Democracy within countries doesn’t only come from electorates and citizens at national or local level. Sometimes in our globalised world the course of democratisation can be directed from the outside, by international agencies, foreign governments, or bilateral or multilateral development cooperation agencies. Whether this is inherently a good or a bad thing depends in large part on context and on distribution of power and influence.

One need only think of the process of democratisation by means of the war in Iraq, and the ongoing role of occupying forces in supporting the democratically elected government, to trigger reflection on the rights and wrongs of democratisation. Where is sustainable development in the process?

Economic development, public institution-building and human rights are certainly visible themes. But poverty reduction; protection of the environment; economic development pathways that could lead to non fossil-fuel dependent futures – these themes don’t seem to be very visible at least in the ongoing process of change in Iraq, where the oil on which the country depends continues to flow.

In a book I’ve just been reviewing for the journal International Affairs, “The Ethics of Global Governance” (edited by Antonio Franceschet), chapter author Tom Keating explores the ethical limits of democracy promotion. He argues that “democracy promotion advocates and practices too often narrowly define democracy in relation to the establishment of markets.”

One former USAID official who I spoke to informally recently suggested that the existence of a free market may itself be an essential attribute or indicator of a democracy. For many advocates of sustainable development, who see economic liberalism (and liberalisation) as part of the problem, this is an extraordinary idea.

One key question then is this: how long before sustainable development gets integrated within the practice of democratisation on the ground? And what would democratisation designed with sustainable development in mind look like?