Democratization Process in Croatia and Slovenia Essay #2 - 275 Words

Democratization Process in Croatia and Slovenia #2 (Research Paper Sample) Content: DEMOCRATIZATION PROCESS IN CROATIA AND SLOVENIAName:Course:11th April 2014IntroductionDemocratization is a political process that a country undergoes to attain democracy. This is one of the most significant processes in many countries in the 20th century. Many countries in the world attained independence in the 20th century and thus began the process of democratization after independence. According to Vidmar, in 1975, approximately 68% of world countries had autocratic form of leadership. However, towards the end of 20th century, approximately 26% of world countries still practiced autocratic leadership. The other countries had transformed into democratic governments through carrying out competitive elections. Furthermore, Vidmar depicts that democratization occurred inform of a wave across different continents in the world. Countries in Eastern Europe such as Croatia and Slovenia are categorized in the third wave of democratization. The third wave is associated with the break of Soviet Union, formerly Yugoslavia.[Vidmar, Jure. Democratic transition and democratic consolidation in Slovenia. Munich: Peter Lang GmbH, Europaischer Verlag der Wissenschaften, 2008. 23.] [Vidmar, 24.] [Vidmar, 24.] [Vidmar, 27.] [Vidmar, 45.] [Vidmar, 46.] [Vidmar, 46.] Democratization Process in CroatiaCroatia was left behind in the democratization process of other European countries. Various factors led to slow democratization process in Croatia. Some of the factors include authoritarian leadership, corruption, postponement of political and economic reforms and clientelism. Croatia began the democratization process in 2000 when the leadership focused in joining the European Union. This strategy helped in enhancing democratization process in Croatia. The Croatia government before independence was a communist government. The process of democratization in Croatia comprised on increased competition of political parties. Danijela states that this is one of the main strat egies used by many communist countries to form democracy governments. The competition of political parties began in 1990 when the first democratic oriented, Croatian Democratic Union (CDU), won the elections against Communist Party. According to Dolenec, since Croatia had undergone some economic and political reforms in 1980s, it was relatively easier to drive democratization process in the country. However, the reforms occurred while the country was still part of Yugoslavia. When the Communist Party lost elections to CDU, this triggered the process of reforms in the party. The Communist Party shed off some of the communist ideologies and embraced ideas that encouraged democratization process in Croatia. Later, there was change of name from Communist Party to Social Democratic Party (SDP). In the reform process, in 1990s, SDP gained popularity in the country and became a strong opposition to reigning party CDU. In 2000, SDP formed coalitions with other opposition parties and ascende d into power.[Dolenec, Danijela. Europeanization as a Democratizing Force in Post-communist Europe: Croatia in Comparative Perspective, PolitiÄ ka misao. 65, No. 5, (2008.): 23à ¢Ã¢â€š ¬46. 23.] [Cierco, Teresa. Europeanization Impact on Croatiaà ¢Ã¢â€š ¬s Course to Democracy, Primavera. 122, No. 4 (2009): 173-201. 175.] [Dolenec, 24.] [Dolenec, 25.] [Dolenec, 26.] [Dolenec, 26.] [Dolenec, 34.] Dolenec states that when CDU was in power from 1990 to 2000, it ruled Croatia on a nationalist platform. This marked the start of consolidated democracy in Croatia. The SDP party had an opportunity to enact new democratic reforms and popularize the party to the voters. This form of leadership made Croatia to be categorized amongst other illiberal countries such as Slovakia and Bulgaria among others. This is because CDU leadership was characterized by factors that derail democratization process such as corruption, postponement of economic and political reforms, and clientelism. Maldin i refers to leadership of CDU as ethnocentrism. This is because the leadership was characterized by intolerant ethnic, exclusive, and closed nationalism. However, Dolenec states that the nationalism agenda played a role in providing a platform for change of ex-communist countries to democratization process. Furthermore, Maldini states that the increase ethnocentrism in Croatia was because of social transformation. Croatia community seceded from authoritarian leadership and enjoyed a change to nationalism form of leadership. This was more satisfying to the citizens of Croatia since they had freedom to pursue personal goals. In this context, the citizens failed to realize the social problems resulting from ethnocentrism leadership of CDU government for 10 years. Therefore, though the people enjoyed freedom, there was slowdown in the democratization process.