Most of the Western world, South America and former colonies of Great Britain (South Africa, India and Australia) conform to a democratic style of government. Democracy, “the power of rule through people”, was first established in ancient Greece over 2,500 years ago. Citizens exercise power by voting for parliamentary representatives.
Definitions of government styles
Autocracy is distinguished from other forms of government by the power of the autocrat to unilaterally repress the civil liberties of the people and to choose what liberties they may exercise. To maintain power, an autocrat must have the support of elites that hold influence in the country and assist the autocrat in carrying out their will.
Anocracy, or semi-democracy, is a form of government that is loosely defined as part democracy and part dictatorship. It is defined as a “regime that mixes democratic with autocratic features.”Another definition classifies anocracy as “a regime that permits some means of participation through opposition group behaviour but that has incomplete development of mechanisms to redress grievances.”
Anocratic regimes, also known as hybrid regimes, are known for having guided democracy instead of liberal democracy. They combine authoritarian powers with some democratic practices, for example holding elections that are competitive to a certain degree. In a closed anocracy, competitors in elections are drawn from the elite. In an open anocracy, others also compete. The number of anocratic regimes has steadily increased over time, with the most notable jump occurring after the end of the Cold War.
The transition between government styles
Former colonies given their freedom found it difficult to transition directly to a democratic style of government. To retain control of their population, many have found it necessary to initially introduce a phase of some form of autocracy of varying lengths. All such transitions can make nation states vulnerable to interference by greater powers seeking to enhance their influence and gain access to the nation’s assets.
With the return of a Trump government in the USA, are we now seeing a reversal of this transition process? Are we witnessing the transition of a former presidential democracy to an autocratic or anocratic style of government and, if so, which? What are the potential consequences for world security and economics?
Trump’s pronouncements and motivations
Trump’s outrageous statement that “illegal immigrants” were eating the cats and dogs of a local town was criticised by town residents as a blatant lie. So why does he consistently make headline-grabbing, false comments? Simply because he can make them and get away with it. He is making it clear that he can say or do anything he wants and there is nothing American citizens or the world can do about it. Recently, in the light of a threat to assassinate him by the Iranian Revolutionary Guard, he responded by saying any nation considering such an act would be “blown to smithereens”. That’s not consistent with his promise to stop wars and not start them.
His previous pronouncements when he refused to accept defeat in the 2020 election led to the storming of the Capitol on January 6 and in my opinion show that he is willing to try any tactic to achieve his personal, narcissistic ambitions. Recently published documents give evidence of his involvement in this event. Almost a year ago the New York Times warned that Trump was running his 2024 election campaign like an autocrat.
There is much concern that having won control of both the Senate and the House of Representatives he is also out to control the legislative and judicial branches of government as well as the executive branches. This is fundamental to the American Constitution to provide checks and balances on the power of the president, with the judicial branch preventing any “overreach.” On 7 November 2024, CNN Politics warned that Trump thinks presidents have near total power and there will be little to stop him from achieving his objectives in his second term. Is he using the anocratic ploy of using the election to give himself democratic legitimacy to become an autocrat?
Potential consequences for world security
Trump has threatened to walk away from NATO. In my opinion, he won’t. He is a transactional person who seeks “America First” benefits. I know from my own experience that the USA uses NATO to promote its own foreign policy and to market F16, and now F35, jets to NATO allies by offering subsidies paid from NATO funds to finance their support infrastructure.
His threat is just an opening gambit to persuade European nations to increase their financial contributions to NATO. His threat should be countered by the EU offering to take over leadership of the Ramstein Group that coordinates 32 NATO members and 25 other countries’ political and military support for Ukraine. There is, however, a case to review NATO’s modus operandi. Its name is also an anachronism. The UN has also shown itself to be totally impotent in resolving world crises.
Now is the time for Europe to return as the leader of democratic nations and oppose autocracy in any form. Despite its own struggle with far-right leaders such as Orban, the European Union has prepared a strategic response to a second Trump presidency. It concludes that:
“The EU is determined to promote its values and interests with a view to ensuring security, stability and prosperity for its citizens and will pursue its ambition to build a strong and sovereign Europe equipped to tackle current and future challenges such as the climate and digital transitions.”
The role of the UK
The Labour government in the UK must follow up its initial approaches to the EU for closer cooperation on key issues, including defence, security and NATO support. The European Movement will continue to lobby the government on this issue. There is a long history of joint development and procurement of military equipment and joint operations with our European partners. We currently maintain forces under NATO in Estonia and Poland. In the mid-60s we always had two aircraft carriers east of Suez with a Commander-in-Chief, Far East Fleet (Admiral Sir Desmond Dreyer) based in Singapore. There is a current discussion about sending one of our two new aircraft carriers east of Suez.
Potential economic consequences
Trump has threatened a trade war with China and the imposition of tariffs on the import of European products. This will increase inflation. The EU’s reaction to this (given in more detail in the link above) is to first offer a compromise, short of a full EU/US trade agreement and, if this doesn’t succeed, impose tariffs on a range of US products.
Trump has never been a supporter of green energy, wants to use the “liquid gold” that the US has more of than any other country and again threatens to withdraw the US from the Paris agreement on climate control. This has a major effect on attempts to wean other nations off fossil fuels before it is too late. Think of the low-lying Pacific islands that have little voice in their own destiny.
In a previous article, I suggested that politicians may use the COP series of UN conferences on climate control to “cop out” of their commitments. This is what Trump wants to do again and is made worse by a recent scandal. But if we don’t control global warming there will be a surge in people wanting to migrate from south to north. How will Trump cope with that?
What did COP29 achieve?
And what did COP29 achieve? Wealthy countries will give $300bn, mainly in loans, annually by 2035 to poorer countries to cope with the effects of global warming. This was described as a “paltry sum” by India compared with the $1.3tn required and met with anger from many developing countries. More than 1,700 fossil fuel lobbyists attended COP29 to ensure their interests limited the agreement and reinforce Trump’s call to “drill, baby, drill”.
The conference started in autocratic Azerbaijan (where 90% of its energy supply and 60% of its revenue comes from fossil fuels) on 11 November 2024. China and the Gulf states are not contributing finance to help poorer nations meet the targets. A deal on finance must be made to control and reverse the rise in world temperatures and severe weather patterns we have experienced since COP28.
