Democracy in Retreat: What Did Biden’s Summit for Democracy Achieve?

A speech given by the U.S. president is always an important event; after all, the U.S. is still a superpower. But the question arises as to how closely the world is listening to Biden today.

The two-day Summit for Democracy, a virtual meeting of the leaders of 111 countries invited to a joint, remote discussion convened by President Joe Biden, has ended. Hardly anyone in the U.S. was interested in this meeting — the media vaguely reported on the summit. America has more pressing problems, which is not surprising.

The virtual meeting was a political event with no practical significance, and mainly served a propaganda and public relations purpose. This is a typical example of a situation where politicians believe that it is appropriate for them to speak on certain matters, even though they know well it will not change anything.

Democracy in Retreat

Biden had to convene this summit because he promised to during his campaign last year. He had good reasons — democracy is in retreat all over the world; therefore, it should be defended. This is supported by research conducted by organizations such as Freedom House, which ranks an increasing number of countries as “not free” or “partly free.” Currently, China and Russia are selling biometric facial recognition and internet censorship technologies to Asia, Africa and Latin America in order to better control the disobedient. We are facing a regression of democracy even in the West, that is, among several dozen countries in the European Union and NATO. The right-leaning populist parties and politicians are gaining strength there, as they attempt to use democratic institutions such as free elections to consolidate their power autocratically and limit the rights of minorities. These forces are growing, even in America.

The idea of the Summit for Democracy logically fits into Biden’s ideological vision and program: strengthening American alliances and liberal democracy globally. Hence his speech opened with, “Democracy needs champions.” Biden admitted that democracy in the U.S. is similarly not doing very well, so he continued, “… we know as well as anyone that renewing our democracy and strengthening our democratic institutions requires constant effort.”

A speech given by the U.S. president is always an important event; after all, the U.S. is still a superpower. But the question arises as to how closely the world is listening to Biden today. The words of American leaders have usually been considered an instrument of soft power. It was America’s way of influencing world events and public diplomacy, promoting American pop culture and exerting other intangible and nonviolent influence. The problem is that America’s waning prestige and authority means that its soft power is also declining.

Biden Exposed Himself to Criticism

The bizarre criteria used for selecting participants for the summit did not help here. Among those invited were countries with parliaments, free elections and other formal democratic intuitions, but where manipulation of the masses, violence, corruption, discrimination against minorities or chicanery used against the opposition do not really qualify them as “democratic.” The Biden administration invited countries considered by Freedom House to be only “partly free” to the summit, including Moldova, Pakistan, the Philippines and Brazil — but it did not invite others, also “partly free,” that ranked higher than countries that were invited, such as Bolivia.

In Europe, the absence of Hungary on the list of participants is the most striking; this was probably punishment for Hungary’s defiance in response to America’s condemnation of the nationalism of Prime Minister Viktor Orbán. Hungary was the only country from the EU not invited to the summit. It is not clear what exactly Biden tried to accomplish with this. In any case, he exposed himself to criticism after admitting that the invitations were determined by geopolitics, and not democratic values — Brazil, India and the Philippines are more important to the U.S. than the insignificant country of Hungary.

What about Democracy in America?

It doesn’t really matter what Biden said to those who participated in the summit, although we do care what he said to President Andrzej Duda. However, the most important thing is whether the U.S. under Biden will continue to support democratic forces globally, and how it will do so. Sanctions against autocrats for persecuting dissidents, helping the opposition and public declarations of support are necessary, not only as a form of material aid but to bolster the morale of those fighting dictators and those suffering in prisons. Congress is still ready to pass laws that require the president take appropriate action, such as imposing sanctions for human rights violations in Russia, for instance, pursuant to the Magnitsky Act.

Moreover, the American media have pointed out that Biden should focus on consolidating democracy in the U.S. The Trumpist storming of the U.S. Capitol on Jan. 6 was, as is increasingly being predicted, just a prelude to what might happen during the next presidential election in 2024. In 19 states, majority Republican legislatures have changed voting laws to limit the voting power of the typical Democratic Party electorate — that is, African Americans and Latinos — and to ensure that the voting is done in such a way as to guarantee a Republican victory. Activists backed by Trump are pushing for this.

What the GOP did not accomplish in last year’s election — namely, preventing a Democratic win — might come to pass this way in three years. It is difficult to imagine that the other party will accept failure under such circumstances. Will there be a peaceful transfer of power then?