As global instability deepens – from hybrid warfare and disinformation to climate shocks and civic repression – the link between democracy and security has never been clearer. Speaking at a high-level roundtable on “Leadership and Partnership in Security: The Leading Role of Civil Society,” Blair Glencorse, Co-CEO of Accountability Lab, reflected on how leadership, trust, and collaboration can help build the foundations of collective security.

“It’s an honour to be part of this gathering, especially as Ukraine’s continued struggle for freedom and Moldova’s recent elections remind us that democracy and security are inseparable,” Glencorse began. “The question before us is not only how to protect states, but how to defend the civic space that keeps democracies alive.”

Drawing from the Lab’s fifteen years of experience translating accountability into practice – and its work within the Open Government Partnership Steering Committee – Glencorse shared five key reflections on how leadership and partnership can reshape security in this era of transformation.

1. Civil society is now a frontline actor in security

Shifts in the global landscape have blurred the line between traditional defense and democratic resilience.

“Civil society is no longer a ‘soft’ partner – it’s part of the hard infrastructure of security,” Glencorse noted.

He commended Ukrainian civil society for documenting war crimes, delivering humanitarian aid, and exposing disinformation campaigns faster than many state systems. Digital volunteers and local community centers have strengthened national resilience from the ground up.

“These experiences show that governments must stop treating civil society as an afterthought,” he said. “They must integrate it into early-warning systems, crisis communication networks, and recovery planning.”

2. Trust is the new national infrastructure

In an age of information warfare, Glencorse emphasized that trust has become a strategic asset.

“Trust isn’t a by-product; it’s the foundation of security,” he said. “Without it, even the strongest institutions will falter.”

He pointed to Estonia’s digital trust architecture, combining cybersecurity, open governance, and public accountability, as a model of resilience. In Ukraine, decentralized digital tools such as Diia and DREAM have enabled citizens to remain engaged during crisis, proving that transparency and participation are themselves defenses against instability.

“Trust also depends on humility,” he added, “on admitting mistakes, sharing intelligence responsibly, and keeping open channels with citizens before crises strike.”

3. Collaboration against hybrid threats must be systemic, not ad hoc

Hybrid threats from cyberattacks to disinformation campaigns – exploit institutional silos. Countering them, Glencorse argued, requires systemic and sustained collaboration.

He cited practical mechanisms that can bridge the divide between sectors:

• Public-private partnerships like the EU Hybrid Center of Excellence, uniting governments, industry, and academia.
• Civic-tech alliances linking journalists, NGOs, and tech platforms to detect coordinated disinformation.
• Protocols that treat verified civil society reports as legitimate intelligence inputs rather than advocacy.

“These collaborations must be institutionalized,” he said. “Partnerships built only in moments of crisis will always be too late.”

4. Operationalizing the European Democracy Shield requires openness and inclusion

Glencorse welcomed the European Democracy Shield as a promising step toward protecting democratic systems but cautioned that its success will depend on its breadth.

“It must move beyond protecting elections to protecting the ecosystem of democracy – from media freedom and civic innovation to digital literacy and anti-corruption,” he said.

He called for regional resilience hubs, rapid-response coalitions, and funding mechanisms that bring together governments, civil society, and tech platforms.

“In short,” he added, “the Shield must function as a network, not a fortress.”

5. Rebuilding trust in institutions is the defining challenge – and civil society is the bridge

The crisis of trust in institutions, Glencorse argued, is not irreversible. “Citizens lose faith when institutions feel distant or self-protective. They regain it when they see responsiveness, integrity, and partnership.”

He highlighted how, through the Open Government Partnership, local governments and civil society have co-created reforms that increase transparency and confidence. “Civil society can be both watchdog and builder,” he said. “Our role is to hold institutions accountable — and to help them rebuild from within.”

From security as secrecy to security as solidarity

As Glencorse closed, he acknowledged the tensions inherent in balancing security and democracy from limited budgets to an ever-expanding threat landscape.

“But Ukraine’s defense has shown that security today is collective – not only among nations, but among sectors,” he said. “Our task is to move from security as secrecy to security as solidarity.”

He concluded by noting that Ukraine is now a “knowledge donor” in how to empower citizens, partner with civil society, and rebuild the trust that makes democracy worth defending.

“At Accountability Lab, we believe this model – grounded in openness, integrity, and collaboration – represents the future of resilient governance,” he said. “Because when citizens trust, societies stand stronger.”

Accountability Lab