Do post-conflict countries which concentrate on retribution and vengeance have worse growth prospects than post-conflict countries which concentrate on forgiveness and acceptance? “Yes!” according to Pete Boettke and Chris Coyne of George Mason University, who build the argument in their recent paper on the political economy of forgiveness. What does their argument mean in terms of policy recommendations?
What this indicates is that a central focus of any transition must be determining mechanisms which increase public discourse. Indeed, if the aim is the establishment of a new regime, fostering public discourse may be more important than seeking retribution. Discourse is one key mechanism has the potential to generate an ethic of reconciliation. Retribution may be a factor in reconciliation but it is unclear that it can, by itself, establish the required ethic to move forward. One means of achieving this is protecting freedom of speech and individual rights as well as creating an environment where a free media can develop. Further, technologies such as the Internet, cell phones and satellite television, which are increasing in availability at decreasing costs, provide another means of foster public discourse not just within border also across borders.
The basic argument makes sense. Boettke and Coyne don’t argue for forgetting a country’s past injustices – their point is that the costs of transitional justice must be carefully considered to make sure they are in line with the benefits. Some level of justice is important, but overconcentration on retribution can hurt countries’ reconstruction prospects.
I wonder how this plays into reconstruction efforts in Iraq, Afghanistan, Sudan, Haiti, Sierra Leone, Kosovo, and others. It does not seem that Kosovo, for example, has been able to “forget and forgive,” and as it remains highly divided ethnically it is dealing with the reality that large financial assistance from the E.U. and elsewhere has brought about little change in terms of setting the country on the path of sustainable economic growth. Is the inability to “forgive and forget” one of the reasons that the country is facing bleak economic prospects? Perhaps.
Consider the example Vaclav Havel:
In an act of profound symbolism intended to invoke the politics of forgiveness, when Havel was given the opportunity to look at the names of those who informed on him to the old regime, he crumbled up the paper and placed it in the small of his back where he could not see the names. Havel continually counseled his countrymen in the early period of post-communism that they not forget the consequences of hatred, but that they move on with the task of creating a new liberal regime and cultivating a cosmopolitan attitude in individuals. Havel argued that citizens must live in truth, but not seek vengeance based on that truth.
Is it a coincidence that Czech Republic is a poster child for successful transition of former Communist states?
Published Date: March 22, 2006