Search

Begin New Search Topic Democracy Political Geography United States of America

71. Russian Foreign Policy in 2020: Strengthening Multi-vectorialism

Author:
András Rácz and Milan Nič
Publication Date:
01-2021
Content Type:
Special Report
Institution:
German Council on Foreign Relations (DGAP)
Abstract:
In 2020, DGAP’s Strategy Group on Russia focused on Moscow’s long-term efforts to diversify its foreign policy portfolio, turn away from Europe, and build-up other non-Western vectors in its diplomacy. Against this background, this report assesses Russia’s relations with the EU, China, and the United States. While Russian relations with the West are unlikely to improve in 2021 – especially ahead of this fall’s Duma election – there is still a chance for limited engagement on issues of mutual interest.
Topic:
Security, Foreign Policy, Diplomacy, European Union, Democracy, and International Order
Political Geography:
Russia, China, Europe, Eurasia, and United States of America

72. The Hidden G2 for Democratic Tech Governance is the EU-US Relationship: A Starter Kit

Author:
Tyson Barker
Publication Date:
06-2021
Content Type:
Commentary and Analysis
Institution:
German Council on Foreign Relations (DGAP)
Abstract:
The EU and the United States are expected to launch a Trade and Technology Council (TTC) on the sidelines of the US-EU Summit in mid-June, which could present a rare opportunity to jumpstart the EU-US technology relationship. Against the backdrop of rapid technological change, a transatlantic digital technology community could be a 21st-century answer to the Coal and Steal Community – a big democratic project that reaches across borders, knits like-minded communities together in a manner that reinforces shared values, and codifies standards of market access, increased interdependence, and intensified political dialogue.
Topic:
Science and Technology, Governance, European Union, Democracy, and Transatlantic Relations
Political Geography:
Europe and United States of America

73. How Middle-Power Democracies Can Help Renovate Global Democracy Support

Author:
Rachel Kleinfeld, Thomas Carothers, Steven Feldstein, and Richard Youngs
Publication Date:
02-2021
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Carnegie Endowment for International Peace
Abstract:
Middle-power democracies—countries which regardless of their geopolitical weight have made democracy support a sustained component of their foreign policy—will be crucial to reimagining democracy support strategies and policies to better meet the moment. Some of these states have crafted new initiatives and wielded diplomatic tools to deepen their impact in recent years. However, these states have on the whole punched below their collective weight. This paper suggests that middle-power democracies can maximize their impact on global democracy in the following ways: Enhancing solidarity: when a country acts courageously in defense of democracy, it needs to know that others will stand alongside it. Sharpening their focus: middle-power democracies should target policy areas aligned with democratic values on issues both at the top of the geopolitical agenda and at the top-of-mind for citizens around the world—for example, economic recovery, injustice and discrimination, corruption, digital repression, and climate change. Improving diplomatic cooperation: pursuing flexible and focused multilateral partnerships allows for collaboration on key policy interests and amplifies middle-power actions.
Topic:
Foreign Policy, Diplomacy, Democracy, Solidarity, and COVID-19
Political Geography:
Global Focus and United States of America

74. Changing Dynamics of Pak-US Relations and the Challenge of Soft Power

Author:
Moonis Ahmar
Publication Date:
05-2021
Content Type:
Special Report
Institution:
LSE IDEAS
Abstract:
There is a history of ups and downs in Pak-US relations since early 1950s till today. From the period of alliances to ostensible hostility and indifference, the changing dynamics of Pak-US relations must be analysed from a pragmatic point of view where power, national interests, security and sovereignty matter. Furthermore, mistrust, suspicions, ill-will and paranoia still influence the political, security, economic and power dynamics of relations between Pakistan and the United States. This research follows the theory of soft power due to two main reasons. First, instead of being a ‘patron-client’ relationship, PakUS relations could be transformed by focusing on diplomacy, trade and technology instead of threats and coercion. Second, President Obama’s policy of ‘do more’ for Pakistan in combating terrorism in Afghanistan proved to be counterproductive as anti-Americanism surged in Pakistan. Overcoming the bitterness of the past in Pak-US relations will be a major challenge to the Biden-Harris administration. Moving forward in Pak-US relations will require political will, determination, prudence and trust from both sides. It is up to the leadership from both countries to foster trust and take confidence building measures which can transform their relations from patron-client to partners in progress. Shift from geopolitics to geoeconomics will ensure a win-win situation for both sides in the years to come.
Topic:
Economics, Violent Extremism, Democracy, Geopolitics, and Soft Power
Political Geography:
Pakistan, South Asia, North America, and United States of America

