Strategic
communications
as a key factor in
countering
hybrid threats
STUDY
Panel for the Future of Science and Technology
EPRS | European Parliamentary Research Service
Scientific Foresight Unit (STOA)
PE 656.323 – March 2021
EN
Strategic
communications as a
key factor in
countering hybrid
threats
This report describes the key features, technologies and processes used
in strategic communications to counter hybrid threats and their
components.
A theoretical description of hybrid threats is complemented by an
analysis of diverse case studies, describing the geopolitical context in
which the hybrid threat took place, its main features, the mechanisms
related to strategic communications used by the victim to counter the
hybrid threat and its impact and consequences.
A comprehensive set of policy options aimed at improving the EU
response to hybrid threats is also provided.
STOA | Panel for the Future of Science and Technology
AUTHORS
This study has been written by Juan Pablo Villar García, Carlota Tarín Quirós and Julio Blázquez Soria of
Iclaves S.L., Carlos Galán Pascual of the University Carlos III of Madrid, and Carlos Galán Cordero of the Universitat
Oberta de Catalunya at the request of the Panel for the Future of Science and Technology (STOA) and managed
by the Scientific Foresight Unit, within the Directorate-General for Parliamentary Research Services (EPRS) of the
Secretariat of the European Parliament.
ADMINISTRATOR RESPONSIBLE
Zsolt Pataki, Scientific Foresight Unit (STOA)
To contact the publisher, please e-mail stoa@ep.europa.eu
LINGUISTIC VERSION
Original: EN
Manuscript completed in March 2021.
DISCLAIMER AND COPYRIGHT
This document is prepared for, and addressed to, the Members and staff of the European Parliament as
background material to assist them in their parliamentary work. The content of the document is the sole
responsibility of its author(s) and any opinions expressed herein should not be taken to represent an official
position of the Parliament.
Reproduction and translation for non-commercial purposes are authorised, provided the source is acknowledged
and the European Parliament is given prior notice and sent a copy.
Brussels © European Union, 2021.
PE 656.323
ISBN: 978-92-846-7812-9
doi: 10.2861/14410
QA-02-21-202-EN-N
http://www.europarl.europa.eu/stoa (STOA website)
http://www.eprs.ep.parl.union.eu (intranet)
http://www.europarl.europa.eu/thinktank (internet)
http://epthinktank.eu (blog)
Strategic communications as a key factor in countering hybrid threats
Executive summary
The hybrid threat concept and its components
The hybrid threat concept attempts to synthesise a complex and evolving phenomenon, where state
and non-state actors use diverse means and tools to influence different forms of decision-making,
undermine citizens' trust in democratic processes and institutions, exacerbate political polarisation and
spread confusion about geopolitical events with the ultimate goal of destabilising the victim while
reinforcing the political vision and values of the offender. The use of digital technologies constitutes a
differential and key component of modern hybrid threats, as it exacerbates their potential.
Hybrid threats can be characterised as follows:
• They are coordinated and synchronised;
• deliberately target democratic states' and institutions' systemic vulnerabilities;
• use a wide range of means;
• exploit the thresholds of detection and attribution as well as different interfaces (war-peace,
internal-external, local-state, national-international, friend-enemy);
• aim to influence different forms of decision-making at the local, state, or institutional level;
• favour and/or achieve the agent's strategic goals;
• while undermining and/or hurting the target.
Promoters of hybrid threats can use a wide range of actions to achieve their goals. This study analyses
these components related to strategic communications and digital technologies: (1) funding
organisations and political parties for propaganda, (2) strategic leaks and cybertools, (3) social media
and domestic media outlets, (4) paramilitary organisations, (5) religious influence, (6) economic
pressure and (7) concerns about migration.
Disinformation campaigns play a crucial role in hybrid threats
Disinformation is a key component of hybrid threats. It can be defined as 'verifiably false or misleading
information that is created, presented and disseminated for economic gain or to intentionally deceive
the public'. Disinformation campaigns take advantage of the possibilities opened up by digital
platforms.
Responses to hybrid threats: the role of strategic communications
Responses have been categorised according to two dimensions: action areas and the time frame in
which the action should be taken. Action areas encompass (1) political or diplomatic actions,
(2) informative actions, (3) economic of financial actions, (4) intelligence actions, (5) legal actions and
(6) military actions. Regarding the time frame, actions are categorised as (1) preventive measures,
(2) detection measures and (3) response measures. Some of these measures are considered within the
scope of strategic communications. Strategic communications may, for the purposes of this study, be
defined as the 'systematic series of sustained and coherent activities, conducted across strategic,
operational and tactical levels, that enables understanding of target audiences, identifies effective
conduits, and develops and promotes ideas and opinions through those conduits to promote and
sustain particular types of behaviour' (Tatham, S., 2008, p. 3).
The essential characteristics of strategic communications can be summarised as follows:
• They are executed according to a predefined and systematic plan;
I
STOA | Panel for the Future of Science and Technology
• involve actions at strategic, operational and tactical levels;
• are developed in a competitive, and even conflictive, environment, where audiences are
subject to a constant buzz that can hamper their goals being met;
• demand a high level of coordination and synchronisation between stakeholders;
• require targeted audiences to be exactly defined;
• require selection of the most adequate communication channels;
• are aimed at informing, influencing or promoting behavioural changes in the target audiences;
• must be aligned with the overall goals of the promoter country or organisation;
• must be focused on both the short and long term.
Digital technologies have a relevant impact on strategic communications
Digital technologies open up great opportunities to spread messages amongst broad audiences in a
rapid and inexpensive way, and to create customised narratives for specific audiences. Digital
technologies can be used by both promoter of hybrid threats to fabricate and spread disinformation,
and the institutions that fight them to develop counter-narratives.
The 5G standard represents a quantum leap in the field of communication infrastructure, which is
bound to revolutionise strategic sectors. Telecommunication network security is critical to countering
hybrid threats.
Other relevant technological innovations that can act as a driver for the development of hybrid threats
are (1) artificial intelligence (AI), (2) the Internet of Things (IoT) and (3) blockchain technologies.
From theoretical analysis to practical implementations of hybrid threats and the use of
strategic communications to counter them
Seven practical implementations of hybrid threats across the world are analysed:
• the most paradigmatic case of hybrid threat: the Russian attacks against Ukraine that led to the
illegal annexation of Crimea;
• four cases that include new or enhanced hybrid attack mechanisms and/or innovative strategic
communications measures in the response: support for the Salafi movement in the Netherlands
by the Gulf monarchies; Saudi Arabian pressure on Pakistan regarding the civil war in Yemen;
foreign influence of Russia and China through academic institutions and think tanks; and
Russian electronic warfare during the Zapad 2017 exercises;
• two recent cases that have drawn the attention of policy-makers and analysts: disinformation
campaigns against NATO operations in Lithuania, and disinformation attacks in the Catalan
issue.
Altogether, these cases, reflect all the components and essential characteristics of hybrid threats, and
the responses include interesting insights into the field of strategic communications.
Successful responses that use communication strategies share common characteristics: proactivity by
implementing preventive measures, such as awareness campaigns, intense cooperation amongst
stakeholders and an elaborate, coherent and solid narrative.
