America Internationaal Trump

Autocrats and how to fight them

huibert_geldropby Huibert•Posted 08/05/2025•1 Comment(s)

Anne Applebaum, Autocracy Inc., the dictators who want to run the world. Penguin/Random House, 2024

 

Trump and the need to understand autocracy

Donald Trump’s second term, in which he has systematically been endeavoring to destroy the institutions of democracy and the rule of law in the few months that he has been in office, has put the theme of autocracy at the center of attention. Is the United States, long seen as a model of democracy, developing into an autocratic state? Is he using the democratic institutions to kill democracy? And, if so, what can we learn from history and from the political reality in non-democratic states?

Since it might provide answers to such questions, I read the book by the historian and journalist Anne Applebaum (written in the period of the Biden administration). She shows the reality of present-day autocracies, their mutual connections and influence on what Applebaum calls the ‘democratic world’, in which at the time of her writing the US played a leading role. The reality after November 2024 is not dealt with in the book.

 

Investigative journalism with ideals

The compact book of about 200 pages can best be characterized as investigative journalism inspired by ideals; it has no scientific pretentions and does not pay much attention to alternative ways of viewing the subject or debates in this field of study. It is written in accessible English, avoiding the use of specialized jargon; clearly it is meant for a wide audience.

In five chapters, preceded by an introduction and followed by an epilogue, the author presents a rich collection of case material from a variety of countries, both full autocracies and failed democracies, with detailed references to sources.

Applebaum shows a strongly involved relationship with her subject, she is clearly committed to her ideals of democracy and rule of law and shows in her case material what can go wrong when states degenerate into autocracies.  The core of the book is a moral argument: Applebaum’s stories serve to convince the reader of the risks of autocracy and the need to fight it.

 

A network of kleptocratic autocracies

The diverse collection of states that reject democracy and create a form of authoritarian rule without checks and balances or a separation of powers do not share an ideology. In that sense they do not form a new ideological block opposing liberal democracy. Applebaum emphasizes that is no new Cold War between the ‘democratic world’ and ‘autocracy’.  Many pragmatic, ad-hoc connections between these states with diverse ideologies exist, however, based on shared interests. Financial networks play a central role here. The autocratic leaders, who, unrestrained by laws and institutions, steal from the citizens – Applebaum writes about kleptocracy – build financial networks to protect their interests and hide their dealings from their citizens and international institutions. The book gives detailed examples of how kleptocratic autocracies escape international influence and sanctions by their participation in invisible networks of money and power.

Fighting ‘Autocracy, Inc.’

The democratic world of today has an elusive opponent, the many-headed monster of Autocracy, Inc.  Although, as I said, the author does not see a new Cold War, she does construct a dichotomy: the (good) democracy versus the (evil) autocracy. And in this battle between good and evil, she shows the many tactics that the autocrats use to undermine the foundations of the democratic world.

‘Controlling the narrative’, i.e. influencing the concepts and stories that guide sense-making in the political arena, is an important aspect of the destructive influence of the autocrats on the democratic world. The internet offers many opportunities for the propagation of ideologies as well as for spreading fake news and rumors. According to Applebaum, the spread of anti-American or anti-western sentiments among the population of Africa and Latin America can to a large extent be attributed to this deliberate controlling of the political narrative by autocratic states.

The book shows that fighting Autocracy, Inc. is not easy. Regulating the internet, restoring transparency in the international financial world and supporting democratic forces in autocratic countries constitute a difficult task, requiring coordination between all democratic forces inside and outside the democratic world. In the Epilogue the author emphasizes the necessity of an international anti-kleptocracy network and launches the term Democrats United for the movement needed to fight Autocracy, Inc. She makes it clear that the US has a central role to play in this movement.

In the book she does not pay much attention to the military aspects of fighting Autocracy, Inc. But in October 2024, when she was awarded a Peace Prize (Friedenspreis des deutschen Buchhandels) in Frankfurt, Germany, she made the military aspect very clear, talking about Ukraine and Russia. To defend democracy in Ukraine we must be prepared to use military means to fight the Russian autocracy.

Investigative journalism, ideals, analysis and political views

I characterized this book as ‘investigative journalism with ideals’.  As investigative journalism this book offers a wealth of interesting data and stories, which show a disturbing picture of a world in which networks of kleptocratic autocrats undermine the existing rule-based order and liberal democracy. This picture should be worrying to anybody committed to democracy and the rule of law.

The author’s strong commitment to a view of the world in terms of a fight between the democratic world and the many-headed monster of ‘Autocracy, Inc.’ simplifies the interpretation of this relevant material, however.  An image in terms of ‘good and evil’, ‘light and dark’ or similar dichotomies may be attractive for rhetorical purposes – ‘we are good, they are evil’ – but is not helpful in understanding the complex world that is evolving and does not easily fit into simple frames.

