0:01

Welcome to the new Books Network. Welcome

0:06

to the People Power Politics podcast,

0:08

brought to you by CEDA, the

0:11

Center for Elections, Democracy, Accountability and

0:13

Representation at the University of Birmingham.

0:19

Hi everyone and thanks for joining us. I

0:22

am Lita Cianetti, Deputy Director of CEDA, and

0:24

I'm going to be your host for this

0:26

episode. Today I am delighted

0:28

to welcome Marlis Gladius, who is Professor

0:30

of International Relations at the University of

0:32

Amsterdam, and author of a new book on

0:34

authoritarian practices in a global age. Welcome

0:37

to the podcast, Marlis. So

0:39

Marlis, your book was published by Oxford

0:41

University Press in 2023, and it's a

0:43

brilliant book, which opens up a new

0:45

way of thinking about authoritarianism through the

0:47

lenses of practice. So the way I

0:49

read the book, and what I find

0:51

really interesting about your work in general,

0:54

is that it challenges our usual way

0:56

of thinking about regimes as coherent entities. So

0:59

we are either in a democracy or in

1:01

an autocracy, and democracies behave in a certain

1:03

way, and autocracies behave in a certain different

1:05

way. So instead

1:07

you show how authoritarian practices are not

1:09

the sole remit of authoritarian regimes, but

1:12

can take place within democracies and can

1:14

be done by actors other than states.

1:17

So you have these five very rich

1:19

empirical chapters, and I suggest the listeners

1:21

go and read your book. Can you

1:24

discuss cases as varied as people with

1:26

migrant background living in democratic

1:28

countries, but facing political repression from

1:30

their country of origin? The practice

1:32

of extraordinary rendition by the CIA,

1:34

the decision making around who gets

1:36

listed or delisted from the Security

1:39

Council terrorist sanction list, the activities

1:41

of multinational mining corporations in the

1:43

Democratic Republic of Congo, and the

1:45

way the Catholic Church dealt with

1:47

evidence of sexual abuse of miners.

1:49

So to get us started, what

1:51

do these things have in common?

1:53

What is an authoritarian practice and

1:56

how do we know One when we see it? Give

2:01

you my. Definition of first

2:03

developed it possible for a terry

2:05

and practices on the it said.

2:07

The reason I wanted to do

2:09

not because I think in our

2:12

Trump national well said his used

2:14

for Nelson A D. Democratizing Well

2:16

do get away from this classification

2:18

of you know you're either an

2:20

authoritarian regime worry a democratic country.

2:22

Sometimes there's been a middle constantly

2:25

that sell I found the hottest

2:27

static a practice and I stay.

2:29

Can this from practice? Theory is

2:31

quite simply. Saturn of action some

2:33

sort of routine behavior that at

2:35

again and again within an organized

2:37

com so it's not a single

2:40

person doing not and authoritarians practice

2:42

is a little bit more complicated.

2:44

I've kind of redefine to authoritarianism

2:46

because when we do to the

2:48

level of states we tend to

2:50

think of what's or terrain is

2:52

and are no free and fair

2:54

elections and all know civil and

2:56

political rights and other than work

2:58

when you take it to all

3:01

the site through practices I sort

3:03

of what our elections there a

3:05

mechanism for accountability were tearing his

3:07

I'm from able to. Return practices

3:09

are kind of access li

3:12

summer time getting accountability Safe

3:14

accountability. Is explaining and just

3:16

the flying policies and actions

3:18

to people over whom you

3:21

have some sort of formal

3:23

power and allowing them to

3:25

have criticism, pass judgment. And

3:27

sometimes in accountability is instead of

3:29

explaining and justifying you being secretive

3:32

and lying, and instead of allowing

3:34

critiques and judgments, you're actually silencing

3:36

people. You do. They say that

3:38

to me a roofer during practices

3:40

I must say a lot of

3:43

people could either the book or

3:45

the article that came before in

3:47

two thousand and eighteen. That kind

3:49

of stakeholders the notion of authoritarians

3:51

practices to get away from regimes

3:54

that then there are a lot

3:56

more loose than. I am about

3:58

what constitutes or. And

4:01

I guess that's okay. I

4:03

don't have ownership over what

4:05

this concept means, but I

4:07

do worry that kind of lays

4:09

academic open to the accusation of,

4:11

oh, you just call anything you

4:13

don't know, unlike authoritarian. That's why

4:15

I do kind of fall to

4:17

a strict definition. You make

4:20

a distinction between authoritarian practices

4:22

and illiberal practices. And maybe is

4:24

that where some of the misuses,

4:26

let's say, of your concept come

4:29

from? So why would we need

4:31

to distinguish between the two? And

4:33

what are liberal practices? Are they

4:35

relevant to your work? Or do

4:37

you define them just to say, okay,

4:39

this is not what I'm looking at?

