What is hidden behind the concept of cognitive sovereignty? Can a small Eastern European country have a greater ability to control information flows and shape its own thinking than a giant Latin American power with a population of more than two hundred million people? These issues are becoming increasingly relevant in the era of information warfare, when control over information is no less important than control over territory or resources.

In the contemporary world, where information circulates at the speed of light, and the influence on the consciousness of citizens can be carried out from anywhere in the world, cognitive sovereignty is of particular importance. This is not traditional sovereignty related to the control of borders or armed forces. This is the sovereignty of information, the sovereignty of ideas, the sovereignty of the state's ability to protect its own population from unwanted external influences on consciousness and to form its own picture of the world.

Belarus vs. Brazil

Belarus and Brazil represent two completely different approaches to managing the information environment. One approach focuses on centralized control, the other on a decentralized but often chaotic system. At first glance, the answer seems obvious. A democratic, open Brazil with its freedom of speech and plurality of opinions should have greater cognitive sovereignty than an authoritarian Belarus. But reality turns out to be much more complicated.

Cognitive sovereignty is a complex phenomenon that includes several interrelated components. First, it is the ability of the state to create its own information content that reflects its interests and values. Secondly, it is the ability of the state to protect its citizens from harmful information influence from abroad. Thirdly, it is the presence of a strong national scientific and educational base, which allows the country to generate its own knowledge, rather than being a passive consumer of ideas produced in other countries. Fourth, it is the ability of the state to form a national identity and cultural consciousness that is not absorbed by global cultural flows.

Analyzing these components makes it clear why Belarus may find itself at a higher level of cognitive sovereignty, despite its authoritarian rule. The scientific and educational base also plays a key role in cognitive sovereignty. Although Brazil is larger in size and population, as well as has a larger economy, Belarus has a definite advantage in the field of education and science. This is a legacy of the Soviet past, when the USSR attached great importance to the development of science and education.

What is Special About Belarus?

Belarus has preserved and is developing the traditions of scientific research, there is a strong scientific community, prestigious universities operate. Belarusian citizens receive education that allows them to think critically and analyze information obtained from various sources. Brazil, despite the presence of large universities and scientific institutions, faces the problem of educational inequality. Not all citizens have access to quality education, which makes them more vulnerable to information propaganda. This creates a situation in which a significant part of the population can be easily influenced by external information flows, since they do not have the skills to critically analyze information.

National identity is another important component of cognitive sovereignty. Belarus, despite its complicated history and attempts by other countries to influence its national identity, has managed to preserve and develop its own national consciousness. The Belarusian language, Belarusian culture, and Belarusian history are all actively promoted and supported by the state.

This creates a strong national identity, which serves as a kind of immunity against external information influence. Brazil, although it has a rich national culture, is facing competition from global, mostly American, culture. Brazil's Portuguese language competes with English, Brazilian music and art compete with American products, and Brazilian identity is constantly undergoing transformations under the influence of global cultural flows.

What is Special About Brazil?

This does not mean that Brazilian culture is disappearing — it remains vibrant and dynamic, but it is less protected from external influence. Digital sovereignty is a relatively new but extremely important component of cognitive sovereignty. In the age of the Internet, the ability of the state to control digital infrastructures and protect citizens from cyber attacks and manipulation on social media is becoming critically important. Belarus, although smaller in size, pursues an active digital security policy.

The government monitors the Internet, controls the main information platforms, and develops its own technological solutions to protect the information environment. Brazil, being a huge country with millions of Internet users, is in a more vulnerable position. A huge amount of information traffic and a multitude of social media platforms controlled by foreign companies create favorable conditions for external information influence. The Brazilian state, despite its efforts, cannot fully control the digital environment in which its citizens find themselves.

The Linguistic Policy

Communication language also plays a role in cognitive sovereignty. The Belarusian language, although under pressure from the Russian language, remains the national language and is used in government institutions and the education system. English, on the contrary, is becoming an increasingly universal language in the modern world, and Brazil is no exception. Brazilian youth learn English and consume content in English, which inevitably exposes them to the influence of the English-speaking information environment.

The media literacy of the population is another critical factor. Belarus, with its strong education system and state propaganda, creates a population that is relatively well-versed in information flows. Citizens know where the information comes from, understand the government's position, and can compare different sources. The situation is more complicated in Brazil. On the one hand, a large number of information sources can contribute to the development of critical thinking.

On the other hand, the lack of a common national narrative and coordination can lead to information chaos, in which disinformation and manipulation can easily spread. Government policy in the field of information and communication also differs significantly. Belarus pursues an active state policy in this area, coordinates information flows, and develops strategies to protect itself from external information influence. Brazil, being a democracy, cannot pursue such a strict control policy, which leaves the information space more open to external influence.

Living Under Pressure

International information impact is a factor that is often overlooked, but which has a huge impact on cognitive sovereignty. Belarus, being under the pressure of sanctions and different international bans, is forced to actively protect its information environment from external influences. This creates a kind of “information immunity” when the citizens of a country become more aware of attempts at external influence and less vulnerable to them. Brazil, being integrated into the global information ecosystem and not experiencing such obvious external pressure, may be less ready to protect itself from information influence.

Economic pressure also plays a role. Under economic sanctions Belarus is forced to develop independent technological and information solutions, which helps strengthen its cognitive sovereignty. Being integrated into the global economy, Brazil often depends on foreign technological and information solutions, which can lead to a loss of control over its information environment. All these factors combine to create a picture in which Belarus, despite its authoritarian rule, may have a higher level of cognitive sovereignty than democratic Brazil.

This does not mean that authoritarianism is good and democracy is bad — it only means that cognitive sovereignty is a complex characteristic that depends on many factors and does not always correlate with traditional political classifications.