Draft: Please do not cite without permission of the author. How the German political foundations shape political parties in Sub-Saharan Africa

Transcription

1 Dr. (des.) Kristina Weissenbach Institute for Political Science, NRW School of Governance University Duisburg-Essen Draft: Please do not cite without permission of the author Outside support for internal party democracy? How the German political foundations shape political parties in Sub-Saharan Africa Paper for the panel Internal Party Democracy in New and in Established Democracies, 7th ECPR General Conference, Bordeaux, 4-7 September 2013 Abstract While internal party democracy is a crucial component of European parties in particular, party leadership in many of the so-called new democracies refuses to democratize its internal decision-making processes. The German political foundations have recognized this issue and have been one of the first international institutions to work on political party development and internal party democracy in new democracies. Since there is a lack of research on the democracy promotion programmes of the foundations as well as on party assistance in general, we do not know much about the effects of party assistance on the party organization and the internal party democracy of political parties in post-authoritarian states. By concentrating on the party assistance programmes of two German foundations, namely the Friedrich-Ebert-Stiftung (FES) and Konrad-Adenauer-Stiftung (KAS) and on their partner-parties in Kenya and South Africa from 2002 to 2010, this paper aims to answer two core research-questions: How institutionalized are the political parties in Kenya and in South Africa and what are their specific characteristics concerning the organization and the internal party democracy? What are the instruments of party assistance by the German political foundations and what are their effects on the development of party organization and internal party democracy? This paper argues that party assistance needs to draw on the individual level of a partys institutionalization (Basedau/Stroh 2008; Randall/Svåsand 2002) to have an impact on political party development and the parties internal decision-making process. Against the background of this hypothesis and based on empirical research in Kenya and South Africa, this paper analyses general conditions and impact of party assistance on internal party democracy. 1

2 Outside support for internal party democracy? How the German political foundations shape political parties in Sub-Saharan Africa 1. Introduction While internal party democracy is a crucial component of European parties in particular, party leadership in many of the so-called new democracies refuses to democratize its internal decision-making processes. The German political foundations have recognized this issue and have been one of the first international institutions to work on political party development and internal party democracy in new democracies. Their aim is to institutionalize political parties by strengthening their internal party democracy. 1 Since there is a lack of research on the democracy promotion programmes of the foundations as well as on party assistance in general, we do not know much about the effects of party assistance on the organization and the internal party democracy of political parties in post-authoritarian states (Burnell 2006; Carothers 2006; Erdmann 2006a,b; Mair 2000). Therefore, the intentional aim of this paper is not to evaluate in a normative way whether political party assistance is good or bad. Party assistance exists. Hence, this paper establishes an understanding of how party assistance proceeds and whether the party assistance instruments of the German political foundations matter for a parties organization and its internal party democracy. Moreover, the study follows the assumption that the German political foundations still carry out their programmes on the basis of an ideal-typical picture of a parties organization and its internal party democracy. But especially in the so called new democracies there is no standard way, in which parties have organised themselves and their intra-party decisionmaking. The established catalogue of elements of party organization and rules of internal party democracy (Katz/Mair 1994; Panebianco 1988; Sartori 2005) can only be adopted for the African context as long as some modifications are considered: for example the ethnical cleavage model 2 or the need for a stronger inclusion of informal politics. In this paper I would like to answer two core research questions. Furthermore I aim to illustrate and back up my argument by empirical findings from the cases of political parties 1 See the interviews conducted by the author, with the executives of the Party Assistance and Sub Saharan Africa divisions of the FES and the KAS in Bonn/Berlin (Germany). 2 As well as Lipset s and Rokkan s (1967) classic cleavage theory on the relationship between societal cleavages and party formation might work for an analysis of Western party system, it is not completely transferable to the African context. 2