[Dolenec, 34.] [Dolenec, 34.] [Dolenec, 23.] [Maldini, Pero. Nationalism in Croatian Transition to Democracy: Between Structural C onditionality and the Impact of Legacy of History and Political Culture, CONTEMPORARY issues. 5, No. 1 (2012): 6-20. 7.] [Maldini, 7.] [Dolenec, 35.] [Maldini, 8.] Maldini depicts that the Croatia territory war fought from 1991 to 1995 caused slow process of democratization process. The war also caused removal of many reform issues in the political agenda of the ruling party. The CDU focused on development agenda of Croatia, which made it grow to a dominant party in the country. Hence, the CDU ruled for an uninterrupted period of 10 years. According to Maldini, though Croatia had started competitive democratization party system after exiting the communist leadership, the 10-year rule of CDU contributed to slow democratization process. This is because the leadership of CDU was not able to overcome some of the social evils such as corruption and clientelism. The postponement of economic and political reforms by the CDU government also caused the process of democratization to lag behin d.[Maldini, 11.] [Maldini, 11.] [Maldini, 15.] The leadership of CDU was also characterized by divisive politics between winners and losers in the 1990 elections. The nationalism leadership strategy resulted to socioeconomic inequality in the country. Moreover, there were high levels of egalitarianism and preferences in the distribution of resources. According to Dolenec, democracy aims at enhancing equal representation and distribution of resources to the citizens. However, the CDU government failed in achieving the goals of democracy by embracing nationalism. Dolenec states that the territory wars in the early 1990s contributed to economic inequality in the country. There was sidelining of the areas affected by wars from socioeconomic and political agenda. This caused the war torn areas to lag behind in political and economic development.[Dolenec, Danijela. The Absent Socioeconomic Cleavage in Croatia: a Failure of Representative Democracy? PolitiÄ ka misao. 49, No. 5, (201 2): 69-88. 70.] [Dolenec, 71.] [Dolenec, 72.] [Dolenec, 72.] Franjo Tudjman became the first president of Croatia after succession from Yugoslavia, in 1990. Franjo Tudjman was the leader of the CDU party that won 60 parliamentary seats and ascended into power to form the first Croatian government. Franjo Tudjman started the movement that helped Croatia to gain independence. The leadership position held by Franjo Tudjman helped him to become the president of Croatia. The leadership of Franjo Tudjman has been categorized as authoritarian. This is because of violations of civil rights and inequality in distribution of resources. Tudjman was also involved in various discussions regarding the wars in neighboring countries of Serbia and Bosnia. According to Bunce and Wolchik, Tudjman at one time said the wars in the region posed a threat to the European region. However, Tudjman was fighting to make some parts of Serbia and Herzegovina part of Croatia. Tudjman carried out the activities se cretly to avoid notice by other nations. In this context, the goal of expanding the Croatian territory caused Tudjman to lose focus on democratization process of Croatia.[Bunce, Valerie Wolchik, Sharon. Defeating Authoritarian Leaders in Postcommunist Countries: Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2011. 102.] [Bunce and Wolchik, 102.] [Bunce and Wolchik, 103.] [Bunce and Wolchik, 109.] [Bunce and Wolchik, 110.] [Bunce and Wolchik, 109.] Although president Tudjman is dead, his legacy faces accusations of war crimes during the succession of various countries from Yugoslavia state. Tudjman committed war crimes by authorizing the forceful removal of the Serb people. There was killing, destruction of property, displacement, and persecution of the people to force them out of Krajina. Furthermore, Tudjman began the privatization and de-nationalization process of Croatia. However, according to Maldini, these processes were not transparent and involved some illegal activities. Thus, the processes could not help in enhancing democracy in Croatia. Since the legal process in government was not fully formed and inefficient, it provided a loophole for corrupt activities to thrive. The leadership of Tudjman was also characterized by nepotism. The affiliates of the ruling party, CDU, acquired various properties owned by the state at exceptionally low prices through the privatization process. Later, the beneficiaries sold the property to the highest bidder making exorbitant profit margins.[Bunce and Wolchik, 111.] [Bunce and Wolchik, 115] [Maldini, 15.] [Maldini, 15.] [Maldini, 16.] [Maldini, 16.] The privatization process caused grave impacts to the economy of Croatia. There was an increase in unemployment rate, bankruptcy, and collapse of public institutions. On the other hand, there was concentration of massive wealth in the hands of few people resulting to socioeconomic inequalities. Dolenec states that the allies of president Tudjman acquired massive wealth th...