US democracy summit ends with move to confront repressive nations' 'misuse' of technology

Washington concluded a two-day virtual "Summit for Democracy" on Friday with a spotlight on "misused" technology by autocratic states and calls for a follow-up summit to evaluate progress in safeguarding fair elections, protecting human rights and fighting corruption.

"A final message I want to impart as we close out this Summit for Democracy is that we know how hard the work is going to be ahead of us. But we also know we are up to the challenge," said US President Joe Biden. "We're committed to working with all who share those values, to shape the rules of the road that are going to govern our progress in the 21st century, including on issues of cybersecurity and emerging technologies."

The online gathering of more than 100 heads of state was organised to counter the rise of authoritarians at a time when democracy is on the defensive worldwide. In recent weeks, Beijing has sent record numbers of military jets into Taiwan airspace and Moscow has dispatched some 100,000 troops on its border with Ukraine.

Do you have questions about the biggest topics and trends from around the world? Get the answers with SCMP Knowledge, our new platform of curated content with explainers, FAQs, analyses and infographics brought to you by our award-winning team.

But the jury is out on what the summit accomplished, analysts said, adding that its unwieldy size, diffuse messaging and the questionable democratic credentials of some invitees may have undercut its effectiveness.

Facing criticism that the virtual meeting was little more than a bloated video-chat call - and in a bid to lead by example in laying out concrete goals - the Biden administration on Friday announced an Export Controls and Human Rights Initiative.

This is part of US$424 million the administration pledged this week to bolster free elections, safeguard independent media and protect minority populations worldwide. The pledge requires approval by the US Congress.

As outlined, Friday's initiative hopes to develop with a handful of other countries a common policy governing the export of sensitive technologies that help autocratic states carry out cyber disinformation campaigns, surveil their citizenry and intimidate their human rights, minority, whistle-blower, journalism and legal communities.

"In the tech world, move fast and break things has been the prevailing mantra," said Samantha Power, administrator of the US Agency for International Development (USAID). "A lot has been broken. And now it is incumbent on all of us to move faster than we ever have before to repair our democracies."

China was rarely if ever mentioned in the tech initiative or, more broadly, the summit. But the meeting and bid to rally allies against strong-arm governments appeared aimed squarely at countering China's growing economic, political and military muscle on the global stage.

"It's not so much about who was at the summit, but who was not at the summit, in particular China and Russia," said Paul Poast, an associate professor of political science at the University of Chicago. "This is as much about bringing countries together who could possibly have a unified front against China."

But the initiative underscores the struggles that democracies have faced as China has become a global leader in using technology to exert control.

Allies often disagree on how aggressive tech and other export restrictions should be and what balance to strike between "decoupling" and engaging. And authoritarian states are increasingly adept at the hardware and software used to carry out facial recognition, censorship and monitoring campaigns at home and disinformation targeted at liberal democracies abroad.

"We focused on the need to empower human rights defenders, and make sure technology [that] enables so much of our lives is used to advanced democracies to lift people up, not to hold them down," Biden said on Friday.

This was reflected in Friday's proposal. The code of conduct will be voluntary. There are no stated deadlines or concrete outcomes. And among those countries involved - Australia, Denmark, Norway and the US, "joined in support by" Canada, France, the Netherlands and Britain - none are from Asia, Africa or Latin America, nor has the European Union signed on.

As the summit wrapped up, analysts gave it mixed reviews.

Despite, or perhaps because, democracies are struggling across the globe, the exercise was useful, some said.

"Given backsliding in democratic governance, human rights and rule of law around the world, and the rising threat posed by authoritarian leaders in China and Russia, the timing is propitious, if not overdue," said Ted Piccone, a Brookings Institution fellow. Reversing that backsliding is essential to "offer the world a compelling alternative to China's authoritarian model", he added.

Others said the messaging - that America is back and engaged in global issues again after four years of a Trump administration distrustful of multilateralism - worked, as does the plan for in-person summit next year to assess progress.

"We've all had these experiences now. If you want to get down to brass tacks, create substantive meaningful polices, it can't be done with 110 people on a Zoom call," Piccone added. "Real work is done before, and during discussion in the hallways."

But others questioned the framing.

"Some in Europe fear that the narrative undergirding Biden's democracy summit - dividing the world into democracies fit for engagement and non-democracies to avoid engaging - does not account for today's complex world," Erin Jones and Elisa Lledo, democracy and governance experts with the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace Europe, said in a statement.

Beijing, even as it promotes the benefits of its authoritarian system, including faster decision-making and less social unrest, continued its aggressive criticism of the summit on Friday. This followed a competing "Democracy Forum" it held in Beijing, the release of a white paper arguing how the one-party state is a democracy and a report citing US hypocrisy in holding its summit.

"The US privatises the public good of democracy, stokes division and confrontation in the name of democracy," said Chinese foreign ministry spokesman Wang Wenbin. "The self-styled 'beacon of democracy' has evident democratic malaise and huge democratic deficits."

Ultimately, it remains to be seen whether the summit moved the needle on bolstering democracy, analysts said. While the Biden administration outlined a very broad agenda and encouraged participants to make concrete electoral and other democratic reforms, the goals are voluntary and progress is largely left to countries themselves to assess.

"It's kind of like an international state of the union address. It's a laundry list, we're going to have this and this and this," said Poast. "It's good for signalling; at least you're showing that you're talking about it. But in terms of substance, follow through, report cards, time will tell how meaningful it is."

This article originally appeared on the South China Morning Post (SCMP).

Copyright (c) 2021. South China Morning Post Publishers Ltd. All rights reserved.