3 and party assistance in Kenya and in South Africa in the period of examination from 2002 to In this period we can find political parties of two kinds that work together with the German political foundations: those which emerged from the top and others which have their grass-roots in liberation movements. Concerning the interdependence of political party assistance and internal party democracy two research questions are of special interest: How institutionalized are the political parties 3 in Kenya and in South Africa and what are their specific characteristics concerning the organization and the internal party democracy? What are the instruments of party assistance by the German political foundations and what are their effects on the development of party organization and internal party democracy? In order to answer these questions the first section of the paper provides a definition and operationalization of the term party organization as well as internal party democracy within the broad concept of party institutionalization as the account constructs the main argument, that the two dimensions party organization and internal party democracy are interrelated and the most important dimensions within a continuum of party institutionalization. Furthermore I assume that the higher the level of party institutionalization, the higher the impact of political parties on the democratic transition is likely to be. 4 Based on these theoretical assumptions the paper provides, secondly, a brief overview of the specific characteristics of the foundations partner parties in Kenya and South Africa with a special focus on the dimensions organization and internal party democracy. The third part examines the specific challenges that Kenyan and South African parties pose for party assistance providers. I analyze whether the foundations party assistance approaches in Kenya and South Africa included these specific characteristics in their instruments and whether they had an impact on the parties organization and their internal party democracy. The conclusion of the study is twofold: Firstly, the empirical findings illustrate, that since 2002 the political party assistance of the German foundations has witnessed a conceptual turn as they intensified the evaluations of their party assistance instruments and specified their party assistance approaches. Yet party assistance approaches rarely reached a level on which precise instruments of party assistance were developed that include aspects such as 3 that work together with the German political foundations. 4 For a discussion of the role of parties and party systems and their institutionalization in the democratic consolidation see: Mainwaring and Scully (1995); Sandbrook (1996); Merkel (1997); Randall and Svåsand (2002a; 2002b); Basedau and Stroh (2008). On the basis of a 12-country study in Latin America Mainwaring and Scully (1995) came to the conclusion that a high degree of institutionalization of party systems supports democratic consolidation. 3

4 the level of institutionalization of a partner party, e.g. the way parties have organized themselves and their intra-party decision-making. 5 Nevertheless, and secondly, the analysis shows that the dimensions organization and internal party democracy are indeed the fields, where the foundations carry out most of their party assistance programs. Moreover it seems, that a special focus of these party assistance instruments is in the field of the programmatic decision-making within the foundations affiliated parties. The study is based on empirical research: The Author conducted 52 interviews and participant observation in party assistance workshops in Kenya, South Africa and Germany in the years 2008, 2009 and Theoretical assumptions: The interplay of party institutionalization, party organization and internal party democracy Whilst international party- and transformation-research has more or less agreed on a common understanding that more strongly institutionalized parties are favourable at least in comparison to less strongly institutionalized parties for democratic consolidation. These findings can be regarded as the basis of this research paper. Less clarity and compliance exists, however, in the terminology: precise definitions of what contributes to institutionalization and what role party organization and internal party democracy accounts for, have not been established as of today. Therefore, the development of the term institutionalization in the context of political parties will be portrayed. Furthermore, the operationalization of the dimensions organization and internal party democracy is established. 5 For a more detailed development of this argument as well as the discussion about the extent to which their party assistance activities take account of the various stages of the democratic transition process see also the study of the author on Political party assistance in transition (Weissenbach 2010b). 6 The author conducted interviews with the executives of the Party Assistance and Sub-Saharan Africa divisions of the FES and the KAS in Bonn/Berlin (Germany) as well as with former resident representatives. In Kenya and South Africa interviews were conducted with the resident representatives of the FES and the KAS, party members and members of the National Executive Committees, members of the Parliamentary Groups as well as representatives of the youth and women leagues of the political parties which are supported by the FES and the KAS. Moreover NGOs and cooperation partners of the German foundations as well as scientific researchers amongst others from the University of Nairobi, the University of the Witwatersrand/Johannesburg and the University of Cape Town have been dialogue partners. 4

5 While some authors do not distinguish between party institutionalization and party system institutionalization 7 or else confuse the concepts, the focus here is on party institutionalization. In the sense of the conceptualization developed by Panebianco, applied to the African case by Randall and Svåsand, and taken as a basis for the Index of Institutionalisation in five African cases by Basedau and Stroh: 8 the process through which they [political parties] become institutionalised is not identical with the party s development in purely organisational terms. Rather we suggest that institutionalization should be understood as the process by which the party becomes established in terms both of integrated patterns of behaviour and of attitudes, or culture. We suggest further that it is helpful to distinguish between internal and externally related aspects of this process. Internal aspects refer to developments within the party itself; external aspects have to do with the party s relationship with the society in which it is embedded, including other institutions. (Randall and Svåsand 2002a:12) Randall and Svåsand consider the four elements of systemness, value infusion, decisional autonomy and reification as constituting the core of the process of party institutionalization. That is, the process through which the party becomes established as an institution (Ibid.14). But the authors also mention, that institutionalization in terms of the four variables will increase the party s prospects for survival, it is certainly no guarantee against regression or de-institutionalization (Ibid. 15). Basedau and Stroh modified this model of party institutionalization and developed an Index of the Institutionalization of Parties (IIP) along the four criteria mentioned above. They understand the institutionalization of political organizations as a process of progress in four dimensions: roots in society, level of organization, autonomy, and coherence (emphasis added). In other words, institutionalization is the process of growing external and internal stability as well as value-infusion (Basedau/Stroh 2008). For the analysis of the German foundations party assistance instruments, the author is extending this understanding of party institutionalization by adding the three dimensions internal party democracy, political programme and regional and international integration, which reflects the current state of established international party research. Each dimension is linked with different indicators (Table 1) which can be directly used to assess the political party assistance instruments of the German Stiftungen in Kenya and South Africa. 7 See for a distinction: Kuenzi and Lambright (2001). 8 Panebianco (1988); Randall and Svåsand (2002a); Basedau/Stroh (2008). 5

