Profesoriaus Vytauto Landsbergio kalba: Community of Democracies, Parliamentary Forum for Democracy, Washington, D. C.

2011-09-15

Community of Democracies, Parliamentary Forum for Democracy

Washington, D. C.

Vytautas Landsbergis:

Highly estimated and dear Colleagues,

On the threshold of its first maturity, Community of Democracies (CoD) and its younger dynamic body Democracy Forum (DF) are overcoming the trial of identity. Good luck in that line for Mongolia!

There is a chance now that world democracies may become increasingly more and more consolidated in a name of democracy ideals and better world.

No surprise that there are forces and states of other ideals. In the most clear assessment they should be called non-democracies.

The existence of both, if democracies keep their identity unspoiled and firm, should cause the real progress via promotion of democracy what means today the urgently needed spiritual growth of peace and cooperation, not confrontation.

Democracy lives in the spirit of a mature nation and in governance of the state of law.

The real and respect-worth Law is rooted in people's reasoning and will, expressed and formulated by people's representatives, who are given that mandate in free and fair elections.

We do believe that that order and governance were better of those based on powers inherited by birth and growth in a dynasty of rulers, out of popular accountability and Constitutional regulation, as well as inside a clan of usurpers ruling their people by armed power and political oppression, kept deprived of liberty of mind and expression.

Quite often executives or servants of any such regime may call themselves "democrats" of special sort, even being butchers, and relevant non-democratic regimes – "democracies" with variety of tricky denominations. The framework here goes extending from totalitarian Communist "people's democracies" (where "the people" is readable as a top of communist clan) to modernized combinations as "ruled", "governed" or "sovereign" democracy.

The concept of "sovereignty" not nations but rulers means that those last have the sovereign right to call themselves emperors or democrats and impose "the law" of their own authoritarian mentality and group interest. Afterward some of them go announcing proudly "dictatorship of law" what means only their own dictatorship embodied in fake legislative formulas.

Such a law may state solemnly that the lie is the truth, or non-democracy is a democracy, and that's all. Lawfulness, if you wish or fear so deadly.

Some among us still remember directly as the Soviet stalinists called their system of mass-terrorism, "rightly and justly" exterminating tens of millions, the best democracy over the world and the highest type of democracy in human history.

Please, remember this lesson, when Chavez, Castro, the mullas from islamist Teheran or mutant authoritarian Moscow will apply to CoD, at least, as the observers.

The same time we welcome and support the emerging democracies led firmly by good will to pass the way of building themselves in freedom.

The intention of the fossile non-democracies is clear: to wash out defining lines and confuse the minds about that fundamental issue. One of the newest and surprising inventions did appear even in papers of important European political party, probably, introduced there by some lobbyist of one or more fossile non-democracies. That is the label "illiberal democracy" (!) suggesting that our liberal democracy is not the one worth that name. Similarly, someone could call a tyranny the "ultimately stabilized" democracy. 

And be not surprised again, when Eastern manipulated dictatorship calls the Western democracy a "colonialism".

Our democracy as a state building and family of democracies as denomination of states are under threat to be equalized to any non-democracy under additional tricky name. This way, if promoted here for moving, our organization loses all senses and is worth a mockery; therefore such conformity with a falsehood should be carefully prevented.

My assessment is that CoD and subsequently the advising DF, if we agree on such grounds, must elaborate some simple and defining principles. Those should embrace the true competitive elections – thus true parliamentary democracy – for a state of law – when the law is worked on and defined by truly elected parliament. All other systems, even those of Quadaffi and Mugabe having their own grounds of existence, should not be called democracies and welcomed into CoD.

Therefore, for example, Taiwan with normal parliamentary democracy deserves to be in CoD, if they will, but not the People's China yet, while oppressing the free word and persecuting Christians, Tibetans and Falun-gongers.  There is still a significant room to grow towards democracy, to build up not the economy only.

We are in favour for human rights and abolishment of dictatorial non-democracies in North Africa, but the same time concerned about further developments, if they lead to nascent true democracies or not.

Dear colleagues, I do believe our organization is able to act with such a call and message in the name of better world for all people, and I am grateful for a chance given to put those basics onto agenda.