The latest US presidential elections were heavily contested without evidence. British politics proved to be brutal and violent in the run up to and aftermath of the Brexit referendum. Several European countries are implementing policies that threaten freedom of the press and the independence of the judiciary. Fareed Zakaria in his 1997 landmark article on illiberalism pointed at the paradox that “Democratically elected regimes, often ones that have been reelected or reaffirmed through referenda, are routinely ignoring constitutional limits on their power and depriving their citizens of basic rights and freedoms”. Important democratic ideals have been severely challenged in many liberal democracies of the Euro-Atlantic area while authoritarian regimes seek to undermine democracy from the outside. Taking the measure of this context of democratic regression, this article proposes a definition of cognitive security as a first step to think about democratic resilience.
Democratic regression is a fertile ground for hybrid threat activity. Authoritarian regimes tend to direct it against democracies in order to promote their own narratives and discredit the very model of liberal democratic governance. This enables them to justify their rule in the eyes of their population. This is one reason why the issue of democratic resilience stands high on the international agenda. Few policy issues carry as much complexity and ethical charge as that of protecting democracy against hostile foreign powers.
Democracy is a system which maintains institutions that make it possible for power to change peacefully, regularly, and transparently through free and fair elections. Elections make accountability and representation possible. Authoritarian regimes typically do not allow for regular and peaceful transfer of power nor are they accountable and representative of the wider population. Elections when they exist are neither free nor fair and do not provide a real chance for political pluralism.
Photo: Sipa Press / Lehtikuva
Political science has pointed at the importance of the invisible institutions of democracy, or its unwritten rules, in making that change of power possible. A well-functioning and solid democracy features trust, authority and legitimacy. Those are the invisible institutions of democracy which hybrid threat actors seek to tamper with. When political power is widely accepted and representative, it has a clear mandate to act without resorting to violence. The meaning of authority is the ability to implement policy with as little coercion as possible. Those foundations of democratic resilience must be paid attention to since they will condition how well democracies overcome hybrid threat activity which will impose institutional stress on them. To take a few examples of such tampering, elections interference greatly impairs trust and legitimacy regardless of whether it succeeds. Cyber-attacks and attacks on critical infrastructure put a dent on the authority of democratic leaders and the capacity of democracy to deliver.
It is important to define a concept of cognitive security for democratic resilience: it refers to the degree of attachment of a citizenry to the invisible institutions and essential values that make a democracy precisely democratic. Acceptance and respect for diversity and pluralism of opinions, ability to compromise, willingness to debate with a certain standard of factual accuracy are unwritten rules of democracy which are significantly more fragile nowadays.
Cognitive security is especially threatened by four interrelated trends: (1) Violent ideals become more acceptable; (2) politics grow more tribal and polarized; (3) politicians increasingly use gaslighting and unseriousness as a way to dodge criticism and contradiction; (4) the abundance of information online has flattened hierarchies based on expertise and competence which makes individuals feel more competent and knowledgeable than established sources of expertise – any idea being potentially backed up by some sort of indication found on the internet. This also explains the prominence of conspiracy theories online.
The interaction of these four trends generally push forward a zeitgeist which ends up intimidating democracy itself: violence curtails debate and deters expression, polarization makes compromise less likely, politicians gaslighting and agitating their supporters foster violence, while individuals may use opinions as an identity and insurgency marker.
Building democratic resilience knows no quick fixes. It is a matter that needs a lot more sensitization towards political decision-makers. Psychological resilience in a democratic context implies nurturing the individual beliefs and collective mindsets that make it possible for a democracy to function based on trust, authority, and legitimacy.
Writer
Maxime Lebrun is the Deputy Director of the Research & Analysis Function at the Hybrid CoE. Prior to taking up his post at the Centre, Maxime worked at the Baltic Defence College in Tartu as a Lecturer in War and Conflict Studies and as Acting Department Director. During that time, he was also a Non-Resident Research Fellow at the International Centre for Defence and Security. Lebrun holds a master’s degree in International Relations from Sciences Po Lyon with a specialization in strategic, military and security studies from Sciences Po Aix-en-Provence.
