JIM GLASSMAN:
Welcome to a special edition of Ideas in Action, a show about ideas and their consequences. I'm Jim Glassman. (MUSIC) This week, how activists are using the Internet to promote change in repressive regimes.

Dissidents and activists from around the world met recently at the George W. Bush Institute at Southern Methodist University to discuss how they are using social media like blogs, Facebook, and Twitter to organize and promote freedom of speech and demand greater human rights in countries such as Cuba, China, and Russia. I had a chance to talk with several of the participants about the effect of this cyber dissent, including Christopher Walker, director of studies at Freedom House. Freedom House was founded 70 years ago to monitor and promote human rights around the world.

Jeff Gedmin, president of Radio Free Europe Radio Liberty. This organization broadcasts news to an audience of 25 million people in countries across Europe and the Middle East. David Keyes, founder of CyberDissidence.org. This group provides support to cyber dissidents fighting repressive regimes in Arab countries.

And Bari Weiss, assistant editorial features editor of the Wall Street Journal. She has been following and writing about cyber dissent since its inception. The topic this week, "Cyber Dissent: Successes and Challenges." This is Ideas in Action. (MUSIC)
ANNOUNCER:
Finding for Ideas in Action is provided by Investor's Business Daily. Every stock market cycle is led by America's never-ending stream of innovative new companies and inventions. Investor's Business Daily helps investors find these new leaders as they emerge. More information is available at investors.com.
JIM GLASSMAN:
It's been a year since the Green Movement protest in Iran showed the world the power of social media networking sites such as Facebook and Twitter. Iranian activists used the sites to organize rallies to protest election fraud and to show the rest of the world how brutally the Iranian government was fighting back.

This new circle of real-time news and the implications it could have for dissent in other countries was not lost on the leaders of many countries with repressive regimes, including Russia. In Russia, attempts to stifle dissent can range from outright brutality and murder to harassing and jailing dissenters using the Internet to protest government policies. Christopher Walker, welcome to Ideas in Action.
CHRISTOPHER WALKER:
Thank you for having me.
JIM GLASSMAN:
Now, your organization Freedom House measures freedom in the world. What do you use for criteria?
CHRISTOPHER WALKER:
We've settled on what we think are indispensable elements of individual freedom and have, for 40 years now, looked at such things as elections, electoral laws, political pluralism, the degree to which civil society can fulfill its rightful role-- freedom of expression, and freedom of the media. These are among the-- ingredients that we're examining for all the countries-- each year in our annual review.
JIM GLASSMAN:
So how is freedom in the world doing? Are we progressing?
CHRISTOPHER WALKER:
Well, here we are 20 years after the fall of the Berlin Wall. And looking over that time period, it's a pretty good picture. All in all, we've seen-- an expansion in the number and percentage of countries that we see as free countries, that is to say societies where basic rights are guaranteed and protected. At the same time, in the last five years, we've seen a sharp downturn in freedom, something we've-- seen serious enough to call a freedom recession.
JIM GLASSMAN:
And what are those regimes?
CHRISTOPHER WALKER:
Well-- this is not an exhaustive list but it's illustrative. We have countries like Russia, China, Iran, and Venezuela, all of which, in-- similar but not identical ways, are pursuing policies that-- use the law to stifle dissent in their countries, that use-- nuanced ways of-- of manipulating the Internet to also wrong foot rightful discussion but, in other ways, are finding that in the modern era it's not-- sufficient to simply use the brutal methods that were-- typical a generation ago.
JIM GLASSMAN:
You know, I want to get to the Internet. You know, we hear a lot about how the Internet is effective in promoting freedom and change in countries like Russia. What's going on?
CHRISTOPHER WALKER:
Well, I think it's fair to say that there is clearly a demand for-- better information, open information. In a country like Russia, I think it's fair to say this is the case in countries like China and Iran as well. Events are-- are showing us this.
At the same time, the obstacles that are being put in-- in the way of unfettered Internet access are making it-- rather difficult in a number of areas for ordinary citizens to-- post blogs, for example, or surf the Web. In all of these instances, we're seeing-- what is better described as distortion, disruption in this new adapted form of authoritarianism that is-- developing really to meet-- 21st century-- challenges.
JIM GLASSMAN:
But the Internet is so vast. I mean, how-- how do these autocratic regimes or oppressive regimes, how do they-- how do they find someone who's doing something they don't like and stop it?
CHRISTOPHER WALKER:
These regimes have recognized it's neither essential nor desirable to control everything. So they've devised ways to focus on and emphasize things that are politically consequential. So when it comes to political organization, when it comes to sensitive topics regarding government performance, government corruption, these are the sorts of things that are focused on to dissuade open and-- candid discussion.