Cold war and neo-conservatism

The black-and-white scheme used by Applebaum still reminds strongly of the cold-war thinking she purports to reject: a frame that reflected the situation after World War 2, when the US and its allies formed the democratic world, which had only one serious adversary: communism. The mission of the coalition of the US and its allies was to build a rules-based global system, based on concepts of democracy and the rule of law.

The adversary has changed: it is now a conglomerate of non-democratic states and leaders. But in Applebaum’s book the way of thinking seems to remain the same: the US has the task of propagating its (liberal democratic) political system. The democratic world continues to have  an interventionist role: it must actively promote democracy and the rule of law in other countries. It may be necessary to use military force to this end, even pre-emptively, to promote political developments in the right direction.

This philosophy has been formulated by thinkers of the neo-conservative school of thought, to which Applebaum clearly belongs. It has inspired presidents like George Bush and Joe Biden. Like those who wanted to restore the power of the US in the world and its role in maintaining the world order – for example Kagan (2018), who feared that the ‘jungle would grow back’ if the US neglected its global leadership role – Applebaum wants the democratic world to take back control, with a key role for the US.

On the basis of past interventions of the US and its allies in the name of democracy and peace (from Vietnam to Iraq and Afghanistan) one may have doubts about the effectiveness of such interventions. The rise of China and Asia in general, leading a fundamental change in the field of global geopolitics, makes the interventionist scenario of the neo-conservatives even more unrealistic. Restoring US leadership seems nostalgia.

The conservative bias of Applebaum also becomes apparent in the choice of her cases: that Israel and Netanyahu do not get their deserved place in Autocracy, Inc. can only be understood by the special relationship conservatives (in both parties) have with Israel. Hamas gets full attention, however.

Whether we like it or not, the world has become multipolar (a term that Applebaum explicitly rejects as belonging to Russian and Chinese ideas of the world order). This sets clear limits on the possibilities of Applebaum’s fight with Autocracy, Inc. by Democrats United.

Attention to the weaknesses of liberal democracies?

The book tells us much about a number of autocratic states and their kleptocratic leaders. But this focus on evil adversaries may distract from honest self-examination: what are the weaknesses of liberal democracies, the contradictions and tensions that create opportunities for the development of autocratic tendencies inside these democracies and weakness with respect to outside influences undermining democracy and rule of law?

Even an advocate of liberalism like Fukuyama wrote about the inherent tensions in liberalism that give rise to authoritarian tendencies (Fukuyama, 2022), but in Applebaum’s book democracy is only menaced from the outside, by the evil forces of autocratic states and networks. She does not pay attention to the evident weaknesses of the US political system, with the disproportionate role of money and marketing in elections and the growing inequality in society. As a consequence, her book does not offer much to those who want to strengthen democracies from within, to enhance their abilities to deal with internal and external threats.

In this context it is striking that Applebaum does not pay any attention to the phenomenon of populism, denoting movements that aim at abolishing democracy and the rule of law in the name of ‘the people’ (Müller, 2016). The rise of Donald Trump as the US home-grown autocrat cannot be understood without reference to the inherent weaknesses of the US political system and the rise of populism.

Outside antidemocratic forces that intend to damage democracies make use of existing weaknesses of the system. Applebaum’s account of the evil outside forces needs to be complemented by insight into internal processes weakening democracies. The reality of Trump’s America is a clear demonstration.

Useful information, insufficient analysis and conservative nostalgia

For a those who are committed to democracy and rule of law, this highly readable book offers a lot disturbing but relevant information about states and their leaders who operate outside the rule-based order created by the US and its allies (the ‘democratic world’).

A major limitation, however, is the neo-conservative frame in which this information is presented: the restoration of US dominance in the rules that govern the world. Given the profound changes in the geopolitical and economic spheres, the US is not likely to assume this leadership role. In dealing with other countries it will have to accept the reality of multipolarity. The idea of ‘Democrats United’ reminds too much of the coalition after World War 2 under the leadership of the US. This created the international institutions that are now threatened by an emerging (multipolar) world order in which China plays a major role. Nostalgia will not save democracy and neither will a combination of moral convictions and weapons, as Applebaum seems to suggest.

New thinking needed

I share Applebaum’s concerns about the threats to democracy and the rule of law and the role of non-democratic states deserves attention. But her analysis is too limited and as a consequence the actions based on this analysis insufficiently realistic.  Applebaum’s interpretation is too much rooted in a frame of the past, in particular in the period after World War 2, a bi-polar and, after the demise of the Soviet Union seemingly a uni-polar world. To understand the challenges of democracy and the rule of law in the present multi-polar world, we need ways of thinking that do not assume a dominance of the US and its democratic allies. The developments in the US, where populism and autocratic tendencies are threatening institutional structures, are further diminishing the relevance of US leadership in the democratic world.

In search of perspectives

We need perspectives on democracy that enable us to think about the development of democracy in the reality of today and tomorrow. I will continue to search for them, from the assumption that multiple perspectives are needed and no ready-made solutions for the complicated problems of democracy exist. In new contributions on this blog I will write about what I have found in books, articles and websites.

Sources

1 Comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *