is, in my humble opinion, the asymmetry between the sizes of the electorate that mandates executive power to a government, and the electorate on which this particular government exercises this executive power.
A prime example to this anomaly is the mass media-manipulation campaign going on in USA about the strategy in Iraq. I was watching a global show on BBC World in which people from all round the globe express their opinions on current issues. It was revelatory and shocking to watch BBC asking the Americans about the condition in Iraq! In the end it will be their vote which will decide the fate of Iraqis, whom they have never seen or met.
So the question to be answered deals with the fates of millions of Iraqis. They are the electorate on which the executive power is being exercised. The government who exercises this power is voted, however thousands of miles away in the USA. This is the asymmetry I am talking about. Now as the electorate in US, does not live in Iraq, they receive information about Iraq through the government, General Petreus in this case, or the media, who is most of the time in some sort of power sharing deal with the government. Obviously, this contradicts the "seperation of powers" pronciple, which is so important for a democracy.
The solution is hard to reach. However for me it is clear that the less potent the the government are, the fewer of such intricate conondrums.