Report

Sep 17, 2026

Manipulation of Sustainable Development: Framing of the UN SDGs by Authoritarian Regimes

The United Nations Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) are global sustainability benchmarks adopted by the United Nations in 2015 to guide an inclusive and sustainable transformation by 2030. However, with less than four years remaining, only 16% of the SDG targets are on track, while the remaining 84% are stalled or regressing. The world is not only falling short of meeting the SDGs but is also drifting further away from them.

This report examines how the engagement of authoritarian regimes has become a significant and overlooked factor in this global underperformance. Although these regimes publicly endorse SDG rhetoric and participate in high-profile international forums, they often use the SDG framework to advance regime interests rather than genuine development.

Through case studies including Azerbaijan, Belarus, China, Iran, North Korea, Nicaragua, Russia, Saudi Arabia, and Venezuela, the report demonstrates how repression, weak accountability, and controlled reporting signal lack of genuine commitment and undermine true SDG implementation.

The report’s analysis and findings are based on country-specific data available for the 2015–2025 period.

Related Topics

Download

If you would like to save this report, you can always download it here as a PDF.

What Are the SDGs?

Adopted in 2015 by the United Nations General Assembly, the SDGs are a global framework designed to address major challenges such as poverty, inequality, and environmental degradation.

Centered on five pillars (People, Planet, Prosperity, Peace, and Partnerships)

People

This pillar focuses on ending poverty and hunger, ensuring health, education, and gender equality, aiming for a world where everyone can thrive in dignity and equality.

Prosperity

This pillar seeks sustainable and equitable economic growth, focusing on inclusive employment, resilient infrastructure, innovation, and sustainable practices for a prosperous future for all

Planet

This pillar focuses on climate change and environmental degradation, advocating for clean water, sustainable energy, and conservation efforts to protect natural habitats and combat climate change.

Peace

This pillar emphasizes the importance of peace, justice, and strong institutions, promoting societies free from fear and violence with inclusive and accountable governance.

Partnerships

This pillar highlights global solidarity and cooperation to address the needs of the poorest and most vulnerable, ensuring participation and shared responsibility across various domains for the successful implementation of the SDGs.

The 17 Goals and 169 targets cover areas including health, education, climate action, and strong institutions. They encourage states to align national policies with these priorities, mobilize resources, and share progress through voluntary reviews.

The overarching aim is to build a more equitable, resilient, and sustainable world by 2030 through coordinated efforts within and among countries.

Human rights and democracy are integral to the SDG framework, even though they are not directly named as separate Goals. Sustainable development, as set out in the SDGs, requires governance systems that protect rights, promote transparency, and allow people to participate meaningfully in public life. The framework mentions human rights and democracy only indirectly, yet it is firmly rooted in both principles. More than 90% of the SDG targets align with established human rights obligations, and democratic values, of participation, accountability, and the rule of law, are most clearly expressed in SDG 16, which focuses on building peaceful and inclusive societies supported by effective and accountable institutions.

However, the fact that human rights and democracy are mostly indirect creates an important weakness in the SDG system. Because these principles are not stated as explicit requirements, countries can claim progress on the SDGs without clearly showing whether that progress is supported by rights protection, transparency, public participation, and accountability. As a result, they can appear to support the SDGs while undermining the very principles on which the SDGs depend. This problem is deepened by the SDG system’s voluntary nature: countries report their progress through Voluntary National Reviews, which explain what they have done to advance the Goals, but these reports are largely prepared by governments themselves. As a result, while this process has encouraged wide participation, it is vulnerable to selective reporting, exaggerated progress, and weak accountability.

United Nations Headquarters in New York City.

Photo credit: USGS

United Nations Headquarters in New York City.

Photo credit: USGS

Do Autocrats Really Support the SDGs?

The problem of voluntary SDG reporting becomes especially important in the context of authoritarian regimes. Although genuine SDG implementation requires transparency, accountability, and respect for fundamental freedoms, authoritarian states still participate actively in SDG processes because the framework is non-binding and easily manipulated. Its voluntary nature gives them a low-risk way to signal commitment without undertaking meaningful reform or compliance.

Across the regimes analyzed, autocrats’ engagement with the SDGs consistently serves regime preservation rather than sustainable development. Regimes often incorporate SDG language into national plans in vague or symbolic ways that reinforce existing power structures.