6 Table 1. Dimensions and indicators of party institutionalization Dimension Indicator Roots in society: The party has stable roots in society. Party age relative to independence. Party age relative to beginning of multiparty period. Changes in electoral support in last and second last elections. Links to civil society organizations. Autonomy: Notwithstanding its societal roots, the party is relatively independent of individuals within and societal groups outside the party. Number of alternations in party leadership. Changes in electoral support after alternation in party leadership. Decisional autonomy from individuals and groups. Popular appreciation of particular party. Organization: There is an organizational apparatus which is constantly present at all administrative levels and acts in the interest of the party. Membership strength. Regular party congresses. Material and personal resources. Nationwide organizational presence, activities beyond election campaigns. Coherence: The party acts as a unified organization; The party tolerates a certain Level of intra-party dissidence. Tolerance vis-à-vis intra-party dissidence Coherence of parliamentary group (no defections or floor-crossing). Moderate relations between intra-party groupings (no dysfunctional factionalism). Internal Party Democracy The internal decision making process concerning personnel and policy takes place from the bottom to the top of the party. The party represents democratic principles. Regular party and membership congresses. Bottom-up principle in the internal decisionmaking process. The internal decisions are transparent. 6

7 The party finances are transparent. Informal politics are rare. Regional and international integration The party incorporates itself into regional and international party groups and organizations. The party is accepted at the international level. Integration of the party in regional and international party groups: Socialist International (SI);Liberal International (LI);Centrist Democrat International (CDI); Global Greens (GG). The Youth League/Women s League are members of the according youth and women s associations (e.g. Socialist Youth International; Socialist Women International; International Young Democrat Union; International Women Union) The party is member of a regional suborganization of the international party groups (e.g. Democrat Union of Africa) The Party is involved and accepted by regional African organisations (AU, NEPAD). Political Programme The party has an ideological coherence; a transparent positioning concerning its policy, values and ideology A Party Manifesto exists; The party is organized around political ideas rather than ethnic, religious or regional identities. No extreme ideologies 9. The party develops policies and programmes that represent the party s value-orientation. Source: Author s compilation; See Basedau and Stroh, 'Measuring Party Institutionalization in Developing Countries. As the empirical preliminary studies of the author have shown (Weissenbach 2013), the party assistance instruments concerning internal related aspects (Randall/Svåsand 2002a) of party institutionalization, namely the organization and the internal party democracy, and the chronology of its implementation are decisive for a parties way from a week institutionalized 9 Knowing that an ethnic linkage with society and an ethnic identity are not negative per se. Especially the African case shows that political parties without a strong organization but based on regional and ethnic cleavages and identity are able to aggregate and articulate interests. Nevertheless the same African examples are proof that, once an ethnic identity is politically mobilized (e.g. in election times), it can curb the process of democratic consolidation and become a danger to the public and the political community. (Compare Erdmann 2004:74f). 7

8 to a institutionalized party. Therefore the focus of this study will be on these two dimensions of party institutionalization. Even though party assistance has been going on for decades and the German foundations are experts in this field, various studies and evaluations criticize the foundations strategy and concepts (Carothers 2004, 2006; Erdmann 2006a,b; Mair 2000). What these critics have in common is an understanding, that the foundations base their strategies solely on Western European party systems and experiences. Burnell and Gerrits (2010:1068) illustrate this to the point when assessing party assistance in general: it still works with an ideal-typical organizational, financial, and ideological image of political parties, largely derived from Western European experiences. Furthermore they stressed, that [t]he extent to which this party image actually determines concrete activities is not so easy to establish (Burnell/Gerrits 2010:1068). In the following I wil accept exactly this challenge and examine how the party assistance concerning the dimensions organization and internal democracy of a party proceeds and whether the German foundations take account of the specific characteristics of the Kenyan and South African political parties when carrying out their party assistance instruments. Therefore, the next section provides a brief account of these specific characteristics of Kenyan and South African parties (which are funded by the German foundations), and explores the context-sensitive challenges for political party assistance. Based on this analysis the third part of the paper assesses whether the foundations party assistance instruments in Kenya and South Africa included these specific characteristics and whether they made an impact on the parties organization and their internal party democracy. 3. How institutionalized are the political parties in Kenya and South Africa? Based on their ideological and value-orientated strategy (see part 4 of the paper) the German political foundations collaborate either with one partner or sister party or with different ideological close parties in South Africa and/or Kenya, and are concentrating on a partisan approach (Table 2). 8

