Search

Begin New Search Topic Authoritarianism Political Geography Europe

11. Political Culture in Southeast Europe. Navigating between Democratic and Authoritarian Beliefs and Practices

Author:
Vedran Dzihic, Gazela Pudar Drasko, Damir Kapidzic, Dario Cepo, Jelena Dzankic, and Jelena Vasiljevic
Publication Date:
03-2019
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Austrian Institute for International Affairs (OIIP)
Abstract:
The failure of the countries in Southeast Europe in the last three decades to initiate deep political and societal change that would lead them towards the goal of liberal democracy cannot be explained only by the reference to wars and internal conflicts or by external factors related to their peripheral position in Europe. We argue that political culture has to be taken into consideration to help explain the phenomenon of defective or phony democracy in the Western Balkans. A more forceful expression of emancipatory values by youth, along with greater action capabilities provided by economic growth, could create a more democratic political culture and leaders that are more accountable within a generation. However, it is necessary to have knowledge and understand what we want to influence, because simply supporting ›democracy‹ can go hand in hand with support for authoritarian values. It has to be accepted and fully realized that political conditions and practices are not part of the inherited cultural repertoire, but are shaped by highly complex and intertwined structural and socio-economic processes. Then we will be able to respond with adequate (political and structural) propositions and solutions that might »expand popular capacities« (in the words of Stuart Hall) and bring about the desired change in Southeast Europe.
Topic:
Authoritarianism, Democracy, Leadership, and Political Culture
Political Geography:
Europe and Southeast Europe

12. Nationalist Polarization in the Western Balkans and Its Institutional Consequences: A Fate That Can Be changed

Author:
Vedran Dzihic
Publication Date:
06-2019
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Austrian Institute for International Affairs (OIIP)
Abstract:
In Southeastern Europe, the process of democratization and Europeanization since the beginning of the 2000s has been seen as a major paradigm shift and made the inter-national community and the EU believe that time of wars and nationalist excesses was in the past. It seemed a sure sign that all countries of the region were set to reach the membership in the European Union soon. In terms of Europeanization and democratization, we can argue that the second decade of the 21st century has brought no substantial progress in Southeastern Europe. Rather, it has seen the region on the path of constant decline of democracy. The latest reports of Nations in Transit, the Bertelsmann Transformation Index, and other serious academic research prove the continuous trend of de-democratization in the region, with scores either falling or stagnating. Weak democratic institutions often resemble empty facades. Lack of rule of law is evident, the principle has perverted into the rule by law of dominant political parties able to control the judiciary. We see huge deficits in terms of fundamental rights and values including media freedom. Just in April 2019, Re-porters Without Borders published their newest ranking on the freedom of media, listing Serbia as one of the coun-tries in Europe in which the media freedom deteriorated the most. Elections are held, but are dominated by dominant par-ties and are not able to generate genuine political chang-es. All in all, we see a mounting democratic deficit before democracy has even had the chance to become “the only game in town.” On top of everything else – with the excep-tion of North Macedonia – comes a rhetorical democratic and EU-integration mimicry from governing elites, who are also engaged in maintaining or establishing illiberal or semi-authoritarian power structures. Citizens are either disillusioned with the type of governance in their countries or generally frustrated, which results in political disen-gagement or the wish to emigrate. One part of the citizen-ry long ago adjusted to the structures and circumstances, learning to obey or to profit from the clientelist structures. Either way the spaces for political engagement and active participation have been shrinking……
Topic:
Democratization, Nationalism, Governance, Authoritarianism, Citizenship, Polarization, and Freedom of Press
Political Geography:
Europe and Balkans