4:42

So yeah, authoritarian versus illiberal is something

4:44

I think people are really struggling with

4:46

at the moment, as we're trying to

4:48

understand imperfect democracies, de-democratization

4:50

and so on. And people use

4:52

it in different ways. And I

4:55

think part of the problem with

4:57

illiberal is that liberal is

4:59

such an incredibly broad concept that

5:01

then illiberal becomes everything that

5:04

isn't liberal. The way I've

5:06

defined it is illiberal practices

5:09

to me are infringements on

5:11

the kind of dignity and

5:14

rights of the individual, whereas

5:16

authoritarian practices are,

5:18

as I said, about accountability. So the

5:21

one for me happens more at

5:23

the macro level, whereas

5:25

the other is really micro.

5:27

And it's to me, very

5:29

similar to defining violations of

5:31

human rights. The difference is

5:33

that liberal practices can also

5:35

be engaged in by

5:37

not formally the state by other

5:40

power halls. So that's my particular

5:42

distinction. I've chosen to focus on

5:44

authoritarian practices, because these illiberal practices,

5:47

if they are something very similar

5:49

to violations of human rights, I

5:51

think we already understand quite well

5:54

what that means. And even as

5:56

already a lot of literature on non-state

5:58

actors actually abusing human Yeah, and

6:00

I think you make a very convincing

6:03

case to look at accountability as also

6:05

a way to understand contemporary politics better.

6:07

So at the beginning of your book

6:09

you say that, and I'm quoting that,

6:12

that struggles over accountability have become central

6:14

to contemporary politics. And that for me

6:16

raises that question. So are accountability struggles

6:19

new or have they intensified? So and

6:21

if so, if they have intensified, why?

6:23

So in other words, our authoritarian practice

6:26

is increasing and that's why we should

6:28

be looking at them or

6:30

have they always been there

6:32

but we were not paying

6:34

attention, we didn't have the

6:36

framework to understand them as

6:38

authoritarian? Well, I think it's

6:40

somewhere in between. I think

6:42

the vocabulary and the implicit

6:44

understandings of what power relations

6:46

should or should not be,

6:48

can or cannot be, do

6:50

change over the ages. So

6:52

I think you always have

6:55

contestations of power holders, but

6:57

in early modern times that

6:59

could be kind of in a

7:01

very polite way as a request to

7:03

the sovereign or it could be the

7:05

opposite, it might be quite bloody. Then

7:08

I think from the 19th century,

7:10

more revolutionary vocabulary

7:13

comes with such requests,

7:15

with such contestation, with

7:17

Marxist, communist, anarchist vocabulary behind

7:20

it. And I think in

7:22

the late 20th century as

7:25

democratic norms have really gone

7:27

into even non-democratic societies,

7:30

I think there is much

7:32

more of an understanding of

7:34

the notion that power holders

7:36

of any kind should be

7:38

explaining and justifying their behavior

7:40

to us. So in that

7:42

sense, I think accountability demands

7:44

in that sense, with that

7:46

vocabulary, you need to explain

7:48

and justify that that I

7:50

think is new and that

7:52

has really taken flight maybe

7:54

since the 1970s or the

7:56

1990s, it's difficult to pinpoint

7:58

it very quickly. I think that

8:00

your focus on practices poses

8:03

a particular challenge. Regime

8:05

studies in general, particularly to those

8:07

of us who study democratic regimes,

8:09

who might be less used to

8:11

think in terms of authoritarianism in

8:13

a way. Because once you start

8:15

looking for authoritarian practices, they're everywhere,

8:17

even if you define them as

8:19

accountability sabotage. So you don't kind

8:21

of blur them into anything we

8:23

don't like, right? So it's not

8:25

only governments, but also non-state institutions,

8:27

private institutions that shape many citizens'

