An SOS From American Democracy

Why the Global Democratic Community Must Respond Before It’s Too Late

Photo by Miquel Parera on Unsplash

The international distress signal SOS doesn't actually stand for “Save Our Ship” or “Save Our Souls,” though these folk etymologies capture its desperate essence. It was chosen for its simplicity in Morse code: three dots, three dashes, three dots. A pattern so distinctive that even those unfamiliar with the code could recognize it, transmit it, and respond to it.

Today, American democracy is transmitting an unmistakable SOS. The signal isn't coming from government buildings or official channels—those have largely been captured. It's coming from journalists documenting constitutional violations, judges issuing orders that go unenforced, civil servants purged for following the law, and ordinary citizens watching their democracy transform into something unrecognizable.

As someone who has dedicated a significant portion of my life to promoting democracy worldwide, I find myself in the unexpected position of sending this distress call rather than answering it. The nation that once stood as democracy's most powerful advocate now requires the world's democratic forces to rally to its defense.

This isn't American exceptionalism or special pleading. It's the recognition of an essential truth: When the world's oldest continuous constitutional democracy begins to collapse, the shock waves will destabilize democratic systems everywhere. The fall of American democracy would represent more than the loss of one nation's self-governance—it would mark a historic inflection point in the global retreat of liberal democratic values.

Liberal democrats in Europe, Canada, Australia, Japan, South Korea, and beyond must recognize that America's democratic crisis is their crisis too. Not just out of solidarity or reciprocity for past American support, but out of enlightened self-interest. The international architecture that protects democratic nations rests significantly on American power and commitment. When that commitment wavers—when America transforms from democracy's defender to its subverter—the entire structure weakens.

The Betrayal of Solidarity

Photo by Vasyl Dizhak on Unsplash

Perhaps the most profoundly disturbing aspect of this moment is witnessing how quickly many international democracy advocates have chosen strategic silence over principled solidarity. I've watched with growing dismay as colleagues in the global democracy movement—people who once passionately defended democratic principles regardless of geopolitical convenience—now carefully calibrate their responses to avoid offending the current administration.

I will not name names—at least not yet. But I must acknowledge the bitter reality: Many who built their careers advocating for democracy abroad are now conspicuously silent as American democracy faces systematic dismantling. Their calculations are transparent if unspoken: Preserving access, funding, and institutional relationships takes precedence over speaking plainly about democratic erosion in America.

This failure of solidarity reveals something profound about the state of global democracy advocacy. For too many, democracy promotion was never truly about universal principles but about strategic interests and institutional survival. When defending democracy required confronting American power rather than channeling it, their commitment proved remarkably flexible.

The silence is deafening. The tepid statements carefully crafted to acknowledge “concerns” while avoiding actual confrontation with authoritarian actions. The private conversations expressing alarm followed by public accommodation to the new reality. The endless strategic calculations about what criticisms might be “productive” versus what might jeopardize funding or relationships.

For American democracy activists working against tremendous odds to preserve constitutional governance, this abandonment by international allies is more than disappointing—it's clarifying. It reveals that much of what presented itself as principled democracy advocacy was actually aligned-interest opportunism, willing to defend democratic principles only when convenient and costless.

The Debt That Must Now Be Repaid

Photo by Nicole Geri on Unsplash

For decades, American diplomats, civil society organizations, and democracy activists have supported democratic movements worldwide. From the Marshall Plan's reconstruction of democratic Europe to the post-Cold War transitions in Eastern Europe; from funding electoral monitoring in emerging democracies to supporting civil society organizations in countries struggling against authoritarian rule—American commitment to democratic development globally has been substantial, if imperfect.

This isn't to whitewash America's contradictory history of also supporting dictatorships when geopolitically convenient, or to ignore its own domestic democratic shortcomings. But the fact remains: When democracies have been threatened, America has often provided crucial support—not just through government channels but through its foundations, universities, and civil society.

Now, in a historical reversal few anticipated, American democracy itself requires similar support. The debt incurred by democracies that benefited from American solidarity must now be repaid—not out of obligation alone, but out of recognition that democracy's defense requires mutual support across national boundaries.

This isn't foreign interference; it's democratic solidarity. Just as Americans supporting Polish labor activists in the 1980s weren't “interfering” in Poland but standing with fellow democrats against authoritarianism, foreign democrats supporting American civil society today aren't interfering in America but helping preserve a system under threat.

The Domino Effect No One Wants to Acknowledge

Photo by Pyae Sone Htun on Unsplash

When the Trump administration openly defies unanimous Supreme Court rulings, purges career civil servants to replace them with loyalists, weaponizes law enforcement against political opponents, and transforms government agencies into extensions of private interests—the effects extend far beyond American borders.

Autocrats worldwide are watching closely. When American power aligns with autocratic methods rather than democratic principles, it creates a permission structure for democratic backsliding globally. Each unanswered violation of democratic norms in America emboldens similar violations elsewhere.

We can already see this effect taking shape. The language of “deep state” purges, once associated with authoritarian regimes, has entered mainstream American discourse. The rejection of judicial oversight, the personalization of state power, the transformation of government into a mechanism for personal enrichment—these authoritarian tactics gain global legitimacy when practiced by the world's most powerful democracy.

This isn't just theoretical. Democracy researchers have documented how authoritarian innovations spread across borders, with successful tactics in one country quickly adopted by would-be autocrats elsewhere. When American democracy falters, the democratic recession already underway globally will accelerate dramatically.

For international democracy advocates now calculating how to maintain access and funding under an increasingly authoritarian American administration, this math should be sobering. Whatever short-term gains might come from accommodation will be dwarfed by the long-term consequences of a globalized democratic collapse triggered by American authoritarian consolidation.

