Search

Begin New Search Topic Authoritarianism Publication Year within 25 Years

81. Understanding Authoritarian Regionalism

Author:
Alexander Libman and Anastassia V. Obydenkova
Publication Date:
10-2018
Content Type:
Journal Article
Journal:
Journal of Democracy
Institution:
National Endowment for Democracy
Abstract:
This article examines the goals, methods, and implications of regional organizations founded and dominated by autocracies—including the Commonwealth of Independent States (spearheaded by Russia), Shanghai Cooperation Organization (China), Bolivarian Alliance for the Peoples of Our America (Venezuela), and Gulf Cooperation Council (Saudi Arabia). It shows the role that these organizations play in preserving and promoting autocracy and the different tools they use for this purpose: rhetorical endorsement; the redistribution of resources to support weaker authoritarian states; and even military interventions to suppress revolution. The existence of authoritarian regionalism poses an important challenge for Western states and institutions in democracy promotion around the world.
Topic:
Regional Cooperation, Military Strategy, Authoritarianism, and Democracy
Political Geography:
Russia, China, Europe, Middle East, Asia, South America, Saudi Arabia, and Venezuela

82. Authoritarianism in the heart of Europe

Author:
Dalibor Rohac
Publication Date:
08-2018
Content Type:
Special Report
Institution:
American Enterprise Institute for Public Policy Research
Abstract:
What distinguishes the governments of Hungary and Poland are not their views on immigration nor their defense of national sovereignty or Europe’s Judeo-Christian heritage. Rather, it is their distinctly authoritarian and anti-market features. With a new Fundamental Law, electoral reform, and other far-reaching changes adopted in Hungary on strictly partisan lines, as well as a politicization of the judiciary and attacks on free media and civil society in both countries, the Law and Justice Party (PiS) and Fidesz governments have sought to entrench themselves and prevent meaningful democratic contestation of their power. In both countries, key achievements of the post-1989 transition to the free enterprise system are being reversed. In Poland, for example, 40 percent of all banking-sector assets are now held by the government. Hungarian and Polish authoritarianism, as well as the rise of political kleptocracy in Hungary, pose a direct threat to the values on which the transatlantic alliance was built and America’s interest in the region. The United States cannot afford to become a cheerleader for either Fidesz or PiS, no matter how convincing their conservative bona fides might seem.
Topic:
Foreign Policy, Government, Politics, and Authoritarianism
Political Geography:
Europe, Eurasia, Poland, and Hungary

83. Commemorating Václav Havel: A Speech by Madeleine Albright

Author:
Madeleine Albright
Publication Date:
09-2018
Content Type:
Video
Institution:
Columbia University World Leaders Forum
Abstract:
Remarks by Former United States Secretary of State, The Honorable Madeleine K. Albright, commemorating Vaclav Hável as an intellectual, leader, and agent of change and how his legacy continues to play an important role in today’s current global landscape. Followed by a question and answer session with the audience.
Topic:
Authoritarianism, Democracy, Populism, and Political Prisoners
Political Geography:
New York, Europe, Soviet Union, and Czech Republic

84. In Turkey, the cult of Ataturk gives way to the cult of Erdogan

Author:
Arega Hovsepyan
Publication Date:
01-2018
Content Type:
Journal Article
Journal:
Harvard Journal of Middle Eastern Politics and Policy
Institution:
The John F. Kennedy School of Government at Harvard University
Abstract:
After the attempted coup d’état of 15 July 2016, discussion inside expert circles about the construction of a “new” Turkey took on a new urgency. The result of the 2017 constitutional referendum remade Turkey’s political institutions, but the events of the 2016 coup attempt also catalyzed changes to the symbolism of the state. The ruling Justice and Development Party, whose slogans had long promised “a new Turkey,” was at the forefront of the surge in hardened messaging. The cornerstone of this “new Turkey” is а classical concentration of political power in the hands of one person, specifically President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan. Kemalism, Turkey’s founding ideology, is in the process of being replaced by the new ideology of the new president. Although it is still early to characterise this new ideology in Turkey as “Erdoğanism”, the similarities and contradictions of Kemalism and Erdoğanism lend insight on the structure of Turkish politics. The era of Erdoğan has been unleashed in Turkey, and moreover, its eponym is eager to not only replace the personality cult of Mustafa Kemal Atatürk, but also to surpass the historic founder’s titanic image.
Topic:
Politics, History, Authoritarianism, Ideology, and Coup
Political Geography:
Europe, Turkey, and Middle East

