Serbia: documented application of the same framework
Academic research base
How do authoritarian governments copy methods from one another?
Authoritarian authorities learn by observing what has successfully reduced political risk elsewhere. They take over models of the law on associations and media, ways of managing protests, digital tools, election techniques and the language by which pressure is presented as security, sovereignty or the fight against disinformation.
Transmission goes through trainings, advisors, international organizations, police cooperation, equipment trade and personal contacts of officials. However, the method is not copied as a ready-made package: it adapts to domestic institutions, technology and history, and sometimes does not give the same result. The similarity of the two laws is not enough to prove learning or influence. A trace of contact, timeline, common text or technology is needed and an explanation of how foreign experience has been translated into the domestic control mechanism.
The authorities do not have to publicly admit that they copy each other to learn from the same examples and buy the same tools. In Serbia, methods known throughout competitive authoritarian systems are seen: elections under unequal conditions, pro-government organizations, digital surveillance, centralized media and laws that formally protect the institution while weakening its controlling role. Links to Russia, China and other partners allow the exchange of technology and political messages, while a part of the market is being expanded.
How the finding is separated in the matrix
Comparative literature places Serbia in a wider regional pattern, and technical and monitoring reports document the import of surveillance systems and the similarity of institutional tactics.
Learning takes place through advisors, party networks, police cooperation, companies and observation of other people’s success; the government takes over what works and adapts it to domestic law and audiences.
Partially similarity and certain transmission channels are demonstrable, but the origin of each particular decision is unknown.
Similar circumstances can produce a similar policy without direct copying. The transfer claim requires a contract, training, technical trace, testimony or documented connection.
Similar laws in the two countries do not prove that one has copied the other. A trace of contact, training, trade or transfer of knowledge is required.
Works supporting this answer, with their evidence type and an explanation of how they relate to the claim.
comparing several countries or cases
Ambrosio, T. (2009), Authoritarian Backlash: Russian Resistance to Democratization in the Former Soviet Union, Ashgate.
- Contribution to this answer
- In this book, Ambrosio shows how Russia has developed multiple strategies to stop democratic pressure in its environment protecting its own system, supporting authoritarian allies, undermining democratic change and coordinating with other countries. This shows the international spread of authoritarian practice, but it is not a direct study of how one regime views another, learns from it and copies its method.
Comparison of International Organizations
Debre, M. J. (2022), „Clubs of Autocrats: Regional Organizations and Authoritarian Survival“, The Review of International Organizations 17(3): 485–511.
- Contribution to this answer
- Debre shows that authoritarian states through regional organizations receive additional resources for their own survival political legitimacy, protection from external pressure and assistance in repression and co-optation. Such organizations create space for the exchange of experiences, but this paper primarily tests whether membership prolongs the survival of the regime, and not how the concrete method is transferred from one country to another.
comparing several countries or cases
Tansey, O. (2016), The International Politics of Authoritarian Rule, Oxford University Press.
- Contribution to this answer
- Tansey shows that authoritarian regimes are not closed national systems: external money, political support and interventions can change relations within the regime and increase its chances of survival. For “learning methods”, however, this is a broader international framework, not a direct proof of policy learning.
comparing several countries or cases
Feldstein, S. (2021), The Rise of Digital Repression: How Technology Is Reshaping Power, Politics, and Resistance, Oxford University Press.
- Contribution to this answer
- Feldstein shows how digital surveillance technologies, censorship and targeted repressions spread across borders and how states can use tools and expertise developed elsewhere. This gives a concrete channel through which authoritarian control can be imported, but the book is broader than the mutual learning of authoritarian regimes.
Explain how the system works
Schlumberger, O., Edel, M., Maati, A. i Saglam, K. (2024), „How Authoritarianism Transforms: A Framework for the Study of Digital Dictatorship“, Government and Opposition 59(3): 761–783.
- Contribution to this answer
- Schlumberger and co-authors show how digital technology can change the very way of authoritarian governance, not just give new tools for old jobs. For the question of how regimes learn from each other, however, the work is very indirect.
Sources supporting the Serbia example, with the claim they support and their limitations.
Reviewed scientific work - Verified 21.08.2026
Bieber, Florian. 2018. “Patterns of Competitive Authoritarianism in the Western Balkans.” East European Politics 34(3): 337–354. https://doi.org/10.1080/21599165.2018.1490272
- What the source records
- The paper explains that modern regimes in the region survive through formal elections, weak institutions, informal control and external legitimacy, but are not the same as regimes from the 1990s.
- Claim it supports
- The claim that authoritarian methods are spread through comparative learning, political connections and the technology market, with the fence that similarity alone does not directly prove copying.
- Source limitation
- The regional comparison does not provide equally detailed evidence for every institution in Serbia.
Reviewed scientific work - Verified 21.08.2026
Kakarnias, Theofanis. 2025. “Decoding Serbia’s Democratic Backsliding: EU Conditionality Meets Domestic Realities.” European Political Science 24(3): 293–312. https://doi.org/10.1057/s41304-025-00518-8
Kakarnias, Theofanis. 2025. “Decoding Serbia’s Democratic Backsliding: EU Conditioning Meets Domestic Realities.” European Political Science 24(3): 293–312. https://doi.org/10.1057/s41304-025-00518-8
- What the source records
- Process monitoring indicates that the internal interests, the issue of territorial integrity and the uncertainty of EU membership are mutually reinforcing.
- Claim it supports
- The claim that authoritarian methods are spread through comparative learning, political connections and the technology market, with the fence that similarity alone does not directly prove copying.
- Source limitation
- The paper explains part of the cause and the external environment, and does not offer a complete classification of the regime.
University laboratory technical research - Verified 21.08.2026
Citizen Lab. 2021. Pegasus vs. Predator: Dissident’s Doubly-Infected iPhone Reveals Cytrox Mercenary Spyware. Toronto: Munk School, University of Toronto.
- What the source records
- Scans have listed Serbia among the likely users of Predator infrastructure, showing the international market of tools that give countries secret surveillance capabilities.
- Claim it supports
- The claim that authoritarian methods are spread through comparative learning, political connections and the technology market, with the fence that similarity alone does not directly prove copying.
- Source limitation
- The network infrastructure indicates a likely user, but it does not prove itself who used the tool in Serbia, against whom and with what legal basis.
International Organization for Human Rights Forensic Research - Verified 21.08.2026
Amnesty International. 2024. A Digital Prison: Surveillance and the Suppression of Civil Society in Serbia. London: Amnesty International.
- What the source records
- The report documents cases of unlocking phones and installing spyware during police or security conversations, as well as consequences for civil society.
- Claim it supports
- The claim that authoritarian methods are spread through comparative learning, political connections and the technology market, with the fence that similarity alone does not directly prove copying.
- Source limitation
- Forensic findings are strong for the analyzed devices, but the number of cases is not a measure of distribution in the entire population; the authorities have disputed the allegations of illegal work.
Is a relevant source missing? Send it to us.
Suggest a source or report an error in this answer →