Supporters listening to Nicolas Sarkozy, UMP candidate for the presidential elections during his last campaign meeting on May 3, 2007 in Montpellier, France. ABACA/ Press Association. All rights reserved.National electorates have lost their primacy in deciding the
outcome of their elections. They have the vote and they go to the polling booths,
but their choice may be determined by a foreign government or a private company.
In the new information order, manipulated voters have come to outnumber
threatened voters and bribed voters.
Democracy stands diminished as the world debates whether
Donald Trump was sent to the White House by American voters or by Vladimir
Putin! Not a month goes by without protests by those who believe that the
Russian state meddled in the US election.
This controversy has been followed by reports that a British
data analytics firm energised Trump’s poll campaign by using allegedly stolen
private data for targeting American voters.
Democracy has spawned manufacturers of dissent and consent
who can be contracted for swaying the election results in one country or
organising a political 'Spring' and destabilising a regime in another. If it is
illegal to subvert free elections in another country, the official intelligence
agency can outsource the job to private commercial players. This formula for
plausible deniability has been tried and tested. Democracy
has spawned manufacturers of dissent and consent who can be contracted for
swaying the election results in one country or organising a political
‘Spring’ and destabilising a regime in another.
Loads of Russians and
some Brits from Cambridge
Technological advances have increased asymmetry in power relations
and the new business leaders come from the same regions that dominated
manufacturing and financial services. Their business depends on data mining
based on technologies monopolised by the privileged.
Stealing of private data seems easier than pilfering coal
from the mines. Data is far more expensive than coal. The victims of robber
barons knew what they lost but the victims of data miners do not know what is
being stolen from them.
Data mining is as important a weapon in the arsenal of a
political leader as it is for a company selling soap and shampoo.
The involvement of a “foreign hand” was one of the reasons
that made Donald Trump’s victory controversial from the moment the results were
announced in 2016. One senior US official or the other keeps revealing details
of cyber-meddling by Moscow. A grand jury in Washington accuses 13 Russians and
three organisations of plotting to sway the US presidential election in favour
of Trump.
The indictment goes beyond the charge of an online operation
and using a “troll farm” in Russia to flood the social media with pro-Trump and
anti-Hillary content. Some Russians even travelled to the US clandestinely to
contact social and political activists and organise demonstrations and protests
designed to harm Hillary and benefit Trump.
This indictment was used by the US national security adviser
H R McMaster to say that “Russian meddling is incontrovertible and beyond
dispute”. Trump denies the allegation and blames the FBI for investigating his
election campaign. Trump denies the allegation and
blames the FBI for investigating his election campaign.
As if the alleged Russian involvement was not enough, it
turns out that some credit must also go to a British data analytics firm which
carries the prestigious word “Cambridge” in its name. Another newspaper
headline: “Cambridge Analytica boasts of dirty tricks to swing elections.”
According to media reports, the Cambridge Analytica executives boasted of their role in
getting Trump elected. Their weapon was “unattributable and untrackable”
advertising to support their clients in elections. The firm, according to a senior member of
staff, was “behind” the “defeat crooked Hillary” advertising campaign. It just
placed false information into the bloodstream of the internet and then watched
it grow!
Such stuff infiltrates the online community with a lightning
speed. Hillary Clinton, the victim of this social media campaign, did notice
something unusual. She said that she faced a new kind of campaign that nobody
had ever faced before.
This data scandal led to the suspension of the company’s
chief executive. Also, Cambridge University asked Facebook to tell it whether
one of its academics used university data and resources to help Cambridge
Analytica.
The Observer
reported that the company had unauthorised access to tens of millions of
Facebook profiles which were used to build a political targeting system to help
Trump. The British company faces allegations of the theft of personal data from
American voters. The newspaper headlines
appearing every week will not let the controversy die or let the Trump poll
campaign get a clean chit soon.
More foreign
interference, France and elsewhere
A report of foreign interference in national politics has
been reported from another democracy – France.
The former President Nicolas Sarkozy has been taken into police custody
for questioning” over allegations that he received millions of euros in illegal
election campaign funding from the late Libyan dictator Muammar Gaddafi.
Sarkozy won that election in 2007. Sarkozy also faced another allegation of
false accounting for his failed re-election campaign of 2012 when he was
described as a “political showman” because of his expensive rallies and the
US-style stadium gigs. The employment of foreign
poll consultants by the candidates in emerging democracies has become a known
strategy.
In France, a foreign power directly helped the then
President by funding his re-election campaign. In the US election, a foreign
power allegedly meddled by abusing social media.
The employment of foreign poll consultants by the candidates
in emerging democracies has become a known strategy. In a new scenario, a
foreign government can offer this expensive service to a favoured candidate in
the Third World in a clandestine manner. It can evade the charge of meddling in
a foreign election by enlisting the Diaspora favouring one candidate over the
other, one ideology over the other in the motherland.
The US and Britain have a long history of using the
expatriates in their official as well as unofficial campaigns to dislodge a
foreign ruler, elected or non-elected.
The Diaspora operates from the safety of their adopted country and does
not mind if its campaign finance causes social unrest and political instability
in the motherland.
The US and Iran
The Iranian Diaspora in the US plays a big role in the
politics of the motherland. The US Government offered grants worth millions of
dollars inviting applications from the groups wanting to promote human rights
and democracy in Iran. This was seen even by some Iranians in America as a
veiled attempt at regime change in that country.
