Asia (Page 1,310)

Many liberals proclaimed triumph for democracy and a “rules-based foreign order” three decades ago. However, the majority of the world’s population currently reside in nations that are only partly free or are subject to some form of authoritarian rule.

Why are monarchies growing? In her new book, Autocracy, Inc, Pulitzer prize success Anne Applebaum provides an truth: there is a “network” among the world’s demagogues, who use the secret roads of our connected world to farther their aims and destroy politics.

Autocracy, Inc is a team of tyrants and their state, Applebaum writes. Like the concept of “autocracy” itself, this integration is soft and smooth. The team’s members are unrestricted by any intellectual kinship or legal structure.

Among them are hard dictatorships ( like Belarus, China, the Islamic Republic of Iran and the Russian Federation ), and hybrid illiberal democracies or softer autocracies ( like Turkey, Singapore, India, the Philippines and Hungary ).

For some reason, Applebaum does not give a similar amount of attention to the hybrid systems or the Muslim kingdoms ( which do not get the close of politics ).

According to Applebaum, deals, no principles, pull the autocrats up. Their partnership is based on a common desire for power and wealth. They square off against a dwindling number of republics, which they use every means to try to overthrow.

At times, this fight leads to war, while in Ukraine. To Applebaum, Russia’s war against Ukraine is the first challenge in a larger battle. It is a result of” a conscious effort to undermine the community of ideas, rules, and treaties” that have shaped the democratic world order, which is now almost extinct.

Are they really all in conspiracy?

However, though beautifully written, this guide barely lives up to the high standards Applebaum’s visitors have come to expect. She does not provide substantial proof that autocrats maintain expert plans or coordinate their actions consistently. Her solutions are often media reports, around which she drafts realistic beliefs.

In Applebaum’s tale, the autocrats change visits, desire power, hate democratic principles and politics, help each other survive through media adjustment, and tell each other the “dark artwork of sanctions evasion”.

For instance, the Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela could not be more distinct from the Islamic Republic of Iran, but these two people of Autocracy Inc. find common ground in anti-Americanism,” shared grievance”, and” a expressed interest in secret gas sales”.

By extension, it seems like all the other members are in cahoots too. But are they? The autocrats ‘ unity is hampered by their own constantly conflicting interests. Their malfeasance is limited by their incompetence.

The main flaw in Applebaum’s analysis is that her theory’s contradictions do n’t show up. Too much of the book’s progresses through omission and confusion. It often patches up observed plausibilities with the author’s own idealism, presenting them as certainties.

The autocracies, says Applebaum, not only keep tabs on the progress of the club members, but also time” their own moves to create maximum chaos”.

Due to the opposition of “minorities with deep Russian ties, led by Viktor Orban in Hungary and a few MAGA Republicans in Congress,” additional aid to Ukraine slowed in the European Union and the United States in the autumn of 2023. At the same time, Applebaum writes, Iranian-backed Hamas conducted a terrorist attack against Israel.

To me, it is not clear who the “minorities” were, nor the nature of their alleged ties to Russia. More importantly, Applebaum does not tell us why Iran would attempt to aid the anti-Ukrainian efforts of these minorities.

Applebaum is well aware that her theory may not be as crystal clear as it may seem. She acknowledges that” there are no “blocks” to join and no Berlin Walls separating neat geographic areas.”

Yet bloc thinking persists. Applebaum never asks whether the autocrats have the capacity – logistical, psychological, military or otherwise – to mount a coordinated attack on” the West”.

Autocracies do this because they continue to collaborate strategically with the nations they despise. China accounts for the majority of West’s production, and Russia continues to sell natural resources that are later re-sold.

Autocracies remain transactional. They react to any intrusion into their own perceived sphere of power, regardless of the political party or movement it is affiliated with, and not just from the “liberals.”

