shift russia to a complete or a terran state that doesn't hold elections rule or to a much more democratic state where we could genuinely talk about someone like. i was growing of age after the soviet union and i remember very vividly this transition from infuse the average jane if you see as and for democracy to cynicism not only among the people but also among the leaders and when it comes to the latter as. it was primarily driven by at realisation and deeply how believe that for the west democracy is not a value it's not a goal it's not something that they lead by it's actually an instrument it's into all of many places it's s. dave i think totally wrong about that tell me a little bit more because i don't really see why democracy would be a stick of the west so tell me a little bit more about where that perception comes from well he your book is not very flattering to you after it terry ends but i think you're ultimately confirmed

that a deeply held believe that everybody almost everybody uses different kinds of tricks and manipulation studio and you kind of subvert the house and take expression of political will and based on lies democracy is i do it in certain the way they are relying on laws and regulations to ensure that it's self interest authoritarian nations maybe doing that and more in crew there are ways but ultimately i think the conclusion of your book is that everybody doesn't. no really i mean i don't think that's the conclusion there's a lot of countries on in the book which don't really do it or at least do it less and there's a lot of countries in europe in north america that you know manipulate elections instead in ways not enough us so really united states for example it is true that historically black populations of minority populations to struggle to be able to vote and express their political rights and that's still an issue that the united states needs to do today it's also true that gerrymandering is

a major issue in the u.s. you know kind of politicians trying to choose their voters both of them both just choosing their politicians carving up the electoral map in a very sort of way that on it is so the united states has more of those problems but is still probably true that donald trump is going to lose the next election and stand down and that's a very key different situation to what we have say in russia recruits in or for example in uganda or president you erema 7 he's been a very long time now i think you would agree that donald trump is in very very unusual candidate as he's allowed to victory came as a major surprise to everybody so he's i think for now a stand alone case when it comes to the american politics but up until him. they believe in this part of the world has been and in china for example the chinese have long described them are collections of he it hasn't they the feeling was that while they face main change the people in power stay the same and it's just. utter cation or alteration that means the democrats and the republicans but by and large

they vastly interest are still the same and the policies remain by and large the same. i think that's fairly true i don't know why when you say this part of the well part of the world are you referring to under her interior russia where we're at and the former soviet union which indeed have a tendency for keeping leaders in power for longer periods of time but that i think that it is a very widespread perception here is that it's actually a more honest way of dealing with politics because the change does not always represent the change a thing that's the the massive step or the idea that is behind a lot of this cynicism that you know the faces may change but that. power still remain the same. but i think it depends what you mean i mean you know which talking about the perception of average citizens in russia that's obviously to some extent

you know controlled and shaped by a long period of information pushed by the government in russia just as a matter you know only that that that is not sure i mean that it had not interested in possession of the people or even propaganda academically do you think that the thing to change your face is in the united states not made me like excluding donald but this before the trial with the change of people in power do you think the powers have actually changed the powers that be i think they have i mean not noted that is right we know that big money big capital the arms trade the military complex industrial complex still survives on one leading to another said there are certain features of us politics that are common but it's also true that the u.s. was able to elect its best black president something that hasn't happened in many countries around the world and certainly not the world's kind of white states impulse architecture is a mock received the color of their presence in so i think being able to elect leaders of different races and different ethnicities different genders is and good

indication of democracy you are asking about change being able to change the phone one color that maybe i know it's your majority to another is i think one of the indications of democracy is. not the only one the other one is being able opposites change your leaders there are indications of democracy where i review the united states down and there we might talk about the ability of the racy to actually tackle inequality and the way in which the 2 party system constrains the ability of more radical forces to come through but i don't think it's right to say or make sense to say right now that the situation in the us actually doesn't allow for any kind of change in the way that some authoritarian regimes do until really meaning that it has been you would agree that it would be a end of exaggeration if you apply that statement's you any country even in the most autocratic regimes there is always a possibility of change because had those changes 1st and foremost serve those to keep you speaking of which one of your most interesting findings is that authoritarian regimes that hold and manipulate elections trying now to be more

stable than those that don't hold any elections at all the fact that they feel the need to say ken is that ultimately at bat or a good thing as far as the moccasins consigning. yeah i mean one of the things that i think i retain regimes do is they stoke the foundations of their future downfall because one of the things that they do is they encourage people to believe in elections and then when they try to manipulate elections people then become frustrated and sooner or later it's ancien between the promise of elections and the failure to hold elections comes into collision and i think that's one of the things we've seen recently in better oops where we seen consistent attempts to manipulate elections you know basically until the people became sufficiently fed up with the failure of the promise to be allowed to choose the government then i think the really interesting question for us is you know what does that mean for the long term future and i think you know in countries like bell or said in fact to seem to

