The growing trend of “foreign agents" laws have targeted prodemocratic civil society groups and activists around the world. As a result, hostile narratives are established that stigmatize these groups, impeding the inherent rights of freedom to assembly, expression, and speech. These narratives often lead to “foreign agents” laws by authoritarian regimes, ultimately stifling the many benefits that civic groups bring to societies.

Gina Romero, the United Nations Special Rapporteur on Freedom of Peaceful Assembly and of Association, sits down with NED Vice President for Studies and Analysis Christopher Walker to discuss stigmatizing narratives that target civil society and activists, their impact, and how civic groups can respond. In this conversation, Ms. Romero highlights the key findings of her recent report on protecting the rights to freedom of peaceful assembly and association from stigmatization.

For further insights on “foreign influence laws”, watch Ms. Romero’s short video on the rights to peaceful assembly and association and read the Forum’s resources on Foreign Agents Laws. You can find additional resources on the Countering Authoritarian Influence research hub and join the conversation with us on Facebook, LinkedIn, and X.

With more than fifty national elections taking place during 2024, in countries that comprise more than half the world’s population, it has never been more critical to secure the integrity of the information space—and never more challenging. The Philippines has been reckoning with this challenge since at least its 2016 election, which led some to refer to the country as “Patient Zero” for its early experience with industrial-scale information manipulation, designed to confuse and manipulate the public.   

Michael Navallo is a Filipino journalist, lawyer, and a former Reagan-Fascell Democracy Fellow, who serves as Chief Communications Officer for the Supreme Court of the Philippines. On this episode of Power 3.0, Michael joined John K. Glenn and Adam Fivenson from the Forum to discuss the evolution of information manipulation in the Philippines and how democracy activists can respond. Together, they discuss the actors who amplify anti-democratic narratives and share lessons for the response around the globe. 

For further insights on related issues, check out the International Forum’s companion blog, “Power 3.0 Understanding Modern Authoritarian Influence.” You can find additional resources on the Information Space Integrity research hub and join the conversation with us on Facebook, LinkedIn, and X. 

The views expressed in this podcast represent the opinions and analysis of the participants and do not necessarily reflect those of the National Endowment for Democracy or its staff. Photo Credit: Reagan-Fascell Democracy Fellowship Staff.

In the Balkans, governing elites who benefit from partnerships with democratic states and participation in the E.U. integration process are, in some cases, simultaneously furthering the autocratic agendas of Russia and China to leverage geopolitics to their advantage. Donika Emini, executive director of the CiviKos Platform and former Reagan-Fascell Democracy Fellow, joined John K. Glenn, director of the International Forum for Democratic Studies, to discuss how local enablers amplify authoritarian influence activities in Kosovo and the Western Balkans. Together they provide a framework for understanding the complex nature of local “Kingpins,” and explore how civil society organizations, like CiviKos, can respond to this significant challenge.   

For further insights on related issues, check out the International Forum’s companion blog, “Power 3.0 Understanding Modern Authoritarian Influence.” You can find additional resources on the Countering Authoritarian Influence research hub and join the conversation with us on Facebook, LinkedIn, and X. 

The views expressed in this podcast represent the opinions and analysis of the participants and do not necessarily reflect those of the National Endowment for Democracy or its staff. Photo Credit: Forum Staff

Globally, democratic activists are confronting novel forms of digital repression pioneered by autocrats who increasingly share software, hardware, and knowledge across borders. Notably, the People’s Republic of China has developed a heavily coercive governance model which it exports internationally through firms such as Huawei and ZTE. In Venezuela, for example, PRC technologies help to underpin the invasive “homeland” digital ID system, which is required for citizens to receive public salaries, state benefits, and access to medical care. 

Iria Puyosa (Atlantic Council DFRLab) and Valentin Weber (German Council on Foreign Relations) joined the Forum’s Christopher Walker and Beth Kerley to discuss the emerging threat from autocrats leveraging digital ID and digital information collection to incentivize compliance with regime models of “normal” behavior. Together, they unpack examples of repressive digital governance practices in China and Venezuela and explore steps the democratic community needs to take to stay ahead of digital authoritarians. This podcast was recorded after a joint, private workshop co-organized by the International Forum, Stanford University’s Global Digital Policy Incubator, and the Hoover Institution’s China’s Global Sharp Power Project. 

For further insights on related issues, check out the International Forum’s companion blog, “Power 3.0 Understanding Modern Authoritarian Influence.” You can find additional resources on the Emerging Technologies and Democracy research hub and join the conversation with us on Facebook, LinkedIn, and X. 

