#7 Gray Area

The recent elections in Czechia and Moldova have once again revealed the fragile balance of European democracy. As Russia’s interference grows stronger, the EU’s reflex to “protect democracy” is intensifying, yet leaders who are skeptical of the European idea are gaining ground. This picture shows that while institutions continue to function, the spirit of politics has become confined within a narrow framework of security and stability.

In the recent elections in Czechia, billionaire businessman and former prime minister Andrej Babis won 34.5 percent of the vote and secured 80 of the 200 seats in parliament . His campaign, which used the slogan “Czechia First,” echoing Donald Trump’s “America First,” signals a strengthening of more populist anti-EU and more distant attitudes toward Ukraine in Czech politics.

Babis’s party ANO is expected to form a coalition with other right-wing parties that passed the electoral threshold, including the Motorists for Themselves, which opposes environmental policies, and the Freedom and Direct Democracy Party led by Japanese-born Tomio Okamura, which is anti-immigration. Moreover, ANO is also a member of the “Patriots for Europe” group in the European Parliament, which defends national sovereignty against the EU and includes Hungary’s Prime Minister Viktor Orban .

On the other hand, Moldova’s elections illustrate how democracy in Europe is increasingly becoming a fragile regime squeezed between external threats and internal control mechanisms. In the vote, the pro-European PAS won approximately 50 percent of the vote and declared victory, while the pro-Russian bloc received only 24 percent. However, the decisive factor was the diaspora, which accounted for 17.5 percent of the votes. Without diaspora support, PAS’s vote share would have been around 44 percent, insufficient for a majority. Meanwhile, Russia, which hosts about a quarter of Moldova’s diaspora, allowed only two polling stations to be set up for Moldovans living there, reigniting debates about whether the popular will in Europe is being designed within geographic and political boundaries .

Amid allegations that Russia bought votes from 130,000 voters, sent Orthodox priests to influence the electorate, and employed hybrid warfare tactics, two pro-Russian parties were banned . YouTube also shut down over a thousand channels citing Russian propaganda, revealing how democratic processes are being narrowed under the pretext of security. At the same time, European leaders’ visits to Chișinău before the vote to publicly endorse Maia Sandu and announce economic aid packages blur the line between “protecting democracy” and foreign intervention. Moldova’s case reflects an era in which the people’s right to choose is preserved, yet elections are increasingly being shaped within certain domains.

Similarly, the electoral crisis in Romania offers another example of how democracy is being “protected but constrained.” After George Simion, who is close to Russia and uses Trump-style rhetoric, led in the first round of last year’s presidential election, the vote was annulled on grounds of “Russian interference” . Authorities defended the decision as necessary for safeguarding the process, but it fueled debates about whether popular will is being redefined by security concerns. Although the pro-European Nicusor Dan won the rerun in May, the result leaves open the question of whether democracy was truly preserved or merely directed.

Developments in Central and Eastern Europe show that the system is eroding at the ballot box, while France’s latest political crisis reveals that this erosion has now reached the realm of representation. The resignation of Sébastien Lecornu, France’s shortest-serving prime minister in modern history . has become a symbol of systemic exhaustion. With the budget deficit reaching 6 percent of GDP, the inability to secure a vote of confidence in parliament, and constantly changing cabinets, voters are being driven to the streets, demonstrating a growing alienation from the system of governance .

The populist surge in Czechia, the debates over engineered democracy in Moldova, the annulled election in Romania, and institutional gridlock in France… different manifestations point to the same reality. European democracy continues to function, but the system is caught between Russia’s influence efforts and the EU’s pursuit of “safe” outcomes. Governmental crises in France and mass protests on its streets show that this fatigue has now reached the core countries of Europe.

U.S. President Donald Trump signed an executive order paving the way for the transfer of TikTok’s U.S. operations to American investors. According to the White House’s statement titled “Saving TikTok While Protecting National Security” ., up to 20 percent of TikTok’s U.S. operations may remain under Chinese ownership. The U.S. government also announced that American users’ data will be stored only on U.S.-based servers and monitored by security partners. Immediately after the order, Trump, after an 11-month hiatus, posted a video on his TikTok account . addressing young users: “I saved TikTok, so you owe me.”

Trump’s TikTok post also stands out as a direct media strategy targeting its core audience. Today, TikTok is one of the most powerful platforms for reaching young voters in the U.S. In fact, 63 percent of American youth are TikTok users . Moreover, the platform is increasingly used not just for entertainment but for information and news. Twenty percent of U.S. adults and 43 percent of those aged 18 to 29 regularly get their news from TikTok . This transformation has elevated TikTok from a simple social media app to an information ecosystem shaping public perception. Thus, Trump’s message “I saved TikTok” carries not only symbolic weight but also strategic significance.

TikTok’s fate sits at the heart of the debate on digital sovereignty. Recently, concerns have grown louder that China could use TikTok for intelligence activities . This anxiety stems from China’s 2017 National Intelligence Law, whose seventh article explicitly requires all Chinese organizations and citizens to support, assist, and cooperate with the country’s intelligence activities. Another concern is TikTok’s potential to function as an “influence tool.”

