about the sharp power and democratic resilience series
As globalization deepens integration between democracies and autocracies, the compromising effects of sharp power—which impairs free expression, neutralizes independent institutions, and distorts the political environment—have grown apparent across crucial sectors of open societies. The Sharp Power and Democratic Resilience series is an effort to systematically analyze the ways in which leading authoritarian regimes seek to manipulate the political landscape and censor independent expression within democratic settings, and to highlight potential civil society responses.
This initiative examines emerging issues in four crucial arenas relating to the integrity and vibrancy of democratic systems:
- Challenges to free expression and the integrity of the media and information space
- Threats to intellectual inquiry
- Contestation over the principles that govern technology
- Leverage of state-driven capital for political and often corrosive purposes
The present era of authoritarian resurgence is taking place during a protracted global democratic downturn that has degraded the confidence of democracies. The leading authoritarians are challenging democracy at the level of ideas, principles, and standards, but only one side seems to be seriously competing in the contest.
Global interdependence has presented complications distinct from those of the Cold War era, which did not afford authoritarian regimes so many opportunities for action within democracies. At home, Beijing, Moscow, and others have used twenty-first-century tools and tactics to reinvigorate censorship and manipulate the media and other independent institutions. Beyond their borders, they utilize educational and cultural initiatives, media outlets, think tanks, private sector initiatives, and other channels of engagement to influence the public sphere for their own purposes, refining their techniques along the way. Such actions increasingly shape intellectual inquiry and the integrity of the media space, as well as affect emerging technologies and the development of norms. Meanwhile, autocrats have utilized their largely hybrid state-capitalist systems to embed themselves in the commerce and economies of democracies in ways that were hardly conceivable in the past.
The new environment requires going beyond the necessary but insufficient tools of legislation, regulation, or other governmental solutions. Democracies possess a critical advantage that authoritarian systems do not—the creativity and solidarity of vibrant civil societies that can help safeguard institutions and reinforce democratic values. Thus, the papers in this series aim to contextualize the nature of sharp power, inventory key authoritarian efforts and domains, and illuminate ideas for non-governmental action that are essential to strengthening democratic resilience.
Papers in the series
by Edward Lucas
This report explores how the leading authoritarian regimes have exploited democratic norms and transformed the market for information into a dangerous tool to exert antidemocratic sharp power. Under enormous economic and political pressures, independent media are struggling to respond. News outlets face wrenching changes in their business models, driven by technological revolution. And features of the media system once seen only as strengths—such as competition, openness, and fair-mindedness—have also turned out to be weaknesses.
Edward Lucas is a writer and consultant specializing in European and transatlantic security. Formerly a senior editor at The Economist, he is now a senior vice president at the Center for European Policy Analysis and writes a weekly column in The Times. His latest book is Cyberphobia: Identity, Trust, Security, and the Internet.
by Martin Hála
This report explores the issue of corrosive capital—or capital flows from authoritarian regimes that undermine democratic processes and institutions in the receiving countries—and outlines what an interconnected, interdisciplinary response from civil society could look like. Illiberal regimes like those in China and Russia use capital as a foreign policy tool and often as a form of strategic corruption to bolster authoritarianism as a globally competitive governance system. The legacy of one Chinese firm’s engagement in the Czech Republic vividly illustrates how corrosive capital from technically private companies can be leveraged by authoritarian regimes to undermine democratic institutions in target countries. Without strong accountability, transparency, and oversight mechanisms, the adverse impacts of such sharp power can go unnoticed and unchallenged. As a critical and distinguishing feature of free and open societies, civil society has an important role to play in fostering democratic inoculation to authoritarian corrosive capital.
Martin Hála is a sinologist and director of Project Sinopsis. He has taught at universities in Prague and Bratislava, and conducted research in China, Taiwan, and the U.S. He has worked for several media assistance organizations, and from 2014 to 2015 served as the regional manager for Asia-Pacific at the Open Society Foundations.
by Glenn Tiffert
This report explores the compromising effects of sharp power on the civil society institutions that democratic societies depend on for knowledge production, including universities, publishers, and think tanks. Authoritarian regimes—China, Russia, Saudi Arabia, Turkey, and others—are exploiting unanticipated vulnerabilities in open knowledge economies to challenge free intellectual inquiry from the inside. By systematically coopting foreign partners, marginalizing or intimidating dissenters, controlling discourse, and globalizing their preferred narratives, these authoritarian regimes intend to discredit democracy, shore up their positions at home, and facilitate the projection of their power and interests abroad. Resisting the compromising effects of sharp power requires a communal awakening backed by heightened regulatory and institutional standards, major investments in employee training and compliance, robust monitoring, and the fortitude to say “no” to authoritarian influence.
Glenn Tiffert is a visiting fellow at the Hoover Institution, and a historian of modern China. His research has centered on Chinese legal history, the judiciary, and the genealogy of the rule of law in the People’s Republic of China. He works with government and university partners to strengthen resilience against authoritarian influence in the academic sector.