The views expressed in this podcast represent the opinions and analysis of the participants and do not necessarily reflect those of the National Endowment for Democracy or its staff. Photo Credit: [Wit Olszewski/Shutterstock]

Around the world, threats to freedom of expression and association are growing. One crucial example is found in Georgia, a struggling democracy with a population of just under four million people. Last year, the Georgian parliament withdrew proposed legislation targeting so-called “foreign agents” that was strikingly similar to such stifling legislation in Russia. At the time, the draft law stimulated widespread demonstrations in Georgia, temporarily pausing the law’s advance. However, on April 3, 2024, the Georgian ruling party reintroduced the widely unpopular law, renewing the struggle and generating fresh mass protests within Georgia and widespread condemnation internationally. 

On March 29, 2024, Tinatin Khidasheli, chairperson of the Tbilisi-based NGO Civic Initiative for Democratic and Euro-Atlantic Choice (Civic IDEA), joined Christopher Walker, vice president for studies and analysis at the National Endowment for Democracy, to discuss laws and narratives that ostensibly combat “foreign influence” but, in practice, have the effect of restricting fundamental freedoms and civic space. They unpack how Georgian society mobilized in 2023 to resist the adoption of the restrictive law and what lessons this holds for those who want to push back against weaponized narratives and restrictive foreign influence laws elsewhere.  

For further insights on related issues, check out the International Forum’s companion blog, “Power 3.0 Understanding Modern Authoritarian Influence.” You can find additional resources on the NED website and join the conversation with us on Facebook, LinkedIn, and Twitter. 

The views expressed in this podcast represent the opinions and analysis of the participants and do not necessarily reflect those of the National Endowment for Democracy or its staff. Photo Credit: [k_samurkas/Shutterstock]

In recent years, international institutions have become an increasingly critical arena of contestation between autocracies and democracies. China, in particular, has leveraged its participation in those institutions and relationships with autocratic regimes to proffer narratives that support authoritarian models of governance and hide its human rights abuses.

Sophie Richardson, visiting scholar at Stanford's Center for Democracy, Development and the Rule of Law and former China Director at Human Rights Watch, joined John K. Glenn, senior director for the International Forum for Democratic Studies, to discuss how the Communist Party of China, among other authoritarian actors, seeks to undermine human rights bodies within the UN system. Together, they unpack the importance of these institutions for civil society organizations and explored how democracy practitioners can shore up the global human rights system. 

For further insights on modern authoritarian influence, check out the International Forum’s companion blog, “Power 3.0 Understanding Modern Authoritarian Influence,” and the report, “Defending the Global Human Rights System from Authoritarian Assault: How Democracies Can Retake the Initiative,” by Dr. Rana Siu Inboden. You can find additional resources on the NED website and join the conversation with us on Facebook, LinkedIn, and Twitter. 

The views expressed in this podcast represent the opinions and analysis of the participants and do not necessarily reflect those of the National Endowment for Democracy or its staff. Photo Credit: [hxdbzxy/Shutterstock]

February 2024 marks two years since the beginning of Russia’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine. In the midst of this crisis, the world has learned much from Ukrainians about countering authoritarian information operations. The Forum highlighted Ukrainian civil society’s resilience in a 2023 report, “Shielding Democracy: Civil Society Adaptations to Kremlin Disinformation about Ukraine.” Yet, a new and more complex threat has emerged to Ukraine’s information environment from Artificial Intelligence (AI)-powered tools. Whether in Ukraine or across many other regions facing these threats, pro-democratic civil society actors have the opportunity to leverage these types of tools to level the playing field against authoritarian actors.

Ksenia Iliuk, co-founder of LetsData in Ukraine, sat down with John Glenn, director of the International Forum for Democratic Studies, and Adam Fivenson, Senior Program Officer for Information Space Integrity at the Forum, to discuss the state of Russia’s information operations and the Ukrainian response with a focus on the use of artificial intelligence and cross-sectoral collaboration.

For further insights on modern authoritarian influence, check out the International Forum’s companion blog, “Power 3.0 Understanding Modern Authoritarian Influence.” You can find additional resources on the Forum’s website at the National Endowment for Democracy and join the conversation with us on Facebook, LinkedIn, and Twitter.

The views expressed in this podcast represent the opinions and analysis of the participants and do not necessarily reflect those of the National Endowment for Democracy or its staff. Photo Credit: [Iliuk Nazar/Shutterstock].

