Digital Sovereignty In Global Politics: A Comparative Analysis Of The Strategies Of The Usa, Russia And China
https://doi.org/10.18384/2949-5164-2025-5-173-189
Abstract
Aim. The purpose of the study is to identify the specifics of the interpretation and implementation of digital sovereignty in the context of the national strategies of the United States, Russia and China, as well as to analyze the impact of these approaches on international relations and global Internet governance.
Methodology. The study relies on the concept of frame analysis to study scientific publications and sources. Additionally, comparative analysis is used to compare approaches to digital sovereignty in the United States, Russia and China, taking into account historical, cultural and political features. Qualitative analysis of texts in Russian, English and Chinese allows us to identify key narratives and practices in this area.
Results. The study demonstrates the dominance of the United States in the digital space. In turn, Russia and China seek to counter this hegemony. Russia focuses on protecting the national segment of the Internet and reducing dependence on Western technologies, while China is developing an autonomous digital ecosystem, relying on state control and cultural and historical specifics.
Research implications. The study expands the understanding of the transformation of the classical concept of sovereignty in the digital age. The results of the study provide tools for analyzing national digital sovereignty strategies and their impact on international relations.
About the Authors
M. P. Bezruchenko
Kuban State University
Russian Federation
Russian Federation
Marina P. Bezruchenko – Cand. Sci. (History), Assoc. Prof., Department of Foreign Regional Studies and Oriental Studies, Faculty of History, Sociology and International Relations
Krasnodar
Т. O. Tkachoyva
Kuban State University
Russian Federation
Russian Federation
Tatyana O. Tkacheva – Cand. Sci. (History), Assoc. Prof., Department of Foreign Regional Studies and Oriental Studies, Faculty of History, Sociology and International Relations
Krasnodar
References
1. Kissinger, H. (2014). World Order. Penguin.
2. Verhoef, P. C., Broekhuizen, T., Bart, Y., Bhattacharya, A., et al. (2021) Digital transformation: A multidisciplinary reflection and research agenda. In: Journal of Business Research, 122, 889–901.
3. Pohle, J., Nanni, R. & Santaniello, M. (2024). Unthinking Digital Sovereignty: A Critical Reflection on Origins, Objectives, and Practices. In: Policy & Internet, 16-3, 666–671. DOI: 10.1002/poi3.437
4. Krivokhizh, S. V. & Telenga, M. P. (2024). Transformation of digital diplomacy in the face of new challenges: a look from Washington and Beijing. In: Bulletin of St. Petersburg University. International relations, 17-2, 143–163. DOI: 10.21638/spbu06.2024.203 (in Russ.).
5. Couture, S. & Toupin, S. (2020). What does the concept of "sovereignty" mean in the digital world? In: Bulletin of International Organizations, 15, 48–69 (in Russ.).
6. Mueller, M. L. (2020). Against Sovereignty in Cyberspace. In: International Studies Review, 22, 779–801. DOI: 10.1093/isr/viz044
7. Heller, K. J. (2024). In Defense of Pure Sovereignty in Cyberspace. In: International Law Studies, 97, 1432–1499.
8. Falkner, G., Heidebrecht, S., Obendiek, A. & Seidl, T. (2024). Digital sovereignty – Rhetoric and reality. In: Journal of European Public Policy, 31, 2099–2120. DOI: 10.1080/13501763.2024.2358984
9. Obendiek, A. (2023). Take back control? Digital sovereignty and a vision for Europe. In: Hertie School – Jacques Delors Center, 341–345. DOI: 10.1080/13501763.2024.2358984
10. Broeders, D., Csernatoni, R., Irion, K., Kaminska, M., et al. (2022). Digital sovereignty: From narrative to policy?
11. Floridi, L. (2020). The Fight for Digital Sovereignty: What It Is, and Why It Matters, Especially for the EU. In: Philos Technol, 33, 369–378. DOI: 10.1007/s13347-020-00423-6
12. Hummel, P., Braun, M., Tretter, M. & Dabrock, P. (2021). Data sovereignty: A review. In: Big Data & Society, 8. DOI: 10.1177/2053951720982012
13. Pohle, J. & Thiel, T. (2020). Digital sovereignty. In: Internet Policy Review, 9. DOI: 10.14763/2020.4.1532
14. Martin, C. (2023). Geopolitics and Digital Sovereignty. In: Werthner H., et al., eds. Perspectives on Digital Humanism. Springer, Cham. Springer, 227–231. DOI: 10.1007/978-3-030-86144-5_30
15. Thumfart, J. (2021). The norm development of digital sovereignty between China, Russia, the EU and the US: From the late 1990s to the Covid-crisis 2020/21 as catalytic event. In: Hallinan D., et al., eds. Data Protection and Privacy: Enforcing Rights in a Changing World. Hart Publishing, 1–44.