One of the ways in Russia that this is done is through the use of-- either government-- surrogates or-- others who are disposed to the government point of view who jump into what should be unfettered-- open debate on all sorts of issues, perhaps criticism of the government. And in essence, they'll muddy the waters.

So you'll have someone talking about government-- government corruption. And suddenly they'll find they're being overwhelmed by-- an enormous number of critics who are questioning why they're raising these questions. It's-- it's a way to-- make it less-- desirable and-- enjoyable to engage in this sort of debate.

JIM GLASSMAN:
How would you compare-- Putin's Russia as far as freedom of speech is concerned and access with Soviet Russia?
CHRISTOPHER WALKER:
Today you have-- a very dynamic media scene in Russia. You have an enormous amount of information. It wouldn't be fair to compare the sheer volume of information that one can get in contemporary Russia with-- that of the-- of the Soviet period. I think the-- the key in this instance is looking at how much politically consequential information can grow roots in today's Russia.
JIM GLASSMAN:
Now, do you think most Americans have a kind of misleading impression of the openness or freedom that's involved in speech and-- Internet in Russia today?
CHRISTOPHER WALKER:
Russia, China as well, these are countries that are deeply integrated in modern economic-- life. But at the same time, there's-- there's this-- enormous focus on denying-- political competition and the life blood of that, in many respects, which is open-- open-- expression.
JIM GLASSMAN:
Thank you, Christopher Walker, for joining us on Ideas in Action.
CHRISTOPHER WALKER:
Thank you for having me.
RODRIGO DIAMANTI:
The civil society is-- is stronger, is getting stronger because these new tools appear thanks to Facebook, thanks to Twitter, thanks to YouTube. We have more tools to spread our message. Each-- each of you can-- tonight-- record on your computers a message to the Venezuelan or to Iranian or to the Syrian people saying that you support them.
JIM GLASSMAN:
Jeff Gedmin, welcome to Ideas in Action.
JEFFREY GEDMIN:
Glad to be here. Thank you.
JIM GLASSMAN:
You're the head of-- Radio Free Europe Radio Liberty. And when you hear Radio Free Europe, to a lot of Americans that kind of conjures up the idea of broadcasting through the iron curtain. Isn't that name kind of an anachronism?
JEFFREY GEDMIN:
Well, fir-- first of all, the mission is the same. We're broadcasting to countries that either don't have free and independent media or countries in which free media is not yet fully established. So today the geographic region starts at Russia, goes down to the Caucasus-- Central Asia, Pakistan, Afghanistan, Iraq, Iran.
JIM GLASSMAN:
So, for example, you broadcast into Iran with Radio FARDA. How were you affected and how have you been affected by the Green Movement and the technology that's being used there?
JEFFREY GEDMIN:
Well, as you said, Jim, our-- our brand-- in each country we have a local brand. Abroad we're known as Radio Free Europe or Radio Free Europe Radio Liberty. In Iran, we're called Radio FARDA, which in Persian means Radio Tomorrow. We do radio. We do Internet. We do Twitter and text-- text messaging and so forth. And we have a pretty good audience.

But what-- what's happening to us is the same thing that's happening to the so-called Green Movement. The government of Iran is pretty good at social media, too. They surveil. They infiltrate. They block. They jam. They do everything to rob us and the protesters or the democrats in the country of that competitive advantage. And they're fairly successful.
JIM GLASSMAN:
Now, another government that seems to be doing a good job of blocking the kinds of dissent that it is not too happy about is Russia.
JEFFREY GEDMIN:
I-- I think the strategy of the Russian government is we want to give people everything that they want except debate about political freedom. If you're interested in cars, if you're interested in fashion, if you're interested in all sorts of consumer goods, you can find that and you can access that. But when it comes to political discourse and debate and discussion, the Russians want to pollute the landscape or disinform or discourage that.
JIM GLASSMAN:
Now, have the Russians shut down some of your stations?
JEFFREY GEDMIN:
Three years ago in Russia we had 26 affiliate partners, radio stations that cooperated with us. Today we have less than five. I can tell you in one case-- a fellow who runs the station in St. Petersburg said to us, "Look, they come, they find me in violation of a license agreement. I fight it. I win it. But it takes me two years and lots of money. I can't afford to do that kind of business."
JIM GLASSMAN:
Does Radio Free Europe support the actions of cyber dissidents?
JEFFREY GEDMIN:
Whether it's Afghanistan, Iran, or Russia, if people want to use free expression-- in support of pluralism and tolerance and respect for diversity, those are our allies. We want to support them.
JIM GLASSMAN:
How do governments in-- in the nations in which you broadcast respond to Radio Free Europe?
JEFFREY GEDMIN:
Well, it's a mixed response. I think it-- it's safe to say that the more severe the authoritarianism, the-- the more hostile the reaction. So there's some governments in central Asia-- Iran, in particular, where they're simply hostile and they will threaten or arrest people who cooperate or work for us if they're caught.
JIM GLASSMAN:
And you have people arrested, right?
JEFFREY GEDMIN:
Well, I can tell you in the last three months in the case of Iran-- the government has arrested eight people who had some association with us. So these are rather severe dictatorships. By the way-- in Iran, as the protest movement has become quieter, mostly because of the technological advantage of the regime-- I've met Iranian dissidents in the Middle East who say, "We no longer know where to go, where the rally takes place."