A political revolution in Iran can be seeded in Brooklyn! This
meddling is done in the name of promoting democracy in the target country. In
some cases, the new regime turns out to be more oppressive and a transient
political ‘Spring’ is followed by a harsher winter.
A big power smells an opportunity if the Diaspora belongs to
a politically polarised country. Depending on the foreign and economic policies
of the target nation, official agencies recruit either the dissidents or the
supporters of the regime from among the expatriates. A
political revolution in Iran can be seeded in Brooklyn! This meddling is done
in the name of promoting democracy in the target country.
Social media is a very powerful political tool in possession
of the Diaspora! Digital patriots have proliferated in recent years. The
Diaspora helps its favourite leader’s campaign in the motherland through tweets
and online campaign videos. It organises impressive events for a visiting
leader from “home” and holds a token protest against his political opponents or
his critics in the media. If a Third World leader cannot afford data mining, analysis
and poll consultancy by a foreign firm, the Diaspora can foot the bill.
Third World leaders
Such remotely run campaigns influence the voters of the
target country as the US Presidential election proved. The growing external
influence on the democratic process is now understood by every smart elected
leader. He knows that his people’s mandate for a given number of years is not
enough and he fears destabilisation. He wants to strengthen his position by
getting a big external power’s endorsement. It also enhances his popularity in
his country, especially if it happens to be a former colony.
If America gives a favoured-nation treatment, global
appreciation follows and the media in the US and Europe starts seeing that
country in a new light. Eric Hobsbawm once told this reporter that young
India’s achievements were ignored by the western media for decades because
America had reservations about India’s policies.
The Third World leaders realise the importance of the
President of the United States and seek a bargain with him. Abandoning their
party’s election manifesto, they open up the domestic market a little more to
become more acceptable to powerful nations. They carry orders for big-ticket
military equipment when they go to meet their counterparts. A smart elected leader does not antagonise a
big power for fear of ruination. His democratic credentials are not enough to
keep him safely in power. They carry orders for
big-ticket military equipment when they go to meet their counterparts.
A vilified dictator who benefits the commercial and
manufacturing interests of his host country is hailed as a world statesman. And
the same dictator refusing to play ball at a later stage can be deported from
the world. An old photograph of an American defence secretary bowing in the
court of Saddam Hussein illustrates how an enemy was a great friend once.
The Golden Square
Mile
Democracy is often threatened by external elements posing as
a force for democracy. The use of social media and foreign funding has
increased challenges facing the election regulators. In the best of times, the
democratic order faced threats from domestic money, media and muscle power. The
dominant castes of Bihar or the money bags of London’s Golden Square Mile have
always swayed the election results in their respective areas of influence. The
latter do not send armed ruffians to capture polling booths but underwrite a
friendly political party’s poll campaign.
The City’s financial might has protected its extraordinary rights
and privileges, granting it immunity from the elected Parliament’s authority! The
unkindest description of the Golden Square Mile, from where the old East India
Company operated once, comes from The
Guardian columnist George Monbiot. He
says it is the place “where democracy goes to die”.
Another columnist Jeremy Fox calls the City of London “the
prime launderette for dirty money and the world’s largest controller of
offshore tax havens”. It became the prime destination for the super-rich
Russians after the end of the cold war. Following the suspicious deaths of a
former Russian spy who spied for Britain, some British columnists made dark
references to the Russian oligarchs helping the ruling party in Britain.
British media moguls
Some British media moguls have perfected the art of winning friends
in a coming government by influencing the people during the election campaign. A
media owner doesn’t just ask his editors to write the desired kind of opinion
pieces and editorials but unleashes his trusted reporter on a leader whom he
doesn’t want to become the next Prime Minister. At the behest of the
government, the media moguls can deploy massive financial resources in
publishing and distributing a book written by a foreigner fighting the leader
of that country.
Their Indian counterparts have quickly learnt from them. The Indian media scene has become so dismal
that every now or then a TV or a newspaper journalist either resigns in protest
or is thrown out for showing signs of independent thinking. This happened twice
this month. The Indian media scene has become so dismal that every now or then
a TV or a newspaper journalist either resigns in protest or is thrown out for
showing signs of independent thinking. This happened twice this month.
Such domestic threats to democracy have been discussed for
years. But it is the external threat that has grown manifold and is set to
acquire greater lethal power to disrupt a democracy. The new weapon is safer to
use, and technological advances will make it more and more effective. It has demonstrated
its capability not just in the young democracies but even in mature
democracies. The new weapon is safer to use, and
technological advances will make it more and more effective.
A spectre is haunting
the democratic process
Globalisation, data collection and analytics and social media
have given a remote weapon to subvert democracy in any distant country. This
weapon is humane. An unfriendly foreign leader no longer needs to be killed
physically. It is easier to assassinate him politically.
Some powerful western democratic nations who preach
democracy while supporting cruel but friendly foreign dictators, used to
suppress the democratic movements in those countries by offering a dictator the
best of weapon systems plus substantial financial aid, while keeping quiet
about the human rights violation by his forces. Now, they can help a
subservient dictator by using subtle methods to sabotage the electoral chances
of his democratic opponent.
Many democracies keep trying to curb the misuse of money and
muscle power in elections. Now the spectre of the “foreign hand” has come to
haunt the democratic process. Media coverage of external meddling in elections
makes the true democrats anxious and gives added credibility to those
forecasting the death of democracy.