In practice, the SDG policies built by authoritarian regimes are selectively constructed and frequently inconsistent. Across analyzed regimes, implementation efforts concentrate on the “People,” “Planet,” and “Prosperity” pillars, while the “Peace” and “Partnerships” SDGs are routinely neglected or actively undermined. Even in the areas they prioritize, regimes often pair nominally progressive policies with measures that restrict or erase their intended effects. Authoritarian states may also endorse international sustainability agreements without creating the domestic laws or institutions needed for implementation, resulting in a surface-level appearance of SDG alignment but minimal meaningful progress.

The items below provide a simplified overview of the report’s conclusions on how the examined authoritarian regimes engage with the SDGs across three dimensions: the existence of a general SDG framework, the implementation of policies across specific SDG pillars, and the overall level of commitment.

Each regime is categorized as:

🟢 Committed (C)

Refers to regimes in which the general framework and specific efforts are fully adopted and effectively implemented.

🟠 Selectively Committed (SC)

Indicates that the general framework or specific efforts are only partially adopted or are implemented inconsistently.

🔴 Not Committed (NC)

Refers to regimes in which the general framework or specific efforts are absent or largely disregarded.

Photo credit: Kim Won Jin/ AFP via Getty Images

Azerbaijan - Overall status: 🔴 Not Committed

Ruled by the authoritarian regime of President Ilham Aliyev, places its emphasis on the “Prosperity” SDGs and uses large-scale infrastructure projects to showcase progress while reinforcing the corruption that underpins its political system. At the same time, the regime neglects the rest of the SDG agenda, especially those goals related to human rights, justice, and environmental protection. Although a general framework for SDG implementation exists, the state’s engagement remains uneven and selective. Persistent discrimination, environmental harm, and widespread repression reveal deep gaps in policy and practice, directly contradicting the core principles of the SDGs.

SDGs

Belarus - Overall status: 🔴 Not Committed

Ruled by the authoritarian regime of President Alexander Lukashenko, has adopted an extensive SDG framework and formally requires new laws to align with the Goals, yet these commitments remain largely superficial. Many initiatives exist only on paper, and policies that appear consistent with the “People,” “Planet,” and “Prosperity” goals often lack real implementation, hindered by inadequate funding and growing ideological control over key sectors such as education and public information. At the same time, the regime continues to impose severe repressive measures, including violent crackdown on dissent, human rights abuses, the mass liquidation of NGOs and restrictions on independent civic activity, which directly contradict the “Peace” and “Partnerships” pillars of the SDGs.

SDGs

China - Overall status: 🟠 Committed

Ruled by the Chinese Communist Party under President Xi Jinping, engages with the SDGs in a highly selective way that aligns closely with regime priorities. While the regime incorporates SDG language into national development plans and introduces policies across the “People,” “Planet,” and “Prosperity” SDGs, many of these initiatives rely on coercive implementation, weak oversight, or mechanisms that extend state control rather than promote genuine well-being. Environmental programs are often accompanied by strict social controls, poverty-alleviation measures have been linked to coerced labor transfers, and green development projects are implemented alongside relocations and intensified surveillance, directly contradicting “Peace” and “Partnerships” SDGs.

SDGs

Iran - Overall status: 🔴 Not Committed

Ruled by the authoritarian theocratic regime of Supreme Leader Mojtaba Khamenei, is formally engaged with the SDGs but demonstrates limited genuine commitment, shaped by ideological red lines and entrenched institutional dysfunction. While the regime has created coordinating bodies and incorporated some SDG themes into its Five-Year Development Plans, implementation across the “People,” “Planet,” and “Prosperity” pillars is weak, narrow in scope, and frequently undermined by corruption, mismanagement, and systemic discrimination. Moreover, severe human rights abuses, including the violent suppression of dissent, the targeting of women and girls, and the persecution of religious and ethnic minorities, directly contradict the “Peace” and “Partnership” SDGs.

SDGs

North Korea - Overall status: 🔴 Not Committed

Ruled by the regime of Kim Jong-un, formally presents itself as committed to the SDGs, claiming that its national development plans align with the Goals. In reality, progress is largely superficial. Laws referencing health, education, and environmental protection exist only on paper, while conditions under the “People,” “Planet,” and “Prosperity” pillars are undermined by chronic shortages, forced labor, systemic discrimination, and the concentration of services and resources among the ruling elite. SDGs related to peace, justice, and partnerships are effectively dismissed, as the regime maintains absolute political control, suppresses civil society, and blocks any form of independent monitoring.