8:29

lives, our workplaces, private corporations,

8:31

pretty much all power holders in

8:33

any aspect of our social life

8:35

are liable to at least try

8:38

to evade or sometimes actively suppress

8:40

accountability. And so thinking about this

8:42

in a context in which we

8:44

are worrying about the decline of

8:46

democracy as a regime, how should

8:49

we understand the proliferation of authoritarian

8:51

practices? Are they a prelude to

8:53

open attacks to democratic institutions? Or

8:55

should we see them more as

8:57

an alternative way in which democracy

9:00

is perverted or eroded, even

9:02

without visible institutional change? I

9:04

think the notion of preludes

9:07

or perverts at this time,

9:10

you still kind of imply that

9:12

first we have a perfect democracy,

9:14

and then these perversions

9:17

creep into it. Whereas

9:19

I think we should recognize that

9:21

even in our own society, there

9:24

has never been perfect democracy at

9:26

the societal level of our institutions,

9:28

really. And I don't even want

9:30

to say democratize, because I think

9:32

that's even a heavier concept, but

9:35

kind of really completely internalized in

9:37

seeing the notion of accountability. Certainly,

9:39

if I think of my own

9:41

university context, in the 1960s, 70s,

9:46

there's a real protest culture and students

9:48

had an enormous amount of power.

9:50

And since then, that's been clawed

9:53

back and there's kind of less

9:55

accountability at our level. So I

9:57

prefer to talk of currents or...

10:00

The Rom authoritarians them rather than

10:02

this notion as first we have

10:04

democracy, then we are. So.

10:06

You don't see a work speaking to

10:09

their out there what they say, sen

10:11

Att literature or teasing that that opposition

10:13

leaders sir in general makes the mistake

10:16

of not understanding what the starting point

10:18

is and then maybe overstate. See.

10:20

A sense of democratic regression? Yeah,

10:23

I think it would be the

10:25

last. The remainder is the democratisation

10:27

compared. they're all I think more

10:29

threats to democracy now than there

10:31

were twenty or thirty years ago.

10:33

but on build around may be

10:36

other elements in society have gone

10:38

kind of in the opposite direction

10:40

and I'm thinking for instance now

10:42

or school purse accountability which is

10:44

think it's much more of a

10:46

societal norm. so I don't think

10:48

the democratisation is amiss. It's absolutely.

10:51

There, but it's starting point for

10:53

version of purity. I think it's

10:55

a little. Bit problematic so we.

10:58

Need to somehow develops measures if

11:00

you know. is it getting worse

11:02

and I think the let your

11:04

tone the democratic nation. It tends

11:07

to focus very much on the

11:09

states and state institutions. thought this

11:11

would my practices approach can do

11:13

the second more sociological perks. nothing

11:16

and that the degree to which

11:18

are institutions or democratic is something

11:20

to do with democratic culture our

11:22

culture as of yet. So let's

11:25

just to push you. And they

11:27

said last. Time. So how many

11:29

a three time fact is that?

11:31

Too many if we still accepted

11:33

the our democracies and there are

11:35

autocracies but that you have all

11:37

this every day and practice actually

11:39

permeating the wing which even democratic

11:41

institutions work and actors playing within

11:43

democrats fields work at what point

11:45

did after they in practice accumulates

11:48

so much that accountability becomes a

11:50

som and we should talk about

11:52

that the Mci regime as something

11:54

else. Yes, I don't think we

11:56

can say twenty seven is too many. I

11:58

didn't think I don't have answers. You

12:00

were looking for either. I think

12:02

one of the things that help

12:05

a measure of this is the

12:07

extent to which something appear relatively

12:09

isolated and shocking and said that.

12:14

Part of my definition. and then if

12:17

and when such a thing comes out,

12:19

it's become the town. Though this may

12:21

be parliamentary inquiry is something that some

12:24

for the self rectifying mechanism if not,

12:26

is still in place, then maybe you

12:28

don't need to be so. Worried at

12:30

the point that it kind of big

12:33

hand. Over it's it's going

12:35

to population know this is the way

12:37

it is. It's this kind of some

12:40

sort of permanence unacceptability to read the

12:42

direction where it becomes too much as

12:44

they were, but I still think that

12:47

can sometimes be the case in some

12:49

areas and loathing others said. he gave

12:51

just one example. I think the extent

12:53

to which notice private corporations with those

12:56

who the state. Invades our privacy

12:58

at the digital level the extent

13:00

to which is nice secret services

13:02

who were up our data to

13:04

find out would have some of

13:06

us might be terrorists. I think

13:08

that's. Another aspect where most

13:11

Western democracies. Of beyond the

13:13

line of would icing his democratic and

13:15

accountable but it doesn't turn them into

13:17

with hurting machine so he of months

13:19

already more than one corporate actor so

13:22

I wanted to us something about that.

