Government By Corruption

{
  "authors": [
    "Minxin Pei"
  ],
  "type": "legacyinthemedia",
  "centerAffiliationAll": "dc",
  "centers": [
    "Carnegie Endowment for International Peace"
  ],
  "collections": [],
  "englishNewsletterAll": "asia",
  "nonEnglishNewsletterAll": "",
  "primaryCenter": "Carnegie Endowment for International Peace",
  "programAffiliation": "AP",
  "programs": [
    "Asia",
    "Democracy, Conflict, and Governance"
  ],
  "projects": [],
  "regions": [
    "East Asia",
    "China"
  ],
  "topics": [
    "Political Reform",
    "Democracy"
  ]
}

In The Media

Government By Corruption

The most common cause of corruption is a combination of discretionary power and low accountability, both of which are imperative for the political survival of authoritarian regimes.

By Minxin Pei

Published on Jan 22, 2009

Source: Forbes

Corruption is universally viewed as a scourge. It stifles commerce, perverts governments and breeds social injustice. The most common cause of corruption is believed to be a combination of discretion and accountability. Governments with enormous discretionary power and low accountability are more corrupt than those with less discretion and more accountability. This observation has led us to seek institutional reforms that would grant governments less discretionary power, while making them more accountable to the people.

So far, so good. But in our quest to rid the world of corruption, we often forget one elemental truth--corruption may be a scourge for the ordinary people, but it is a vital governing tool for authoritarian regimes.

Of course, corruption exists in democracies as well, but such corruption, petty in both nature and sum, is fundamentally different from the massive looting by autocrats in dictatorships. That is why the least corrupt countries, with a few exceptions, all happen to be democracies, and the most corrupt countries are overwhelmingly autocracies. In Transparency International's Corruption Perception Index 2008, which covered 180 societies, 90% of the 60 least corrupt societies in the world are democracies. The remaining six non-democracies are small city-states (Singapore, Hong Kong, United Arab Emirates, Oman, Qatar and Bahrain). In contrast, about 60% of the 60 most corrupt countries are autocracies, including Russia, Iran, Venezuela, Belarus, Syria, Sudan and Burma. Nearly all the 30 most corrupt countries are dictatorships. (China is viewed as among the middle 60 "medium-corrupt" countries.)

That corruption is more prevalent in autocracies is no mere coincidence. While democracies derive their legitimacy and popular support through competitive elections and the rule of law, autocracies depend on the support of a small group of political and social elites, the military, the bureaucracy and the secret police. Because these elites and constituencies do not have any core values other than self-serving instincts, their loyalty and support are fickle and must be secured by constant bribes in the form of special privileges. They not only have ostensibly legal perks such as free world-class health care, lavish official residence, and expensive junkets, but also make huge illicit profits by rigging government contracts and looting public wealth in shady privatization deals.

The rest of this publication can be read here.

About the Author

Minxin Pei

Former Adjunct Senior Associate, Asia Program

Pei is Tom and Margot Pritzker ‘72 Professor of Government and the director of the Keck Center for International and Strategic Studies at Claremont McKenna College.

Recent Work

In The Media
How China Can Avoid the Next Conflict
- Minxin Pei
In The Media
Small Change
- Minxin Pei

Political Reform Democracy East Asia China

Carnegie does not take institutional positions on public policy issues; the views represented herein are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of Carnegie, its staff, or its trustees.

More Work from Carnegie Endowment for International Peace

Commentary
Strategic Europe
Taking the Pulse: Was it Right to Boycott Eurovision?
Five countries staged the biggest political boycott in Eurovision history over Israel’s participation. With the FIFA World Cup and other sporting or cultural touchstones on the horizon, are boycotts effective?
Rym Momtaz, ed.
Article
China’s Pivot on Global AI
Beijing’s AI diplomacy is pivoting from infrastructure and associated technical standards toward a more comprehensive effort aimed at recrafting global norms and institutions of AI governance.
Arindrajit Basu
Article
Realizing the Potential Gains of AI-Enabled Deliberative Democracy
Democratic institutions currently lack the capacity needed to govern AI-augmented deliberation in ways that serve democratic imperatives.
Micah Weinberg
Commentary
Senegal: An Island of Resilience
During our visit, we observed a democracy that has learned from its difficult past and is working toward an even more dynamic future.
Sarah Yerkes, Natalie Triche
Paper
Delimitation After Defeat: India’s Unfinished Debate Over Representation
The battle over representation and regional power has been delayed—not resolved—and will shape the future of India’s federal balance.
Louise Tillin, Milan Vaishnav, Andy Robaina

More Work from Carnegie Endowment for International Peace

Commentary

Strategic Europe

Taking the Pulse: Was it Right to Boycott Eurovision?

Five countries staged the biggest political boycott in Eurovision history over Israel’s participation. With the FIFA World Cup and other sporting or cultural touchstones on the horizon, are boycotts effective?

Rym Momtaz, ed.

Article

China’s Pivot on Global AI

Beijing’s AI diplomacy is pivoting from infrastructure and associated technical standards toward a more comprehensive effort aimed at recrafting global norms and institutions of AI governance.