On the fourth anniversary of Egypt's January 25 Revolution, Hesham Sallam, associate director of CDDRL's Program on Arab Reform and Democracy and Jadaliyya co-editor, remarks on the return of authoritarianism in Egypt under President Abdel Fattah el-Sisi. Sallam argues that the ruling military regime has become more repressive than that of President Hosni Mubarak, highlighting growing victimization of civil society members. Listen to Sallam's interview with KPFA 94.1 Berkeley below.

Writing for Democratization, Kyong Jun Choi at the University of Washington reviewed New Challenges for Maturing Democracies in Korea and Taiwan (Stanford University Press, 2014), a co-edited book by Stanford professors Larry Diamond and Gi-Wook Shin.

“Among the most notable strengths of this volume is its analysis of new phenomena that have rarely been addressed in existing literature,” Choi writes.

The book seeks to illustrate different characteristics of the evolution of democracy in Taiwan and South Korea. The two countries share similar economic and political directions since industrialization took place in the 1960s and transition toward democracy began in the 1980s.

Choi says that the book “certainly stands as a stepping stone for research on new democracies struggling to consolidate democracy.”

“New Challenges” is one outcome of a multiyear research project at the Walter H. Shorenstein Asia-Pacific Research Center, and a conference co-hosted with the Center on Democracy, Development and the Rule of Law in 2011.

The review is featured in Democratization’s vol. 21, issue 7. Information about accessing the review can found by clicking here.

Nick Deychakiwsky, program officer at the C.S. Mott Foundation, and Maurice Middleberg, executive director of Free the Slaves, engaged in a realistic, yet encouraging conversation on the fabric of NGOs for CDDRL's Program on Human Rights’ Winter Speaker Series “U.S. Human Rights NGOs and International Human Rights” on January 14, 2015.

Deychakiwsky gave the audience the macro perspective to NGOs working in human rights, while Middleberg, working on a specific mission to end modern day slavery, provided the micro perspective. Both Deychakiwsky and Middleberg pronounced the complications and challenges of working for and running an NGO today, narrating a cautionary yet motivating story of NGO management. Deychakiwsky pointed out that all too often, accountability to the society whose projects are designed to help gets lost in the bigger picture of NGO management. He emphasized that to have a positive impact, an NGO must remain mindful of and true to its core values and organizational mission. Middleberg agreed with Deychakiwsky’s view that an organization must always stay true to its mission, while at the same time emphasized that an NGO must nurture its own financial health and organizational culture in order to have the capacity for safekeeping its mission.  

Helen Stacy, director of the Program on Human Rights, was struck by the overlap in Deychakiwsky and Middleberg’s stances on NGO management. Stacy questioned Deychakiwsky about indicators for testing local accountability, and Deychakiwsky pointed out that when a community is willing to offer resources such as time or money, that it is a very strong indication that the project will succeed. Stacy probed Middleberg on his theory of change, asking whether there is an overemphasis of “head” (organizational management) over “heart” (organizational mission). Middleberg asserted that the head and heart of an organization are not in contradiction, but that the head has to be “squared off” in order for the organization to not lose its heart. When asked about NGO competition, both Middleberg and Deychakiwsky believe that there need to be fewer emerging NGOs, and more partnerships and mergers between those that currently exist. Questions from the audience included the resources required for theory of change, the need and ability to stay true to one’s mission, and the systems in place to test and measure change.  

Dana Phelps, Program Associate, Program on Human Rights

Douglas Rutzen, president and CEO of the International Center for Not-for-Profit Law (ICNL), and adjunct professor of law at Georgetown University in Washington, D.C., gave a talk on defending civil society for the Stanford Program on Human Rights’ Winter Speaker Series, “U.S. Human Rights NGOs and International Human Rights,” on January 7, 2015.

Rutzen sounded the alarm of today’s disturbing trend of governments around the world using the rule of law to restrict civic spaces of congregation and protestation. Highlighting that national governments are constitutionally committed to a rule of law, Rutzen claimed this is not being applied in the interests of the citizen but rather to restrict citizens’ criticism of government. Rutzen emphasized that this misuse of the rule of law to restrict civil society is a tool of manipulation utilized not just by nations with a history of civic control, such as Cuba and Russia, but also by liberal democracies, including the United States.

Rutzen noted that the Millennium Development Goals (MDG) established in 2000 were dramatically altered by the attacks of September 11, 2001. NGOs were targeted as potential terrorist organizations, while at the same time recognized for their potential to fight terrorism. This contradiction shows the tension in the role of NGOs in civil society. The challenge now lies in a long-term transformation of the relationship between NGOs representing civil society and national governments.

The talk continued with a discussion with Helen Stacy, director of the Program on Human Rights, and Rutzen. Stacy posed provocative questions that challenged Rutzen to defend his stance with questions on U.S. cultural imperialism; “good” and “bad” civil society groups; and the need to understand domestic civil society engagement with human rights issues as part of international human rights activism. 

-Dana Phelps, Program Associate, Program on Human Rights