By: Vaishak Sreekumar
The author is a first-year master’s student at Jindal School of International Affairs. He can be reached at
Image:
All democracies have elections, but not all elections are democratic. This year has been the year of the elections, with more than half the world’s population heading to the polling booths. However, the question remains: how many people were presented with a real choice, how many of the votes cast were counted, and how many results were honoured?
Many elections across the world have their results fixed even before the first ballot is cast or their results manipulated by those in power to maintain control. But why do these dictators, with such a vice-like grip on their countries’ institutions and military, bother to conduct elections and present an illusionary choice to their citizens? Why bother with the charade, why entertain the risk to their position or power?
The existing literature points to the theory that the co-optation of political institutions is just as useful a tool to exert control as repression. Through the state institutions, the dictator draws out their opposition into political parties and the legislature, out of the public, making it easier to identify who the actual opponents are and gauge the popular support they receive. It also lessens the extent of comprehensive repression of the population which tends to breed discontent and strife.
Institutional co-optation is very common in autocracies. Of the 460 dictators who were in power between 1946-2004, only 11% chose not to create some form of political party or legislature while they were in office. Whether these democratic institutions are mere window dressing or significantly contribute to the democratization of these states is an ongoing academic endeavour. This article will focus more specifically on the use of elections as a key tool in this charade. Taking three examples of Russia, Venezuela and North Korea, we will explore how these autocrats subvert elections to curry favour internationally while maintaining all the power.
Have no Opposition – Russia
On February 16th, 2024, Alexei Navalny died in an Arctic prison, where he was sentenced to a 19-year jail term by the Russian judiciary for extremism. Navalny was Putin’s most vociferous critic within Russia and was seen by many as the leader of its opposition. Navalny spent most of his time in the public eye facing multiple charges of corruption, which were often alleged to be politically motivated. The Russian government, which for the longest time was cracking down on Navalny’s dissent, miraculously let him participate in the Mayoral elections for Moscow in 2013. Quite predictably, he lost this election, but this was a chance the government did not take again both in the 2018 presidential election (when he was debarred from participating) and now quite definitively in the 2024 elections.
Russian Anti-War critic Boris Nadezhin was also barred from participating in the presidential elections through an absurd invalidation of the signatures he had collected from the public in support of his nomination. The other three candidates are 40-year-old Vladislav Davankov of the New People Party, 50-year-old Leonid Slutsky of the nationalist Liberal Democratic Party of Russia, and 70-year-old Nikolai Kharitonov of the Russian Communist Party. All three are alleged to be sympathetic to Vladimir Putin and have backed the invasion of Ukraine among other Kremlin initiatives. Critics claim they were the puppets in a masterfully staged play that was the Russian presidential election. This led to Putin winning with 87.8% of the vote share, who is now set to embark on a six-year term that will see him break Joseph Stalin’s record and become Russia’s longest serving ruler for the past 200 years.
Turn a blind eye to the votes- Venezuela
The current autocratic leader of Venezuela, Nicolas Maduro took over from Hugo Chavez in 2013 following Chavez’s death. Under his presidency, Venezuela has undergone several economic and socio-political crisis. Maduro’s government is also guilty of restructuring the constitution and co-opting judicial/ electoral institutions to remain in power. The 2024 election was marred with controversy from its onset, as Maduro and his loyalists worked to disbar Maria Corina Machado, the main candidate of the opposition. She was barred from participating in elections under accusations of conspiracy and support of US sanctions. Her replacement was eventually selected to be Edmundo Gonzalez Urrutia, who represented a coalition of opposition parties against Maduro.
On election day, three hours after the polls closed, the Maduro loyalist National Electoral Council announced that Maduro had won the election with 51% of the votes favouring him. This would have been the disappointing end to the story, if not for the paper trail built into the ballot voting systems in Venezuela. The voting system in Venezuela provides for a paper receipt from the EVM post-voting, which must be deposited at a separate ballot box by each voter. At the end of the day, each machine prints a tally of the total votes recorded for each candidate. This system of multiple redundancies and organised efforts from the opposition with more than a million volunteers gave the opposition access to around 83% of the votes recorded, out of which 67% of the votes were for Gonzalez. This claim has also been verified by international independent organisations. The Maduro government refused to officially release the tally under the pretense of their website being hacked. With an arrest warrant out for Gonzalez leading to his exile in Spain, Maduro has paved the way for another presidential term. The elections were held, the parties had candidates, and the candidates campaigned, the people voted, and the votes were counted but it all went up in smoke when the dictator changed his mind.
Elections as Propaganda- North Korea
It comes across as a surprise to many that North Korea or the Democratic People's Republic of Korea holds regular and compulsory parliamentary elections every five years and local elections every four years. With a participation rate of almost 100% and the popular vote swinging from 99.9% to 100% for the Workers Party, of which Kim Jong Un is the chairman. The last election was conducted in 2019, the 2024 elections slated to be held in February, which have been postponed indefinitely. During the last parliamentary elections, on each ballot paper, there was one candidate who was pre-selected by the party, and the voters had to simply collect the ballot paper and deposit it in the box. The voters are presented with the “choice” of crossing out the nominee in the ballot, but this invites the scrutiny of the secret police. The parliament, also known as the Supreme People’s Assembly, is a rubber-stamp body with no power and which rarely meets post the election cycle. The last local elections, conducted in November of 2023, played up the charade by having a green box for approval and a red box for dissent, having multiple parties field their candidates and then reporting a dissenting vote of a shocking 0.09 percent.