85. Insidious Threats to Academic Freedom in the US and Abroad

Author:
Michael Ignatieff and Craig Calhoun
Publication Date:
03-2018
Content Type:
Journal Article
Journal:
Centerpiece
Institution:
Weatherhead Center for International Affairs, Harvard University
Abstract:
n the division of labor that Craig Calhoun and I agreed upon, he's going to deal with the insidious threats, the subtler ones, the ones that are perhaps characteristic of American or North Atlantic academic life, and I'm going to deal with the straight on, in your face, “boom boom” threats that have arisen where I am in Hungary. I'm going to tell you a little narrative about what's happened to Central European University (CEU), and then I'd like to talk about a characterization of these kinds of societies. The relationship between a place like Hungary and a place like here is complex. There is a collusive relationship, a disturbingly collusive relationship between liberal democratic societies, which enjoy full academic freedom, and societies which do not. And it's that collusive relationship that I think we need to think about. That will be my headline. Most of you will know that CEU is a graduate institution offering masters and PhDs, accredited in New York state and by Middle States. We offer degrees that are accredited also by the Hungarian administration. So we're a kind of European-American institution. We're one of almost thirty institutions of higher learning around the world that have no domestic US campus. But note, this is the geostrategic implication: these institutions are now implanted all over the world in authoritarian societies where their capacity to operate freely is very much in question. So my story about Hungary is not just a story about Hungary. It's potentially a story about Egypt, about Russia, about Abu Dhabi—about all the places where American norms of academic freedom are suddenly under challenge because of the emergence of these kinds of regimes.
Topic:
Authoritarianism, Populism, Academia, and Atlantic World
Political Geography:
United States, Europe, Hungary, North America, and Central Europe

86. Energy as a tool of foreign policy of authoritarian states, in particular Russia

Author:
Rem Korteweg
Publication Date:
04-2018
Content Type:
Case Study
Institution:
Clingendael Netherlands Institute of International Relations
Abstract:
This study is originally published by the Directorate General for External Policies of the Union of the Policy Department for External Relations of the European Parliament and was requested by the European Parliament's Committee on Foreign Affairs (AFET committee). Russia and other energy-rich authoritarian states use their energy exports for economic gains but also as a tool of foreign policy leverage. This study by Rem Korteweg looks at the ways and methods these states have used to exert political pressure through their energy supplies, and what it means for the European Union. Most energy-rich authoritarian states use their energy wealth to ensure regime survival. But, more than others, Russia uses its energy wealth as well to protect and promote its interests in its ‘near abroad’ and to make its geopolitical influence felt further afield, including in Europe. It uses gas supplies to punish and to reward, affecting both transit states and end-consumers. This publication explores how supply disruptions, price discounts or hikes, and alternative transit routes such as Nord Stream 2 and Turkish Stream, are used by Russia to further its foreign policy ambitions, feeding suspicions about its geopolitical motives. The lack of transparency about Russia’s energy policy decisions contributes to this. In response, the EU is building an Energy Union based around the Third Energy Package, a more integrated European market and diversified supplies. By investing in new supplies, such as LNG, and completing a liberalised energy market, the EU will be better able to withstand such energy coercion and develop a more effective EU foreign policy.
Topic:
Foreign Policy, Energy Policy, Authoritarianism, European Union, and Geopolitics
Political Geography:
Russia, Europe, and Eurasia

87. Shoring Up a Democracy Under Siege

Author:
Laleh Ispahani and Ryan Knight
Publication Date:
07-2018
Content Type:
Journal Article
Journal:
Journal of International Affairs
Institution:
School of International and Public Affairs, Columbia University
Abstract:
The US is experiencing an unprecedented erosion of democratic institutions and norms under the Trump administration. While constitutional checks and balances are holding for now, we are seeing the kinds of challenges that have presaged a shift toward authoritarianism in other countries. If not countered, this kind of “constitutional regression” can develop into something that looks like a more lasting authoritarian condition, with institutions that are so hollowed out as to be ineffective, and with impact that outlives the Trump administration. Since November 2016, American civil society’s reform sector has adjusted, adapted, and innovated to meet these challenges. To facilitate their success, the philanthropic sector must likewise adapt. The Open Society Foundations (OSF) are a global philanthropy whose mission is to foster open societies in place of authoritarian ones.[i] Our founder, George Soros, was born in Hungary and lived through the Nazi occupation of 1944 to 1945, which resulted in the murder of over 500,000 Hungarian Jews. In 1947, as Communists consolidated power in Hungary, Mr. Soros left for London where, ultimately, he studied philosophy with Karl Popper, author of The Open Society and Its Discontents, at The London School of Economics and Political Science. In 1956, he emigrated to the US, where he worked in the worlds of finance and investment. He has used the fortune he amassed to support philanthropy that reflects Popper’s philosophy—that no ideology is the final arbiter of truth, and societies can only flourish when they allow for democratic governance, freedom of expression, and respect for individual rights.[ii] Mr. Soros began his philanthropy in 1979, giving scholarships to black South Africans under apartheid who might lead their country out of closed and authoritarian conditions, and into ones governed by democratic principles, respect for the rule of law, protection of the rights of minorities, and civil and political liberties. In the 1980s, he applied the same principles to help promote the open exchange of ideas in Communist Hungary, and across Eastern and Central Europe after the fall of the Berlin Wall. While the Foundations started as an effort to help those in countries emerging from more closed or authoritarian conditions, in 1996, OSF launched its first US-based programs; as Mr. Soros wrote in 2006, “America was an essentially open society [but] even open societies are open to improvement.” Since then, OSF and leaders of civil society have worked to protect democratic society and its institutions in the US and in over 140 countries around the world. At OSF, our guiding principle is that the world is imperfect, but that what is imperfect can be improved. With that comes a commitment to examining our own role in the world, a constant questioning as to whether our philanthropy—what we fund, and how we fund it—is responsive to the most pressing issues facing the world as it really is, and not as we perceive it to be. Still, even though we have spent the last two decades supporting U.S.-based efforts to counter what we view as threats to the American democratic project (e.g. the influence of big, secret money on politics, restrictions on the right to vote, the criminalization of poverty, racial disparities in the criminal justice system, a bipartisan tendency toward government secrecy), to date, we viewed that work as part of a project to ensure that a largely sound framework was improved so that it lived up to its promise. As we reflect on conditions a year after President Donald Trump’s election, however, we think that the US is experiencing an unprecedented erosion and hollowing out of democratic institutions and norms, and could be derailed from this course of improvement. This prompts us to consider how OSF might work differently in order to allow our civil society grantee institutions to more assiduously protect against further decline. Together, these shifts in civil society and philanthropy could erect the bulwark needed to counter both the threat of constitutional regression and the more remote risk of a total constitutional breakdown. These reforms are significantly informed by rights organizations and foundations operating in other countries that are contending with threats to democratic government.
Topic:
Civil Society, United Nations, Authoritarianism, and Democracy
Political Geography:
Global Focus