Case studies show that strategic communications have a great potential to counter hybrid threats.
However, more proactive approaches, better cooperation and more intensive use of digital
technologies are needed to provide more efficient and effective responses to hybrid threats.
II
Strategic communications as a key factor in countering hybrid threats
Policy options to tackle hybrid threats
Although the EU has already implemented different measures to counter hybrid threats, vulnerabilities
persist. The policy options proposed in this study are aimed at facing hybrid threats by addressing such
vulnerabilities. They have been grouped into eight categories:
• Policies related to regulation against hybrid threats.
• Polices related to attribution of hybrid threats.
• Policies related to the role of social media platforms in the fight against hybrid threats.
• Policies aimed at raising awareness about hybrid threats.
• Policies related to coordination and information sharing between stakeholders.
• Policies related to the digital technology gap between the EU and its competitors.
• Policies aimed at supporting the use of digital channels to fight against hybrid threats.
• Policies aimed at defining proactive approaches to dealing with hybrid threats.
III
STOA | Panel for the Future of Science and Technology
Table of contents
1. Introduction _________________________________________________________________1
2. Analysis of hybrid threats________________________________________________________3
2.1. Concept and scope of hybrid threats_____________________________________________3
2.1.1. Detailed analysis of the components of hybrid threats _____________________________6
2.1.2. The special role of disinformation campaigns___________________________________12
2.2. Taxonomy and key characteristics of response actions ______________________________16
3. Strategic communications as response to hybrid threats _______________________________19
3.1. Concept and scope of strategic communications __________________________________19
3.2. Elements of strategic communications __________________________________________24
3.2.1. Impact of digital technologies on strategic communications _______________________25
3.2.2. Influence of strategic communications on economic affairs ________________________29
3.3. National initiatives _________________________________________________________30
3.4. Initiatives from international bodies ____________________________________________38
3.4.1. EU efforts to tackle hybrid threats____________________________________________38
3.4.2. NATO initiatives for leveraging strategic communications to counter hybrid threats _____44
3.4.3. Other intergovernmental initiatives __________________________________________45
4. Description of case studies _____________________________________________________46
4.1. Case 1: Rise of religious extremism in The Netherlands due to financing and support of the Salafi
movement by the Gulf monarchies ____________________________________________48
4.1.1. Geopolitical context ______________________________________________________48
4.1.2. Features of the hybrid threat _______________________________________________49
4.1.3. Strategy, tactics and tools to counter the hybrid threat ___________________________50
4.1.4. Impact and consequences _________________________________________________52
4.1.5. Conclusions of the case ___________________________________________________52
4.2. Case 2: Saudi Arabian pressure on Pakistan in the context of the civil war in Yemen ________53
4.2.1. Geopolitical context ______________________________________________________53
IV
Strategic communications as a key factor in countering hybrid threats
4.2.2. Features of the hybrid threat _______________________________________________54
4.2.3. Strategy, tactics and tools to counter the hybrid threat ___________________________55
4.2.4. Impact and consequences _________________________________________________55
4.2.5. Conclusions of the case ___________________________________________________56
4.3. Case 3: Foreign influence of Russia and China through academic institutions and think tanks_56
4.3.1. Geopolitical context ______________________________________________________57
4.3.2. Features of the hybrid threat _______________________________________________58
4.3.3. Strategy, tactics and tools to counter the hybrid threat ___________________________60
4.3.4. Impact and consequences _________________________________________________61
4.3.5. Conclusions of the case ___________________________________________________62
4.4. Case 4: Russian intervention in Ukraine __________________________________________63
4.4.1. Geopolitical context ______________________________________________________63
4.4.2. Features of the hybrid threat _______________________________________________64
4.4.3. Strategy, tactics and tools to counter the hybrid threat ___________________________68
4.4.4. Impact and consequences _________________________________________________69
4.4.5. Conclusions of the case ___________________________________________________70
4.5. Case 5: Disinformation campaigns against NATO operations in Lithuania ________________71
4.5.1. Geopolitical context ______________________________________________________71
4.5.2. Features of the hybrid threat _______________________________________________71
4.5.3. Strategy, tactics and tools to counter the hybrid threat ___________________________72
4.5.4. Impact and consequences _________________________________________________74
4.5.5. Conclusions of the case ___________________________________________________75
4.6. Case 6: Russian electronic warfare during Zapad 2017 military exercises _________________75
4.6.1. Geopolitical context ______________________________________________________76
4.6.2. Features of the hybrid threat _______________________________________________77
4.6.3. Strategy, tactics and tools to counter the hybrid threat ___________________________77
V
STOA | Panel for the Future of Science and Technology
4.6.4. Impact and consequences _________________________________________________77
4.6.5. Conclusions of the case ___________________________________________________78
4.7. Case 7: Disinformation attacks in the Catalan issue _________________________________78
4.7.1. Geopolitical context ______________________________________________________78
4.7.2. Features of the hybrid threat _______________________________________________79
4.7.3. Strategy, tactics and tools to counter the hybrid threat ___________________________81
4.7.4. Impact and consequences _________________________________________________82
4.7.5. Conclusions of the case ___________________________________________________83
5. Challenges in effectively countering hybrid threats ___________________________________85
5.1. Lack of harmonised regulation against hybrid threats, particularly against disinformation and foreign
influence ________________________________________________________________85
5.2. The effectiveness of the measures depends on the identification of perpetrators __________85
5.3. Disinformation is spread through digital means with scarce control by social media platforms86
5.4. Citizens' lack of awareness about the existence and potential damage of disinformation ____86
5.5. Current mechanisms of information sharing and coordination are proving insufficient______87
5.6. The EU is falling behind its main competitors (the US and China) in the development of key digital
technologies to tackle hybrid threats ___________________________________________87
5.7. Narratives of EU institutions and Member States try to debunk disinformation in retrospect__88
6. Policy options _______________________________________________________________89
6.1. Assessment criteria _________________________________________________________89
6.2. Policies related to regulation against hybrid threats ________________________________91
6.2.1. Development of the European Strategy against Hybrid Threats, Disinformation and Foreign
Interference (EU-HTDFI Strategy) ____________________________________________91
6.2.2. Regulation of risk analysis for hybrid threats____________________________________92
6.2.3. Improvement and harmonisation of the European legal framework against hybrid threats,
disinformation and foreign interference_______________________________________93
6.2.4. Adaptation of a sanction regime against promoters of hybrid threats, disinformation and foreign
interference ____________________________________________________________95
VI
Strategic communications as a key factor in countering hybrid threats
6.2.5. Update the interpretation made by the Cybercrime Convention Committee (T-CY) regarding
interference in electoral processes ___________________________________________96
6.2.6. Improving regulation of artificial intelligence to address hybrid threats, disinformation and foreign
interference ____________________________________________________________97
6.3. Polices related to attribution of hybrid threats ____________________________________98