Since voting is mandatory, the government simultaneously uses it as a census to locate individuals and identify any defectors who might have escaped to China. The election is primarily used as an opportunity for re-education and affirmation of the people’s belief in the party and the supreme leader. The voters are expected to express their devoutness to the government through celebrations held after the elections and to confirm their indoctrination into the ideas that are at the heart of the North Korean regime. This attempt at orchestrating election style events stems from the need to legitimise the regime’s power and to move away from the perception of a one-person leadership to a one-party government. But still always keeping the Kim family and the supreme leader at its centre.
Elections in the International Context
Despite the increased risk of democratic backsliding, the actual severity of the decline has slowed down considerably in recent years, as sudden autocratization has become more dangerous for those in charge. Wilfully apparent violations of multiparty elections and democratic processes can take a huge toll on a countries reputation and may create national and international resistance.
Post the Cold-War, there seemed to be a boom in the number of autocratic leaders conducting elections. As the world became unipolar, a democratic government remained at this pole. As the ideas of economic sanctions became more prevalent, these authoritarian leaders were faced with greater risk of personal sanctions, which impedes their power and wealth building. Not conducting elections also threatens to make one a pariah in the international community. While this can be untrue in the cases of large countries like Russia and China, the smaller countries still must maintain the façade. Conducting elections is also a means to give reprieve to other international actors that are associated with the regime. It enables democratic countries or companies involved in trade and other forms of bilateral agreements to shield themselves from criticism for engaging with and profiting from an authoritarian regime.
The attempted co-option of electoral/democratic norms have been rampant these past few decades. In context of 2024, these elections* should be discussed with an asterisk. It is important to differentiate these election style events from free and fair democratic elections. The leaders of these regimes should receive little to no respite from the international community for putting on a show. It is also crucial that these sham-elections are not ignored because within them lies the tricks of the trade for subverting electoral results that the next generation of aspiring dictators look to and draw tremendous inspiration from.
References
BBC News. (2019, March 10). North Koreans vote in “no-choice” parliamentary elections. BBC News. https://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-47492747
Burrows, E., & Litvinova, D. (2024, February 16). Protests, poisoning and prison: The life and death of Russian opposition leader Alexei Navalny. AP News. https://apnews.com/article/russia-navalny-life-timeline-0722708e19e51b10699b2cc73ece0bae
Cheng, C.-Y., & Noh, Y. (2024). Electoral institutions and repression in dictatorships. Electoral Studies, 89, 102791–102791. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.electstud.2024.102791
Choi, S.-H. (2023, November 28). North Korea cites rare dissent in elections even as 99% back candidates. Reuters. https://www.reuters.com/world/asia-pacific/north-korea-cites-rare-dissent-elections-even-99-back-candidates-2023-11-28/
Davenport, C. (1997). From ballots to bullets: an empirical assessment of how national elections influence state uses of political repression. Electoral Studies, 16(4), 517–540. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0261-3794(97)00032-2
Davies, C. (2023, November 30). The upside-down world of North Korean elections. Www.ft.com. https://www.ft.com/content/3930db9c-207e-4c62-be3d-0ecde70b3c43
Explained Desk. (2024, March 18). Vladimir Putin won the Russian elections with 87% of the vote. Who were his opponents? The Indian Express. https://indianexpress.com/article/explained/everyday-explainers/vladimir-putin-russia-elections-candidates-opposition-9221272/
Frantz, E., & Kendall-Taylor, A. (2014). A dictator’s toolkit. Journal of Peace Research, 51(3), 332–346. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022343313519808
Gandhi, J. (2008). Political institutions under dictatorship. Cambridge University Press.
John, M., & Sen, S. (2024, July 9). Elections in 2024 are going to reshape global politics. Reuters. https://www.reuters.com/graphics/GLOBAL-ELECTIONS2024/gdvzmkejkpw/
Klaas, B. (2024, March 17). Why do dictators hold “elections”—but rig them? Forkingpaths.co; The Garden of Forking Paths. https://www.forkingpaths.co/p/why-do-dictators-hold-electionsbut
Narayan, A. (2024, September 23). What is the controversy regarding Venezuela elections? | Explained. The Hindu. https://www.thehindu.com/news/international/what-is-the-controversy-regarding-venezuela-elections-explained/article68671739.ece
Papachristou, L. (2024, February 19). What we know about Alexei Navalny’s death in Arctic prison. Reuters. https://www.reuters.com/world/europe/alexei-navalnys-death-what-do-we-know-2024-02-18/
REGINA GARCIA CANO. (2024, October 2). Independent election experts legitimize tally sheets Venezuela’s opposition says prove Maduro lost. AP News. https://apnews.com/article/venezuela-election-tally-sheets-actas-oas-carter-center-41d1000926d0ab99e522e53bf6c2b916
Schedler, A. (2002). Elections without Democracy: The Menu of Manipulation. Journal of Democracy, 13(2), 36–50. https://dx.doi.org/10.1353/jod.2002.0031
Sequera, V., Armas, M., & Buitrago, D. (2024, January 26). Venezuela court upholds ban on leading opposition presidential candidate Machado. Reuters. https://www.reuters.com/world/americas/venezuela-arrests-allies-opposition-candidate-conspiracy-accusations-2024-01-26/
THE ASSOCIATED PRESS. (2024, July 31). Little-known paper sheets are key to declaring victory in Venezuela’s election. AP News. https://apnews.com/article/venezuela-election-maduro-machado-gonzalez-tally-voting-362e844cd8ee5a706586e868bbe4c4b5
Wells, I. (2024, September 5). Venezuela opposition: Everyone knows we won election. Bbc.com; BBC News. https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/c5ypreexqxlo
Comments