come together at the same time to getting to loosen president bush in close hold on power those facts as an ultrasound to many of our 10 states what you've just picked up is an intelligent tension within the space scenes that does constantly all into question elegy them and i think there are a set of facts as that then come into play is the regime able to deliver economic development is it looking like it's fulfilling its promises in other areas of elections doesn't lead to maintain a reputation does it avoid corruption scandals if you can do one of those things then the popular frustration with the electoral process is probably going to be kept in check when all of those things start to be triggered at the same time that's when the whole sort of tearing regimes really starts trouble i mean to your head that. if you fix something there is ultimately a chance of you making it which is good for those who believe in democracy as you know as a genuine means of arranging human affairs as you point out in your writing.

democracy promotion is is a very cash intensive field somewhere between 8 and. $1000000000.00 in a year is here and yet the results seem to be very very superficial you're right in the above that. we're experiencing a real democratic deficit and not only in authoritarian regimes i think you are pretty clear that even in is that really democracy is there is a substantial democratic deficit and a lot of average going to. bridge sending old window dressing brother down and practicing this this process authentically in their gag my question to you is whether it is a coincidence that we have observed this democratic decline ride over the period when democracy promotion has become such air hot issue both in terms of going by me give me seems and in terms of their rhetorical attention abysses. well i mean i

think the ultimate answer to this is that democracy is driven domestically and internationally and we've seen efforts by international organizations and governments to promote democracy in countries like iraq afghanistan and we see how difficult that it is also mentally it has to be reduced domestically because otherwise international actors need to be in the country $24.00 seventh's to make it sustainable so any country in the world that's built a sustainable democracy is due to domestic sometimes of international help domestically and one of the other things that we need to keep in mind is 10000000000 may sound like a lot but when you compare 10000000000 to the to an economies of the countries that we're talking about it's a tiny drop in the ocean so we have international governments that are trying to promote democracy but we've really it's of the small budgets in processes that are actually controlled domestically and that's why i think we have this mismatch between this great ambition to promote democracy around the world and as you say the kind of limited effects of that ultimately there's only so much international

actors can do i've seen you write recently that this summer a grab that the west is turning its back on democracy promotion is abroad do you think it's possible that there was real altoona to chop the issue completely to allow countries like russia like many others around the world to try that hand at this enterprise biden south without giving hardliners inside the country an excuse that you know these people are trying to hurt us through democracy promotion therefore we have to you know the cattle about this do you think there's a chance of the west actually allowing other countries to do it for themselves. well i think you're putting the question in an unhelpful way frankly i don't really think that's what was going on during the course a number of cases where in particular the u.s. government has been accused of using democracy promotion is a tool of foreign policy and we need to hold them accountable for that donald trump's policy and inconsistency between how he treats a venezuelan tacky is embarrassing and unhelpful but is also true that president

clinton's policy in democracy promotion i mean it's very likely you are sidestepping him but he's one of the champions of it. i'm not sidestepping anything i'm answering your question if you stop long enough means once and i'll give you an answer what i think we need to recognize is that in many cases the international community is providing assistance to governments that have asked for a lot of the money that we just talked about is going to governments to help them establish electoral commissions and your training to help them run elections to operate in that way international actors have to be invited they can't simply offer money to electoral commissions or governments don't want to governments who passed legislation or simply behaved as they kind of election observation and in many cases what is happening is the west is funding will denies ations and programs and movements that either supported by the government will they want civil society groups that are based in the country consent i would fully agree with you if you would say that what we should see is international funding for domestic process is

way international regimes do not try and push their own agenda i think that's true but i think it would be wrong to suggest that you know a lot of the countries we're talking about is simply been the case that the international community has come and tried to enjoy being imposed this is that we're already going on in most cases in better reese is a great example of this international community really gets engaged when there's already a political crisis you know look ability says last year elections will is nothing was said about the elections when there was no public protest this time around everyone speaking about the elections not because the international community has decided to middle east amount but because there's a mass protest on the streets and that has triggered international action so i think we just need to complicate that international process a little bit more well professor cheeseman just as we were getting all worked that we have to take a sure the break and perhaps cool down the to believe that in a few moments stacey.

