we had an Arab Spring everyone got excited how wonderful the military never went anywhere they still controlled the country Arab monarchies how do we think they work do you think they'd be better off if there was actually more representation how would women be treated in those Arab monarchies a little better I think so do we like that sure so we'd be telling them what to do with women what do you think the Arab women would say I know what they'd say they like a different system that's not the West's shoving it down their throat I hate the idea of American exceptionalism I don't want to tell people how to run their system look at the way we run our system in a disaster the fact that the US government today is less popular does not mean that democracy is less pop you in America it actually means that people want to return to democracy in America I completely agree with Martin that China is the interesting case here right the Arab states are not Russia is not it's very clear in so many countries of the world that they would be run better for their people if there was more democracy and accountability it's very clear right in China for 35 years they've been growing and on average 10% a year and the world's never seen that 1.3 billion people that's very impressive but what interests me in China is that they understand that that's not sustainable if they don't have the ability to tell their people that there's a reason that you vote for us besides throwing you 10% growth every year they're in very serious trouble because you know what happens in an authoritarian regime when you lose power they don't just vote you out it's worse than that the Chinese government the most successful authoritarian revolution and experiment that the world has ever seen over 35 years even they understand that if they don't create a more democratic system they're gone too if they recognize it what does it mean for the rest of us thank you very much Ian Bremmer thank you very much indeed now our second final speaker for the motion Rosemarie Hollis professor of Middle East Studies and expert on conflict and security in the region also director of the olive tree scholarship program at City University here in London please welcome resume holders a lot of nonsense is talked about democracy and mostly by people who live in relatively rich Western democracies who attribute their comparative wealth and well-being to of course first their own hard work second their liberal capitalist system and thirdly their democratic form of government in other words the benefits of democracy are relative it depends on who you are where you are in the global system how wealthy your state is compared to others and where you are in the evolution of your own political system now first looking at who you are supposing you are a member of a minority community an ethnic or religious minority for example a Basque separatist in Spain a Jew in Nazi Germany a Turk in Germany how well will majority rule protect you democracy does not automatically do so your safety depends on the values espoused by the government of the day and a populist government may win election by playing to majority prejudices at the expense of the minorities why else would religious minority communities sometimes feel safer under dictatorial role than majority rule the benefits of democracy all depend whether you draw the lines on the map around the democracy concerned for ordinary Indians who do have a democracy and Chinese who not what matters is that their government is strong enough to defend their national corner they're not operating in a vacuum democracy or otherwise that's whether they have a say in the composition of their government is less relevant to their chances of prosperity than the ability of their government to exercise leverage at the international level suppose you live in a small underdeveloped country dependent on investment and aid from the developed world for you to achieve a halfway decent standard of living and gainful employment whether elected or not your government will have to bow to the dictates of multinationals and international financial institutions whose priorities are respectively profits and loan repayments not your well being your democracy is meaningless when your government has no real power in any case politicians are masters at managing national perceptions manufacturing consent even and I contend the Western democracies mistake their moral authority at home as a license to tell other people how they should govern themselves but their own systems are non exportable do not please ladies and gentlemen equate the word democracy with what makes you feel good here because it cannot work without the comparative economic advantages that are enjoyed here thank you Rosalie Hollis thank you very much indeed so we've heard the two main voices for the motion now the final speaker against the motion andrey Shevchenko a former journalist turned politician who represents the fatherland party of Yulia Tymoshenko in the Ukrainian Parliament he has been described in the London Times as a potential future leader of Ukraine here straight from Kiev Andrey Shevchenko I would first sure will this thing it's a it's this constructors helmet is one of the symbols of recent anti dictatorship protests in Ukraine it was supposed to protect your head from police sticks or if you were lucky enough from rubber bullets of course later on helmets like this would not protect people from snipers and from gunmen and as you know more than 100 of protesters died in the streets of Kiel mostly because of the snipers bullets and because of police grenades but if well I have brought this helmet here and just to remind all of us that there are countries where people literally fight and die for their right to live under democracy and if you talked to my brothers on the barricades they will be very surprised to hear this kind of discussion democracy for them means that no one can govern people without their consent democracy for them it's their right to be responsible for their future so people those angry men who were wearing orange helmets orange constructors helmets they were literally feeling themselves felt themselves as constructors of their future this is what democracy is about for them it's a very clear moral choice it's a choice between freedom and slavery between hope and humiliation that's what democracy is about for them and I think we should really keep that in mind before we go into some more pragmatic things to discuss now let's do some numbers and let's talk pragmatically here's the world list of the richest countries by the per capita income in 2012 only four out of top 20 countries were not democracies only six out of top 30 countries were not democracies and there is a clear evidence of a correlation between democracy and economic development and we perfectly understand why true not all democracies are each in fact some democracies miserably poor but if you build a stable democracy you have