Or they'll say, "We were going to go on Thursday. But we saw through friends on a Facebook page that at the square where the rally was going to take place, snipers were pre-positioned on top of the roofs." Well, guess what? Thursday comes and there are no snipers. And the best guess is the Iranian secret police put that out and, voilà, they've been able to disband a rally before the protesters even mobilized at the square on that day.
JIM GLASSMAN:
So the Iranians and the Russians are examples of two regimes that are very good at-- very sophisticated?
JEFFREY GEDMIN:
In fact, if you look globally, the three countries that are most sophisticated are Iran, Russia, and China. China, by the way, covered by our sister company, Radio Free Asia. Those three countries are employing an army, if you will, of people who are well trained, who are well financed, and who are highly motivated in blocking, infiltrating, and surveilling, playing the social media game from the other side.
JIM GLASSMAN:
Thank you, Jeff Gedmin.
JEFFREY GEDMIN:
My pleasure. Thanks, Jim.
ARASH KAMANGIR:
In Iran, one of the things that we have had is that we are a sort of a polarized society. We have all these different fractions there. Now, we-- we're having Green Movement and even outside Iran we're having sort of a unity. We have something in-- in-- in common. So a lot of people-- a lot of different political ambitions. They are all, you know, having that green color. And so that's-- that has been-- we've been able to be unified. And that's what the Internet has given us, a conversation.
JIM GLASSMAN:
David Keyes, thank you for joining us on Ideas in Action.
DAVID KEYES:
Pleasure to be here.
JIM GLASSMAN:
Now, why did you found CyberDissidence.org?
DAVID KEYES:
At the time, I was-- working for Natan Sharansky-- who-- was a famous Soviet dissident who spent nine years in the gulag. And I was trained on his ideas. And-- we realized at the time, me and a few friends-- realized that there was-- a gap that there were those on the frontline against tyranny in the Arab world and Iran specifically-- that needed the West's support that had an important message-- that needed to get out. And we felt that the West had an important role to play in supporting their ideas-- and coming to their defense.
JIM GLASSMAN:
Tell me about some of the people that you work with. There's-- there's an Egyptian blogger named Kareem Amer--
DAVID KEYES:
Sure.
JIM GLASSMAN:
--Who's now in prison I believe.
DAVID KEYES:
Right. He-- he was sentenced four years ago in prison. He was one of the cases we've taken up and we've coordinated global protests on his behalf at Egyptian embassies-- and on a wide network of campuses in America. He's not directly associated with the organization, but we're certainly championing his cause.

We have a network of-- bloggers in the region that we're in contact with on an almost daily basis. We work with-- a young Syrian who was tortured and imprisoned in Syria for Internet activities. He fled his homeland and-- and now works with-- CyberDissidence.org. And he's one-- one of the point people that is in touch with a lot of the bloggers in the region.
JIM GLASSMAN:
Now, how threatened are regimes, are autocratic regimes in the Middle East by what-- dissidents are doing using cyber tools?
DAVID KEYES:
I think-- they're absolutely terrified, to be frank. I subscribe to Potter Stewart's philosophy that censorship reflects-- a regime's lack of confidence in itself. These regimes simply cannot-- handle the-- glorious light of freedom of expression.