time of the time called her ration to repeat the same mantra sustainability very short seller it thrives. to sustainable prize board sustainability. more equitable and sustainable world. they claim their production is completely harmless. the big. companies want us to feel good about buying their products while the damage is being done far away this is just as deep we don't even. understand. what we've got to do is identify the threats that we have it's crazy confrontation let it be an arms race is on off and spearing dramatic development only really i'm

going to resist i don't see how that strategy will be successful very critical time to sit down and talk. welcome back to the world that need cheeseman professor of democracy of the university of their manhattan and call their of out you need an election visit she's many imagined a couple of times and i don't know if president look has read your book or not but he definitely seems to be a tad book example of a leader who used the lash of strength and used grip on power until these year if you watched his recent interviews he seemed to be jeering me blindsided by

all the mass problems that followed presidential elections and all the allegations of vote rigging. i wonder if it's fair to say that these type of. democracy imitation works only entally doesn't thing we talked about this already i mean i think in my treatise on say you know we talked about the fact that you know he's managed to put off this trick for a number of times in a row but to mentally if you see corruption scandals the failure to deal effectively with a growing perception of economic stagnation a growing sense of a desire for change if you don't have the kind of ability to rotate the political elite within the ruling party of an authoritarian regime you know sooner or later going to face a challenge like this in a little over 10 indeed is that and one of the responses has been the question if you see a big uprising in moscow you shut it down enough you might go to get ahead of it the same in tanzania the same in uganda you shut down the airwaves you increase censorship and a lot of spending and it's there's

a great britain let's not put them to the side though because they're using the law enforcement forces caught kohima why they have it handed way as well and so i don't understand how we could draw an equivalent between belarus where the security forces are torturing people and the united kingdom could you explain how you could possibly join improvements you can have an equivalence ad saying that every country uses its security apparatus in a way that suits its political goals and i think some of the son of the protestant in the great britain aboard this person in pretty shabby handed way that's all i'm saying it's not about the political equivalence but i think the reality people here and it's actually you know repeating this is fundamental you are trying to excuse authoritarian practices and human rights abuses and i think it's fair to say that 'd arab leaders and tearing to pieces are crude i review 100 percent i'm just saying that and he absolutely follows from gimpel that status democracies are also using treats those treats

a different but not less manipulative they are less manipulate it but i do think i mean the a god given of the book is that these things happen everywhere but not that they happen to the same extent everywhere i do want to go back. to president look i think if you if i may because i think he's a very candid manipulator. i think a few years ago and you're right about that in your book here owned up to tempering the modes with the with the purpose of actually decreasing the count from i think 90 percent up until. you make it more believable and as funny or obnoxious as that anecdote may be i think it also reflects a deeply how do believe that a lot of sins are ultimately not about the will of your people but about presenting . you know a suitable story for the international community here you only played president lukashenko for maintaining that story yes really.

who would you blame the international environment that exists that puts democracy promotion. in its rather superficial form above the actual process is on the ground. the international community is not responsible for that the international community would rather see genuine domestic process is the reason i was going to happen as president you should go so again the circle goes back to the president new christian could be welcome again you seem to want to excuse i'm going to and i don't really understand why you would take the side of their experience who as we speak abusing human rights in the most terrible way anything decided their exam and taking the side of democracy believe it or not but if you go back to dollars i think it's pretty clear that while. the social maturing in the political maturity in that country it is jenny and it's also pretty avid and that it comes into conflict with geopolitical games and all the belorussian neighbor bellows his neighbors are using the situation to print tat or ensuring their interests would

you say that that's not the case. well i mean to go back to your previous point would you then say that instead of allowing delegates to get away with a superficial form of democracy the western government should have been forced to more genuine form of democracy what i was trying to say and i actually got to save you from your book is that there is a lot of sort of window dressing and pretending you know the reason why denmark autocrats feel the need to fake is because there are there is a pressure to fix certain democratic processes and in the case of some countries the. irregularities could could be ignored to give that suitable for certain powers that be and in kilo they're going to go for that matter how. do you think it would be better for them not to have to fake it at all would it be better at a to have a situation where they didn't have to fake it and actually they could just be gucci oh it's airy and they don't have to pretend to hold elections they don't have to

pretend to allow freedom of speech would be bad if they didn't have to do that is that you look at a situation and this interview is not about me but if you ask me i think it would be bad it's you give nations a chance to develop that own process as in fact i think it's very arrogant it's not supremacy is to believe that you have to meet why have political and social change for others eve democracy is it indeed the bass way of organizing human affairs which i believe it is that you should accept the possibility that other nations could also arrive and that without your help that's what i believe in. sure but in that case what we'd actually be saying is that perhaps for the next 102030 years the international community would tolerate far greater human rights abuses and follow levels of freedoms relating talking thinking isn't doing really anything i mean. as far as i'm concerned it's only creating as you know rhetorical battles but it's not doing anything to stop this human rights abuses or that i think i mean