75. How Do We Talk to Foreign Audiences After Trump’s Subversion?

Author:
Ken Moskowitz
Publication Date:
02-2021
Content Type:
Journal Article
Journal:
American Diplomacy
Institution:
American Diplomacy
Abstract:
When I was the U.S. Embassy press officer in Kyiv, Ukraine in the late 1990s, the public affairs section sponsored programs showcasing and explaining American democracy in the post-Soviet republic. One major event I organized was a public symposium entitled “Holding Elections in a Free Society”. We featured American government and academic experts on topics such as how to maintain a level playing field among competing political parties, registering to vote, ensuring fairness in the counting of ballots, election monitoring, equal access to the media, and similar features of our electoral system. The implicit message, of course, is that our election system is worthy of emulation. But our experience in last November’s presidential election, and the groundless objections about its integrity and result raised by President Donald Trump, culminating in a pro-Trump mob’s attack on the U.S. Capitol on January 6, did not resemble the exemplary depiction in my symposium. How could American diplomats justify holding such programs today, after the president himself condemned our Federal elections as rigged and massively fraudulent, our national government as corrupt, federal bureaucrats as members in a disloyal or self-serving Deep State, and the federal and state courts as biased institutions? The world has noted the deterioration in America’s democratic culture. In the 2019 Index of Democracy published by the Economist Intelligence Unit, the rating of the U.S. on its democracy scale fell from 8.05 in 2015 to 7.96 in 2019 (with 10 as the top score), dropping it further into the “flawed democracy” from the “full democracy” category. The U.S. now ranks 25th of 167 countries rated. American diplomats might be shocked to learn that the Economist team now grades U.S. democracy lower than Mauritius, Chile, and Uruguay according to its measures of features such as the electoral process and pluralism, and the functioning of government.
Topic:
Foreign Policy, Diplomacy, Democracy, and Donald Trump
Political Geography:
United States of America

76. Can the U.S. Still Be an Example to the World?

Author:
Renee M. Earle
Publication Date:
02-2021
Content Type:
Journal Article
Journal:
American Diplomacy
Institution:
American Diplomacy
Abstract:
Between January 6 and January 20, disbelieving viewers in America and throughout the world watched two weeks of American history, unlike any before, cascade across their TV screens like a 33vinyl record played at 78 RPMs. Cameras recorded the dizzying transformation of the Capitol from take-for-granted placidity, to unimaginable desecration, and finally to a stage festooned to welcome the inauguration of a new president. Foreign Service friends and colleagues in Washington, DC and abroad wondered what the world would take away from these images. We had often encountered military and armed police patrolling cities in other countries—but never in OUR capital. A Department of Justice colleague worried that our work abroad, such as justice system reform in countries from Colombia to Afghanistan, might now be at risk. After witnessing the January 6 events on Capitol Hill, would our overseas partners embrace us with as much confidence? The Constitution and citizen participation in a democracy played a large role in my career abroad as a public diplomacy foreign service officer with the State Department. In the years after the Berlin Wall and Iron Curtain fell, supported by the FAS (Freedom Support Act) and SEED (Support for East European Democracy) Congressional appropriations, helping the people of Central Europe and the former Soviet Union construct, or reconstruct, democratic institutions and practice was an important focus for our embassies in East and Central Europe. These programs were broadly welcomed by our host countries.
Topic:
Foreign Policy, Diplomacy, Democracy, and January 6
Political Geography:
North America, Global Focus, and United States of America

77. Dr Richard Johnson on the Georgia Senate Election

Publication Date:
01-2021
Content Type:
Video
Institution:
Mile End Institute, Queen Mary University of London
Abstract:
Dr Richard Johnson discusses the importance of the Georgia Senate election and the implications that the result may have on Joe Biden's presidency.
Topic:
Elections, Democracy, Voting, and Political Parties
Political Geography:
North America and United States of America