And so when young bloggers are-- arrested, detained, beat up-- and even killed sometimes like in Iran, I think it's the ultimate expression of lack of faith in their own system of governance. The imposition of ideas on other people is the-- the root of the problem and is the nature of these regimes, which cannot stand to have alternative-- opinions. And it was that way in the Soviet Union. And I believe it's that way-- in Egypt and Iran and Saudi Arabia and most of the other authoritarian regimes in the Middle East.
JIM GLASSMAN:
Is there a kind of-- virtuous-- circle developing or cycle developing with cyber dissent, with more information being pumped in; therefore, more bloggers getting out and doing the same kinds of things and-- and kind of-- moving things along very quickly?
DAVID KEYES:
There is and there's not. The Internet has, of course, afforded dissidents-- a level of-- the ability to get information out that's unprecedented in human history. But, at the same time-- I've heard-- Bernard Lewis, the Princeton historian, say that it-- technology has also allowed the regimes to crack down on dissidents-- with unprecedented-- fury. So there is also a danger that dissidents, despite the abilities they have to utilize the Internet-- will get lazy and they'll spend time behind computer-- screens and not get out on the streets.
JIM GLASSMAN:
So what can Americans do besides becoming more aware of what these cyber dissidents are doing or besides maybe putting pressure on the government not to support certain regimes, what can-- what can Americans do really to support the work of cyber dissidents?
DAVID KEYES:
Ultimately, I'm a Sharanskyite. I believe-- as Sakharov did that there are a few basic principles that America, as-- as a country, needs to adhere to. The first is that the democracy that hates you is the better than the dictatorship that loves you. The second is that we should trust states only as much as they trust their own people.

So advocating for linkage in the final analysis, America sends an awful lot of money, tens of billions of dollars-- to regimes in the Middle East. I think it's time to link foreign aid to human rights-- much the way that the-- Jackson-Vanik Amendment did.
JIM GLASSMAN:
Besides-- besides aid, is there something that the U.S. government can do more directly--
DAVID KEYES:
Sure.
JIM GLASSMAN:
--To help cyber dissidents?
DAVID KEYES:
I think one of the main things that they can do is-- in meetings with their counterparts in these countries, they can bring up the names-- of those who-- who are our best allies. I was in Turkey a few weeks ago and-- I met a member of the first trade delegation to Libya. He had never heard of the most famous Libyan dissident who just recently died, Fathi Eljahmi.

I wonder-- how many times in meetings with their counterparts in Egypt the name of Kareem Amer has come up. Irwin Cotler, who was the former justice minister of Canada and Sharansky's lawyer, asked Gorbachev in 1997 why he let Sharansky out of prison. And his answer was that he had traveled to Canada and everywhere he went, he was the minister of agriculture at the time, and everywhere he went-- nobody would ask him questions about agriculture. They just kept asking him about Sharansky, Sharansky, Sharansky.

And when he left-- buildings, there were huge placards with Sharansky. And so he went back to the Soviet Union and looked into Sharansky's file. He said he had never heard of him and decided he might be-- a rabble-rouser, but he certainly wasn't a criminal.

So America has a vital role to play in raising-- the names of these imprisoned-- democratic dissidents and those-- who are our best allies. And I think those whom the regimes fear most and that is their own people.
JIM GLASSMAN:
So Kareem Amer is the equivalent today, with new technology, of the Sharanskys of the past.
DAVID KEYES:
I believe so. And that was the-- the purpose of-- starting this organization. He is a man who writes letters from prison that are reminiscent of Patrick Henry. Give me liberty or give me death. He says-- "No matter how hard you try and silence me, I am-- as free as I can be because my freedom exists inside of me."

That's a very Sharansky-esque-- view and a lot of other Soviet dissidents. I just read Andrei Amalrik's wife -- said that he felt more free inside of his prison than many people walking on the streets of Moscow because he understood that liberty is inherent, that it's unalienable, and it's the most fundamental right of man.

JIM GLASSMAN:
Thank you, David Keyes.
DAVID KEYES:
Thank you very much.
OSCAR MORALES GUEVARA:
One thing that I would recommend is to connect the virtual world with the real world. I mean, having an all-in movement, just by the sake of having it and having a large membership, do not help. You need to go propose something. You need to go to the streets.

