2024-08-22 00:52:28
According to respected journalist, author and historian Anne Applebaum, Russia, China and Iran together form a global network of autocratic regimes that support each other in the fight against democracy. In an interview with the newspaper Aktuálně.cz, he explains what holds this network together and why it should worry us.
The winner of the prestigious Pulitzer Prize Applebaum in her latest book titled Autokracie, as: Dictators who want to rule the world describes the decline of democratic institutions around the world.
According to her, the new danger is the connection of autocrats who help each other. “Their greatest common interest is the need to oppose us, against the liberal world and its values - and especially against the ideas of democracy,” says Anne Applebaum
A native of Washington, USA, and a naturalized Pole, she is professionally devoted to the issues of Soviet Russia and Eastern Europe, which she writes about for the renowned American magazine The Atlantic. In 2004, she won the prestigious Pulitzer Prize in the non-fiction category for her book about the Russian Gulag labor camps.
Her husband is a Polish politician, Foreign Minister Radoslaw Sikorski. Together with their two children, they live in Chobielin, Poland, near Bydgoszcz, where after 1989 they bought and gradually renovated a devastated classicist mansion.
Photo: Facebook Anne Applebaum
How does the global network of autocratic regimes you describe in your new book work?
Like a big corporation, made up of different companies. They each do their own thing, have loose connections and work together when it’s convenient for them. The three largest and most aggressive are Russia, China and Iran. They have the most influence around the world. The global network also includes Venezuela and Cuba in Latin America, and it is complemented by African states influenced by Moscow.
You claim that today’s autocrats cement their ties “not through ideals but through deals”…
Yes, they have common interests. For example, they want to use the global financial system to launder money or share propaganda. But their greatest common interest is the need to oppose us, against the liberal world and its values - and especially against the ideas of democracy.
The language of rights and transparency threatens them. They are dictatorships that try to avoid checks and balances of power. Anyone who promotes these things stands in their way.
So they are motivated purely by power and wealth. How is this different from the totalitarian blocs of the 20th century? Has this network evolved in any way?
In the 20th century, the Soviet bloc was linked by ideology and led by one country – the USSR – with one group of leaders. This is not how it works now: there is no special room where they meet, give orders and everyone follows them. They act in their own interest when it suits them. It’s a network, not a block. And that makes her very different.
Why did states need ideology to work together before, but now the global network of autocratic regimes doesn’t? What has changed?
The Chinese invest in and help support autocratic regimes around the world. The Russians do the same. They offer mercenaries to dictators in Africa who are in trouble. They look for areas where they have something in common and where they can help each other. And they don’t really need a common ideology for that.
Leaders of autocratic states are billionaires who have money to bribe and influence others. They are very interested in secrecy, in the lack of transparency and in maintaining systems not only for power, but mainly for money.
In the book, you also write about fundamental changes in technology. How did the emergence of the Internet or artificial intelligence strengthen the network of autocrats?
Very. The Chinese have surveillance technology that is a million times more sophisticated than anything the Soviet Union or the Nazis had, and they are selling it to people. These technologies are now used in many countries around the world. This is where the current threat most manifests itself: today’s autocrats have far more ways to maintain power than their 20th-century predecessors. This should be a huge warning to us as a democratic world.
Are autocrats successful in destroying democracy?
I don’t know if they want to dismantle it directly. I’d say they want to undermine her and make sure she doesn’t threaten them. It doesn’t quite strike me as a matter of success, I think it will be a long struggle that will probably last the rest of our lives.
Knowing this, how do you view the war in Ukraine?
As a pretty clear example of Russian failure. It was supposed to end quickly and be a great triumph for Vladimir Putin. Instead, it has dragged on for two and a half years. As we speak, the Ukrainians are attacking Russia (in the Kursk region, editor’s note). However, as I said, there are ups and downs. For example, Russian authoritarian propaganda has probably influenced some elections in the democratic world.
Is the West somewhat complicit in the fact that the web of autocratic regimes continues to expand?
I think some people have realized that, but not all. It is rather that people who sympathize with autocracy work or are active in the Western financial and political system. In most European countries there are political groups of people who are said to be influenced by Russia or Russian ideas but actually agree with them. And they are happy when these ideas are promoted. They don’t even hesitate to help it.
On the other hand, even the democratic world has allies within autocracies. Activists and opposition in Venezuela or for example the Iranian women’s movement are a great threat to their regimes. We did not create these movements, but we are their allies – or at least we should be. They rely heavily on our thoughts and use them.
How do you think the global network of autocratic regimes will evolve in the future, especially in light of the ongoing wars in the world?
I’m not a big fan of predictions. What happens depends on what we do. How do we respond to this? Will we reform in our own countries as we should? Will we stand up to autocracies where they seek to expand their influence, or will we stand by?
If we strengthen our democratic institutions and stand firm against these regimes, we can limit their influence and perhaps even reverse some of their successes. But unless we address the internal weaknesses in our own systems, such as political polarization or economic inequality, then we are putting ourselves at risk.
Video: And now the Russians will do what? Ukrainist is sharp about the Kursk action and the “terrible” shame of the West (August 15, 2024)
Video: Team Spotlight