16. Binxing, F. (2018). Cyberspace Sovereignty. Springer Singapore.
17. Gromova E. & Brantes Ferreira D. (2024). On the Way to BRICS+ Digital Sovereignty: Opportunities and Challenges of a New Era. In: BRICS Law Journal, 11, 54–69. DOI: 10.21684/2412-2343-2024-11-3-54-69
18. Ustyuzhantseva, O. & Popova, E. (2024). Shaping Digital Sovereignty in Russia: Actors and Debates. In: Problems of Post-Communism, 72, 76–87. DOI: 10.1080/10758216.2024.2346202
19. Bukharin, V. V. (2016). Components of the digital sovereignty of the Russian Federation as the technical basis of information security. In: Bulletin of MGIMO University, 6, 76–91 (in Russ.).
20. Efremov, A. A. (2017). Formation of the concept of information sovereignty of the state. In: Law: Journal of the Higher School of Economics, 1, 201–215 (in Russ.).
21. Kucheryavy, M. M. (2015). State policy of information sovereignty of Russia in the context of the modern global world. In: Management consulting, 2, 11–12 (in Russ.).
22. Zorina, E. G. (2017). Information sovereignty of the modern state and the main tools for its provision. In: Izvestia Saratov University. Series: Sociology. Political science, 17-3, 345–348 (in Russ.).
23. Volodenkov, S. V. , Voronov, A. S., Leontyeva, L. S. & Sukhareva, M. (2021). Digital sovereignty of the modern state in conditions of technological transformations: content and features. In: Polylogos, 5. DOI: 10.18254/S258770110014073-2 (in Russ.).
24. Smyth, R. & Oates, S. (2015). Mind the Gaps: Media Use and Mass Action in Russia. In: Europe-Asia Studies, 67, 285–305. DOI: 10.1080/09668136.2014.1002682
25. Pierucci, F. (2025). Sovereignty in the Digital Era: Rethinking Territoriality and Governance in Cyberspace. In: Digital Society, 4. DOI: 10.1007/s44206-025-00189-4
26. Cong, W. & Thumfart, J. (2022). A Chinese Precursor to the Digital Sovereignty Debate: Digital Anti- Colonialism and Authoritarianism from the Post-Cold War Era to the Tunis Agenda. In: Global Studies Quarterly, 2-4, 1–13. DOI: 10.1093/isagsq/ksac059
27. Zeng, J., Stevens, T. & Chen, Y. (2017). China's Solution to Global Cyber Governance: Unpacking the Domestic Discourse of “Internet Sovereignty”. In: Politics and Policy, 45, 432–464. DOI: 10.1111/polp.12202
28. Creemers, R. (2020). China`s Conception of Cyber Sovereignty: Rhetoric and Realization. In: Broeders, D., Berg, B., eds. Governing Cyberspace: Behaviour, Power and Diplomacy. London: Rowman & Littlefield, 107–142. DOI: 10.1007/978-3-319-60405-3
29. Chandel, S., Zang, J., Yu, Y., Sun, J., Zhang Zhipen (2020). The Golden Shield Project of China: A Decade Later An in-depth study of the Great Firewall. In: International Conference on Cyber-Enabled Distribut ed Computing and Knowledge Discovery, 111–119. DOI: 10.1109/CyberC.2019.00027
30. Zeng, J., Tim, S. & Yaru, C. (2017). China’s Solution to Global Cyber Governance: Unpacking the Domestic Discourse of “Internet Sovereignty. In: Politics and Policy. 2017. № 45. P. 432–464. DOI: 10.1111/polp.12202
31. Schneider, F. A. (2023). China’s digital nationalism. In: Lu, Z., ed. The Routledge handbook of nationalism in East and Southeast Asia. New York: Routledge, 167–180. DOI: 10.4324/9781003111450-14
Review
Views:
129
JATS XML
Email this article 