9 Table 2. German foundations and their partner-parties in Kenya and South Africa German foundations KAS Kenya Partner-Party Democratic Party (DP) National Rainbow Coalition (NARC) FES Kenya Orange Democratic Movement (ODM) Liberal Democratic Party (LDP) United Democrats of Kenya (UNDA) Forum for the Restoration of Democracy Kenya (FORD-K) KAS South Africa FES South Africa Inkatha Freedom Party (IFP) African National Congress (ANC) Source: Authors compilation 10 Party Institutionalization in South Africa: African National Congress (ANC) and Inkatha Freedom Party (IFP) In South Africa the FES has a partner-party which is performing relatively well. At least in terms of the seven institutionalization dimensions: roots in society, autonomy, organization, coherence, internal party democracy, programmatic and regional and international integration. It is certainly not performing equally well in all seven criteria: as a former liberation movement, the ANC has strong roots in society and still refers to this traditional background, especially in election times. Moreover the ANC does not rely as much on ethnic groups as, for example, Kenyan parties do but instead focuses on programmatic discussions. The fact, that changes in the ANC-party leadership are accepted peacefully clearly shows that the party is independent of individual leaders. This could well be demonstrated with the relatively smooth transition from Nelson Mandela to Thabo Mbeki to Jacob Zuma. As we will see later, this is in stark contrast with most of the Kenyan parties. However, there remain challenges concerning the coherence of the party as well as the internal party democracy. These issues led to the break-away of a new party from the ANC, 10 Based on interviews by the author with current and former resident representatives of the KAS and the FES in Kenya and South Africa. 9

10 namely the Congress of the People (COPE). Dysfunctional factionalism is still one of the pressing issues within the ANC. ANC-members of Parliament stated that a higher toleration of intraparty dissidence is the one topic which party assistance partners should strengthen and emphasize when arranging workshops or trainings. They mentioned that the lack of unity within the party organization is a challenge the ANC has to cope with at the moment. 11 As far as internal party democracy within the ANC is concerned, a lack of transparency in internal decision making as well as party financing remains a problem. Even if the ANC conforms to formal-organizational requirements of an institutionalized party especially in comparison to parties in other African countries its evolution as a liberation movement during the time of Apartheid left strong residues of a top-down tradition regarding intra-party decision-making processes. Both the armed liberation struggle and the coercive leadership from exile cause hierarchichal and centralistic structures inside of the present-day party. Meeting of members and party conferences are held, but factual control of decisionmaking rests centralistically with the NEC. Generally the factionalism inside of the ANC is bipolar, ranging from leftist activist of COSATU and SACP (which increasingly experience friction themselves) to a group of liberal entrepeneurs on the other end of the spectrum. This polarization is paralleled by different unformal networks, which are less organized than the major factions but nevertheless undermine intraparty democracy. How these networks are based on ethnicity is still a question to be researched. Especially in the terms of Mbeki it is obvious, that personnel with Xhosa background was preferred. Summing up we see intransparent decision-making processes inside of the party, an averseness to open and controversial debate as well as opaque financial sources. Power within the ANC has shifted to the executive, moreover the ANC holds an almost hegemonic position in South Africa and is a leader on the African continent. Whether the foundations party assistance in South Africa takes these findings into account and henceforth concentrates on developing instruments that strengthen the coherence of the party and internal party democracy, is a core question for the foundations' party assistance practice and for the professionalization of their party assistance concepts. Possible instruments, amongst others, could be a series of workshops with party officials, stressing the importance of the management of party organization and internal party communication combined with methods for mobilizing party members and civil society. Furthermore, advising the party elites on issues such as the decentralization of the internal party decision-making process or ethics and politics could strengthen tolerance for intraparty dissidence and encourage transparent internal decision-making processes. 11 See Interviews by the author with party members and members of parliament of the ANC. 10