13. Beyond populism: European politics in an age of fragmentation and disruption

Author:
Dalibor Rohac, Matt Browne, Max Bergmann, Ismaël Emelien, Karin Svanborg-Sjövall, Andreas Johansson Heinö, and Agata Stremecka
Publication Date:
10-2019
Content Type:
Special Report
Institution:
American Enterprise Institute for Public Policy Research
Abstract:
Since 2016, concern over the resurgence of illiberal populist political parties and movements has been palpable in Europe and the United States. The election of Donald Trump, the United Kingdom’s referendum to leave the European Union, and the electoral advances of far-right parties in many European states, including France and Germany, created the sense that populist parties were a new, unstoppable political force in democratic politics.1 Yet in 2019, the notion that populist parties are the future of European politics seems far less certain. The term “populism” itself may have outlived its usefulness. Originally, it referred to parties and leaders who described themselves as true voices of the people against self-serving, out-of-touch elites—and it was prone to run roughshod over established political norms and institutions. Over the past three years, differences in approaches, tactics, and outlooks between different populist parties have emerged, making it clear that there is no clear populist governing strategy. Accordingly, beyond disrupting the current order, anti-establishment political forces in Europe share no actual transnational policy agenda. Yet populist and anti-establishment forces have upended European politics and contributed to fragmentation and uncertainty. As the example of the record turnout in the 2019 European parliamentary election illustrates,2 the EU itself has become an important dividing line for voters. The high turnout and raucous nature of the 2019 election portends animated debates over European policies. Gone are the days when the EU could move initiatives forward without much public attention or concern. In short, Jean Monnet’s “salami-slicing” method of incremental, technocratically driven European integration3 is dead. A more engaged and aware European public is in itself a positive development. Yet simultaneously, for better or worse, the sudden salience of European policies can present an obstacle to policy initiatives that otherwise would be seen as uncontroversial. Just as partisan divisions in the United States have plagued Washington with significant policy paralysis, the emergence of a similarly contentious and partisan politics in Europe may make it hard for Brussels to act. Europe has proven resilient over the past decade, but that resilience should not be taken for granted. The EU largely has failed to address its structural weaknesses that were exposed following the 2008 financial and fiscal crisis, meaning that the EU would confront a future economic crisis with the same limited toolbox it had in 2008.4 To make matters worse, influential populist actors could also obstruct swift action while benefiting politically at home from the EU’s failings. Unlike only a few years ago, fears of the EU’s sudden unraveling seem farfetched. Yet a protracted death by a thousand cuts, caused by populist leaders undermining EU rules and norms, remains a distinct possibility. The new instability of European politics poses a real challenge to the trans-Atlantic alliance. Unity among free and democratic states of the West is hard to sustain in the current political environment on both sides of the Atlantic. Yet at a time when the alliance faces a rising challenge from autocratic powers such as China and Russia, the case for unity and cooperation is stronger now than at any point since the end of the Cold War. This report seeks to chart a course for the EU and for the trans-Atlantic alliance, while acknowledging that the anti-establishment sentiments that reverberate through European politics are here to stay. While there is a strong case to be made for a Europe that works together to defend democratic values at home and abroad as well as a trans-Atlantic alliance that is willing to work in proactive partnership to tackle big global challenges—from climate change to terrorism to nuclear proliferation—that goal is still a long way off.
Topic:
Foreign Policy, NATO, Authoritarianism, European Union, and Populism
Political Geography:
Europe and Eurasia

14. Authoritarian Advance: How Authoritarian Regimes Upended Assumptions about Democratic Expansion

Author:
Laura Rosenberger
Publication Date:
10-2019
Content Type:
Special Report
Institution:
German Marshall Fund of the United States (GMFUS)
Abstract:
Thirty years after the fall of the Berlin wall, democracies again face a struggle against authoritarianism. This is not the ideological battle of the Cold War, but it is a confrontation between systems of government.
Topic:
Democratization, International Affairs, and Authoritarianism
Political Geography:
Europe

15. The Brain drain from Russia: The Kremlinʼs double-edged sword

Author:
Jussi Lassila
Publication Date:
05-2019
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Finnish Institute of International Affairs
Abstract:
The accelerated brain drain from Russia concretizes the failures of the Kremlinʼs authoritarian modernization and deepens the country’s longer-term problems. At the same time, the brain drain is reducing the regimeʼs political pressures to make the country more attractive to educated and internationally oriented citizens.
Topic:
Education, Globalization, Authoritarianism, and Modernization
Political Geography:
Russia, Europe, Central Asia, and Asia

16. Regional elections in Russia: The Kremlin is tackling previous challenges while facing new ones

Author:
Jussi Lassila
Publication Date:
09-2019
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Finnish Institute of International Affairs
Abstract:
The Kremlin is trying to learn lessons from old problems regarding its electoral authoritarian system, but new ones are constantly emerging. At the heart of these is the Kremlin’s party system.
Topic:
Authoritarianism, Elections, Election watch, Local, and Party System
Political Geography:
Russia, Europe, and Eastern Europe

