Tracing Authoritarian Learning in Belarus, Moldova, Russia and Ukraine By Stephen Hall SSEES UCL PhD Thesis Word Count: 99,492 I, Stephen Hall confirm that the work presented in this thesis is my own. Where information has been derived from other sources, I confirm that this has been indicated in the thesis. 1 Abstract The thesis addresses how authoritarian regimes remain in power, and the processes of learning they engage in, using the case studies of Belarus, Moldova, Russia and Ukraine. I investigate six propositions, arguing that firstly, authoritarian learning differs from democratic learning because authoritarian regimes are concerned principally with survival and so learn best practices to ensure that they possess a full palette of survival practices. Secondly, there is a flattened learning hierarchy or network between authoritarian regimes. Thirdly, internal networks are important for learning among authoritarian regimes. Fourthly, success and failure are equally important for authoritarian learning. Fifthly, internal examples are as relevant to authoritarian learning as external examples. Sixthly, authoritarian regimes use a full palette of survival practices than just relying on repression. Therefore, authoritarian regimes are more likely to be concerned than democratic regimes about survivial, and so they develop a full palette of survival practices. The thesis argues that learning hierarchies are flattened. Success and failure are as important to authoritarian learning as each other, with authoritarian regimes drawing on both successful and failed examples. Similarly, internal sources of learning are as relevant to understanding authoritarian learning as external examples. Lastly, authoritarian regimes have a full palette of survival strategies than just relying on repression. Analysis of the four cases studies helps better understand how authoritarian regimes learn to retain control. Often learning comes from internal sources and this is particularly the case in Moldova and Ukraine. By analysing authoritarian learning in detail I expand existing literature and increase understanding of how authoritarian regimes survive. 2 Impact Statement There are a number of relevant areas of impact in this thesis. Within academia, there are a number of areas where this thesis improves understanding. Firstly, by providing a framework of authoritarian learning, incorporating learning theories into the outline of authoritarian learning depicted here the thesis improves existing literature which has so far failed to ground authoritarian learning in existing learning theories. Secondly, the thesis provides a similar outline for democratic learning with existing literature on democratic learning failing to base it in the theoretical literature. Thirdly, by ascertaining that the aims of authoritarian and democratic learning are distinct from one another the thesis increases understanding on authoritarian learning. Fourthly, existing literature on the subject has to a great extent concentrated on state-to-state relations and learning from failure. But, as the thesis shows authoritarian regimes learn from domestic examples as much as from external sources. Fifthly, networks of authoritarian learning are less hierarchical then previously envisioned, with different and practices shared by a multitude of states, rathe than one key actor. The benefits of the thesis to areas outside of academia are primarily for policymakers at the national and regional level to counter the survival of authoritarian regimes. By increasing understanding of how authoritarian regimes learn governments can improve public policy design to aid in countering the growth of authoritarian regimes and providing better democratisation practices. With increasing pushback by authoritarian regimes to existing efforts at democratisation, understanding how authoritarian regimes learn and survive helps the creation of new practices to counter this pushback and survival. With rollback in full swing, some authoritarian regimes are becoming role models for others, 3 leading to the possibility that established international norms and structures will be threatened. Authoritarian regimes are learning from one another and from domestic examples to hold onto power, and it is possible that in the future such cooperation will occur. By understanding how authoritarian regimes learn and what they learn from provides a clear analysis for the division for countering this rise. The rise of authoritarian regimes and understanding the means of this rise and their survival is likely to have an impact at the national and international levels for decades to come. The impact of this thesis is likely to reach the academic community. I have used ideas from the thesis and developed them for publication in scholarly journals and the wider thesis is likely to have a greater impact in the academic world. It is also likely to serve as the basis for work with the mainstream media and engaging with policymakers and could help influence government ministers in the near future. 