While the state of democracy has been debated for years, 2024 may prove decisive for its future. This issue of New Eastern Europe examines whether democracy can withstand its current challenges.

An interview with Samuel Chu, a community organizer for human rights and democracy. Interviewer: Ottilie Tabberer

If in the expression “hybrid regime” the adjective will be the focus of this short essay, understanding the meaning and implications of the term “regime” is an unavoidable starting point. The subsequent questions will be: How do we define a hybrid regime? Are there different types? And what is the crux of the issue today?

The mainstream notion of regime refers to all government institutions and norms, either formalized or informally recognized as existing in a given territory and concerning a given population. When, more precisely, we look at the patterns that shape the channels of access to the leading government positions, the characteristics of the actors who are admitted or excluded from such access, and the resources or strategies that they can use to gain access, we understand that to have a regime we need some stabilization. If there is no stabilization, we are in a fluid transitional phase that can also go towards either an authoritarian solution or a democracy.

From Russia to Kyrgyzstan, and Georgia to Hungary, “foreign agent” style laws have become a preferred instrument for authoritarians to extinguish critical voices, shield their rule from scrutiny and strengthen their hold on power.

By stigmatizing independent civil society, media and other dissenting voices as “trojan horses”, “foreign agent” laws have offered a convenient framing to delegitimize and isolate them. In addition, they have also helped to impose harsh monitoring and reporting requirements and shut critics out of public life. As the promotion of democratic practices and human rights threatens authoritarians’ grip on power, foreign agent laws offer a handy tool to discredit these activities by equating them with promoting the interests of a foreign power.

In the past, authoritarian regimes such as the Soviet Union maintained power through the total control of information and propaganda. Today, the situation has changed significantly. Many of the new features of contemporary dictatorships have been imposed by the process of globalization and technological progress.

Throughout history, dictatorial rulers have been a consistent presence, evolving from tribal chieftains and monarchs to modern-day autocrats. Even in different settings, these leaders had one thing in common: pursuing and maintaining power by utilizing diverse tools to secure their dominance. In ancient times it was often sufficient for a ruler to claim divine endorsement, such as being the representative of a rain or fire god, and to eliminate any threat or expression of disobedience.

An interview with Kacper Rękawek, senior fellow at the International Centre for Counter-Terrorism. Interviewer: Andrzej Kozłowski

ANDRZEJ KOZŁOWSKI: How is Russia exploiting far-right organizations in Europe?

KACPER RĘKAWEK: This process began over ten years ago and specifically after the 2012 protests in Moscow, when Russians gathered at Bolotnaya Square to express their disagreement with Putin’s third term as president. Having seen the protesters, who in large numbers were representatives of the urban middle class, the Russian authorities came to the conclusion that it was the liberals who were the main threat to the regime. Although these enemies were identified internally, the Kremlin decided to attack them abroad as well.

Across the region there has been a lot of talk about the power of young voters. While this group was seemingly responsible for a recent shift towards the centre in Poland, young people are also linked to growing radicalism. This has seen the youth vote increasingly correlated with a potential threat to democratic values and norms.

The 2023 elections in Poland were historic with a record turnout exceeding 74 per cent. The dissatisfied youth moved against the ruling party, leading to many headlines declaring that “young voters and women saved the elections.” Indeed, many polling stations remained open well past closing time, as videos circulated on social media of queues of voters stretching far down the street. There is no doubt that the youth vote played a decisive role in preventing another term for the populist Law and Justice (PiS) party. But did they also stop the far right from gaining influence?

Within hours of assuming the presidency of the Council of the European Union, the Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orbán paid a visit to Ukraine, Russia, China and the United States. In Orbán’s own words these meetings were a part of a “peace mission” that he had initiated to bring peace back to Europe and the world as soon as possible.

The phrase “Make Hungary Great Again,” or in Hungarian “ismét naggyá teszi Magyarországot,” from a passage in the Preamble (National Avowal of Faith) of the Hungarian Constitution, enacted in April 2011, has become the motto of the Hungarian presidency of the Council of the European Union. From July 1st 2024 until the end of this year, “Make Europe Great Again” is the official slogan of the council’s rotating presidency.

The French far-right party and its leader, Marine Le Pen, have been engaged in a strategy designed to assume power and take over the presidency after Emmanuel Macron. To do this, the daughter of Jean-Marie Le Pen rebranded the party, renewed her team and promoted new and young faces. But did it change its posture on foreign policy? What is today the place of Russia in the political agenda of the National Rally?

It has been more than a decade since French far-right political movements developed a real fascination with Russia and a vocal admiration for its leader, Vladimir Putin. Considering the long and complex history of the clubs, parties, sects, journals and political groups of this political trend, this love affair is quite recent. And it is far from natural.

Telegram is a growing digital platform that is being used in the region and around the world. Yet, out of all major social media companies, it remains the least transparent in its content moderation and curation practices. The platform makes vocal commitments to protecting user privacy but practice shows otherwise.

Russia and Ukraine share few things in common when it comes to their respective social media environments. Following the start of the full-scale invasion, Russia banned the use of Meta’s platforms – Instagram and Facebook – in addition to the wholesale blocking of various domestic and foreign media outlets. Ukraine, for its part, blocked the Russian social network Vkontakte long before the invasion.

Russia’s invasion of Ukraine has involved the most extensive use of offensive cyber operations by one state against another in history. It is now obvious that blurring the lines between competition, crisis and war in cyberspace requires continuity in cyber defence. As a result, national cybersecurity must be one of the state's top priorities in terms of policy focus and budget allocation.

Forces that influence the world order are constantly evolving, and therefore, the global security landscape has become even more dynamic. For decades, the power dynamics of global balance were different to those today. Those with an economic advantage had the upper hand and dictated the rules to the rest of the world. Soon after, the emphasis moved towards military might, particularly during the Cold War. Of course, the economy is also the backbone here, as the development of weapons requires a strong and stable economy.

November could see former US President Donald Trump return to the White House. His rather unpredictable approach to foreign policy could subsequently leave an even greater impact on the world than it did in his first term. This is due to various new conflicts like Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, with both Kyiv and Moscow preparing for Trump’s potential victory.

Over the last month, Democratic nominee Kamala Harris has upended the presidential race in the United States by opening a small lead over Donald Trump in national polls. However, historical experience suggests early leads are often overturned and the upcoming presidential debates may prove decisive. With Trump still very much in the race, policymakers in Russia and Ukraine are bracing for what could be a seismic shift in US foreign policy.