11 In the Inkatha Freedom Party intraparty participation for common party members regarding political or personnel decisions are very restricted. The party on the ground is strongly disadvantaged in comparison to the national level. Top-down decisions are the rule. Even though party conferences are held yearly the National Council (consisting of office holders on national and provincial level, delegates from the provinces and members of the National Executive Committee) is solely responsible for the programmatical direction of the party, the intraparty control of public office holders, the financial satet of affairs and the creation of electoral lists. An accentuated role in the context of intraparty decision making lies with the founder and long-time president of the party Mangosuthu Buthelezi. According to the party statutes from 2006 he himself appoints a quarter of the 100 members on the National Council and of the 16 members on the National Executive Committee. During the government participation of Inkatha ( ) little attention was spent on party organization. Only after the elections of 2004 the focus shifted to the constitution of party structures. In his speech on the IFP party conference in 2006 Buthelezi recognized deficits in the intraparty structure and postulated a re-structuring of the party (Heyn 2009: 116). Nevertheless he contested the intraparty elections in 2008 as front-runner for the party leadership and still leads the party. Party Institutionalization in Kenya: Democratic Party, National Rainbow Coalition, Orange Democratic Movement, Liberal Democratic Party, United Democrats of Kenya and Forum for the Restoration of Democracy-K The partner-parties of the FES in Kenya are young (the right to establish parties alongside the ruling KANU party was not installed before 1992) 12 whereas the ANC in South Africa has a much longer political tradition, being established as early as Therefore the selection of an ideologically close party for the FES in Kenya was, and still proves to be, difficult. A partisan approach and the support for only one affiliated party has proven to be a risk in this context, therefore a multiparty approach and instruments that aim at building up the value-orientation of a party seem to be more appropriate. In comparison to South Africa, the young multi-party system of Kenya is strongly influenced by ethnic cleavages. Therefore those parties referring to an ethnic group have stronger roots in society than those parties which are organized around political ideas and a political programme. These ethnic roots are not to be considered negatively per se and it would be a 12 DP was founded in 2002, ODM in 2005, LDP in And also the partner party of the KAS in South Africa, the Inkatha Freedom Party (IFP), founded in

12 mistake to ignore the fact that ethnic cleavages are fundamental to Kenyan political culture. However, ethnic identity becomes dangerous and can weaken a plural civil society and a pluralistic party system, as political leaders exploit ethnic roots in political campaigns and in seeking electoral support. 14 Moreover, the existing youth leagues (e.g. of LDP or ODM) only offer weak links between the party and civil society, as all of the youth leagues are organized outside their mother parties organizational frame and do not have a voice within the party. Personalization and dependence on one powerful political patron, informal politics and nontransparent decision-making processes and party finance systems are the major deficits concerning nearly all Kenyan parties. Likewise there is no evidence of strong membership ties to the parties, regular party congresses, comprehensive material or personal resources or a nationwide organizational presence with party-activities beyond the obligatory election campaigns. As the General Secretary of the Kenyan Democratic Party (DP) states, this is mostly because of the fragile financing of the party and the fact that because of the bad infrastructure as well as the high criminal rates some party members have to travel by plane to the party. Which is unaffordable for a party like the DP. 15 Most political parties in Kenya have no register of members. If membership passes exist they are usually bought by the representative for supporters in his electoral district. Even moreso multiple memberships are very common. This rests mainly in the expectations of Kenyan voters, who rarely connect with parties or representatives on ideological or programmatical grounds but rather because they hope for material benefits. As for the indicator organization, the partner parties of both German foundations in Kenya are hardly institutionalized. Compared to South Africa this is significantly different. In general the South African partner parties have established an organizational apparatus which is constantly present at all administrative levels and is able to act in the interests of its party. Concerning the Kenyan parties you will not find such an organizational apparatus. A research fellow of the FES in Kenya brings this to the point. He assesses, that [a]ll decisions are made in Nairobi. People come to the congress but they don t have any influence on the party positions and the party activities" (Interview of the author, ). Looking at intraparty decision-making, be it for personnel or programmatic questions, a similar results hold true for all examined Kenyan parties: The party leader is of paramount importance. If he decides to change to a different party or to found a new party, his former party typically dissolves (among others party politicians of the LDP and ODM, Interview of the author ). The prominent role of the party leader determines grave deficits in intraparty 14 For a discussion about ethnic parties and ethnic party bans in Africa see: Bogaards/Basedau /Hartmann/Niesen (2007). 15 See interview of the author with the Secretary General of the DP,