SDGs

Nicaragua - Overall status: 🔴 Not Committed

Ruled by the regime of Daniel Ortega and Rosario Murillo, formally aligns national policies with the SDGs and has adopted laws related to the “People,” “Planet,” and “Prosperity” pillars, but these commitments remain largely superficial. Enforcement is weak because of entrenched corruption, underfunded institutions, and the systematic dismantling of independent civil society. The “Peace” and “Partnership” Goals are directly contradicted by repressive laws that criminalize dissent, restrict the press, suppress labor rights, and eliminate meaningful oversight.

SDGs

Russia - Overall status: 🔴 Not Committed

Ruled by the regime of President Vladimir Putin, is selectively engaged with the SDGs in ways that primarily serve regime preservation rather than genuine sustainable development. Although the regime has announced commitments across the “People,” “Planet,” and “Prosperity” pillars, these measures are consistently weakened by poor implementation, inadequate funding, and policies that openly contradict their stated aims. The “Peace” and “Partnership” SDGs are effectively disregarded, as the state continues to adopt repressive legislation that criminalizes dissent, restricts independent activity, and eliminates public accountability. The full-scale invasion of Ukraine represents one of the most severe violations of the SDGs globally, destroying the foundations of peace, causing widespread civilian harm, and diverting enormous state resources toward war and repression.

SDGs

Saudi Arabia - Overall status: 🟠 Selectively Committed

Ruled by the regime of Mohammed bin Salman, presents only a selective commitment to the SDGs. Its engagement remains superficial and fragmented. The Kingdom has introduced reforms tied to the “People,” “Planet,” and especially “Prosperity” pillars, including renewable-energy targets and reforestation initiatives. Yet these steps coexist with entrenched inequalities such as the male-guardianship system and discriminatory labor practices affecting millions of migrant workers. Most critically, progress on the “Peace” and “Partnership” Goals is virtually absent, as the regime continues to suppress free expression, criminalize dissent, and impose harsh penalties on activists and critics.

SDGs

Venezuela - Overall status: 🔴 Not Committed

Ruled by the regime of Nicolás Maduro, demonstrates one of the steepest declines in SDG compliance. Although the regime formally endorses the Goals, its policies show little genuine commitment across any of the SDG pillars. The regime pushes forward extractive projects that disregard environmental protections, violate Indigenous rights, and exclude affected communities from decision-making. Endemic corruption has severely weakened public institutions and diverted billions of dollars away from essential services, leaving most SDG commitments hollow, unimplemented, and disconnected from the realities of deepening poverty, state repression, and institutional collapse.

SDGs

How Do Autocrats Manipulate the SDGs?

The SDG Framework’s flexibility enables authoritarian regimes to apply familiar strategies of repression, co-optation, censorship, propaganda, and manufactured legitimacy⁶, repurposing the SDGs to serve political survival rather than genuine sustainable development. Our analysis finds that regimes deploy SDG narratives to justify repressive actions, promote state-controlled messaging, and cultivate tightly managed civic or international partnerships that strengthen their rule. By positioning themselves as champions of sustainable development, these governments deflect criticism, attract external support, and legitimize practices that ultimately undermine the core aims of the SDGs. Across the cases analyzed in the report, authoritarian regimes consistently weaponize the SDGs in varied ways that ultimately serve regime preservation rather than sustainable development. They use SDG language to justify coercive actions and disguise state violence as development, turning the Goals into tools that normalize repression. Regimes also convert limited SDG engagement into propaganda, crafting curated success stories while tightly controlling information. At the same time, they co-opt domestic and international actors through state-managed or symbolic SDG initiatives that mimic civic participation or partnership but strengthen regime influence. Finally, autocrats use SDG rhetoric to legitimize their rule on the global stage, presenting themselves as responsible development leaders and deflecting criticism or sanctions by blaming external factors for stalled progress.

The items below provide an overview of the ways authoritarian regimes manipulate the SDGs, organized into the four categories used throughout the study:

Repression

Refers to the use of SDG language to justify harassment and the suppression of dissent, both domestically and abroad.

Co-optation

Indicates that regimes use SDG narratives to draw domestic groups or international partners into cooperation that ultimately reinforces state control.

Propaganda

Refers to the use of SDG branding to project an image of progress while restricting or discrediting independent information.

Legitimation

Indicates that a regime invokes SDG commitments to manipulate procedures, deflect criticism, and present their rule as lawful and aligned with global norms.

Baku, Azerbaijan

🇦🇿 Azerbaijan - 3 SDG Manipulations

Manipulates the SDG agenda to advance regime interests rather than genuine development. The regime uses SDG rhetoric to deflect criticism of widespread human rights abuses and to legitimize its actions in Nagorno-Karabakh, presenting occupation and reconstruction as SDG-aligned “development”. By promoting greenwashed projects that mask cultural erasure, demographic engineering, and ongoing repression, the regime transforms the SDGs into a political instrument aimed at consolidating control instead of serving as a framework for sustainable and inclusive progress.