78. Black Lives Matter Might Just Rescue American Democracy

Author:
Oona A. Hathaway and Daniel Markovits
Publication Date:
06-2020
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Center for Global Legal Challenges, Yale Law School
Abstract:
The past weeks in the United States have produced two horrifying varieties of violence. First, and all too familiar, the police killings of Breonna Taylor in Louisville, George Floyd in Minneapolis, and Rayshard Brooks in Atlanta follow a long and awful tradition of brutal state violence directed against Black Americans, beginning with chattel slavery and extending through the fugitive slave laws, lynchings, and right up to the present. The Black Lives Matter movement, which rose to prominence after earlier police killings of Eric Garner in New York City and Michael Brown in Ferguson, Missouri, rightly emphasizes this terrible lineage and contends that achieving racial justice today requires coming to terms with the past. Second, and less familiar, we see an American president openly embracing tools of authoritarian rule. President Donald Trump has incited violence against peaceful protesters, threatening to use “vicious dogs” and “ominous weapons” against them and demanding that the authorities “dominate” citizens gathered to express their values. At the same time, the police have responded with documented instances of violence against members of the press seeking to cover the protests, while military units and military equipment have been deployed against peaceful protesters in Washington D.C. and threatened against protesters throughout the country. These two injustices — racism and authoritarianism — may seem merely to coincide, perhaps because of the person who happens now to occupy the White House. But they are, at least at this moment in American history, deeply intertwined. The writer Akilah Green observes (in a Tweet) that “Police are now brutalizing everyone just to maintain their ability to brutalize black people.” This is more than a Twitter slogan: it captures a deep and powerful social logic.
Topic:
Law Enforcement, Social Movement, Democracy, Protests, and Black Lives Matter (BLM)
Political Geography:
North America and United States of America

79. Democracy by Design: An Affirmative Response to the Illiberal Use of Technology for 2021

Author:
Kara Frederick
Publication Date:
12-2020
Content Type:
Special Report
Institution:
Center for a New American Security (CNAS)
Abstract:
Aglobal contest between democracies and autocracies is raging on the digital front. Technology stands to alter the balance between free, open societies and closed, repressive regimes. Nation states in direct competition with the United States seek to project global influence by shaping an existing digital order to their will. Impulses toward illiberal use of technology at home threaten to curtail individual liberties, constrict opportunity, and erode a truly open society. Democracies do not yet have a model for how to confront this. In the United States, a roadmap for a solution must start with the fundamental question: How should U.S. technology companies, with the help of the U.S. government, respond to the illiberal use of technology by authoritarian actors abroad? This report contends with this question by identifying concrete actions and threat-mitigating strategies that contain the input of government, the tech sector, civil society, and academia. It provides starting points to address the systemic risk inherent in dealing with authoritarian regimes and also examines cost imposition on those complicit in tech-enabled human rights abuses. Yet a strategy aimed only at staunching the illiberal use of technology will fail in the long term. Instead, the U.S. government and tech companies alike must recruit democratic allies to purvey an affirmative agenda that promotes digital freedom across the globe. This report proposes an agenda that stresses privacy leadership by the United States and its technology companies. It identifies areas of collaboration for U.S. allies and democratic partners, like digital trade, foreign law enforcement requests for data, and technical standards. This report’s affirmative agenda also contains an imperative for U.S. tech companies to build commercial norms toward digital freedom and incentivize transparency within their own ranks. For digital freedom to prevail over authoritarian uses of technology, democracies must present something better. Together, they must establish an alternative model for the use of technology globally. These recommendations build that democratic case, starting with the United States.
Topic:
Human Rights, Science and Technology, Authoritarianism, and Democracy
Political Geography:
North America, Global Focus, and United States of America

80. Intelligence Transparency and Foreign Threats to Elections: Responsibilities, Risks, and Recommendations

Author:
Carrie Cordero
Publication Date:
07-2020
Content Type:
Special Report
Institution:
Center for a New American Security (CNAS)
Abstract:
As the United States nears a consequential November election in a charged political environment and society reels this year from a global pandemic, historic unemployment, and a summer of civic unrest and violence, the threat of malign foreign interference in the campaign season and election system looms. In 2016, policymakers and intelligence community leaders were reluctant to release information publicly regarding the activities of the Russian government intended to affect the election. This year, a new playbook is needed to ensure that the intelligence community, policymakers, and the public are in sync regarding transparency expectations about foreign threats to the election. The discussion that follows provides context—how intelligence transparency was addressed in the 2016 election, adjustments that were made for the 2018 midterms—and articulates responsibilities of the intelligence community versus the risks involved in greater transparency. The paper concludes with recommendations for transparency about election threats in order to protect against and mitigate ongoing foreign efforts to damage our stressed democracy.
Topic:
Government, Intelligence, Elections, and Democracy
Political Geography:
Russia, North America, and United States of America