6th Annual UGSPN Conference

Abstract

Over the past two decades authoritarian governance has undergone a significant transformation driven by the expansion of digital technologies. This article examines the rise of digital authoritarianism as a distinct mode of rule in which surveillance systems, algorithmic content control, and information manipulation are embedded within the routine structures of governance. It argues that contemporary authoritarianism is not merely an updated version of earlier coercive regimes, but a qualitatively different and more resilient form of rule characterized by greater subtlety, precision, and durability.

The article traces the evolution of digital authoritarian practices from early internet regulation to their consolidation in the 2010s, situating the concept within ongoing definitional debates that contrast intention-based, promotion-based, informational, and practice-oriented approaches. It then analyzes the political logic of digital authoritarianism, focusing on how information control, compliance, and legitimacy are managed through digital means, before outlining the core pillars of digital authoritarian rule: surveillance, censorship, and disinformation. The final sections assess international responses and the diffusion of digital authoritarian practices across regime types, with particular attention to hybrid regimes and small democracies, including a case study of Georgia as an illustration of how digital control tools can emerge even in formally democratic contexts amid political polarization and democratic backsliding. The article concludes that digital authoritarianism poses a structural challenge to liberal governance that existing regulatory and normative frameworks remain poorly equipped to address.

Abstract

In an era marked by the global decline of liberal democracy and the concurrent rise of authoritarian regimes, the role of independent and impartial media has become increasingly pivotal.

This article investigates the role and influence of media institutions operating free from governmental or partisan control within authoritarian contexts, where regimes systematically curtail freedom of expression and monopolize the flow of information, and analyzes the capacity of the independent media to promote transparency, uphold accountability, reinforce the rule of law, and foster political engagement among citizens. Specific focus is given to the role and impact of investigative journalism in autocracies as a mechanism for exposing abuses of power and systemic corruption.

In addition to theoretical analysis, the article presents case studies from two authoritarian countries – Serbia and Hungary – where independent media outlets have played a critical role in revealing political manipulation, abuse of power, suppression of critical thought, human rights violations, and corrupt practices by ruling elites. Moreover, the paper explores the media’s contribution to the emergence of civic resistance, the mobilization of anti-government protests, and the imposition of political accountability on those in power.

The article concludes that in environments characterized by institutional capture and democratic backsliding, independent media constitutes a vital safeguard against authoritarian consolidation and serves as a cornerstone of democratic resilience.

This article provides a comprehensive analysis of the transformation in Sino-Georgian relations since 2012, highlighting how bilateral ties have evolved from limited economic engagement into a formal strategic partnership. It situates this evolution within China’s more assertive foreign policy under Xi Jinping, embodied in the Belt and Road Initiative and Georgia’s strategic recalibration under the Georgian Dream government. The study examines China’s motivations, including logistical access via the Middle Corridor, political diversification in the Black Sea region, and symbolic partnership with a cooperative democracy. It explores Georgia’s calculus in seeking alternative sources of investment, hedging against Western conditionality, and leveraging the relationship for domestic legitimacy. The article then assesses key risks: the asymmetry of power and unmet expectations, the tension between Georgia’s Euro-Atlantic aspirations and deeper ties with China, the waning momentum of the BRI, and the fragility of a pragmatism-based partnership. In conclusion, it argues that without stronger institutional mechanisms and clearer strategic objectives, the Sino-Georgian partnership is likely to remain symbolic rather than transformative, offering cautionary lessons for small-state diplomacy in a multipolar world.