🇧🇾 Belarus - 3 SDG Manipulations

Manipulates the SDGs to conceal state abuses and reinforce its own legitimacy. The regime selectively promotes isolated achievements to polish its international image and argue for sanctions relief, while ignoring the realities of political imprisonment, the suppression of civil society, and the dismantling of independent institutions. It also uses SDG-branded programs to co-opt young people interested in sustainability, bringing them into state-controlled structures that prioritize loyalty over meaningful civic participation. At the same time, state media heavily advertises these initiatives as SDG successes, creating a manufactured narrative of progress that obscures widespread repression and directly contradicts the core principles of the SDGs.

🇨🇳 China - 3 SDG Manipulations

Uses SDG-related achievements to bolster international legitimacy and deflect criticism of human rights abuses. State-controlled media highlight selective successes and present them as evidence of effective and benevolent state leadership. On the global stage, China embeds SDG branding into various cooperation initiatives, using development language to expand influence, create strategic dependencies, and frame itself as an indispensable partner. In doing so, the regime deploys the SDG framework as a tool of propaganda, foreign policy, and soft power.

🇮🇷 Iran - 1 SDG Manipulation

Manipulates the SDG framework to advance regime interests rather than genuine human development. In international forums, the regime cites its SDG commitments to deflect accountability and shift blame, portraying external pressures, particularly sanctions, as the primary obstacle to progress while ignoring the impact of domestic repression, corruption, and discrimination.

🇰🇵 North Korea - 2 SDG Manipulations

Manipulates the SDGs to reinforce its legitimacy and reshape global narratives in its favor. The regime uses SDG language to blame sanctions for domestic governance failures, deflect responsibility for decades of internal repression, and present its authoritarian system as a legitimate development model aligned with the Goals. By redefining concepts such as peace as the “consolidation of the socialist system” and limiting partnerships to politically aligned states, the regime strips the SDGs of their rights-based foundations. In doing so, it employs the framework to justify repression, cultivate external sympathy, and shield itself from international accountability.

🇳🇮 Nicaragua - 1 SDG Manipulation

Uses the SDGs as a tool for political manipulation and international legitimation. In global forums, the regime selectively promotes minor development gains while blaming shortcomings on international sanctions, thereby deflecting responsibility for widespread repression, corruption, and institutional decay. By presenting itself as a victim of external pressure rather than an authoritarian regime undermining its own sustainability efforts, it turns the SDGs into a shield against criticism and a platform for seeking sanctions relief, rather than a genuine roadmap for sustainable and inclusive development.

🇷🇺 Russia - 3 SDG Manipulations

Actively manipulates the SDG framework to bolster its geopolitical narratives and legitimize its actions. The regime uses SDG rhetoric to deflect responsibility for its governance failures, claiming that foreign sanctions, imposed as a consequence of its aggression, are the main obstacles to SDG progress. Domestically and regionally, the regime uses SDG-themed messaging to cultivate loyalty among youth groups, and present its regional influence as development cooperation.

🇸🇦 Saudi Arabia - 1 SDG Manipulation

Actively manipulates the SDGs to strengthen its international image and political legitimacy. The regime selectively highlights sustainability initiatives in global forums, sponsors SDG-branded events, and advertises its work with various UN agencies, presenting itself as a modernizing and responsible state. This messaging diverts attention from severe rights abuses and systemic repression at home. In practice, the Kingdom uses the SDGs as a soft-power instrument to elevate its global standing and reinforce regime authority, while undermining the very principles of transparency, inclusion, and human rights that the SDGs are meant to uphold.

🇻🇪 Venezuela - 1 SDG Manipulation

Manipulates the SDG framework to reinforce its control. State propaganda uses SDG language to recast the country’s crises as the result of external pressure, and the regime increasingly treats the SDGs as a bargaining chip in negotiations over sanctions, presenting cooperation on development as something to be exchanged for political concessions. Meanwhile, development funds are mismanaged or siphoned off, and laws that criminalize humanitarian aid and silence dissent further undermine the principles of sustainable development.

Recommendations

To address the identified problems under the current SDG framework and prevent similar abuses in any post-2030 framework, the report offers the following recommendations for civil society, democratic countries, and international organizations.

Recommendation 1: Revise Current SDG Measurement Frameworks to Reflect the Central Role of Human Rights and Democracy

The Problem

The current SDG Index evaluates countries using technical indicators but overlooks democracy and human rights. These are core to meaningful, long-term sustainable development and integral to all 17 SDGs.