17. Poland’s 2019 election: Bright prospects for the populist Right

Author:
Marco Siddi and Barbara Gaweda
Publication Date:
10-2019
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Finnish Institute of International Affairs
Abstract:
Poland’s incumbent party Law and Justice seems poised to win the election thanks to its welfare policies and the weakness of the opposition. However, its attacks on the independence of the judiciary and the media could further erode the rule of law and exacerbate disputes with the EU.
Topic:
Authoritarianism, Elections, European Union, Populism, Conservatism, and Rule of Law
Political Geography:
Europe and Poland

18. Russia's New Nuclear Weapons: Whoever Dies with the Most Toys Wins?

Author:
Anthony H. Cordesman
Publication Date:
03-2018
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Center for Strategic and International Studies
Abstract:
Whatever his other limitations, Vladimir Putin has shown he is a master in exploiting Russian nationalism and American and European sensitivities. His latest gambit—publicizing new Russian nuclear systems—several of which are still developmental, may have key components that are untested, or do not yet exist—give him political credibility in asserting Russian national strength in a Russian election year, and emphasize the one key area where Russia remains a leading global super power: its possession of nuclear weapons. The key question is whether they represent any real change in the nuclear balance, Russian and U.S. ability to pose an existential threat to the other state, and mutual assured destruction. If they do not, they are more technological status symbols or “toys” than real threats, although the proliferation of such weapons might allow smaller nuclear powers like Iran and North Korea to defeat today’s missile and air defense systems and technologies. An analysis of the actual content of his speech, the changing nuclear and conventional balance between the superpowers—the U.S., Russia, and China, the global balance of deployed nuclear weapons, the shifts taking in US and Russian balance since the Cold War, and as a result of START, the full range of new U.S. and Russian nuclear programs, and of what Putin did and did not say about Russia's new programs, provides a very different picture from the one Putin portrayed in his speech. It shows that Putin focused on the "toy factor" in emphasize technology over any real world aspects of the balance, arms control, and war fighting.
Topic:
Defense Policy, Nationalism, Military Strategy, Authoritarianism, and Nuclear Power
Political Geography:
Russia, United States, China, Europe, and Asia

19. Milada Horáková: Defender of Democracy Against Totalitarianism in Czechoslovakia

Author:
Greg Ross
Publication Date:
08-2018
Content Type:
Special Report
Institution:
Center for the Opening and Development of Latin America (CADAL)
Abstract:
On the 23rd of August, the City of Buenos Aires observes the Day of Remembrance for the Victims of Totalitarianism. The life of Czech activist Milada Horáková is emblematic of the fight against various forms of totalitarianism. Horáková, detained by the Nazis in a concentration camp and later executed by communists in Czechoslovakia, was posthumously awarded the honor of the First Order of Tomáš Garrigue Masaryk by Czech president Václav Havel in 1991. It is the Czech government’s highest recognition of citizens who have dedicated their lives to democratic and humanitarian causes. Horáková’s story was recently highlighted in «Milada», a 2017 Czech-American film distributed by Netflix.
Topic:
Authoritarianism, Democracy, State Violence, Violence, Dictatorship, and Totalitarianism
Political Geography:
Europe and Czech Republic

20. Transforming Turkey? Putting the Turkey-European Union Relations into a Historical Perspective

Author:
Galip L. Yalman and Asuman Göksel
Publication Date:
01-2018
Content Type:
Journal Article
Journal:
Uluslararasi Iliskiler
Institution:
International Relations Council of Turkey (UİK-IRCT)
Abstract:
This article aims to provide an alternative critical reading of Turkey-European Union (EU) relations, by contending that Turkey’s EU accession process has been instrumental in changing the contours of the transformation of Turkish economy and its governance as part of its neoliberal restructuring. However, the “transformative power” attributed to the EU’s enlargement strategy by the EU Commission has been somewhat debatable since the 2008 global financial crisis as reflected in the slowdown of the accession process. With the rising authoritarian tendencies in its domestic governance, the protracted saga of Turkey’s quest for the EU membership is back to square one, as the proposal for the modernisation of the Customs Union underlines “respect for democracy and fundamental rights” as an indispensable basis for the future of the relations.
Topic:
Government, History, Bilateral Relations, Authoritarianism, European Union, Neoliberalism, and Global Financial Crisis
Political Geography:
Europe, Turkey, and Mediterranean