6.3.1. Increasing economic resources allocated to the attribution of threats ________________98
6.3.2. Increasing economic resources allocated to the detection of disinformation __________100
6.4. Policies related to the role of social media platforms in the fight against hybrid threats ____101
6.4.1. Making the Code of Practice on Disinformation mandatory, and adding periodic external audits
____________________________________________________________________101
6.5. Policies aimed at raising awareness about hybrid threats ___________________________102
6.5.1. Incorporation of critical information analysis competencies in school curriculums ______102
6.5.2. Teacher training and ongoing development of educational resources and content _____104
6.5.3. Policymaker training ____________________________________________________105
6.5.4. Digital literacy programmes for people with low digital competency ________________105
6.5.5. Promoting citizen guides to detecting disinformation ___________________________106
6.6. Policies related to coordination and information-sharing between stakeholders _________107
6.6.1. Creation of a coordination unit at the EU level to unify responses against hybrid threats _107
6.6.2. Creation of common response mechanisms at the EU level _______________________108
6.6.3. Intensifying cooperation between the EU and NATO ____________________________110
6.6.4. Development of training exercises on countering hybrid threats involving all stakeholders111
6.6.5. Increasing operational intelligence capability at the EU level ______________________112
6.6.6. Development of the European Cybersurveillance Tool (ECT) ______________________114
6.6.7. Increasing public-private collaboration ______________________________________115
6.7. Policies related to the digital technology gap between the EU and its competitors ________116
6.7.1. Increasing R&D investment and financial support for start-ups, and scaling up companies related
to digital technologies ___________________________________________________116
6.7.2. Developing industrial policies for key technologies (5G, AI, IoT, blockchain)___________117
VII
STOA | Panel for the Future of Science and Technology
6.8. Policies aimed at supporting the use of digital channels to fight against hybrid threats ____118
6.8.1. Allowing public authorities to exceptionally intervene in digital services to counteract hybrid
threats _______________________________________________________________118
6.8.2. Improving law enforcement in 5G networks ___________________________________119
6.9. Policies aimed at defining proactive approaches to dealing with hybrid threats __________120
6.9.1. Strengthening the EU's vision and values outside the EU borders___________________120
6.9.2. Supporting free journalism against disinformation______________________________122
6.9.3. Mandatory creation of StratCom units at the highest level in EU countries and institutions123
6.9.4. Creation of an EU news agency to ensure veracity of information___________________124
6.9.5. Improving diplomatic relations with countries considered strategic challenges ________125
7. Conclusions ________________________________________________________________127
VIII
Strategic communications as a key factor in countering hybrid threats
List of figures
Figure 1: Main components of hybrid warfare __________________________________________6
Figure 2: Summary of the features of hybrid threats ____________________________________11
Figure 3: Components of disinformation campaigns ____________________________________12
Figure 4: Main features of disinformation campaigns ___________________________________16
Figure 5: Strategic communications domains _________________________________________21
Figure 6: Main features of strategic communications____________________________________23
Figure 7: Critical election incident public protocol in Canada _____________________________33
Figure 8: EU actions to counter hybrid threats _________________________________________39
Figure 9: EU bodies to combat hybrid threats _________________________________________43
Figure 10: EU CSDP missions and operations 2020_____________________________________121
IX
STOA | Panel for the Future of Science and Technology
List of tables
Table 1: Comparison of means of influence considering their novelty and legitimacy ____________5
Table 2: Components of hybrid threats used by Russia ___________________________________9
Table 3: Capacities for developing disinformation campaigns in selected countries ____________14
Table 4: Taxonomy of measures to counter hybrid threats________________________________17
Table 5: Strategic vs. non-strategic communications ____________________________________20
Table 6: NATO strategic communications' domains _____________________________________44
Table 7: Summary of the case studies _______________________________________________47
Table 8: Chronology of main cyber-attacks in the Russian-Ukrainian conflict __________________66
Table 9: Summary of policy options _________________________________________________90
Table 10: Assessment matrix for the policy option 'Development of the European Strategy against Hybrid
Threats, Disinformation and Foreign Interference (EU-HTDFI Strategy)' ______________________92
Table 11: Assessment matrix for the policy option 'Regulation of risk analysis for hybrid threats'___93
Table 12: Assessment matrix for the policy option 'Improvement and harmonisation of the European legal
framework against hybrid threats, disinformation and foreign interference' __________________94
Table 13: Assessment matrix for the policy option 'Adaptation of the legal framework for sanctions against
promoters of hybrid threats, disinformation and foreign interference' ______________________95
Table 14: Assessment matrix for the policy option 'Update the interpretation made by the Cybercrime
Convention Committee (T-CY) regarding interference in electoral processes' _________________97
Table 15: Assessment matrix for the policy option 'Improve regulation of artificial intelligence to address
hybrid threats, disinformation and foreign interference" _________________________________98
Table 16: Assessment matrix for the policy option 'Increasing economic resources allocated to the
attribution of threats' ___________________________________________________________99
Table 17: Assessment matrix for the policy option 'Increasing economic resources allocated to the detection
of disinformation" _____________________________________________________________100
Table 18: Assessment matrix for the policy option 'Making the Code of Practice on Disinformation
mandatory, and adding annual external audits" ______________________________________102
Table 19: Assessment matrix for the policy option 'Incorporation of critical information analysis
competencies in school curriculums' _______________________________________________103
Table 20: Assessment matrix for the policy option 'Teacher training and ongoing development of
educational resources and content'________________________________________________104
Table 21: Assessment matrix for the policy option 'Policymaker training'____________________105
Table 22: Assessment matrix for the policy option 'Digital literacy programmes for people with low digital
competency' _________________________________________________________________106
Table 23: Assessment matrix for the policy option 'Promoting citizen guides to detecting disinformation'
___________________________________________________________________________107
Table 24: Assessment matrix for the policy option 'Creation of a coordination unit at the EU level to unify
responses against hybrid threats' _________________________________________________108
X
Strategic communications as a key factor in countering hybrid threats
Table 25: Assessment matrix for the policy option 'Creation of common response mechanisms at the EU
level' _______________________________________________________________________109
Table 26: Assessment matrix for the policy option 'Intensifying cooperation between the EU and NATO'111
Table 27: Assessment matrix for the policy option 'Development of training exercises on countering hybrid
threats involving all stakeholders' _________________________________________________112
Table 28: Assessment matrix for the policy option 'Increasing operational intelligence capability at the EU
level' _______________________________________________________________________113
Table 29: Assessment matrix for the policy option 'Development of the European Cybersurveillance Tool
(ECT)'_______________________________________________________________________114
Table 30: Assessment matrix for the policy option 'Increasing public-private collaboration' _____115
Table 31: Assessment matrix for the policy option 'Increasing R&D investments and financial support for
start-ups and scaling up companies related to digital technologies" _______________________117
Table 32: Assessment matrix for the policy option 'Developing industrial policies for new technologies (5G,
AI, IoT, blockchain)' ____________________________________________________________118