Why It Matters

By leaving democracy and human rights rights out, the measurement frameworks allow authoritarian regimes to appear on par with democracies. This masks repression and produces a misleading picture of real progress.

What Needs To Change

SDG measurement should include democratic governance and human rights-based weightings. Countries that restrict civil liberties or block democratic participation should receive lower scores, because genuine sustainability cannot exist under systemic oppression.

Recommendation 2: Reevaluate SDG Engagement With Authoritarian Regimes

The Problem

Authoritarian regimes use the SDGs and SDG-branded initiatives not to advance progress but to expand repression, promote state propaganda, co-opt participants, and gain international legitimacy. These efforts include multilateral partnerships, high-level forums, public diplomacy programs, and development cooperation projects that are presented as aligned with the SDGs but serve authoritarian interests. Democratic states often join these initiatives, unintentionally reinforcing autocratic narratives and abuses.

Why It Matters

When authoritarian regimes use the SDGs as cover for repression, they undermine the credibility of the entire framework.

What Needs To Change

Democracies should refrain from partnerships or participation in SDG-branded initiatives led by, or clearly tied to, regimes that violate core SDG values. Protecting the integrity of the SDGs requires ensuring that cooperation does not inadvertently strengthen authoritarian influence or enable further abuses.

Recommendation 3: Condemn and Hold Accountable Regimes That Manipulate the SDGs

The Problem

The 17 SDGs have no meaningful oversight or enforcement mechanisms. This allows authoritarian regimes to ignore or manipulate their commitments without consequence. Many autocratic regimes not only fail to meet the Goals but actively violate them through repression, corruption, environmental harm, and the deliberate weakening of public institutions.

Why It Matters

When regimes face no accountability for SDG manipulation, they distort global progress in achieving the Goals and erode trust in the entire SDG framework.

What Needs To Change

The international community must apply consistent pressure, within the limits of international law, to promote real accountability for SDG manipulation. This includes coordinated public condemnations, using global platforms to expose and document violations, and withholding support or investment from SDG-branded initiatives that legitimize or materially assist regimes that manipulate the SDG framework.

Recommendation 4: Ensure the Post-2030 Framework Affirms That Sustainable Development Depends on Human Rights and Democratic Governance

The Problem

The existing SDG Framework contains few explicit references to human rights or democratic governance in their titles, targets, or indicators.

Why It Matters

Without clear references to rights and democracy, the SDGs fail to capture the conditions needed for genuine, people-centered sustainable development. The absence of clear language enables authoritarian regimes to exploit the SDG agenda while undermining its transformative purpose.

What Needs To Change

Any post-2030 global development framework that succeeds the SDGs must place human rights and democratic governance at its core. This requires:

Clearly defining how sustainable development depends on human rights and democracy.
Establishing a standalone goal with targets on democratic governance and human rights.
Anchoring the framework in foundational documents such as the Universal Declaration of Human Rights.
Integrating rights- and governance-based indicators across all goals, including equality, access to justice, civic participation, anti-corruption, institutional accountability, and open government.

Recommendation 5: Replace Voluntary Reporting With Mandatory, Periodic, Independently Reviewed Submissions in the Post-2030 Framework

The Problem

The SDGs lack real oversight and accountability. Without enforceable mechanisms, authoritarian regimes can ignore or manipulate their commitments without consequence.

Why It Matters

When there is no structured accountability, countries can claim progress without making real changes. This limits the impact of international pressure and undermines the effectiveness of the Goals.

What Needs To Change

The post-2030 development framework must introduce stronger, clearer, and enforceable accountability mechanisms. This should include:

Mandatory, regularly scheduled reporting reviewed by independent bodies.
Independent verification of data and progress, replacing self-reporting.
Linking genuine implementation to concrete benefits, such as development aid or trade preferences.
Clear participation standards to ensure only verified, good-faith efforts receive international recognition.

Thank You

The Human Rights Foundation (HRF) is a non-profit organization that promotes and protects human rights globally, with an expertise in the Americas. HRF unites people in the common cause of defending human rights and promoting liberal democracy. Our mission is to ensure that freedom is both preserved and promoted around the world.

Sergei Korotkov

International Legal Associate

Regions

Take Action

Sep 17, 2026

Manipulation of Sustainable Development: Framing of the UN SDGs by Authoritarian Regimes

The report’s analysis and findings are based on country-specific data available for the 2015–2025 period.

Related Topics