Democracy is always exported, but most frequently without success

At least Vladimir Putin’s Russia is more transparent. It is not keen on the “will of the people” and says so: most recently in the Ukraine and regularly in Chechnya. The spread of democracy is not in the interests of a Russia whose collective psychology is rooted in imperial and territorial grandeur and strength. If the US is the world’s leading “exporter of democracy”, Russia is its mirror image.

One final point. There is a seemingly inextricable link between healthy democracy and growing economies. When the people are able to press government for change, through the ballot box and a free media and society, then reforms are more likely to occur. And democratic regimes are attractive locations for investment and so on.

In short, democracy and a transparent economy are more often than not co-existent. So if the “exporters” of democracy were genuinely serious about their cause, they would remove the impediments to economic success in countries where democracy is currently a pipedream.

Yet there is no consensus on debt relief for the most heavily indebted countries - an idea pushed by UK Chancellor Gordon Brown - and rampant self-interest at the WTO prevents the more rapid lowering of trade barriers.

When there is a marriage between the ideas of political liberty and economic freedom, the export of democracy might be adjudged a success.