better chances to be rich and to live in a prosperous society we understand why because democracy also means rule of law freedom of entrepreneurship more democracy generally means more prosperity here is the United Nations Human Development Index list of 2013 and it's even more interesting for us because this index is based on three criteria its life expectancy its education and it's the per capita income which we have just discussed so the Premier League of the list is called the countries with very high human development only 3 out of 47 countries on the list are not democracies and that makes sense because democracy means that you spend wealth national wealth not just for fancy palaces or luxury cars for the few who are in power but you've got to take care of the constituency when you cast your vote in the end of this debate I really ask you to think about the rest of the world when you will be making a decision please cast a vote on behalf of protesters in Venezuela on behalf of civil activists in Iran on behalf of all those people who know they will not be able to enjoy the privileges of democracy you enjoy why they enter their lives that's the reason why they are ready to fight for that that's reason why they are ready to fight and probably die to give the chance to their kids and to their grandchildren so please do think about the Ukrainians who have been fighting for freedom of their country for its territorial integrity and for the better world for our loyal followers so please vote against the motion and in favor of democracy I drew Shevchenko thank you very much indeed and for being here from Kiev now we've heard from the four speakers for and against the motion before I hear from you in the audience with the microphones I'm going to give you the result of what you decided as you were coming in not having listened to any of the debates so far let me tell you that almost half of you had not made up your minds 44 percent of you don't know what your view is are on that this motion democracy is not always the best form of government but 38% of you did think that you were for the motion and 18% were against so there's a lot of work to be done on both sides here to convince you let's hear from you please stand up could I get a lady there and a lady somewhere in the middle there please hello this is a question for Ian you gave a lot of examples in your speech of sham democracies and democracies that are flawed I was wondering whether you could give us an example of a good democracy as if that's something that we all should be working towards it would be good to have a role model stick that up in theirs at the back please you've got the microphone and then move the microphone down here please to the gentleman here hello I was wondering if we could have a definition of what democracy is if it's about voting then and for Representatives we have a 55% unelected legislature here in the UK or House of Lords under Queen are we a democracy also for turnout rates particularly among young people about 30% the last general election 15% at the last European election is this a democracy thank you at the back at the back there please I am against the motion and for democracy and I think that Ian Brenner had really good points you know he's a very good speaker as well but I think that a very important point a very important point he made was that it isn't the question really isn't whether democracy is or isn't the best form of government but it's about accountability and that is something that I think we're kind of missing the point and it's democracy in many countries countries can be poor and democratic and rich and democratic it doesn't mean that democracy is always being like practiced but it is the best form right so the issue about definition of democracy which we could debate all night but and rave when you look at what you've been through what you're still going through and what still lies ahead in your country do you have a clarity about what democracy is I think what we might think about is we can explore some new opportunities of democracy I think it would be ridiculous to limit democracy just to representative democracy in the classic mean think about Iceland after it went through these terrible financial crises they had the Constitutional Assembly it wasn't elected in the classical way but when people represented fishermen teachers whoever get together if I may say so in other words democracy is everything that makes you feel good democracy is something that the lady was talking about it's really about feeling confident I would think I would say it would be ridiculous to limit democracy just to mathematics and to the boat count that's my point but going back to Iceland so when they got together when they were rewriting the constitution of this country one of the first thing which was in the document was we are supposed to protect the earth it's probably something which which typical politicians would not think about in the beginning of the Constitution so I think new forms of democracy could provide us with some great new forms of Garnon but it's it's not to undermine the basic principles we are talking about I said at the beginning government for the people by the people yeah you have a queen it's true do I think that really enjoys on representative democracy in Britain the House of Lords and it cost you some money but fundamentally speaking no there's a spectrum here look China is more democratic than North Korea right do we think China is more generally respectful of civil rights to North Korea yeah who's farther along that spectrum India is more democratic than China is do we think India is more respectful of human rights generally speaking than China I think the answer is yeah are there any well-run democracies out there look Canada's more democratic than the United States today Canada is pretty well run the Scandinavians are more democratic the Scandinavians are more well-run than the United States absolutely I think I'd say Australia on balance is more run they're smaller it's easier to use efficiency well run well run as part of the above being a democracy no no I didn't say that at all you said they were better than democracies because they were well-run what does that mean better better democracies in the sense that they are they are governments that are more effectively run for and by the people they are more legitimate and seen as more legitimate the as I mentioned the United States has a more difficult time today because the the the the state has been captured to a degree by the private sector in a way that has not in Canada that absolutely undermines the ability of the American government to be seen as governed by and forth so your argument does basically rest on ideals not realities but democracy certainly democracy absolutely takes into into consideration the ideals of the people of the country well I mean you know I don't really know beyond a point what your argument is because it seems to be