13:24

You have recently published an article in

13:26

which she take these other damn practices

13:29

lands at say a transnational corporations It's

13:31

entitled one hundred Years of Authoritarian Practices

13:33

United Fruit and it's banana plantation workers

13:35

and the we can burning to.to call

13:38

in our episode now and again it's

13:40

and other and of brilliant. Piece of

13:42

work and in the article his so

13:45

called multinational corporations not only to deal

13:47

with authoritarian regime that may help them

13:49

survive which is something that seemed more

13:51

thoroughly the same investigated or they themselves

13:54

can be the ones that directly engage

13:56

in authoritarian practices I can be to

13:58

drive as of authoritarian. And in

14:00

fact interestingly the term Banana Republic of

14:03

which is now of the use very

14:05

loosely to mean a country with then

14:07

incompetent government are useless. Governments originally meant

14:09

a country whose economy was so dependent

14:12

on banana plantations that that politics with

14:14

pretty much controlled by the corporations that

14:16

own does plantations and seen a weight

14:18

and of in their original you that

14:20

the term the agency of corporations was

14:23

very much present than it's been lost

14:25

in the usage or not if we

14:27

take the potential process for corporations to

14:29

be. A three here and agents.

14:31

They have power over our economic

14:34

lives and political lives in many

14:36

places and then add to it

14:38

to the unprecedented capital accumulation that

14:40

we are witnessing globally. That puts

14:42

a certain companies in Southern individuals

14:45

outside of the reach of the

14:47

states and of democratic institutions. What

14:49

does this mean for the prospects

14:51

of building and maintaining democratic accountability

14:54

like a weed? Do what they

14:56

think. The first thing to say

14:58

is the extent to which corporations.

15:00

Including multinational corporations aren't going

15:03

to be engaging and author

15:05

a tear in practices is

15:07

get is very variable and.depends

15:09

I think the launch li

15:12

own the incentives who wanting

15:14

in some way to engage

15:16

with routine practices and I've

15:18

kind of listed a bunch

15:21

of very likely incentives. If

15:23

your business model depends on

15:25

she thirty dangerous labor that

15:28

could be an incentive is.

