­What made the centerpiece of international affairs year 2011? It was one of the most turbulent periods since the early 21st century in terms of ongoing global shift. But if one wanted to identify a key notion, it would be democracy. The events of the past 12 months demonstrated that it is also going through fundamental changes, albeit in opposite directions.

The most vivid example of complicated dialectics was the Arab Spring – a chain of popular movements and uprisings in several states in North Africa and Middle East.

On the one hand, developments there showed that the idea of unchangeable authoritarian rule doesn’t suit the public mood at all anymore. People don’t trust that an experienced autocrat knows better what should be done to the country, and even more that he has right to pass authorities to his children or cronies. Twenty to 25 years ago dictatorship was perceived as a “normal” form of government, now even leaders inclined to authoritarianism need to legitimize themselves.

Legitimacy is a key pillar to internal stability. And the latter is now crucial to preserve because any domestic turbulence starts to resonate with numerous outside factors and influences which brings the situation out of control. In the Middle East, most conservative regimes – Gulf monarchies –survived the turmoil relatively unscathed because they rest on anachronistic, but solid legitimate grounds of succession. Meanwhile, authoritarian republics from Tunisia to Syria faced fatal challenges due to a lack of legitimate explanations as to why a dynasty should be established.

Events in other parts of world, very distant from the Middle East confirmed this phenomenon. In Transdniester, for example, people rejected voting for either an autocratic leader who wanted to serve for the fifth term or another candidate promoted by Moscow, preferring an independent self-nominee. Even the Russian leadership experienced a change in public attitude due to people’s discontent with a decision by the ruling tandem which was not discussed with anybody.

Vladimir Putin’s announcement about his future comeback as president and putting Dmitry Medvedev in Putin’s current position of prime minister was orchestrated in such a form that almost everybody felt ignored. That led to rather poor results of the ruling party in parliamentary elections and an outbreak of protest activities in December. Now Putin acknowledges that the presidential elections in March should be conducted in an atmosphere of maximal transparency to eliminate all possible doubts of legitimacy. How it will happen remains to be seen.

Anyway, changes which started more than 20 years ago with revolutionary processes in Eastern Europe took root, people worldwide refuse to accept “eternal” leaders even if they initially enjoyed support and popularity.

The opposite trend which became obvious 2011 was the continued discrediting of democratic rhetoric used as pretext for intervention. The Libyan operation by NATO, conducted as “humanitarian”, and support of popular democratic forces turned into classical regime change action, where European countries followed their own interests and agendas in terms of prestige and economic needs. After the overthrow of the Gaddafi regime we don’t hear much about the situation in Libya, and what new “democratic” rulers do in the country. Their actions have apparently nothing to do with freedom and democracy. Libya, with direct involvement of outside forces, including the most powerful military alliance, into a local civil war was the culmination of the interventionist democratization approach developed since the end of Cold War. Results are steadily negative.

So 2011 showed that authoritarianism is most likely doomed as a form of government due to people’s emancipation and unwillingness to accept it, wherever it happens.

At the same time, the use of democratization as an instrument remains the most hypocritical and ugly act which undermines democracy as a notion.

­Fyodor Lukyanov, for RT

­The statements, views and opinions expressed in this column are those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of RT.