Table 33: Assessment matrix for the policy option 'Allowing public authorities to exceptionally intervene in
digital services to counteract hybrid threats' _________________________________________119
Table 34: Assessment matrix for the policy option 'Improving law enforcement in 5G networks' __120
Table 35: Assessment matrix for the policy option 'Strengthening the EU's vision and values outside EU
borders'_____________________________________________________________________121
Table 36: Assessment matrix for the policy option 'Supporting free journalism against disinformation"123
Table 37: Assessment matrix for the policy option 'Mandatory creation of StratCom units at the highest level
in EU countries and institutions' __________________________________________________124
Table 38: Assessment matrix for the policy option 'Creation of an EU news agency to ensure veracity of
information' _________________________________________________________________125
Table 39: Assessment matrix for the policy option 'Improving diplomatic relations with countries considered
strategic challenges' ___________________________________________________________126
Table 40: Potential usefulness of digital technologies in the realm of hybrid threats ___________128
Table 41: Summary of the policy option assessment ___________________________________134
XI
STOA | Panel for the Future of Science and Technology
List of abbreviations
AAUP
American Association of University Professors
AI
Artificial Intelligence
APT
Advanced Persistent Threat
AQAP
Al Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula
CAUT
Canadian Association of University Teachers
CEC
Central Election Commission
CERT
Computer Emergency Response Team
CFI
Counter Foreign Interference
CFSP
Common Foreign and Security Policy
CI
Confucius Institute
CIS
Commonwealth of Independent States
CoE
Centre of Excellence
COP
Conference of the Parties
CSDP
Common Security and Defence Policy
CSIRT
Computer Security Incident Response Team
DCCC
Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee
DDoS
Distributed Denial of Service
DNC
Democratic National Committee
EACS
European Association for Chinese Studies
ECT
European Cybersurveillance Tool
EFP
Enhanced Forward Presence
EIB
European Investment Bank
eIDAS
electronic Identification, Authentication and trust Services
EU-CHTC
EU Counter Hybrid Threat Coordinator
EUAM
European Union Advisory Mission
FPI
Foreign Policy Instruments
GDP
Gross Domestic Product
GDPR
General Data Protection Regulation
GONGO
Governmental-Organised Non-Governmental Organisation
HTDFI
Hybrid Threats, Disinformation and Foreign Interference
ICAS
Institute for China-American Studies
IDC
Institute of Democracy and Cooperation
IEA
International Energy Agency
XII
Strategic communications as a key factor in countering hybrid threats
IGO
Intergovernmental Organisation
INTCEN
Intelligence Analysis and Situation Centre
IT
Information Technologies
IOP
Instruments of Power
IoT
Internet of Things
JIT
Joint Investigation Team
MS
Member State
NATO
North Atlantic Treaty Organisation
NCFIC
National Counter Foreign Interference Coordinator
NGO
Non-Governmental Organisation
NIS
Network and Information Security
NSS
National Security Strategy
OECD
Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development
OHCHR
Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights
OSCE
Organisation for Security and Co-operation in Europe
OSINT
Open Source Intelligence Sources
PACE
Parallel And Coordinated Exercises
RICU
Research and Information Communication Unit
ROC
Russian Orthodox Church
RT
Russia Today
R&D
Research and Development
SITE
Security Intelligent Threats to Elections
STC
Southern Transitional Council
StratCom
Strategic Communications
T-CY
Cybercrime Convention Committee
UAE
United Arab Emirates
UAV
Unmanned Aerial Vehicle
UN
United Nations
UNFCCC
United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change
UOC
Ukrainian Orthodox Church
USSR
Union of Soviet Socialist Republics
UUV
Unmanned Underwater Vehicle
XIII
Strategic communications as a key factor in countering hybrid threats
1. Introduction
In recent years, European countries, and the EU as a whole, have witnessed several attempts at
destabilising society and legitimate governments. State and non-state actors, both foreign and
domestic, have tried to undermine citizens' trust in democratic processes, exacerbate political
polarisation and spread confusion about geopolitical events by using different strategies. These
strategies, which range from disinformation campaigns to the use of migration as a pressure element,
constitute what has been called 'hybrid threats'. The promoters of hybrid threats seek to weaken their
adversary in an inexpensive and rapid way, without the need to use conventional means of warfare,
and always remaining below the threshold of direct attribution of authorship.
Many of the strategies deployed in hybrid threats are related to the fields of information and
communication. Digital technologies are of paramount importance in these areas, for both the
execution of hybrid actions and for countering them. In fact, services such as social networks or video
sharing platforms and technologies such as artificial intelligence play a double role in the realm of
hybrid threats: they can be used as both enablers and barriers to hybrid threats. In such a scenario, one
of the essential instruments to counter the effects of hybrid threats is strategic communication. For the
purposes of this study, strategic communication may be defined as a 'systematic series of sustained
and coherent activities, conducted across strategic, operational and tactical levels, that enables
understanding of target audiences, identifies effective conduits, and develops and promotes ideas and
opinions through those conduits to promote and sustain particular types of behaviour' (Tatham, S.,
2008, p. 3) Its main goal is to provide narratives to the targeted audiences through appropriate
channels in a timely way in order to prevent, detect and reduce or eliminate the consequences of
hybrid threats.
Geopolitical tensions across the world are fuelling the deployment of hybrid threats and the use of
strategic communications to counter them, by all kind of actors. The growing rivalry between the USA
and China for world economic hegemony, ongoing overt or covert conflicts in the Middle East, Russia's
desire to regain influence in the international sphere, the political instability in certain regions
(Venezuela, North and Central Africa) and the rise of extremist movements at both sides of the political
spectrum in Europe and North America are the main arenas where hybrid threats are arising. Most
recently, the Covid-19 pandemic has emerged as a relevant factor of destabilisation for security and
cooperation, even being compared to a kind of hybrid warfare (Hybrid CoE, 2020b). The Covid-19
pandemic has allowed another form of soft power exercise to flourish, promoted by China and clearly
linked to the concept of strategic communication (Karnitschnig, M., 2020).
China's economic growth in recent decades has fuelled a shift in its foreign policy, turning the country's
eyes abroad. Improving the country's external image is a vital objective for the Chinese government in
order to increase its cultural and ideological influence, and therefore enhance its soft power. The
Confucius Institute, which will be analysed as a case study in Chapter 4, is one of its most important
tools. However, the Covid-19 world crisis has jeopardised any progress made in recent years. The
emergence of the virus in China has threatened the country's image. In response, the country has
launched a major communication strategy to debunk the accusations of mismanagement and lack of
transparency at the onset of the pandemic. This strategy, although it is still too early for it to be fully
assessed, includes at least three areas of action. Firstly, China made a major effort to show the world
the efficiency of its management and governance and its spirit of international collaboration, especially
with international health organisations. Secondly, China presented itself as an ally in helping other
countries fight the virus. China sent doctors, expert teams and medical supplies to other nations such
as Italy, Spain, the Netherlands, Poland, Cambodia, Iran, Iraq, etc. Finally, China engaged in an open and
public 'blame game' with its main geopolitical competitor, the USA, regarding responsibility for the
emergence of the coronavirus. The spokesman for the Chinese Foreign Affairs Ministry accused the US
Administration of withholding information about the first cases of the virus in the United States,
arguing that it was possible the virus was introduced to China by American soldiers. In response to
1
STOA | Panel for the Future of Science and Technology
China, President Trump made public declarations related to the coronavirus crisis, calling it the Chinese
virus (Gil, T., 2020).
Far from reducing the number of hybrid threats, the current international health crisis seems to be a
breeding ground for their proliferation.