That's why I love that people are really rallying on the streets and taking pictures and then putting them on Twitter. And then on Facebook, calling people to go out on a specific day for a flash mob and things like that. You need to connect both worlds. You cannot remain entirely in the virtual world without having some kind of action outside.
JIM GLASSMAN:
Bari Weiss, thank you for joining us on Ideas in Action.
BARI WEISS:
Thanks so much for having me.
JIM GLASSMAN:
Now, you just graduate from Columbia less than three years ago, and you're working for the Wall Street Journal. What-- what exactly do you do for the Journal?
BARI WEISS:
So my official title is assistant editorial features editor, which is a fancy way of saying that I edit op-eds for the paper. And these come in from a huge range of people. The other thing that I do is I get to write for our leisure and arts section, our op-ed page. And I tend to focus on issues like human rights in the Middle East and poetry and movies that are coming out of places like Iran.
JIM GLASSMAN:
Now, when you talk about human rights in the Middle East, a lot of Americans suddenly became aware of what was going on as far as human rights are concerned with the Green Movement in Iran that sprang up after the Iranian elections. How robust is this movement in Iran against the regime?
BARI WEISS:
It's hard to say. There are people who argue that it's mostly elites, mostly people-- who are-- who have been involved prior to the June election. But I would say from my experience that it seems to be very widespread. I mean, like any social movement, there's a pretty hardcore group of individuals who seem to be constantly pushing things.

They're the ones who are organizing the protests. They're the ones who are, you know, constantly in touch with the Western media. But as we saw in the June election, I mean, anyone who saw the YouTube videos of the masses of people marching in the streets, you know, only a cynic could say that it's only the elites who cared about the fact that there was a sham election in their country. It was absolutely widespread. It crossed religious/secular bounds, crossed, you know, lower class/upper class.
(OVERTALK)
BARI WEISS:
It was everyone.
JIM GLASSMAN:
Right. But some people would say that February 11th, for example, when millions were expected in the streets and really a lot-- fewer than millions--
BARI WEISS:
Yeah.
JIM GLASSMAN:
--Showed up, that that was evidence that the movement is somehow dying down or that it's been intimidated and may be hard to get-- to get up off the mat.
BARI WEISS:
It certainly has been intimidated. There's no question. I mean, some of the leaders have been rounded up, thrown in jail, and arrested. So, yes, obviously it's been intimidated. However-- and-- and maybe this is one of the things that's difficult-- to gauge about the power of the Internet because it's easy to join a Facebook group or to, you know, express your dissent when you're on the Web. Of course, oftentimes, the government is also monitoring that. But that's different than actually putting your body out in the street.
JIM GLASSMAN:
Right. But the-- but the activity on the Web--
BARI WEISS:
Yes.
JIM GLASSMAN:
--Has not died down, you're saying?
BARI WEISS:
No, it hasn't at all.
JIM GLASSMAN:
You know, is-- is-- is there-- is there something that we can do, we as Americans, can do to encourage-- the people who are pushing for freedom in Iran? It may be some people, including me, believe it may be our best chance at stopping the regime from getting nuclear weapons, to have-- to have a regime that might not think that getting nuclear weapons is all that important.
BARI WEISS:
I certainly believe that. The overwhelming sense I get from talking to my contacts on the ground in Iran is that solidarity of the West and especially this country means a tremendous amount to them. When they see that the President of this country is scared to say the name of Neda Soltan out loud in his Nobel Price speech, they're totally disheartened by that.
JIM GLASSMAN:
And Neda Soltan was?
BARI WEISS:
Neda Soltan, excuse me, was the-- young woman who was marching in the streets in June and was shot dead by a Basij militiaman for simply marching in a peaceful protest. And-- she was made famous because a bystander captured-- the footage, the extremely gruesome footage, of her dying in the street. And it was shot around the world. It was on the cover of the Wall Street Journal and I believe also the New York Times the next day. So going back to the question--
JIM GLASSMAN:
About solidarity, right.
BARI WEISS:
--About solidarity, because the Obama administration's policy, at least till now, with Iran has been one of engagement, that necessitates that the people they negotiate with, namely the leaders of Iran, are in a strong position and not in a position of weakness. And so what that has meant for dissidents and human rights activists and-- people that are trying to promote freedom is that our government has been, you know, unbelievably silent towards them. And I think it's a moral atrocity, quite frankly.
JIM GLASSMAN:
Thank you, Bari Weiss.
BARI WEISS:
Thank you so much.
JIM GLASSMAN:
Thank you for joining us on this edition of Ideas in Action. For more information about this program and others, go to www.ideasinactiontv.com. (MUSIC) I'm Jim Glassman. We'll see you next time.
ANNOUNCER:
For more information, visit us at IdeasInActionTV.com. Funding for Ideas in Action is provided by Investor's Business Daily. Every stock market cycle is led by America's never-ending stream of innovative new companies and inventions. Investor's Business Daily helps investors find these new leaders as they emerge. More information is available at investors.com. (MUSIC) This program is a production of Grace Creek Media and the George W. Bush Institute, which are solely responsible for its content.
* * *END OF AUDIO* * *
* * *END OF TRANSCRIPT* * *