13 democracy (Interview with the Kenyan residential representative of the FES, ). Elections for party office are either not held at all or under dubious circumstances, i.e. regarding nomination of candidates (Kopsieker/Oloo 2005:16). Candidates are not selected by votes from party members on local level but rather by loyality to the party leader. There are no established and transparent management structures. Patronage and loyality to ethnic leaders secure a superficial cohesion (Kopsieker/Oloo 2005:16). These top-down mechanisms replace a bottom-up approach in Kenyan parties and render internal party democracy like in western democratic parties impossible. Furthermore these structures pave the way for corruption. If a party recieves a majority at parliamentary elections, the party leadership is solely focused on staying in power and extending power where the governing party regularily draws on state ressources, which are inaccesible to opposition parties, leaving them impeded in the political competition. But, still, even without a culture of political participation through political parties, the Kenyan parties are the only framework for political discussion and for the political organization of different ethnical leaders. 4. Does party assistance matter for the development of party organization and internal party democracy? As the portray of the organization and of the internal party democracy showed, South African and Kenyan parties pose a special challenge to party assistance programmes: It is obvious that party assistance instruments cannot be conceptualized without considering the contextspecific characteristics and the level of institutionalization of a partner-party. It would not be adequate, to work with an ideal-typical image of political parties. Whether the German political foundations include the individual level of institutionalization of their partner-parties when carrying out their party assistance instruments will be examined in the last part of this paper. What are the instruments of party assistance by the German political foundations and what are their effects on the development of party organization and internal party democracy? Within the Western organizations working in the field of foreign relations, development policy and political party assistance, the German Stiftungen take up a special position 16 : they are 16 For this part of the paper and a detailed discussion of the special position of the German Stiftungen in international democracy promotion and political party assistance see: Weissenbach 2010a;

14 neither non-governmental nor governmental organizations and therefore sometimes referred to as Quangos (quasi non-governmental organizations). This status provides unique opportunities in the field of party assistance; while they are nearly as independent as nongovernmental organizations (NGOs) in carrying out their projects with resident representatives enjoying a high degree of autonomy, at the same time they are securely state-funded by the German Ministry for Economic Cooperation and Development and therefore, but only to a moderate degree, subject to ministerial controls. 17 In the field of party assistance there are the following six major approaches: 18 supporting ideologically close parties (partisan approach); supporting several parties (multiparty approach); supporting supra and inter-party dialogues (cross-party dialogue); promoting institutional development (institutional approach); supporting transnational cooperation between parties from the same region/continent (international cross-party collaboration); supporting the civil-society environment (civil-society approach). In comparison to other NGOs or institutions working in the field of party cooperation the German foundations possess unique features: their long tradition within the countries 19 and networking between different branches in the region: In the course of their long-term presence abroad, each foundation has managed to create a close-knit network of contacts which it can place at the disposal of its affiliated party. (T)he foundations contacts can be instrumental in the creation and maintenance of transnational party cooperation. As such, a political foundation fulfils its international role in the interest of its affiliated party, although this is not its primary 17 E.g. the Ministry for Economic Cooperation and Development assures that none of the German foundations is working together with the partner party of another foundation. But concerning the party assistance measures and instruments, the German foundations are acting relatively independently, in contrast to e.g. NDI or IRI which are less autonomous as their projects have to conform to guidelines set by the US government. See Mathisen/Svåsand See Erdmann 2006b; as well as the interviews of the author with the regional representatives of the German political foundations in Kenya and South Africa. 19 However there are differences to be acknowledged when comparing the FES and the KAS: There are marked differences among the foundations not only in functional concentration but also in regional terms. the FES has permanent offices with field representatives in 21 African countries, 17 Latin American countries, 14 Asian countries and eight Eastern European countries; the numbers for the KAS are 14 in Latin America, 13 in Asia, ten in Eastern Europe countries, nine in sub-saharan Africa, eight in North Africa/Middle East. See Mair 2000:

15 concern. The extent to which political foundations and political parties work harmoniously can vary considerably, depending on such variables as the individuals involved and the political role of the respective party. (Bartsch 2001:207) Since the dawn of multi-partyism in Kenya and South Africa most of the German foundations have been offering partisan support to more than one political party as well as support for cross-party dialogue and international cross-party collaboration. Nevertheless, they are still focusing on long-term partnerships with ideologically affiliated parties, as, for example, the long-lasting partnership between the South African African National Congress (ANC) and the Friedrich-Ebert Stiftung in South Africa shows. In the following the paper focuses on those instruments, the FES and KAS in Kenya and in South Africa applied to strengthen the organization and the internal party democracy of their partner-parties. Party Assistance concerning Party Organization and Internal Party Democracy in Kenya Appropriate to the individual way the Kenyan political parties are organized, party assistance instruments would be adequate if they are conceptualized in a way that encourages the leader and the executive of a party to open up and to bottom-up their internal structure. At the moment, party leaders refuses party assistance programmes and workshops that try to broach the issue of bottom-up-organization and political participation of the public. Friedrich-Ebert-Stiftung The FES realized the deficit of internal party democracy of their partner parties and stated in the description of a cooperation-project with the NGO Centre for Governance and Development that: ( ) Internal democracy, thus, has to address the endemic problem of lack of transparency in the nomination process, voter bribery, intimidation, vote buying and official interference with the results. All this could be, to a large extent, minimized if the implementation of the Political Parties Act is done in spirit and letter ( ) (FES 2010:23). Between 2004 and 2006 the party assistance instruments of the FES focused on the topic internal party democracy of its partner-parties LDP and NARC-K. Anyway, in workshops and counseling interviews with both parties it came out, that the party leadership didn t follow their own statutes: elections within the party have not been hold within the declared time period and decisions of different committees have not been implemented. Those experiences caused a turn of the party assistance strategy of the FES: on the one hand the foundation intensified its party assistance programmes with the youth organization of the LDP and 15