Within this context, this study aims to analyse the concept of hybrid threats, their components and the
potential means to counter them, taking into account the perspective of digital technologies and the
role that strategic communications play. Some case studies of recent hybrid threats developed across
the world are presented as an introduction to the description of the challenges the EU must face to
effectively tackle hybrid threats. Finally, policy options to address these challenges are assessed.
The study is structured as follows:
2
•
Chapter 1. Analysis of hybrid threats. This chapter describes the concept of hybrid threats and
their main components, with special focus on disinformation campaigns.
•
Chapter 2. Strategic communications as response to hybrid threats. Chapter 2 is devoted to
describing of strategic communications and its elements. It also includes a detailed analysis of
the impact of digital technologies on strategic communications, as well as a summary of
national and international initiatives using elements of strategic communications to combat
hybrid threats.
•
Chapter 3. Description of case studies. This chapter analyses seven case studies from recent
years which, overall, include all the components and essential characteristics of hybrid threats
and responses in the field of strategic communications.
•
Chapter 4. Challenges in effectively countering hybrid threats. Based on the findings of
previous chapters, Chapter 4 describes the vulnerabilities and the challenges they represent,
which the EU must face to successfully manage hybrid threats.
•
Chapter 5. Policy options. This chapter describes and assesses a comprehensive set of policy
options aimed at improving the EU's response to hybrid threats.
•
Chapter 6. Conclusions. The last chapter provides final reflections on the main findings related
to the concepts analysed (mainly hybrid threats and strategic communications), the EU's
current state of play to counter hybrid threats and the policy options that are most suitable for
tackling them.
Strategic communications as a key factor in countering hybrid threats
2. Analysis of hybrid threats
2.1. Concept and scope of hybrid threats
Defining hybrid threats
The concept of hybrid threats aims to synthesise a complex and evolving phenomenon. In recent years,
diverse institutions, from the European Parliament 1 to NATO, 2 have provided different definitions.
Nevertheless, the most comprehensive one, according to the experts consulted when drawing up this
report, is that offered by the Hybrid CoE (the European Centre of Excellence for Countering Hybrid
Threats). According to this source, the essential characteristics of hybrid threats are as follows (Hybrid
CoE, 2020a):
•
They are coordinated and synchronised;
•
deliberately target the systemic vulnerabilities of democratic states'3 and institutions;
•
use a wide range of means;
•
exploit the thresholds of detection and attribution as well as different interfaces (war-peace,
internal-external, local-state, national-international, friend-enemy);
•
aim to influence different forms of decision-making at the local (regional), state, or institutional
level;
•
favour and/or achieve the agent's strategic goals;
•
undermine and/or hurt the target.
Both the literature reviewed and the experts interviewed agree that two of the greatest strengths of
hybrid threats, which make them extremely difficult to address, are their ambiguity and the difficulty
of attributing them to a particular actor (NATO StratCom CoE, 2019). Promoters of hybrid threats
usually conceal their real intentions and objectives. They also try to deceive the victims about the origin
of the threat, so the victims cannot adequately respond, as it is very difficult for them to identify who is
really responsible.
Means and objectives of hybrid threats
As the Hybrid CoE states in the previous definition, hybrid threats are developed through a wide set of
means and tools. The NATO StratCom Centre of Excellence includes the following (NATO StratCom CoE,
2019): (1) disinformation campaigns; (2) cyberattacks; (3) facilitated migration; (4) espionage; (5)
manipulation of international law; (6) threats of force (by both irregular armed groups and
conventional forces); (7) political subversion; (8) sabotage; (9) terrorism; (10) economic pressure; (11)
energy dependency.
Hybrid threats can pursue specific objectives linked to specific situations related to the victim, for
instance, getting a candidate to win an election by meddling in the electoral process through
1
'A phenomenon resulting from convergence and interconnection of different elements, which together form a more
complex and multidimensional threat' (EPRS, 2015).
2
From the point of view of NATO, hybrid threats are 'A type of threat that combines conventional, irregular and asymmetric
activities in time and space', stressing that this is a threat that owes its dangerousness to the synergies generated by its
various components when used in combination (Treverton, G. et al., 2018).
3
It should be noted that our analysis has shown, nevertheless, that hybrid threats can also target non-democratic states.
3
STOA | Panel for the Future of Science and Technology
disinformation. However, they are usually aimed at more strategic and long-term goals such as
(Alvargonzález, A., 2018):
•
Eroding citizens' trust in their institutions.
•
Generating mistrust in the democratic system.
•
Undermining social cohesion or social models of states, political communities (such as the EU)
or international organisations (NATO, for example).
•
Weakening its victims' government system.
•
Convincing both the victim's population and its own the decay of the political system.
•
Economic destabilisation.
•
Influencing political decision-making to further promote the attacker's own agenda.
Through these goals, the attackers, both state and non-state actors, seek to destabilise the victim
(another state, a specific community or group) while reinforcing their political vision and values
amongst their own audiences.
A key component of hybrid threats: the digital technologies
Neither the objectives nor the means used to develop a hybrid threat are new. All of them have been
used throughout history to weaken enemies without the need for conventional acts of warfare. The
differential and key component of modern hybrid threats, which makes them more harmful than ever
before, is the use of digital technologies. They have 'the unprecedented ability to use information as
an element of warfare with much greater volume, velocity, breadth and depth and precision than
previously possible, because global IT systems have made us more connected, more automated and
allow for more precise messaging than ever before.' (Gibson, K. H., 2019).
In recent years numerous cases of hybrid threats where the technology component has become
particularly important have been observed. One of the most serious and well-known was the
cyberattacks in Estonia in 2007. Through distributed denial-of-service (DDoS), attacks targeted many
institutions (the government, parliament, the police, etc.), businesses (banks, internet service
providers) and critical infrastructure, causing an unprecedented national disruption and an
extraordinary economic damage (Ottis, R., 2008).
More recently, probably the most mediatised case of a hybrid threat was the disinformation and
meddling campaign -attributed to Russia (Mueller, R., 2019)- during the United States presidential
elections in 2016 (US Senate, 2019). The attackers, GRU (Russian military intelligence agency) units,
used cyberespionage techniques to hack Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee (DCCC) and
Democratic National Committee (DNC) systems and steal sensitive information. GRU officers sent
hundreds of phishing emails to Clinton Campaign employees and volunteers in order to steal accounts
and credentials to gain access to the systems. Once the attackers accessed and stole the information,
it was leaked to the public opinion through the website DCLeaks.com, the Guccifer 2.0 WordPress blog
and Wikileaks at an opportune time, with the intention of weakening the Democratic Party candidate,
Hillary Clinton, and preventing her election as US President (Mueller, R., 2019). In this case, the attackers
also used fake accounts on social networks to magnify the impact of the disinformation campaign
against Clinton's candidacy, based on the stolen information (Office of the Director of National
Intelligence, 2017).
These few examples show the power of hybrid threats (and especially the impact of digital
technologies in their informational components) to change others' beliefs, opinions, expectations,
attitudes, preferences, emotions and willingness to act.
