📰 [The Voting Wars of the 21st Century — Part 5]Whose Side Are We On?
🧭 Where Is Our Technology Really Headed?
South Korea has proudly branded itself as an exporter of democratic technology.
Electronic ballot counters, early voting systems, and election management solutions have been sent to developing countries.
Through A-WEB, an international body founded in Korea, electoral cooperation networks now span dozens of nations.
As a member of the free world, we have claimed to promote transparent and fair elections with pride.
But one question needs to be asked:
“Whose regimes are we truly supporting with the technology we export?”
🧩 The Gap Between Rhetoric and Reality
South Korea emphasizes its role in the democratic camp through its strategic alliance with the U.S., participation in Democracy Summits, and alignment with Indo-Pacific strategies.
This security framework is clearly tied to the United States.
📌 Fact-Based Indicators:
- Participated in two consecutive U.S.-led Democracy Summits (2021–2023)
- Expanded ROK-U.S. joint military drills
- Public support for Indo-Pacific strategies and statements countering China
Yet in practice, many of the countries that receive Korea’s election technologies are:
- Part of China’s Belt and Road Initiative (BRI)
- Governed by authoritarian regimes
Countries like DR Congo, Paraguay, Cambodia, Bangladesh, Kyrgyzstan, and Zambia
have all faced allegations of electoral fraud, media suppression, and long-term authoritarian rule.
🔗 We Say “Democracy” — But Do We Deliver It?
This contradiction is hard to ignore.
We claim to spread democracy —
but how deeply have we examined the possibility that our technology is being used to consolidate authoritarian power?
📌 International media coverage:
“Korean electronic voting systems have allegedly been used in some countries as tools for political entrenchment.”
— The Guardian, DW, Human Rights Watch, among others
👉 The phrase “technology is neutral” is far too convenient.
If we export tools in the name of democracy, we must also bear responsibility for how they are used.
🧩 What Standards Guide Our Choices?
Too often, we have judged technology and diplomacy through the lens of “national interest”.
Terms like “balanced diplomacy,” “pragmatic diplomacy,” and “economic security” are used to justify which values we prioritize and which injustices we ignore.
If the recipients of our systems suppress the press, hide ballot boxes, and silence dissent,
can we really say that we bear no responsibility?
🧩 Who Do the People Trust?
The people express democracy through voting —
but the systems that store, transport, count, and record those votes — whose hands are they in?
Elections are not only a domestic affair.
They are a reflection of a nation’s sovereign integrity.
If foreign technologies, outsourced operators, or opaque contracts are involved,
we must ask ourselves:
“Are we truly casting a free vote?”
“Who is counting it — and through what system?”
🧩 In Closing
We speak of liberty,
we export democracy,
and we showcase our technology.
But in reality —
We chant “democracy” while practicing security, silence, avoidance, and complacency.
Do we truly want democracy?
Maybe democracy begins with cold skepticism,
with the courage to criticize what’s wrong,
and the strength to talk about what we’ve long ignored.