A question that is the subject of intense speculation in Middle East study centres in the United States and Europe, as well as in think tanks throughout the world, is whether the implementation of democracy in undemocratic environments could allow extremist political groups to gain a hold on power, and whether a commitment to democracy entails submitting to such an eventuality. Actually, the question betrays an all too common misconception of democracy and a poor understanding of what it really means. Democracy is a complex system that depends for its existence on three processes. The first is the arrival of the ruler in power through democratic means. The second is his exercise of power within the parameters of constitutional and legal rules and his full accountability to the people. The third is his departure from power by democratic means. These processes, which form the structural underpinnings of any democracy, are not a function only of the ballot box, but rely essentially on civil society organizations on the one hand, and on the availability of mechanisms for democratic practices on the other. The ballot box is only a small part of a much larger whole, just one of the constituent elements of a democratic environment, which cannot exist in the absence of the three processes mentioned above, nor in the absence of the mechanisms and organizations of civil society or the institutions of democracy. Those who are truly committed to democracy are aware of what it entails, and are working tirelessly to set in place the institutions and mechanisms for democratic political action and to establish and consolidate civil society institutions and organizations. The common denominator between them is institutional participation, and it is this that lays the groundwork for the three processes required for democracy: the ruler’s accession to power by democratic means, his exercise of power by democratic means and his departure from power by democratic means.

Then there are those who pay lip service to democracy but who see it merely as a tool they can use to reach power. Once they achieve their end, these false prophets will ride roughshod over the institutions, organizations and mechanisms of democracy and bring the curtain down on democratic life. Actually, the only aspect of democracy they are interested in is the ballot box, which can serve as their passport to power. They know that in the context of widespread frustration at the inefficient administration of society, seething resentment at the privileges enjoyed by those holding a monopoly on power and bitter anger at endemic corruption, the ballot box is likely to work in favour of those who rail against these aberrations, all too common in many Third World countries, and who promise to cleanse society of their effects when they come to power. Of course, making promises is one thing, keeping them quite another. In the first place, these demagogues lack the ability to introduce the required reforms; more important, they lack the will, and are more likely to destroy the components of a democratic climate than enhance them. In a way, they can be compared to the member of an orchestra who may be adept at playing his own instrument but who, on being called to conduct the full orchestra, can only produce dissonant sounds. So too with democracy, which, like an orchestra, can only function as a synergic whole, that is, if all its elements are properly brought into play. To claim that democracy can be reduced to ballot boxes in isolation from the other, more important, elements necessary for its existence, is both naïve and dangerous.

Let us take the case of Third World countries. Most are suffering from severe political, economic, social, cultural, educational and media problems as a result of the absence of democracy, the sidelining of people with real skills and the spread of negative values like individualism, cronyism and sycophancy. It is not by focussing exclusively on ballot boxes and their results that these societies can hope to overcome their problems. They need to focus, rather, on laying down the policies and building up the organizations and mechanisms of democratic life, as well as on promoting the role of civil society. This should run in parallel with a resolute drive to introduce political, economic and educational reforms and to replace Goebbels-style media institutions with modern institutions commensurate with the requirements of the age. All these measures come under the heading of ‘engineered reform,’ the most effective political process which can prevent chaos from setting in or the reins of power from falling into the hands of extremist groups who will take society down a ruinous path of obscurantism, backwardness and regression. Engineered reform is guaranteed to succeed, perhaps in as little as one decade, if concerted efforts are directed at the areas mentioned above. These can be summed up as follows: