Freedom House 79 to 100, on a 0–100 scale where 0 represents the least access to political rights and civil liberties. One country, Ukraine, is rated Partly Free, and the remaining two, Thailand and Turkey, are Not Free. The set includes some of the wealthiest countries in the world as well as some that are less economically developed. Two of the states, Thailand and Turkey, not only host victims of transnational repression but are also perpetrators themselves. All of these factors are important for the countries’ ability and political willingness to build responses to transnational repression. Their experiences offer illustrative examples of policies and practices that can facilitate or prevent extraterritorial violence. Freedom House research identified security, migration, and foreign policy factors that are important for countering transnational repression: • Security policy: Inclusive national security frameworks, awareness among law enforcement and intelligence personnel, and proactive protection for targeted individuals. • Migration policy: Permanent forms of protection for refugees and consideration of transnational repression within asylum review processes. • Foreign policy: Mechanisms for holding both individuals and governments accountable for transnational repression. Host countries can help protect vulnerable people by adopting policies and practices that will increase their resistance to and accountability for transnational repression. Ultimately, however, a global threat to human rights requires a global response. Lasting security for exiles and diasporas depends not only on individual action by governments to fortify their domestic protections, but also on a coordinated, multilateral campaign to counter the spread of authoritarianism. The challenge of host-state co-optation The tactics of transnational repression are difficult to counter because they have developed in tandem with the growing interconnectedness of the post–Cold War international order, in which states seek ever more seamless cooperation on issues of trade and security. Perpetrators of transnational repression have also exploited the vulnerability and unpreparedness of host countries’ domestic institutions, taking advantage of their courts, immigration systems, and security agencies. More than 60 percent of the cases of physical transnational repression recorded by Freedom House involve the origin state co-opting the host country’s government, most commonly leading to the detention and unlawful deportation of a targeted individual.42 By leveraging legitimate concerns about terrorism and extremism, autocrats are able to enlist host states in their suppression of dissent. Perpetrators of transnational repression have exploited the vulnerability and unpreparedness of host countries’ domestic institutions. Fifty-three percent of the physical cases of transnational repression documented by Freedom House featured accusations of terrorism.43 In January 2022, Serbian police handed over Ahmed Jaafar Mohamed Ali to officials from Bahrain who were waiting for him on an airport tarmac in Belgrade. Ali, a labor activist, is at risk of torture and life imprisonment in his homeland.44 He is accused of terrorismrelated offenses and was detained in Serbia based on a Red Notice issued by Interpol. Human rights groups and the United Nations have noted that the Bahraini government uses torture to extract confessions and has carried out executions after unfair trials.45 Nevertheless, Ali was unable to challenge Bahraini authorities’ allegations or stop his extradition from Serbia. Authoritarian states have also successfully influenced asylum processes in other countries to make sure that critics cannot find refuge. In 2020, Austrian authorities rejected the asylum application of Hizbullo Shovalizoda, a Tajikistani activist, based on the Tajikistani government’s assertion that he was a member of a banned extremist political party.46 The Supreme Court of Austria later invalidated the extradition on the grounds that migration officials had failed to take into account the use of torture in Tajikistan’s judicial system while examining the case. The ruling came too late for Shovalizoda, who had already been returned to Tajikistan and sentenced to 20 years in prison after a trial held behind closed doors. At times, the co-optation of host state agencies for the purposes of transnational repression is nearly indistinguishable from more mundane forms of security cooperation. In the past, Tanzanian police have worked with freedomhouse.org 11