By Aeryn Northway, 2023

Published 4/8/22

With a single glance over our world, one will without a doubt see that foreign policy and international constructivism in consideration to democracy is decaying at a dramatic pace. The last decade has shown us glimpses of the creeping shadows of the past slowly entrenching themselves within our day-to-day lives. Our lines of sight are engulfed in struggles for rights won long ago, while substantial conflicts just out of our surroundings continue to weaken our own claim on humanity as an enlightened species. In the swaying shade of those shadows, a great number of countries strive to maintain the values of democracy and self-determined independence. We as a people must realize that part of the essence of humankind is protecting the right to choose as we so wish.

With the continuous Russian offensive upon Ukraine and viewing the scenes settling upon the screens of my daily life, I realized something I had at times previously glossed over. The passion of those wishing for the right to choose for themselves. As a smaller nation fighting with tremendous strength against its oppressor, the Ukrainian people must greatly desire democracy and freedom of choice. Ukraine has a lengthy history with its invading neighbor; one of curses and brotherhood and hatred. Induced famine has cost this land as many as 3.9 million of it, primarily caused by power-hungry hands in the heart of its motherland at the time. Is the desire to take away choice dictated by hatred or by power? In itself, an unanswerable question for the people on the ground far from those of great sway in countries like Russia.

Ukrainians have called and will likely still refer to some Russians in the future as ватники, meaning “quilted jackets.” In practice, the term refers to the blind and nationalistic state of some Russians, typically in reference to Ukrainian sovereignty. The sort of character of these individuals and their carelessness towards allowing others to choose opposed to themselves is the weakness of the world without a path for less stable countries to pursue democracy.

The mention of importance here is one of reliance on singular countries to maintain choice in their government and populace. In the spirit of that intrinsic idea, the United States created the Truman Doctrine after the Second World War. Within the document stating that they vowed to protect any democratic country threatened by authoritarian rule. Though similar to a great many doctrines of a nation, the Truman Doctrine has gone mostly unused for several decades. Yet, this catalog of opinion in relation to democracy abroad lays a shimmering groundwork for change. People should without fail have the ability to choose who, what, which, when, where, wherever they so aspire to.

A union of nations with pro-democratic values would allow a dream of that sort to succeed in the world of today. Multilateral institutions of the present exist to advance society, and by extension, a complex group of individuals with differing opinions and backgrounds. By protecting countries with lesser powers relative to their neighbors, millions of dissimilar people will likely benefit. Across nearly all cultures lies the desire to choose, because it is an innate human desire. With no desire other than to promote pro-democracy ideals along with an understanding of what fearing a lack of those desired values. This institution has far more ability to spread not just democracy alone, but a shared future of free choice across the Earth.