An account of the “gray zone”

For a non-specialist audience, Autocracy Inc. presents an intriguing, if morbid, exposé of the “grey zone” autocrats operate. At times, Applebaum makes an interesting point, only to drop it later on.

Applebaum devotes some time to the future Russian president Vladimir Putin, who was then Saint Petersburg’s deputy mayor, in relation to the post-1991 era of business expansion in Eastern Europe. According to her, even then, Putin had a” close-knit cabal” around him, biding his time to restore an authoritarian regime.

During the 1990s, the future autocrat was exposed to the double standards of Western democracies. These democracies were only too happy to aid in the establishment of illiberal regimes abroad as long as there was money.

However, the useful discussion of the underlying role of Western hypocrisy falls flat on the next page. What remains unanswered is the question of whether Putin is an idealist, a cynic, a pragmatist or all of these.

There have been many” Putins” throughout Putin’s career, as he has adapted and changed to the power constellations that surround him, according to Philip Short’s meticulous account of his career.

In Applebaum’s book, a lot of emphasis is placed on how autocracies appear to be sharing media tropes and supporting one another. The book’s most substantial section is centered around this.

StarTimes, China’s media and satellite television provider, helped Russia Today, a satellite network, avoid its widespread expulsion after the Ukraine war, and it continues to offer it to customers. Autocracies also echo each other’s thematic presentation of events, what Applebaum calls “information-laundering”.

Although the chapters are undoubtedly interesting in terms of content, they do not go far enough to inquire about how propaganda antennae spread their message. Applebaum does not address how – and most importantly, why – autocratic media manage to convince people in Latin America, the Middle East or Africa of their anti-Western ( and in every sense anti-democratic ) views.

Clearly, the “great movement for democracy” and grassroots activism – which Applebaum is fond of – are not inspiring enough for those people. Potentially, their lack of inspiration is a byproduct of the autocratic propaganda that instills cynicism and nihilism in those countries, an effect Applebaum illuminates.

The Russian media’s audience, for example, is bombarded by a range of false versions of major events, one so wide it is impossible to grasp. The cacophony leads to hopelessness, says Applebaum. But young people in liberal democracies, too, display a palpable hopelessness and disbelief in a better future, and even in the system itself.

A war against authoritarian behaviors

According to Applebaum, the fight against autocracy is not fought against a particular nation or bloc. Rather, it is a war against authoritarian behaviors.

Applebaum calls for solidarity, unity and coalition building, along with sanctions against offending countries. A network of lawyers and anti-corruption activists should help, she says. “Economic warriors” who can track sanctions in real time should set the record straight. This certainly means more exposure of autocracies, and probably more sanctions.

Applebaum never questions the efficacy of sanctions, their contribution to autocrats ‘ propaganda messages and, most importantly, their human cost. Autocrats have the option of avoiding sanctions regimes. Their beleaguered citizens, though, often cannot. Propaganda appanchists never fail to make the most of this.

For instance, in late 2023, Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov disputed a statement made by Finnish Foreign Minister Elina Valtonen, who stated that she “minced no words” to describe the sanctions ‘ intended effects on regular people.

I share Applebaum’s preference for liberal democracy and its renewed defense, which she articulates well in her book’s final pages. Due to the policies of the past three decades, the world is noticeably smaller. Globalization worked only too well, tying everybody – good, bad and neutral – into one interconnected whole.

Reading Applebaum’s book, it might seem as if” they” are winning. But this is almost certainly an overstatement. In the hopes of obtaining a Venezuelan or Iranian passport, migrants are not attempting to cross the borders of autocratic nations.

Instead, there is mass migration to Australia, America, Canada and Europe. The debates about the number of people entering the US through its southern border are political hot topics that have significant electoral impact.

It is obvious that The West has a strong product in the market. Autocracies will not go extinct, but neither will they win at large. In some places in the world, “democracy” will remain a slur.

Oleg Beyda is the University of Melbourne’s Hansen Lecturer in Russian history.

This article was republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.

Continue Reading