15:30

A year in the extractive industries

15:32

and you kind of very dependent

15:34

on very specific lander you just

15:36

need to get your hands will

15:38

not sure likely to need to

15:40

be doing business in order to

15:42

resume. so does this. A bunch

15:44

of skirt conditions are going to

15:47

make the more likely filtering the

15:49

scope conditions that are going to

15:51

make it less likely serves his

15:53

new. depend for instance on on

15:55

very highly educated the motivated professionals

15:57

for a business that my make

16:00

it less likely or for some

16:02

reason you have a long standing

16:04

company culture of transparency, you're going

16:07

to be less likely to engage

16:09

in authoritarian practices. So that I

16:11

think is the first thing to

16:14

say. Then secondly, I think capital

16:16

accumulation kind of, we know it

16:18

correlates negatively with, and then I

16:20

go back to regime level, levels

16:23

of democracy, but we

16:25

don't understand the mechanisms for

16:27

that very well yet. So

16:29

whether it is the bigger the

16:32

company, the nastier, for instance, or

16:34

whether it's levels of income inequality,

16:36

the driver there for the democratization,

16:39

we don't really know very well

16:41

what is going on there. And

16:43

I think we just need a

16:46

lot of more research. What strikes

16:48

me is that multinational corporations, they

16:50

operate at a global level by

16:53

definition, but they would encounter different

16:55

contexts. And so what you say

16:57

in the article, that they have,

17:00

that you show how United Fruit have adapted

17:02

their, the ways in which they operated

17:05

and also the kind of authoritarian

17:07

practices that they use in different

17:09

contexts over time also applies over

17:11

geography in the sense that the

17:14

same multinational corporation might have very

17:16

different practices in different places. So

17:18

does that mean that the regime

17:20

intended as the kind of state

17:22

bound unit makes a difference in

17:24

that sense that multinational corporations would

17:27

operate in specific ways in democracies

17:29

and in different ways in autocracies

17:31

or there are other dimensions that

17:33

make a difference. So there'll be

17:35

some portions of the population that

17:37

will be at the kind of

17:39

receiving end of authoritarian practices also

17:41

within democracies more than other portions

17:43

of the population. Yeah, so I

17:45

think there's a lot more to

17:47

it. So yeah, autocracy, democracy does

17:49

make some difference, but precisely in

17:51

that United Fruit article, I looked

17:53

at a plantation that was kind

17:55

of spread across the border between

17:57

Costa Rica and Panama. And so

18:00

Most of the period Costa Rica was

18:02

a formal democracy and Panama was not

18:04

and it didn't seem to make that

18:07

much difference to the practices. Another thing

18:09

that's going to make a lot of

18:11

difference is whether the product in question

18:14

is close to consumers and

18:16

has a lot of value to

18:18

consumers. At some point we got

18:20

a demand for bananas that should

18:23

be more ecologically produced but also

18:25

workers rights should be better

18:27

protected. You've got premium bananas that they

18:30

met those specifications, supply and demand but

18:32

it didn't work so well for bananas

18:34

because it turned out people still want

18:37

most people want their bananas to be

18:39

relatively cheap. When it comes to diamonds

18:41

it seems to have a kind of

18:44

much stronger mechanism because it's such a

18:46

high value added to product so there's

18:48

a lot more going on than in

18:50

which country they operate. Yeah so this

18:53

to put it crudely about capitalism. You

18:55

don't use the word a

18:57

lot but there is a

19:00

big literature about the relationship

19:02

between capitalism and democracy and

19:04

potential conflicts between the two.

19:06

Is this about how capitalism

19:08

has developed and it's changing

19:10

and what effect it has

19:12

on the accountability and possibilities

19:14

for new actors or growing

19:16

actors, corporations to frustrate accountability

19:18

for profit motives or is

19:20

it not such a systemic

19:22

problem? I think some authors

19:24

treat it in that manner. I

19:27

take a slightly different approach.

19:29

I'm interested in the corporation as

19:31

an organizational environment so that's why

19:34

it is in the same book

19:36

with the Catholic Church and Secret

19:38

Services to kind of get more

19:41

of an empirical operationalization of this

19:43

notion of authoritarian practices in an

19:46

organized context. What does that context

19:48

mean? How do employees

19:51

in a firm imbibe certain

19:53

cultures and ideas about

19:55

appropriate behavior? So I'm less

20:00

corporation are standing for

20:02

capitalism with a capital C. Of

20:04

course, corporations are different because they

20:06

have a profit motive, but there's

20:08

also a lot of

20:10

literature that says corporations are more

20:13

than just profit maximizers. And I

20:15

personally find them most interested in

20:17

their organizational capacity. Yeah, I

20:20

think that works very, very

20:22

well also to make this

20:24

comparison. They at first, I

20:26

think wild, but then they

20:28

bring home really how different

20:30

kinds of actors that operate

20:33

in different, very different kinds

20:35

of also territorial contexts and

20:37

territorial articulations can pervert accountability.

20:39

And just to close, I'd

20:41

like you to give an

20:43

example of silencing secrecy and

20:46

subterfuge, which are three authoritarian

20:48

practices that you discuss, but

20:50

with in mind the idea that people

20:52

might want to know how to recognize

20:54

them and how to fight against them.

20:57

So what are silencing secrets in subterfuge

20:59

and how should we respond to them?

21:01

And how should we try and recognize

21:04

them and push back? Let

21:06

me give you an example from

21:08

my own country, the Netherlands. One of

21:10

the kind of big state institutions

21:12

here that has been through a

21:15

major scandal in recent years is

21:17

actually the tax office. And as

21:19

is often the case with authoritarian

21:21

practices, it begins with

21:23

a behavior that is illegal

21:25

or at least frowned upon.

21:28

And here the tax office

21:30

in relation to a particular

21:32

tax break in benefits, child

21:34

benefits or rather benefits rebates

21:36

for childcare, they were

21:38

looking for fraud and they were

21:41

really engaging in ethnic profiling as

21:43

they were doing so. You know,

21:45

people with exotic surnames or who

21:47

were born outside the country were

21:49

really kind of modest and treated

21:51

very harshly. That in itself could

21:53

be an illiberal practice. But then

21:56

on top of that, when it

21:58

become uncovered, they are losing. using

22:00

documents, destroying documents, the Ministry of

22:02

Finance, lies about this in Parliament,

22:05

and there's also silencing. So

22:07

some of the whistleblowers who brought

22:09

this out in the open were

22:11

actually suspended by the tax office.