4 Table of Contents Title Page 1 Abstract 2 Impact Statement 3 Table of Contents 5 List of Abbreviations 12 List of Figures 16 List of Graphs 17 Preface 18 Acknowledgements 23 Chapter One: Introduction – A Contextual Overview 26 Defining Authoritarianism 30 Case Choice 33 Case Selection as Authoritarian Regimes? 36 Placing Four Cases in Context 47 Co-option 47 Legitimation 56 5 Repression 63 What is Authoritarian Learning 82 Thesis Plan 84 Chapter Two: Understanding the State of Current Authoritarian Learning Literature 86 Introduction 86 Learning Theory and Political Learning Types 88 Theories of Learning 88 Political Learning Types 93 Authoritarian and Democratic Learning Compared 96 Democratic Learning 97 Democratic Learning Theories 97 Democratic Learning Types 99 Democratic Diffusion 100 Democratic Linkage and Leverage 103 Authoritarian Learning 105 Authoritarian Learning and Authoritarian Literature 106 Authoritarian Learning Theories 115 Authoritarian Learning Types 121 Authoritarian Diffusion 121 Authoritarian Linkage but not leverage… 126 Authoritarian Persuasion 131 6 Towards Authoritarian Learning? 132 Conclusion 141 Chapter Three: Fieldwork and Methodological Procedures in Analysing Authoritarian Learning 143 Introduction 143 Into the Field – Explaining My Fieldwork 145 The Black Box Problem 152 Research Design and Methodology 155 Research Design 156 Research Methodology 163 Process-tracing 164 Interviews 166 Propositions and Research Questions 170 Propositions 171 Research Questions 173 Conclusion 175 Chapter Four: Learning from Internal and External Failure 177 Introduction 177 Learning from External Failure by the Four Cases 180 Learning from an Orange Protest 181 Learning from the Arab Spring 189 7 Learning from a Protest in Kyiv 194 Learning from Western Failure 202 Learning from External and Internal Failure: The example of Moldova 203 Learning from Internal Failures in Belarus, Moldova, Russia and Ukraine 207 Learning from History 208 Lessons from the Soviet Period 208 Lessons from the 1990s 210 Learning from Image Failure 212 Bankova Learning from the Orange Revolution and the Euromaidan 215 Yanukovych and Orange Lessons for after 2010 215 Poroshenko’s Lessons after the Euromaidan 218 Conclusion 220 Chapter Five: Learning from External and Internal Success 222 Introduction 222 Learning from External Success in Belarus, Moldova, Russia and Ukraine 223 Illiberal Democracies in Europe and the rise of Trump in America 224 China, Singapore (Kazakhstan?): Authoritarian Models for the Four Case Studies? 234 Russian Learning from Alleged Western Covert Actions 244 NGOs 249 Learning from a Successful Re-Election 251 Learning from Domestic Success in Belarus, Moldova, Russia and Ukraine 254 Back to the Past in Belarus and Russia 254 8 Learning from the Past in Belarus 254 Learning from History for the Kremlin 257 Learning from Previous Regimes: Plahotniuc and Poroshenko 260 Discussion: Success or Failure and Internal or External? 262 Chapter Six: The External Networks of Authoritarian Learning 264 Introduction 264 Regional Organisation Collaboration: Vehicles for Networks? 266 The Commonwealth of Independent States (CIS) 267 The Collective Security Treaty Organisation (CSTO) 270 The Shanghai Cooperation Organisation (SCO) 272 The Eurasian Economic Union (EAEU) 274 The Union State 276 GUAM 277 The Zapad Exercises: Countering Protests 279 Ties that bind: Inter-elite links in Belarus, Moldova, Russia and Ukraine 280 Presidents 280 Presidential Administrations 283 The Security Services 285 Security Councils 289 Governments 290 Foreign and Internal Affairs Ministries 291 Ambassadors 295 Business 299 9 Russian Influence in Moldova and Ukraine 303 Russian Linkage in Moldova 303 Russian Linkage in Ukraine 309 Conclusion 314 Chapter Seven: The Internal Networks of Authoritarian Learning 316 Introduction 316 Presidential Administrations 318 Enter the Siloviki 323 The Security Services 323 Interior Ministries 327 National Security Councils 331 Political and Business Elites: One and the same? 334 Belarus and Russia 331 Moldova and Ukraine 344 Conclusion 358 Chapter Eight: Conclusion 360 Introduction 360 Research Findings 360 Authoritarian Diffusion? 361 Learning is not just Democratic 362 Authoritarian Interlinkage 362 10 Intra-state Learning 363 Success is as Important as Failure 364 The Internal is as Relevant to Authoritarian Learning as the External 364 Investigating the Propositions and Research Questions 365 Areas for Future