4
Strategic communications as a key factor in countering hybrid threats
The scope of hybrid threats: from influence to hybrid warfare
As Hanna Smith, Director of Strategic Planning and Responses at the Hybrid CoE, has pointed out, the
means of influencing, which is one of the main goals of hybrid threats, are more complex and
multidimensional than just material means (Smith, H., 2017). Within the means of influencing, it is
necessary to consider so-called soft power elements: education, cultural attractiveness, technology,
science, diplomacy, good governance, etc. The influential capacity of different countries and actors in
world politics may vary significantly and is not uniquely connected to so-called hard power, aggressive
and coercive measures in the military and economic spheres.
Both types of power, when properly combined, can be used to influence and take part in a hybrid
threat. This was considered, for example, in the Strategic Defence Review of Georgia, which was
approved in 2017. The Georgian government understood that the combined use of elements of soft
power and economic pressure by a third party (Russia) against Georgia's national integrity represents
one of the greatest challenges for its security environment (Ministry of Defence of Georgia, 2017).
The use of mechanisms of influence, based to a greater or lesser extent on soft power techniques, have
led, for instance, to Russian businessmen linked to President Putin financing the think tank Dialogue of
Civilisations Research Institute (DOC) in Berlin, which opened in 2016 (Treverton, G. et al., 2018). This
think tank has been cited by several experts interviewed as a paradigmatic example of Russian
attempts to influence Western countries through soft power measures.4
From everything mentioned, the combination of soft and hard power actions, usually in the form of
hybrid threats, have become a key component of a new way of managing international relations and
consolidating the influence of states. The problem is that this new scenario blurs the line between
influence and interference in national affairs, and it is not always clear when the principle of nonintervention, and therefore international law, is violated.
The following table outlines a brief comparative analysis of means of influence. The comparison is
based on two main characteristics: their novelty (columns) and their legitimacy5 (rows). Hybrid threats
usually encompass non-legitimate means, both traditional and non-traditional. However, legitimate
means such as military exercises can also be used to reinforce the impact of hybrid threats.
Table 1: Comparison of means of influence considering their novelty and legitimacy
Traditional
-
Legitimate
-
Non-legitimate
-
Source: (Hoffman, F. G., 2018)
Security cooperation and foreign
military sales
Economic sanctions
Military presence / engagements /
exercises
Freedom of navigation exercises
(maritime or aerospace domains
Political subversion by penetration or
false-front organisations
Economic corruption
Propaganda / psychological
operations
Sponsored criminal activity
4
See Chapter 4.3.
5
Legitimacy is understood as respect for international law and agreements
Non-traditional
-
-
-
Public diplomacy through
non explicit support to
IGO/NGO
Foreign internal defence
Misinformation /
disinformation (non-criminal
/ freedom of expression)
Disinformation (when it
violates the rule of law)
Cyber intrusion / cyber
corruption / disruption
Electoral interference
5
STOA | Panel for the Future of Science and Technology
An actor (state or non-state) may increase the strength of a hybrid operation by intensifying one or
more tools (military, political, economic, civil, information, cyberattacks, etc.) or by synchronising
multiple tools in order to achieve a greater combined effect. The following figure shows the most
important elements of so-called hybrid warfare, a concept used in the military context and analogous
to that of a hybrid threat. Those elements in which the technological element is important or even
decisive are highlighted in red.
Figure 1: Main components of hybrid warfare
Source: (Cubeiro, E., 2018)
In order to complement the analysis of the concept and scope of hybrid threats, the following section
describes their most relevant components from a communication point of view, and the use of digital
technologies.
2.1.1. Detailed analysis of the components of hybrid threats
As described above, hybrid threats encompass a wide range of means and tools to help the promoter
achieve its goals. The following analysis will take into consideration the components suggested by
Treverton, G et al. (2018).
Funding organisations and political parties for propaganda 6
This component refers to the creation of organisations (think tanks, academic institutions) or political
parties that promote and spread friendly visions amongst different groups (citizens, journalists,
politicians, public servants, academics) according to the sponsor's interests. Indeed, this tool is one of
the oldest means of political and social influence, the impact of which is now amplified by using digital
services (social networks, online media outlets).
Russia can be considered one of the most active actors funding organisations in foreign countries.
Allegedly Kremlin-funded think tanks are primarily focused on legitimising the Russian worldview by
portraying a more favourable vision of its narrative and by defending its policies, even in operations of
foreign influence (Hansen, F. et al., 2018). In addition to the aforementioned Dialogue of Civilisations
Research Institute, the Kremlin think tank Russian Institute for Strategic Studies (RISS), with offices across
the Baltic states, has been accused of trying to hinder Montenegro's integration into NATO, meddling
6
Propaganda can be defined as 'dissemination of information -facts, arguments, rumours, half-truths, or lies- to influence
public opinion' (Lannes, B., 1999).
6
Strategic communications as a key factor in countering hybrid threats
in Bulgaria's national elections (Treverton, G. et al., 2018), and defining a plan to influence the 2016 US
presidential elections (Parker, N. et al., 2017).
China has also adopted this strategy to increase its foreign influence. For example, in 2015, Beijing
promoted the creation of the think tank Institute for China-American Studies (ICAS) in Washington, the
goal of which was to spread China's political vision amongst US politicians and economic leaders
(Treverton, G. et al., 2018).
A similar approach has been used to economically support political parties with favourable views about
the sponsor state. Some political parties from diverse Member States (France, Germany, Spain and
Greece, amongst others) have been accused of receiving funds from foreign states in exchange for
supporting their interests in Europe. 7
Strategic leaks and cybertools
As the Hybrid CoE has pointed out, 'information and documents obtained via cyber or traditional
espionage can be leaked to influence public opinion, perception, and discourse' (Treverton, G. et al.,
2018, p. 50). Strategic leaks of information stolen through cyberespionage techniques can pursue
diverse objectives, such as eroding of citizens' trust in democratic institutions (government agencies,
political parties), damaging the reputation of public figures (politicians, public servants, journalists) or
even blackmailing those public figures to act in favour of the leak promoter.
Cyber spies exploit computing system vulnerabilities to gaining unauthorised access and steal sensitive
information. The information is usually leaked through specific websites such as Wikileaks at an
opportune moment. One of the most dangerous tools used by cyber spies is the so-called advance
persistent threats (APTs), which allow highly customised attacks to be carried out and can act for
months, or even years, without being detected (Rivera, R. et al., 2017).
The most well-known cases (leaks of information stolen from the Democratic National Committee and
the Clinton presidential campaign in 2016, and the leaks of e-mails related to the Emmanuel Macron
campaign in 2017) were carried out in the context of presidential elections in two Western countries
(USA and France) with the intention of influencing citizens' decisions and thus hampering the normal
progression of the electoral process.
Apart from cyberespionage, ENISA (the European Union Agency for Cybersecurity) maintains a detailed
taxonomy of cyber threats (ENISA, 2016), many of which can be used to develop a hybrid attack: (1)
communication network outages; (2) interception of communications; (3) network traffic
manipulation; (4) critical infrastructure sabotage; (5) identity theft; (6) distributed denial-of-service
(DDoS); (7) malware; (8) manipulation of information.