88. Kazakhstan: Presidential Succession and Political Instability in a Neopatrimonial State / Kazajstán: sucesión presidencial e inestabilidad política en un Estado neopatrimonial

Author:
Rubén Ruiz Ramas
Publication Date:
12-2018
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
International Security Studies Group (GESI) at the University of Granada
Abstract:
The refusal of Nursultan Nazarbayev, both to designate his future successor and to strengthen the institutions that can take responsibility for this task, fuel the potential for conflict attached to the future context of succession. The horizon of the transfer of power concerns Nazarbayev, who in July 2018 reaches 78 years old. The sources of concern are related not only to Nazarbayev’s family safety but also to the risk of confrontation among the elite networks and their social, ethnic and regional power basis. A kind of political instability vulnerable to escalation to major threatens to the national and even regional security. On the one hand, this article aims to analyse the structural vulnerability of Kazakhstan to a context of presidential succession product of its nature as an authoritarian regime and a neopatrimonial state. On the other hand, the paper also tackles the preparation of that context by the authorities and the options available to deal with the transfer of power. To this end, the paper begins with an analysis of the neopatrimonial state heterogeneity in Central Asia, followed by a section focused on the specific nature of the authoritarianism and neopatrimonialism in Kazakhstan. Finally, it elaborates the Kazakh context of succession, and the several options of transfer of power and the likely actors involved in them are examined.
Topic:
Politics, Authoritarianism, and Political stability
Political Geography:
Central Asia and Kazakhstan

89. Turkey’s presidential system and the Kurds: Increased resentment, fragmentation, or deal-making?

Author:
Toni Alaranta
Publication Date:
11-2018
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Finnish Institute of International Affairs
Abstract:
The Kurds are an ethnic group of approximately 35 million people, half of whom live inside the Republic of Turkey, where the conflict between the state and the Kurdish separatist PKK organization has now lasted for over three decades. After a promising peace process in 2009–2015, the AKP government under President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan has now reduced Turkey’s Kurdish question to anti-terror operations, and marginalized the legal Kurdish HDP party, echoing the failed policy of the 1990s. Turkey is now a presidential system where power is tightly concentrated in the hands of President Erdoğan, a development directly opposed to Kurdish demands for greater local autonomy in the Kurdish-majority districts. Through the PKK network and transnational Kurdish sympathies, the fate of Syria’s and Turkey’s Kurds is now inextricably intertwined. The current way of building the new regime in Turkey is likely to produce more PKK attacks, but also widespread resentment among ordinary Kurds, including those opposing the PKK.
Topic:
Authoritarianism, Ethnicity, Separatism, and transnationalism
Political Geography:
Europe, Turkey, Asia, and Kurdistan

90. Russian Norm Entrepreneurship in Crimea: Serious Contestation or Cheap Talk?

Author:
Betcy Jose and Christoph H. Stefes
Publication Date:
02-2018
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
German Institute of Global and Area Studies
Abstract:
Western actors have long dominated the political processes and discourses that shape global norms impacting interstate behaviour. Yet, more recently, powerful autocratic regimes such as China and Russia have seemingly challenged democracies, emerging as potential contesters of international norms. What might be the outcome of this contestation? This paper broadly explores this query by investigating Russia’s humanitarian justifications for its Ukrainian incursion. It examines whether Russia’s claim of humanitarian intervention is more than a petty attempt to disguise pure power politics. Is Russia contesting Western understandings of humanitarian interventions in order to reshape our ideas of permissible violations of sovereignty norms to protect vulnerable populations? Using Atlas.ti, we also explore global responses to Russia’s humanitarian claims. Our initial findings indicate that the Ukrainian intervention enabled Russia to contest Responsibility to Protect (R2P) and to champion an alternative version of humanitarian intervention with some limited success.
Topic:
Imperialism, Military Strategy, Authoritarianism, and Conflict
Political Geography:
Russia, Europe, Ukraine, and Crimea