While the EU and European governments are embracing the much-lauded middle-power moment, this entails three difficult conundrums.
Richard Youngs
REQUIRED IMAGE
Source: Carnegie
Summary
It is widely believed that the Internet poses an insurmountable threat to authoritarian rule. But political science scholarship has provided little support for this conventional wisdom, and a number of case studies from around the world show that authoritarian regimes are finding ways to control and counter the political impact of Internet use. While the long-term political impact of the Internet remains an open question, Kalathil and Boas argue that these strategies for control may continue to be viable in the short to medium term.
Many authoritarian regimes translate a long and successful history of control over other information and communication technologies into strong control of Internet development within their borders. Potential challenges to the state may arise from Internet use in several areas: the mass public, civil society, the economy, and the international community. Authoritarian states will likely respond to these challenges with a variety of reactive measures: restricting Internet access, filtering content, monitoring on-line behavior, or even prohibiting Internet use entirely. In addition, such states seek to extend central control through proactive strategies, guiding the development of the medium to promote their own interests and priorities. Through a combination of reactive and proactive strategies, an authoritarian regime can counter the challenges posed by Internet use and even utilize the Internet to extend its reach and authority.
In this paper the authors illustrate how two authoritarian regimes, China and Cuba, are maintaining control over the Internet's political impact through different combinations of reactive and proactive strategies. These cases illustrate that, contrary to assumptions, different types of authoritarian regimes may be able to control and profit from the Internet. Examining the experiences of these two countries may help to shed light on other authoritarian regimes' strategies for Internet development, as well as help to develop generalizable conclusions about the impact of the Internet on authoritarian rule.
Click on link above for full text of this Carnegie Paper.
Former Associate
Former Project Associate
Carnegie does not take institutional positions on public policy issues; the views represented herein are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of Carnegie, its staff, or its trustees.
While the EU and European governments are embracing the much-lauded middle-power moment, this entails three difficult conundrums.
Richard Youngs
Ex-president Gurbanguly Berdimuhamedov remains interested in politics, but his son Serdar, Turkmenistan’s current president, is becoming increasingly independent and willing to break with his father’s legacy. If their covert rivalry goes too far, both risk losing power.
Galiya Ibragimova
Europe is facing rising populism internally as well as external pressures from Russia, China, Turkey, and the United States.
Dimitar Bechev
A notable degree of participative democracy has firmly arrived in Europe. But to have more far-reaching impact, democratic deliberation needs to move into a radically new phase.
Richard Youngs
The acknowledgment has sparked fears of a new arms race with China and Russia.
Chris O’Meara