Social media and domestic media outlets
Propaganda campaigns are often aimed at both foreign and domestic audiences. These campaigns use
both traditional media outlets (TV and radio channels) and digital means (social networks), adapting
the messages to each audience. When media outlets, whether traditional or digital, are sponsored by
specific states, they tend to spread information from the perspective of those state sponsors. That is
the case of two well-known media outlets, Sputnik and RT, which have delegations in many Western
countries and content in several languages, the main objective of which is to inform Western citizens
about current events from the Kremlin's perspective, favouring Russian interests.
Social media platforms are helping perpetrators develop new forms of influence. They allow the
information offered by foreign official media to be altered, increasing the diffusion of information
provided by local media, as well as generating new information through state-sponsored accounts.
This was the case of Russian influence in the US presidential elections. Disinformation began in foreign
7
(Oliveira, I., 2016); (Sciorilli, S., 2019); (Marcos, J., 2016); (Foster, P. & Holehouse, M., 2016).
7
STOA | Panel for the Future of Science and Technology
media outlets such as RT or Sputnik. Then, it was amplified on a mass scale through bots and trolls on
social networks (mainly Twitter and Facebook), which finally facilitated its spread through traditional
media.
While the use of traditional media outlets for propaganda campaigns are aimed at broad audiences,
with almost no segmentation capacity, social media platforms represent a great opportunity to spread
personalised messages to very specific audiences. The vast amount of information that social media
platforms have about their users can be exploited to profile them and define microtargeting campaigns
according to those profiles, improving the effectiveness of propaganda.
Paramilitary organisations
It is also necessary to point out the role played by paramilitary organisations in hybrid conflicts. They
act as local proxies following orders from foreign governments, without revealing their origin. The use
of diverse paramilitary organisations has been witnessed in recent conflicts, such as the so-called Night
Wolves, a Russian ultranationalist motorcycle club with different branches in Eastern European
countries (Peter, L., 2018). One of its most relevant interventions took place during the Crimean crisis,
intimidating the civilian population that opposed the referendum to decide on the annexation to
Russia. Other examples, also related to the illegal annexation of Crimea by Russia and further attacks
by Russian-backed forces in the Donbass region (eastern Ukraine), are the Russian Orthodox Army, the
Vostok Battalion, the neo-Cossacks (Darczewska, J., 2017) and the so-called little green men. This last
armed group, equipped with modern weapons, deployed masked soldiers in green military uniforms
without any type of identification or badge. Although they were part of the Russian armed forces, as
the Russian President Vladimir Putin finally admitted (Schreck, C., 2019), they operated in a covert
manner in order to hide their connection with the Russian government. This way Russia could avoid
formal warfare with Ukraine and military responses from intergovernmental organisations such as
NATO. 8
Religious influence
Mechanisms of influence can also be deployed by making use of religious matters. For example, the
Russian government has been trying to use religious influence to support the Kremlin's interests in
European countries. The diverse local churches within the Orthodox Church can be used not only to
tighten the bonds between communities, which may be positive, but also for influencing minorities or
exacerbating nationalist sentiments. The other way around, the Russian Orthodox Church has
influenced the ideological motivations related to internal security among Russian politicians and
military leaders, trying to gradually paint the national defence of Russia as a spiritual and holy mission
(Adamsky, D., 2019).
Religion is also used by other state and non-state actors to influence religious believers in foreign
countries. It is well known that the spread of religious propaganda through social networks by terrorist
groups like ISIS or Al Qaeda is used to justify their terrorist attacks and inflame their supporters around
the world. Countries such as Saudi Arabia or Iran also use religion to expand their influence beyond
their borders. They are the most powerful countries in the Middle East and the main representatives of
the two major branches of Islam: Sunni Islam (Saudi Arabia) and Shia Islam (Iran). Religious matters are
often used to influence both neighbouring countries and the Muslim population in other regions. For
instance, Saudi Arabia is one of the greatest financers of Salafist mosques and Islamic centres in EU
countries (AOAV, 2017), from where one of the most conservative ideologies within Sunni Islam,
Salafism, is spread. 9
8
Although Ukraine was not a NATO member country at the time of the Crimea's invasion by Russia, they cooperated closely.
9
For more details, see Chapter 4.1.
8
Strategic communications as a key factor in countering hybrid threats
Economic pressure
Means of influence based on economic aspects are also very effective as elements of pressure, and can
have different forms: foreign aid, use of borrowed resources, foreign influence in strategic economic
sectors (energy, tourism, agriculture, etc.) (Treverton, G. et al., 2018). These have been common
practices in most recent conflicts. China, given its economic power, is one of the international actors
that most uses economic pressure to threaten its competitors and broaden its influence.
Concerns about migration
Migration can be considered another relevant component of hybrid threats when it is used by a state
actor as a mechanism to pressure or influence other countries or international organisations. Promoters
take advantage of Europeans' concern regarding this topic, as reflected in recent official surveys
(Eurobarometer, 2019, p. 15). At present, some countries use migration as a political weapon to coerce
other states to act in a certain way. One of the most notorious cases in the EU refers to the Turkish use
of migrants as a pressure element at the Greek border. Diverse indicators, mainly data from the UN
Refugee Agency, showed an increase in migratory flows through the Evros river, the natural border
between Greece and Turkey, which was the result of tensions in Greek-Turkish relations. The Greek
authorities confirmed the deliberate impassibility of the Turkish border guards, allowing large groups
of refugees to cross their border with Greece to pressure Athens and Brussels on visa liberalisation for
Turkish citizens (Euroactiv, 2018).
Like other components of hybrid threats, this phenomenon can hardly be managed autonomously by
each country. In the EU, a comprehensive approach that takes into account European interests as a
whole is still lacking, as Member States act according to their needs, perceptions and circumstances,
supporting the initiatives that best match their interests (Fine, S., 2019). An example of this lack of
common vision about migration among EU countries can be found along the shore of the
Mediterranean. While some Mediterranean EU countries denied NGO vessels devoted to rescuing
migrants off the coasts of Maghreb countries (mainly Libya) access to their ports, 10 other EU countries
willing to host those migrants found it very difficult to do so (Sanders, L., 2019).
Russia, the most active promoter of hybrid threats against Western countries
Russia has been identified by most of the experts interviewed as the major state actor in using hybrid
threats against Western countries. Because of its importance in the international context, the following
table, based on (Davis, J. R., 2015), shows a compendium of the most significant hybrid actions that the
Russian government has deployed in recent years (especially during the illegal Crimean annexation),
in support of its claims.
Table 2: Components of hybrid threats used by Russia
Level
Action
-
Tactical level
-
10
Combination of irregular and tactical forces with advanced conventional
weapons and elite regular military special operations forces (Spetsnaz)
pursuing a common objective.
Use of combatants linked to irregular units and local pro-Russian criminal
gangs.
Use of cyber-attacks against critical communication infrastructure to
interrupt the flow of information and allow the Russians to obtain
information about enemy intentions and actions.
The most notorious example was the conflict between Italy and the NGO Sea Watch in June 2019, which concluded with
the arrest of the Captain Carola Rackete after 60 migrants rescued off the Libyan coasts disembarked in Lampedusa, defying
the Italian banning on NGO vessels bringing migrants to the Italian coasts (Holroyd, M., 2019).
9
STOA | Panel for the Future of Science and Technology
Operational level
-
Synchronisation of all IOPs (Instruments of Power) towards a common
goal.