everything now let's take the example of China okay compared with any Western country at the moment and you look at the Pew Global Attitudes survey statistics and the levels of satisfaction amongst the Chinese with what's going to happen to their standard of living the economic competence of the government and their outlook in terms of what the future is going to bring is way higher than it is in Western societies and it's not true that you know democracies are by and large better run than thing than things that in our book like China aren't democracies although of course they do have elements of democracy up there please you'd be very patient and a lot of other people as well which way you voting which way when I was that don't now I'm afraid and I'm still I'm still swinging in the wind but not I'm swinging both ways but if I can offer a handy realistic definition of democracy you don't really know what it means don't we the Queen's nothing to do with it all it means is that the executive can be held meaningfully to account through whatever mechanism representative or not by a large enough body of the electorate or public and that does seem to hand in hand with the virtuous of liberalism which include freedom of the individual whether or not this takes a fully capitalist form or not although I suspect that capitalism is intimately linked with freedom therefore I want to put an argument to a dr. Holliston and dr. Jakes I hope haven't promoted you and the argument is if the professor I beg his pardon the argument is this if you were to find by some secret channel that there were movements of thought in China to move China decisively towards that notion of representative democracy would you really stand in its way hold that thought up there please specifically on China I just would like to make few comments that economic development at the barrel of a gun where large swathes of population in China was killed one child policy where especially baby girls were being abandoned or strangled I don't think this is a good argument to say that a form of government that has brought some economic development also by cooking their books most of the time it's a good argument to say that democracy is not always a good situation one more review here please so I'm I'm for democracy and for the motion which I don't regard as a contradiction at all thank you you're very welcome this point may have been covered since already but I only thought it well I'll ask the question very quickly which is if you guys were to form a sort of government consultancy given the the explosive growth we've seen in China over the last 25 years would you go back 25 years and recommend to that government that they should actually vote in a democracy all right three questions there Martin particularly you've got a very short time to answer them but give as the idea of your thoughts please there well the first question was would I stand in the way of the development of a representative democracy in China no I wouldn't if that's what the Chinese want to do if you're suggesting that that's a likely scenario in anything like the next 20 or 30 years I think you're wrong and the and linking this with the last question the fact is that you know I would say that probably the kind of government they've had in China over the last 30 years since 1980 since Deng Xiaoping has served the Chinese much better than for example the kind of democracy that they've got in India it is true it is true and that a lot of de famille babies have been killed in China especially in the countryside by the way exactly the same things happened in India this is not about democracy and authoritarianism this is about traditions in backwards a surprise I'm Dre I would just add that I strongly believe that the Edit value of democracy is universal across the world and I I could hardly imagine good arguments why some countries should should be deprived of civil rights or some what some other basic things and in general when I hear about some special ways for specific country when we hear about this idea of sovereign democracy very special way usually it's just a cover for some very bad things and not that good things ruthless corruption terrible crimes and fear of rulers rulers to lose the power that's what that's what sometimes stands behind those nice words let me check hydrate let me ask you though specifically about your country where there's a referendum on Crimea what's your view about that is that democratic well we have another brilliant example of referendum to compare the Crimean referendum with it's the Scottish referendum you're going to have in this country and now feel the difference so in this country you have you have a clear clear a good public debate on the issue and I think it's done in the consent of different sides in the Crimea they have changed the question three times in six days they have changed the date of the referendum three times in six days there is no list of voters all the Ukrainian channels are turned off in the peninsula is it really for referendum so if we talk about minorities under democracy or without a democracy that's another good thing to discuss the way we see the referendum in Scotland and the way we see the referendum under no democratic rule of Russia potemkin democracy is not democracy let's be clear we can we can have a vote a vote does not mean that we're creating legitimacy that we're creating government by the people I think one thing that has fused this discussion so far has been that we fetishize growth right authoritarian States authoritarian States can be good because they can drive more growth they can create more jobs they can build the economy growth is not the only thing that matters in the world right it is there's no question that China grows a hell of a lot faster than India what Martin will lead you to believe is that means that their system is clearly superior you know what if there's a massive shock in China and there's a massive shock in India the likelihood that the Indian system stays stable as opposed to the Chinese leadership is reasonably high furthermore the likelihood that we'll see that kind of shock in China compared to India is reasonably high - in a global environment that is massively more uncertain and volatile and unstable we will stop fetishizing growth we will start paying more attention to resilience and that is why democracy continues to be the system that we should be aspiring toward Martin well I suppose it's I suppose if you come from one of the richest countries in the world and certainly the most powerful country in the world then to say we're fetishizing growth is well that's to put it mildly I mean quite frankly and I'm amazed that you can speak like that there is or if you are a poor country if you are a poor people then the importance of growth is absolutely fundamental to changing your circumstances I say I won't accept your argument in relationship to this I think that this is absolutely crucial well I have