22:14

So that combination was a lot

22:16

more secrecy than this information that

22:19

was silencing, but it was also

22:21

silencing. That would be kind of

22:23

a very concrete example of, oh, you

22:25

see that combination. But that's still at

22:28

a level of national state institutions.

22:30

It might also be that your

22:32

child attends a boarding school. We

22:34

know because boarding schools are quite

22:36

closed organizations, there can be abusive

22:39

practices there, it might be bullying.

22:41

And if you see that a

22:43

complaint is then being treated by

22:45

evasion, by lies, but also by

22:47

somehow silencing the people who are

22:49

first bringing it up, that's when

22:51

alarm bells should start to ring.

22:53

Yeah, that's very interesting. There is

22:55

a book by Sarah Ahmed where

22:57

she discussed the complaints, and she says

23:00

that complaints are the ways of knowing

23:02

institutions. Once you lodge a complaint, you

23:04

become the problem, you see how the

23:06

institution operates. So in a way, she's

23:09

not talking about authoritarianism, but points to

23:11

the same kinds of ways in which

23:13

institutions work. And that, to me, also

23:15

points to the importance of looking at

23:18

institutions and organizations as institutions and organizations.

23:20

So where will you study authoritarian practices

23:22

take you next? So are you looking

23:24

to look at different kinds of authoritarian

23:27

practices now by different actors?

23:29

Or what are you working

23:31

on now that uses this

23:33

framework? I'm actually kind of

23:35

switching topic a little bit,

23:37

and engaging in some new

23:39

research that is not directly

23:41

about authoritarian practices, although I'm

23:43

certainly expecting to find them. As

23:46

I already mentioned, it seems

23:49

to be the case, not

23:51

just that there's a virtuous

23:53

cycle between democratization and economic

23:55

equality, but also between the

23:58

democratization and increasing within. country

24:00

inequality. So I've become very

24:03

interested in inequality and specifically

24:05

the kind of very top

24:07

of the wealth distribution, the

24:09

super rich. So I'm beginning

24:12

to do some research on the

24:15

tax politics of the super rich,

24:17

which is not just whether they

24:19

pay their taxes, it's about whether

24:21

they pay money to lobbying organizations,

24:23

whether they themselves engage in anti-tide

24:25

rhetoric, whether they move to Monaco

24:28

and so on and so forth.

24:30

So that is my new research,

24:32

which is still something to

24:34

do with accountability issues, but

24:36

it's also taking me in a

24:38

new direction. That's very fascinating and

24:40

also to me kind of brings

24:43

again this transnational importance of the

24:45

transnational dimension, right? Because you have

24:47

this transnational infrastructure for wealth management,

24:49

it's called, that probably comes into

24:52

the picture there. And it's got

24:54

also to do with evading accountability,

24:56

would you say? Yeah, but I

24:59

think there's a lot more secrecy

25:01

and disinformation than there is

25:03

silencing. There's less of the kind

25:05

of overt repression in new research

25:08

design. So thank you. We come to

25:10

the end of our podcast and

25:12

I really want to thank you, Marlies,

25:14

for joining the People Power Politics podcast

25:16

and for talking to us about authoritarian

25:19

practices and about your new exciting work.

25:21

So hopefully we'll have you again in

25:23

a few months or a year no

25:26

more about how that's going. I really

25:28

want to encourage the listeners to read

25:30

your work, which I think fundamentally challenges

25:32

the way we tend to think of

25:34

political regimes as self-contained, coherent units and

25:36

the most important units to think about

25:38

political reality and instead brings in

25:40

all these contradictions, non-state actors, transnational

25:43

dimensions that are really, really, important

25:45

to shaping contemporary political life. So

25:47

thank you very much. I

25:50

am Lita Channiti, Deputy Director of SIDA

25:52

and the host of this People Power

25:54

Politics podcast episode. I've been talking to

25:56

Marlies Glasses, Professor of International Relations at

25:58

the University of Amsterdam. Thank you.

26:32

Thank you.