Gleanings from the press:

• A follow-up on the previous note about Bush’s subtle signals: isn’t it a bad thing if you’re to the right of Genghis Khan?
• Also, GWB hit the airag, which is “sometimes likened to a mix of warm beer and buttermilk” (to put it generously). Will this affect Bush’s teetotaling image?

There’s a new op-ed from Elbegdorj in the Washington Post. A few reactions:
- “Welcome to freedom.”

- I’ll leave the discussion of whether bad governance = lack of freedom for another time.

-”Without a bullet being fired, without tanks in the streets, we laid the groundwork for building a new society”

- this is true and nontrivial, particularly vis-a-vis the Tajik Civil War and, more recently Andijan. Mongolian politics have been almost entirely devoid of the polarized/polemical rhetoric that marks the political sphere in other developing countries. Or, more precisely, there is a great deal of hostile talk between the parties, but nothing truly bad has come of it.

-”Our people are working hard to consolidate our freedom.”

- Who are these people? How many work outside of Sukhbaatar Square?

-”Without question among the greatest challenges facing our democratic institutions are poverty and corruption. Parliamentarians in both parties of our ruling Grand Coalition are working to provide the legal framework and resources to ensure that civil servants remain exactly that — servants of the people.”

- OK, who will take the first step beyond corruption? Who will risk their career to break the cycle of graft?

-”It is now not uncommon to see a satellite dish outside a herdsman’s ger — our traditional dwelling.”

- I did find this (and solar panels) a bit disorienting and surreal.

-”Further strengthening our development efforts is the inclusion of Mongolia in the Millennium Challenge program. When we sign our compact to begin project implementation, it will add a new level of transparency, ’sunlight’ and public participation to this critical poverty alleviation program by supporting economic growth.”

- An interesting construction that could be illustrative: Elbegdorj expects the MCC and/or the compact to add transparency rather than pledging to do it himself in anticipation of the MCC.

-”The mechanics of putting together our Millennium program have involved public input and solicitation of proposals from the people.” - Sort of. It was not exactly “grass-roots governance at its best”

- there was quite a bit of elite bargaining and referendum politics in order to achieve consensus in the process of developing the proposal.

- “perhaps there are already lessons for others in what we have accomplished.”

- I’m not so sure. Certainly the structures of Mongolian democracy are in place, but given the political stagnation of the ‘Grand Coalition’

With this I’m (hopefully) going to begin a semi-regular (or, rather, more frequent) series of wiritings tentatively titled “Alan Responds” (yes, I realize the title is unoriginal - let me know if you have a better idea). I’m now in the literature review part of my work, and I’m wrestling with how the major theories of democratic transition (Huntington, Lipset, Putnam, etc.) may or may not apply to Central Asia. I’ll be posting quotes from the authors and my response to them. Hopefully, there will be some dialog, as I’ll probably have misinterpreted the quote or taken it out of its proper context. Maybe there may even be a flame war or two. It should be fun!