The International Politics of Authoritarianism

This week’s seminar stressed the following notion: that authoritarianism is not created in a domestic vacuum – as a regime it is a result of, and continues to play a major part in, global politics.

Although authoritarianism is more prevalent in the Global South (based on statistics such as the Freedom House Index) – richer countries and Western democracies have undeniably played a role in promoting the regimes, which can be seen through the example of foreign aid. A useful exercise in class was to look at OECD statistics combined with Freedom House Index rankings. This revealed that of the top ten recipients of aid worldwide only one of those countries (India) is classified as ‘Free’, with the majority labelled as ‘Not Free’.

Harmful relationships between the Global North and South is not a new phenomenon in our development studies, the starkest example being colonialism and the structural adjustment programmes that followed. However, returning to a topic of this week, how exactly does this relationship, and aid specifically, promote authoritarian regimes?

From my own professional experience working on funding applications to UK and Australian government aid agencies, I know first-hand the many loopholes recipients of their funds jump through to provide robust plans and assurances for due diligence – that aid monies will further development aims and not cause harm. However, a new concept introduced in this seminar was the fungibility of aid; despite money being channelled into the country for specific development purposes, it can nonetheless end up being diverted for other means (Pack and Pack, 1993). Therefore, the more unconditional the aid, the more risks this carries for indirectly strengthening authoritarian and damaging regimes. This is seen in the case of China’s financial assistance to Africa and Central Asia (Sharshenova and Crawford, 2017).

Putting the specifics of aid-giving aside, there are further underlying factors related to geopolitics that encourage the funding of certain regimes. For example, in the wake of 9/11 Western countries have fed large amounts of capital into global security and militarisation including in authoritarian regimes, such as Chad (Fisher and Anderson, 2015). The same countries have also strategically used this war on terror to receive funds and strengthen their regimes (Fisher and Anderson, 2015).

Although it is useful to look at the international dynamics of authoritarianism through a Global North/South lens, if I were to revisit this topic I would explore the influential relationships that exist between countries within the same Global categories. I believe these are increasingly important to explore if we consider the increasing wave of autocratic fervour within the Global North and influential relations between major Global South autocracies such as the Arab monarchies.

 

References

Fisher, J. and Anderson, D, M. (2015). ‘Authoritarianism and the Securitization of Development in Africa’, International Affairs, 91 (1): 131-151.

Pack, H. and Pack, J. (1993) ‘Foreign aid and the question of fungibility’ The review of economics and statistics, LXXV (2): 258-258

Sharshenova, A. and Crawford, G. (2017) ‘Undermining Western Democracy Promotion in Central Asia: China’s Countervailing Influences, Powers and Impact’, Central Asian Survey, 36 (4): 453-472.

Advertisements

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

w

Connecting to %s