a similar point and actually Egypt did not collapse in the face of its experiment with democracy and the election of a president that the army took against and as actually in himself has argued the army never went anywhere that's an institution that's a stable one and it didn't come out of Denia bankrupt state Egypt at the moment and democracy is not going to create the jobs that the Egyptians want from any government this is the point it's irrelevant democracy to whether Egyptians get jobs or not right let's hear some more voices please from the middle tell me which way you're voting please well I started for the motion but now I'm swaying in between and it seems that democracies often crumble when they're faced with 50/50 whoever that's because the votes are split and this is due to sometimes splitting ethnicities or ideologies but a nice history are shown when this faithfully split they normally lead in a divided like happened Ireland now Korea and now this happen in Ukraine so your question do we have to accept this divide if democracy your face were 50/50 thank you okay over there this is a question for mr. Shevchenko you're on the platform speaking in support of the virtues of democracy and I wanted to know what your observations were how you felt about the your opponent if you like mr. Yanukovych as I understand it a democratically elected leader being deposed in what some people would regard as an undemocratic way elected in 2010 and reapply it is well he was the first president in the country who gave the direct order to shoot into his own people and when he finally realized the consequences of that decision I think he was done as a politician so I like the the definition of democracy which which Ian presented to us at what what was done by in the college it was definite and not by the people and for the people but you accept that he was democratically elected of course we use anymore or as as I said we see a lot of democratically elected leaders who do create the things we see mr. Putin who at some point one kind of a democratic election and now we see that after destroying all the democratic institution he has the power to do any kind of decisions which mean clear problems for his neck for his nation do you think Russia is a democracy no it's not and I think the terrible things we wish were witnessing now when Russia is bringing is taking the world back into the Cold War era is exactly the consequence of losing the democracy in this car even though he was elected in an election absolutely please just tell me which way you're voting please we heard from the proposition that actually what really mattered for government was how much power it has but what we didn't hear was any analysis of how having the people backing you gives you more power not only on the international stage with international relations but also within your own country when you're sort of stand out to global corporations and stuff and I was wondering whether they should offer us any discussion on can I immediately swing in if you look at I believe it's [Music] 800 million Indians will be voting in their election coming up or at least how are entitled to vote over 800 million where is India at the international bodies like the United Nations Security Council if numbers and democracy count or did count for your weight in the world about decisions that defect affect the fortunes of everybody in the world the democracies don't get in there the big ones it's a little one like this one right let's get some more who's got a microphone please if tells tell me which way or which waves against the motion if democracy is and the best form of government what is because I don't feel you should criticize something which you have no solution to benign dictatorship could you just say that again what's the best alternative benign dictatorship we would all love it until you don't until you don't please something Martin said to ear when he said it's easy to say a comment about growth when you know you're not from a poor country and in light of that I just want to ask the whole panel how well-equipped we even think we are to have the discussion when we actually have no representation from nations from Africa South America or Asia for instance I think this is a very very important remark very very important remark indeed an observation I agree right drape I would also add that if you look at the data on let's say on the African countries there is a clear correlation between between democracy and economic development and once again I strongly believe that the in the well the Edit value of democracy is the universal think across across the world I cannot find the reason to deprive one or a different nation from the same standards that we we are usually applying to the today to the world which we usually refer as to as Western world and I would say that it is not the norm to act democratically who's gonna lead at the back the microphone please undecided but I'm leaning towards against this long talk about China tonight I'm Chinese I was born in Beijing and I've lived there for 13 years and I lived here for 12 years so I've experienced both systems which do you prefer well like I said I'm undecided but against emotion now so for me coming from here the definition of democracy what I experienced this ability to have an opinion the ability to be able to see with the degree of transparency what the government's doing and and to hear both of the arguments even if you don't like either so that for me is my experience of what democracy is so while I may accept that democracy is not always the best form of government for China given our history and tradition well the panelists accept democracy is eventually the best form of government right I now have the result of what you have decided having listened to this debate this intelligence squared debate in London about democracy I remind you about the emotion democracy is not always the best form of government I remind you how you were thinking when you first came in to this hall before the debate 44% of you hadn't made up your mind for the motion 38% against the motion 18% well almost everyone who didn't make up their mind at the beginning has now made up their mind only 3% of you have not decided that means 40% of you have made up your mind and I have to report that after the debate those voting for the motion were 39% against the motion 58% by any measure by any measure in this democratic voting system it was a huge swing so congratulations to those in and Andrey who swung all of you 40 percent of you in their direction and commiserations to those proposing the motion Rosemarie and Martin I'm afraid you lost our thanks to the speakers to the audience all of you here at the Cadogan Hall in London in what's been a fascinating debate with a remarkable swing my thanks to intelligence squared as well for making all this possible goodbye from me Nik gowing and everyone here in London bye-bye [Applause] [Music] [Applause] [Music]