Like other social media platforms, TikTok’s algorithm has the potential to shape public opinion by promoting certain content and suppressing others . This concern reached its peak when Osama bin Laden’s “Letter to America” went viral on TikTok . Last year, foreign actors were accused of running a coordinated disinformation campaign on TikTok during Romania’s presidential election. According to a report by the European Commission ., 25,000 new accounts were activated shortly before the vote, most of which shared content supporting pro-Russian candidates.

On the other hand, content related to China’s “red lines,” such as Tiananmen Square and Tibetan independence, is systematically censored on TikTok . While videos about the anti-China Hong Kong protests were shared millions of times on other platforms, they were nearly invisible on TikTok . Another clear example is the suspension of a U.S. user’s account for criticizing China’s policies toward Uyghur Turks ., demonstrating how TikTok serves as a tool advancing China’s national interests.

Beyond these issues, the core of the debate around TikTok centers on data security. The possibility that China could access data from U.S. TikTok users has triggered discussions on digital sovereignty. While the U.S. and its allies fear TikTok could act as a hidden backdoor, a clear contradiction emerges: TikTok is not significantly different from other social media platforms like Facebook, Instagram, or YouTube in terms of data collection . The real issue is not how data is collected, but who controls it. TikTok’s takeover demonstrates that the U.S. intends to maintain its monopoly over digital data for the foreseeable future.

Allied countries such as the United Kingdom view the “Americanization” of TikTok as a victory against China’s growing influence, but concern is rising that the U.S. may use its technological power at the expense of its allies . Many countries, from Europe to Australia, are heavily dependent on American companies for their digital infrastructure. This situation is strengthening the efforts of allies, especially those whose security ties with the U.S. have recently weakened, to secure their own digital sovereignty. In short, for third countries, the issue is not merely which superpower controls digital data, but how much the world is becoming subject to its order.

The U.S.’s digital hegemony also strengthens Israel’s interests. The largest shareholder in the consortium taking over TikTok’s U.S. operations is Oracle, known for its support of Israel. In a recently revealed email, Oracle’s former CEO Safra Catz wrote to former Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Barak: “Embedding love for Israel into American culture.” This reveals the strategic backdrop of this move. Similarly, Netanyahu described the U.S. takeover of TikTok as the most strategic move in this new battlefield, stating: “Weapons change over time; the most important one is social media” .

Israel’s intense interest in TikTok is no coincidence. U.S.-based tech giants have long been known to protect pro-Israel narratives and suppress pro-Palestinian content. However, TikTok does not enforce such a clear policy. On the contrary, TikTok has emerged as a platform dominated by pro-Palestinian content. A recent report revealed that for every pro-Israel post on the platform, there are 17 pro-Palestinian posts . This dynamic explains the underlying reason for Israel’s focus on TikTok.

All these developments show that the TikTok issue is not merely about the transfer of ownership of an app, but a process shaping the geopolitics of the digital age. Today, digital data and social media platforms have become strategic sources of power. The narrative of “saving TikTok” represents a significant move in a larger struggle over who will control the digital domain. This process is redefining the boundaries of sovereignty in the digital age, gradually shifting the center of power from the physical realm to the digital one.

Recent reports from around the world show that flood disasters have reached a level that threatens societal security. The same scene repeats across diverse geographies—from Spain to Pakistan, from Alaska to Sudan. Cities submerged under water, homes destroyed, millions displaced, and state institutions helpless. This process clearly reveals that the climate crisis has become a matter of security.

The “Alice” storm that struck Spain’s Valencia region and the Balearic Islands exposed how unprepared European infrastructure is for this new climate reality. Torrential rains in a short time rendered roads and rail lines unusable, forcing thousands to evacuate. Experts note that rising sea temperatures and disrupted atmospheric currents are making storms more frequent and unpredictable. This shows that Europe’s trusted robust infrastructure and functioning institutions are struggling to cope with an increasingly severe climate crisis.

In Mexico, the death toll from flooding exceeded 60, with dozens still missing. Cities were completely isolated due to dam failures, and rescue teams reached the affected areas only days later. People living in the poorest regions lost their homes, livelihoods, and access to basic services. Mexico’s situation reminds us that climate security is also social security. The heaviest costs of global warming are borne by those living in the lowest economic strata.

In Pakistan, thousands were stranded in floods last month. With large portions of agricultural land destroyed, the food crisis is deepening. UN officials have described the floods as a “humanitarian crisis,” while local populations continue to survive in temporary shelters. Under these conditions, security is no longer defined merely by military or border threats but by access to clean water, healthcare, and safe housing.

In Sudan’s Darfur region, a landslide killed over a thousand people, representing another tragedy where nature and conflict are intertwined. Due to the presence of multiple armed groups in the region, aid teams faced difficulties reaching the area. In other words, in Sudan, the disaster is not only the landslide but also the collapse of authority. This situation compels us to recognize that security must encompass a humanitarian dimension beyond physical threats.

In Nepal, heavy rainfall combined with glacial melt destroyed mountain villages. In Taiwan, hundreds of homes were submerged due to a lake overflow caused by a typhoon, with residents expressing anger over receiving no warning . Even in technologically advanced countries, the failure of early warning systems highlights the crisis management dimension of disasters. The recent floods remind us that such events will become more frequent due to global warming, and that preparedness is a security imperative. In this new era of intensifying climate crisis, security depends on a country’s capacity to survive when the waters rise.