16 FORD-Kenia and on the other hand they identified a new and younger partner-party, namely the United Democrats (UNDA): The youth organization and the young parties are not taken seriously by their motherparties and are not involved in important decision-making-processes. As a result of this we found more honest and more sustainable interest with regard to contents and with regard to internal party democracy when working together with those parties. Moreover they weren t as much fixated on power-seeking as the older parties and open-minded for a strengthening of the internal-party democracy (Interview with the resident representative, ; translated by author). Therefore the instruments of the FES concerning the organization and the internal party democracy of the LDP Youth League have been workshops to work out strategies for internal party elections. Together with the United Democrats the FES conducted a yearlong training course in party-leadership and developing of party statutes. Moreover different party politicians were invited to Germany to workshops and counseling interviews concerning party-leadership, party organization and coalition building (FES 2006, 2007). The stratey paper and course material of the FES for its party assistance in 2006 aims to strengthen the programmatic position of the partner-parties and to support that those programmes are the results of a bottom-up decision-making process (FES 2006). Therefore the FES organized public round-tables and discussions concerning the different party programmes at the University of Nairobi. The LDP leadership has been invited to workshops with experts and to round-tables on the regional level. As well as there has been a consulting service for the strategic planning unit of the LDP and the UNDA with regard to questions of the developing of a party programme. The strategy paper of the FES for the year 2007 therefore expected, that the partner-parties developed substantial programmes concerning important policies (FES 2007, translated by author). Accordingly the FES supported UNDA, NARC-K and ODM-K with regard to the development and publication of their party programmes and statutes. Anyway the residential representative admits that especially the round-tables with the LDP haven t been successful: We tried to arrange small working-groups and to develop professional position papers concerning important policies. The next step should have been to take these position papers to the regional level, to the grassroots, so that it can be discussed there and be further developed. But it didn t work very well. Even if there were developed proper position papers, we assume, that these papers have been written by academic experts who are affiliated to the party. So the aim to bring a programmatical discussion to the grassroots failed. Contrary to this, the LDP-leadership gave Top-down -lectures on different policies to regional party elites. (Interview with the residential representative, , translated by author). 16

17 Konrad-Adenauer-Stiftung A former residential representative of the KAS in Kenia, had emphazised the goal of strengthening the internal party democracy of the partner parties of the KAS during his tenure: Intra-party structures must be in accordance with the democratic principle in order to have a minimum level of legitimacy. And that can only be achieved by anchoring the party deeply in society. Nationwide structures have to be established and and members directories have to be created. Currently the parties obstruct themselves their own future if they do not allow new and highly motivated members into the party" (Ahner-Toennis 2007:11, translated by author). However, after a new representative was introduced to the KAS office in Kenya, the formulated goal was rarely translated into concrete instruments. The former residential representative of the KAS in Kenia critically acknowledges the tension between ethnic and programmatic orientation within the partner-parties. Yet, he reflects that political party assistance cannot ignore these tensions, but, instead, must learn to effectively deal with them: Ethnicity is a a major factor in Kenya. A factor that obstructs party development. At least as long as ethnicity is used as instrument of power. It would be illusory to be able to remove ethnicity from the political thinking of the Kenyans or the Africans. Rather ethnicity has to be converted into a tool of free and fair political competition. Ethnicity could then be used as a driving force for economic and even cultural development.through the organization of party on the regional and local level, this may partly be achieved. Because decentralization reduces the impression, that political decisions are exclusively made in Nairobi. The influence of local leaders is only established if they are also present in decsion-making processes. And thus that radiates through economic development throughout the country. Decentralisation combined with economic development are two important variables in order to push back the restricting influence of ethnicity in the process of democratization" (Ahner- Toennis 2007:12, translated by author). Ahner-Toennis also claimed, that it was important tot he KAS to position the partner parties programmaticaly; Recent surveys illustrate, that the voters expect some form of explanation by the parties, about how they imagine the development of Kenia in general, how jobs can be created, what perspective they can offer to the younger generations, how more autonomy can be transferred to regional districts and how the use of public funds can be implemented effectively. Up unitl today, little information was provided by the party representatives. Even the party-manifestos only included (Ahner-Toennis 2007:12, translated by author). If all specific instruments implemented by the KAS in recent years are cosidered, the measures that deal with internal decision-making processes concerning the political programmes have clearly decreased. Even if recently seminars with the NARC-K were held on such issues as party-structure, organization and leadership, programmatic guidance was, 17