Authoritarian influence in multilateral institutions is growing rapidly and poses a serious threat to democratic and human rights principles. Repressive governments have worked to undermine mechanisms that are meant to ensure accountability for human rights abuses and to transform the United Nations, its related bodies, and other international institutions into fora for mutual praise. Both the Chinese Communist Party and the Kremlin are working to subvert human rights norms, peddle favorable narratives, and oppose resolutions examining their poor human rights records. Democratic societies must rally behind the global human rights system and ensure that it remains capable of assisting activists and victims around the world.   

International Forum report author and senior fellow with the Robert S. Strauss Center at The University of Texas at Austin, Rana Siu Inboden, and China Director at Human Rights Watch, Sophie Richardson, sat down with Christopher Walker, vice president for studies and analysis at the National Endowment for Democracy, for a discussion on this crucial challenge to global democratic integrity. This episode highlights key moments from this conversation. 

This podcast was adapted from a launch event for Dr. Inboden’s excellent report, “Defending the Human Rights System from Authoritarian Assault: How Democracies Can Retake the Initiative,” published by the Forum. To watch the full event, visit the National Endowment for Democracy’s YouTube channel. 

For further insights on modern authoritarian influence, check out the International Forum’s companion blog, “Power 3.0 Understanding Modern Authoritarian Influence.” You can find additional research on the NED website and join the conversation with us on Facebook and Twitter. 

The views expressed in this podcast represent the opinions and analysis of the participants and do not necessarily reflect those of the National Endowment for Democracy or its staff. Photo Credit: [Ana Maria Serrano/Getty Images].

As the People’s Republic of China (PRC) has become more authoritarian and closed to the world in recent years, its global influence has risen even more rapidly. Civil society and other democratic institutions around the world must grapple with the PRC’s malign influence in many domains, including the information, technology, economic, and political spheres. Key democratic institutions often operate with significant knowledge deficits regarding the Chinese Communist Party’s opaque political system, Chinese language skills, and the ways in which the PRC’s outward-facing engagement is adapting and evolving. How should democracies fill these crucial knowledge gaps? What role can key diaspora, academic institutions, and civil society organizations play at a global level to shrink such deficits?  

Journal of Democracy author and Professor at Australia’s Swinburne University of Technology John Fitzgerald, Hong Kong native and Advisor at Central Asia’s OSCE Academy Niva Yau, and CEO of Taiwan’s Doublethink Lab TtCat discussed how their societies have leveraged expertise on China to address democratic vulnerabilities, and how others might be able to do the same. Christopher Walker, vice president for studies and analysis at the National Endowment for Democracy, and Kevin Sheives, deputy director at the International Forum for Democratic Studies, co-hosted the conversations.

For further insights on modern authoritarian influence, check out the International Forum’s companion blog, “Power 3.0 Understanding Modern Authoritarian Influence.” You can find additional resources on the NED website and join the conversation with us on Facebook and Twitter. 

The views expressed in this podcast represent the opinions and analysis of the participants and do not necessarily reflect those of the National Endowment for Democracy or its staff. Photo Credit: Ran Sinee/Shutterstock.com.

In 2016, Mauritius announced the launch of a “safe city” project—a public-security initiative deploying cameras and other advanced digital technologies from the controversial PRC-based vendor Huawei. Shrouded in opacity and set up outside standard oversight mechanisms, the project raises the specter of surveillance and digital control in the country.

In this episode of the Power 3.0 podcast, featured guest Roukaya Kasenally discusses how the Mauritius Safe City Project could worsen backsliding in one of Africa’s most stable democracies. Drawing on her essay for the International Forum for Democratic Studies’ recent report Smart Cities and Democratic Vulnerabilities, Kasenally will explain what the Mauritian experience tells us about responding to China’s smart city exports, and the broader dangers of digital development in the absence of democratic guardrails.

Roukaya Kasenally is an associate professor at the University of Mauritius and an alumna of the National Endowment for Democracy’s Reagan-Fascell Democracy Fellows Program. Christopher Walker, vice president for studies and analysis at the National Endowment for Democracy, and Beth Kerley, a program officer at the International Forum for Democratic Studies, cohost the conversation.

 

 

For further insights on emerging technologies and democracy, check out the International Forum’s companion blog, “Power 3.0 Understanding Modern Authoritarian Influence,” and tune into our upcoming virtual discussion on Tuesday, February 7, from 12:00 pm-1:00 pm EST to learn more about the digital risks of smart cities in an era of democratic backsliding. You can find additional resources on the NED website and join the conversation with us on Facebook and Twitter.

The views expressed in this podcast represent the opinions and analysis of the participants and do not necessarily reflect those of the National Endowment for Democracy or its staff. Photo Credit: Agilard/Shutterstock.com.