again but the whole discussion of bellary says demonstrated that there is an effect to the fact that because franco had to hold elections gave an element of hope to the opposition the fact that he continued to reap them undermined his legitimacy and now we see it very clearly that the majority of people in belarus do not want him as a leader so the openings that were fostered by the international community in that country have allowed the domestic grossest it's a place much more quickly than it might international community absolutely has nothing to do that we have to give the credit to the belorussian people and speaking out which for now it looks interim ancient parallel with russian hout but i think it's pretty clear to everybody that there is a signal level of texas city about. that. he hasn't been able to insure his cell agendum is he asking wanted for these elections speaking not in moral terms and but in political terms. do you think what do you

thing it everything like this can do you know by far it. can it return to the old ways. one bath possible strategies it can employ to ensure its own security and physical security i think that you would recognize that it's ecan situation and the basket for its people as well as the preservation of the legacy that president lukashenko got in athens country i mean i don't feel that the people of right now want the aleutian go legacy right this year the length lucas shank a legacy of one of corruption libertarianism failed economic policies and stagnation so i don't think there are 30 he also built the can is the economy of the country you have to give him some credit you can avoid it all to one side i mean part of the reason people are protesting is because christie can now my situation is not favorable because they do not believe that this government has the economic interest i think she meant it because they say as we all see this isn't back now is that there are certain things that he's done for his country they say

that it's just his time to go that's it but they are not talking to him in bloody truth and actually trying to people who are out on the streets calling for someone to go and not trying to preserve that person's legacy in terms of the options that he has available to him obviously he has to she has and try and reform and try and introduce mood to its democratic processes that will buy off the opposition my sense is that just won't work the opposition is too strong and she just misses approaches and you can sink or doesn't want to share anyway or he can become increasingly repressive until he has something close to a totalitarian police state to contain the opposition of a sufficient opposition leaders and hope that he then survives the international sanctions that will follow refresh the support must. the sense right now is he will go for the latter option unless one of 2 things happens won't it faces a major force of opposition from within the ruling party itself or until putin says

actually this is becoming barassi for us to be don't want to have to be about he going to pull for someone else to come in who we can see is someone we can work with but hope it goes to bill it's so i think it's hard to see a short term solution to my own sense is that there's going to be a lot more bloodshed and pain before this is all about well we don't have time to go into russia there is one question and i want to ask you that was bugging me as i was reading your book i had a feeling that all those tricks electoral tricks that you are describing a normal easily a political in either democratic or attack craddock saddening i have this feeling that every new generation of voters. is becoming the last and last patient with these kinds of many places and what they do that from the leader and what they demand from the south is changing is that wishful thinking on my pride or is it supported by the now the it's

a cat and mouse game i mean voters get wise that he doesn't start to get fed up and he does start to use new strategies digital media has created opportunities for opposition parties and voters to you know hold leaders accountable and to scrutinize them and to do things like in a more effective election observation but it also creates opportunities by leaders to then take control of that sense of that and use exactly the same platforms to put out their positions so one of the things we talk about a little bit in the book and i think is really important moving forwards is that you know the way that elections have been made will change a lot of countries are now using electronic technology to run their elections you can men you get laid electronic technology just as much as you can manual technology and so the big battleground in the future may be digital me place in hacking etc. when i was in the other thing in gerrymandering so yeah i think you're right that voters get wise but i think it's also true that leaders are often one step ahead they probably won't they often spend

a lot of money on advisors and those advisors often know the latest new elation strategies and $1.00 of the problems for election observers is that they often say look we're we almost always the last election looking at what was done and trying to stop it and the leader was always beating the future election trying to find a new strategy and i think that came out a mouse is probably going to keep playing out over the next decade well perhaps and she's going to have to leave it there i really appreciate your spirit and you can i thank you very much. a lovely day and thank you for watching hope to see you again next week on worlds apart. there.

was a woman in less than with opposed to some of the. not that i know of just before. last. and we chased. each one of them carrying 20 kilos 'd of drugs. to fence down. then they just step by

3 of. the 3 we have maintained a medical man they believe they have. this is for me. if. i don't know maybe they don't make or. break right. now or. that the believe he is smear those who really can show you. that with that i suppose you noticed that us they have something that. you know

none of the stupina bull episodes didn't go to see you through the. clear during your force where you could be near my stuff in the street if not thoughts about spirits i did it was more experienced than you know. stadia. for you to. sort of move to. keep your boat is.

post-election on ranson dollars shows no signs of relenting 6 weeks after the disputed about our correspondent there isn't meant for us. as it's happening barden . crowds merging together right now it's difficult to tell with the with regards to numbers told by 5000 people behind me. also this hour the u.s. claims u.n. sanctions against iran are now back and forth spotted world powers including washington's closest allies say the move to legally void.