18 instead, focused solely on the responsibility of the parties in the context of a constituional revision (Interview with the former residential representative, ; Föllner 2009; Jansen / Lerch 2010). Party Assistance concerning Party Organization and Internal Party Democracy in South Africa Centralized top-down-structures characterize the descion-making processes within the ANC. The IFP, however, might be distinguished by the special status, that is assigned to party leader Buthelezi. The party leader is granted with certain privileges concerning personnel descions. As the leader of his ethnic group, he has dominated the Inkatha Freedom Party/Inkatha Movement. What ANC and IFP have in common, however different the reasons for it may be, is a rather reservered position when it comes to bottom-up-structures within their respected parties. For the german foundations, which consider the strengthening of internal party democracy as one of their main goals, this situation obviously poses a serious challenge. Therefore, incentives as well as persuasiveness are needed in order to convince party elites to open up towards bottom up processes of inner party democracy. Friedrich-Ebert-Stiftung Since Zuma, there has been a setback in inner-party democarcy within the ANC (Interview with the residential representative of the FES in South Africa, , translated by author). The former head of the FES-Bureau in South Africa also links the set back of internal party democracy within the ANC to the dominance of the party executive, to fear of the simple ANC-representatives in the national parliament and therefore directly to the electoral system. Because of the ballot-list and the leaderships dominance in choosing the electoral lineup on that list, no representative is willing to stand up to Zuma, as they will, most certainly, not be placed on the ballot again (Interview with the residential representative, , translated by author). As the head of the Africa Department of the FES in Bonn/Berlin mentioned: Tailor-made instruments for internal party democracy are a major challenge. One would have to actively manage to bring together different fractions within the ANC of some of the major issues. If there was a debate on an economic issue, it would, for example, not suffice to work with the trade unions, one would have to get the trade unions involved in a proper discussion within the party. Yet, the interests of the ANC can not be neglected. There would have to be proper discussion amongst all actors involved (Interview, , translated by author). 18

19 The South African residential representative of the FES states that, right now we are witnessing a new phase: it s the we are prepared to kill for Zuma -Phase. The ANC is currently getting increasingly militarized. The main task for the FES has to be the strengthening of democratic and programatic elements (Interview, , translated by author). In recent years the FES has not provided advice on the program or the manifesto of the ANC. Instead, open dialogues on various topics were initiated amongst representatives by the FES in order to strengthen programmatic elements and to create forums for a intraparty debate, as the former residential representative explained. Such consulting measures were implemented especially on economic policy in the context of the Economic Tranformation Council of the ANC. The course material from 2005 for example, specifies under Point 2.2 Project Goals that alternative models of economic transformation ( ) [must] be introduced into the economic discourse (translated by author). Konrad-Adenauer-Stiftung Commonly the two big issues are internal party democarcy and the political programme. Maybe Finance could be considered as a third (Interview with the deputy head of the International Department of the KAS, , translated by author). In order to attain these goals, instruments that foster internal party democracy would have to be implemented on a personal and invidual level: Wherever individual potential is discovered, that is, for example, a person that strongly identifies with our poitical positions, we encourage this indivdual to foster change either within the party or to establish a new group or faction within the party. Therefore our assistance focuses on the individual person ( ) on instruments like a scholarship, including travels to Germany and informational programs. Because every party, especially when it is not highly structured or deeply rooted within society, has different fractions and a multitude of different singular opinions. But a single opinion can become an opinion of the majority over time. But this depends on the right party assistance of the individual. The same applies to changes in personell. Alternatives need to be available (Interview with the deputy head of the International Department of the KAS, , translated by author) In order to enhance the transparency of the funding of political parties, the KAS published relevant publications on party financing and distributed those publications to the leaders of the IFP (e.g. Butler 2011). With regards to programmatic decision-making within the party, the KAS has also played a central role in the drafting of the new party mainfesto of the IFP (2008, 2009) in direct party advisory measures ('partisan approach'). The KAS organized and financed the first workshops for the discussion of the political programme and provided a framework to foster exchange between the decision-makers with representatives of the women and youth organization of the IFP or with forces from civil society. Furthermore, 19