DEFENDING DEMOCRACY IN EXILE Policy Responses to Transnational Repression Countering Digital Transnational Repression In New Delhi, an opposition Congress party worker wearing a mask of Amit Shah (India’s home minister) protests the Indian government’s use of military-grade spyware to monitor political opponents, journalists, and activists. Photo credit: Qadri/AP via Shutterstock. W hile assassinations and renditions garner the most attention, digital forms of transnational repression are vastly more common. Digital technology facilitates crossborder communication and civic participation among exile and diaspora communities, creating channels of dissent that challenge those in power in the origin state. Nondemocratic governments have responded by searching for ways to use the same technology to silence critical voices. Digital attacks require minimal resources, making them a low-cost and high-reward means of targeting people abroad. 26 @FreedomHouse The menu of tactics for digital transnational repression includes but is not limited to the deployment of spyware, social media monitoring, online smear campaigns and harassment, and reporting dissidents’ posts to social media platforms in an effort to have them removed. Governments employ a range of sophisticated technologies and exploit popular global platforms. Developing effective countermeasures is difficult because the repressive tactics are both ubiquitous and frequently opaque. Strong digital hygiene practices among users can serve as a first line of defense, but governments and technology companies should play a more robust role in providing protection for at-risk individuals and groups. The advantages of digital tactics Compared with many forms of physical transnational repression, digital attacks require minimal resources, making them a low-cost and high-reward means of targeting people #TransnationalRepression