The True Test of Principles

Photo by Amit Jain on Unsplash

The current moment represents the defining test for the global democracy movement. It reveals whether our commitment to democratic principles extends beyond strategic convenience to genuine moral conviction. It exposes whether we truly believe in universal democratic values or merely in their instrumental utility.

For those who have worked alongside American democracy advocates over decades—who have received American support, funding, training, and solidarity—the question is stark: Was that relationship based on shared principles or merely aligned interests? If the former, then reciprocal solidarity in America's moment of democratic crisis should be automatic. If the latter, then the democratic project itself has been hollow from the start.

I say this not out of bitterness, though I cannot deny feeling betrayed by international colleagues whose careers were built on American democratic support but who now calculate that their interests lie in accommodation rather than solidarity. I say it because naming this failure is the first step toward addressing it.

The democratic project has always claimed universality—the belief that self-governance and constitutional constraint on power represent universal human aspirations rather than Western preferences. If that claim is to remain credible, then democratic solidarity must flow in all directions, including toward America in its moment of democratic crisis.

What Can—and Must—Be Done

Photo by Jamie Street on Unsplash

The looming question is what liberal democrats worldwide can actually do in the face of American democratic collapse. While I don't pretend to offer a comprehensive strategy, several avenues of support must be urgently pursued:

1. Moral Clarity Before Strategic Calculation

Before specific actions, what's needed is moral clarity—the willingness to speak plainly about democratic violations regardless of who perpetrates them. The strategic calculations about access and influence that currently paralyze many international democracy advocates must be set aside in favor of consistent, principled stances.

2. Diplomatic Pressure and Clear Messaging

Foreign democratic leaders must abandon diplomatic niceties when fundamental democratic norms are violated. While maintaining necessary diplomatic relations, they should clearly communicate that certain actions—defying court orders, targeting political opponents, undermining electoral integrity—place leaders outside the community of democratic nations.

3. Support for American Civil Society

Just as America has funded civil society organizations abroad, foreign democracies should now support American organizations defending democracy, voting rights, press freedom, and the rule of law. This includes financial support, institutional partnerships, and amplifying the voices of American democracy defenders.

4. Media Partnerships and Information Sharing

As American media comes under increasing pressure, partnerships with international news organizations become crucial. Joint investigations, resource sharing, and mutual support can help maintain the information infrastructure democracy requires.

5. Election Monitoring and Validation

The 2024 election faced unprecedented challenges to its legitimacy. Future elections will likely face even greater threats. International election observers—once primarily deployed to emerging democracies—must now turn their attention to American elections, providing independent validation of results and documenting irregularities.

6. Economic and Business Pressure

Foreign companies and investors have significant leverage through their business decisions. They should make clear that undermining democratic institutions creates an unstable business environment and adjust investment accordingly. This isn't about punishing America, but about creating economic incentives for democratic adherence.

7. Academic and Intellectual Exchange

As academic freedom comes under threat in America, foreign universities and research institutions should create partnerships that preserve intellectual independence. Visiting fellowships, joint research projects, and educational exchanges can maintain space for free inquiry when domestic spaces contract.

These measures may seem unprecedented—and they are. But so is the situation we face. Never before has American democracy confronted such systematic internal subversion combined with such international consequences.

The Moral Imperative Beyond Strategy

Beyond strategic calculations lies a simpler moral truth: Democracy requires solidarity across borders. When Czechs or Poles or Koreans fought for democratic rights, Americans stood with them not just because it served American interests, but because their struggle was part of a universal human aspiration toward self-governance.

Now, as Americans fight to preserve democratic governance, they deserve similar solidarity. Not because America is exceptional or entitled to special treatment, but because it isn't—because the American struggle for democratic preservation is part of the same global struggle that has played out across continents and centuries.

This solidarity doesn't mean endorsing every aspect of American society or policy. It means recognizing that the core democratic principles being undermined—judicial independence, free elections, civil service integrity, peaceful transfers of power—are universal values worth defending regardless of where they're threatened.

The SOS Must Be Answered

Photo by alesia on Unsplash

The SOS signal was designed to cut through linguistic and national barriers—to create a universal call for help that transcended differences. Today's call from American democracy requires a similar response—one that recognizes that democratic solidarity transcends nationalism, that the defense of liberal democratic values knows no borders.

For foreign democrats hesitant to “interfere” in American affairs, consider this: If you were on a ship watching another vessel sink, would you hesitate to respond to their distress signal because it might constitute “interference”? Of course not. You would recognize the humanitarian imperative transcends normal boundaries of jurisdiction.

So too with democracy. When a democratic system faces existential threat, the normal boundaries of non-interference yield to the more fundamental imperative of democratic solidarity.

For those international democracy advocates now calculating how to preserve their access, funding, and relationships with the current administration—I ask you to consider the deeper question: If principled solidarity fails when it becomes inconvenient, was it ever truly solidarity at all? If democratic values apply only when strategically advantageous, were they ever truly values?

As I write this from within an America experiencing democratic erosion in real time, I do so not as a citizen seeking special treatment for my country, but as a democrat seeking solidarity from fellow democrats. The SOS signal from American democracy is clear and urgent. The only question that remains is whether those who hear it will respond in time—or whether their silence will stand as the epitaph for a global democratic project that collapsed when its universal claims were put to the test.

Two plus two equals four. There are twenty-four hours in a day. And no democracy, however powerful, can survive alone when its foundations are under systematic assault. The center must be held—not because it is easy, but because it is ours to hold. And in this moment, “ours” must expand beyond American borders to encompass all who value democratic governance and the rule of law.

The ship is taking on water. The distress signal has been sent. Will you answer?