- Exploiting information from IOPs to build competing strategic narratives
that affect multiple audiences:
o External and international audiences: Russia employs a strategic
narrative that gains the support of international organisations
seeking peaceful resolution of conflicts.
o Domestic audiences: Russia promotes a strategic narrative aimed
at maintaining internal support by combining the exaltation of
nationalism and denouncing the oppression of its own people in
foreign countries.
- Use of diplomatic 'ceasefire' as a tactical pause in ongoing operations, to
consolidate, reorganise and relocate forces to achieve a position of
relative advantage for future missions, allowing Russia to resume
hostilities again at the time and place it chooses.
- Use of economic IOPs to threaten and coerce other nations into action or
inaction. Economic sanctions, destabilisation of energy prices and physical
access to energy resources, and the actions of transnational criminal
organisations can deter a country from acting.
- Exhibition (more or less veiled) of the enormous destructive capacities of
cyber-attacks against financial and/or energy infrastructure.
The Russian government has been able to combine various forms of paramilitary
action with economic, intelligence and diplomatic IOPs, under an integrated
approach, which has allowed it to keep the conflict below the minimum threshold
required to invoke the collective defence guarantee of Article 5 of the NATO
Treaty.
-
Strategic level
Source: (Davis, J. R., 2015)
10
Linking tactical level actions with information operations to achieve an
operational level of deception.
Deployment of conventional military capabilities along the borders with
the target countries, conducting demonstrations and training exercises
that divert attention from other operations.
Covert movements of arms and paramilitary elements under the cover of
humanitarian aid to the ongoing crisis.
Performing psychological and informational operations to help achieve
the operational deception. These operations incite violence to force
people to act when necessary. Conversely, they can also intimidate and
coerce people into not acting.
Strategic communications as a key factor in countering hybrid threats
Summary of hybrid threats' components
The following image summarises the characteristics of hybrid threats, the means and tools used to carry
out such threats, and the strategic and long-term goals they pursue.
Figure 2: Summary of the features of hybrid threats
Source: own elaboration based on desk research and interviews
11
STOA | Panel for the Future of Science and Technology
2.1.2. The special role of disinformation campaigns
As the Joint Research Centre has pointed out, the term 'fake news' is a newcomer to the news media
vocabulary, especially since the US presidential elections in November 2016, when its use became
widespread (Martens, B. et al., 2018). However, the European Commission, following the suggestions
of the High Level Expert Group on fake news and online disinformation, has opted to use the term
disinformation for two main reasons (High Level Group on fake news and online disinformationEuropean Commission, 2018, p. 10):
1
The term 'fake news' does not adequately reflect the complexity of disinformation.
Disinformation implies not only the use of fake content but also fabricated information
blended with real facts, and goes beyond news creation.
2
The term 'fake news' has been appropriated by some politicians and their supporters, who
use it to dismiss any unfavourable information related to them and to discredit critical news
media.
Disinformation can:
•
'threaten democratic political and policy-making processes;
•
put the protection of EU citizens' health, security and their environment at risk;
•
erode trust in institutions and in digital and traditional media;
•
harm democracy by hampering the ability of citizens to take informed decisions;
•
polarise debates;
•
deepen tensions in society;
•
undermine electoral systems' (European Commission, 2019d).
Disinformation is created by distorting the reality with the aim of generating confusion amongst
citizens and exacerbating political polarisation and division. Foreign governments or domestic populist
movements can leverage the effects of disinformation to weaken the social and political landscape of
the countries attacked. The following figure shows the five essential elements of disinformation which,
when properly combined by the attacker, represent its greatest danger.
Figure 3: Components of disinformation campaigns
Source: own elaboration
12
Strategic communications as a key factor in countering hybrid threats
The first phase of a disinformation campaign is the creation of manipulated content, which usually
addresses a real fact from a distorted perspective. After the fake content is fabricated, disinformation
promoters try to attribute it to reputable sources. This has two main goals: to increase the credibility of
the false information in order to amplify its impact, and undermine the reputation of the source when
the disinformation is discovered. The fake content is complemented and backed through false
arguments, and relies on media outlets and digital platforms to reach broad audiences and meet its
goals: misleading the public opinion to undermine social and political cohesion and weaken
democratic institutions.
Disinformation campaigns take advantage of the numerous options for spreading information that
have been opened up by digital platforms. They allow fake content to be developed and disseminated,
thanks to the use of bot accounts, which have a credible, professional appearance and a low cost, and
without requiring high journalist skills. They also allow direct connection with the targeted audiences,
bypassing traditional gatekeepers (news editorial committees) and avoiding fact-checking (European
Commission, 2018a).
Disinformation campaigns promoters also seek another objective: delegitimising one of the
fundamental actors in democracies, the journalism sector. They try to undermine citizens' trust in
media outlets, companies and specific journalists in order to enhance the credibility of false
information: if no media outlet or journalist is reliable, false information becomes as credible as any
other information, increasing its impact (Hybrid CoE, 2019). According to the Special Eurobarometer
503 (European Commission, 2020d), 62 % of European citizens consider media outlets the principal
agents to combat disinformation, surpassing public authorities (53 %), social media platforms (48 %),
the citizens themselves (28 %) and educational institutions (22 %). Given the key role that citizens give
to media outlets in the fight against disinformation, it is not surprising that one of the first goals of any
disinformation campaign is to undermine their reputation.
Another major issue when dealing with disinformation spread through digital means is the so far
unresolved dilemma of social media platforms' responsibility on the veracity of content. The legal
status of social media platforms regarding key aspects such as transparency or accountability remains
undefined, in contrast with the relevant regulation to which the media sector is subject (Hybrid CoE,
2019). This issue is increasingly relevant, as online social networks and other online channels are
extensively used by citizens of all ages to access news: 88 % of people under 25, 85 % of people aged
between 25-50 and 70 % of people over 50 use social media weekly to stay informed (European
Commission, 2018a). Despite high levels of use, these channels (social networks, online news
aggregators and online blogs) are the least trusted by citizens (European Commission, 2018a).
The phenomenon of disinformation is not easy to measure. For instance, the EUvsDisinfo Database,11
part of the flagship project of the East StratCom Task Force, includes over 6 500 examples of proKremlin disinformation12 collected since the launch of the project (May 2015). However, the real impact
of each piece of disinformation is unknown.
The Oxford Internet Institute tried to quantify and describe organised online disinformation and
propaganda campaigns around the world (Bradshaw, S. & Howard, P., 2019). According to this source,
the number of countries where such campaigns have taken place increased from 28 in 2017 to 70 in
2019. The campaigns in each country were promoted by one or various actors: government agencies,
politicians and political parties, private contractors, civil society organisations, or citizens and
influencers. Regarding the techniques and tools, 87 % of countries used human accounts to spread
propaganda and disinformation on social media platforms, 80 % used bot accounts (automated
accounts designed to mimic human behaviour online), 11 % used cyborg accounts (which mix
automation with human treatment of the content) and 7 % used hacked or stolen accounts. The
11
https://euvsdisinfo.eu/disinformation-cases/
12
Data consulted in January 2020.
13
STOA | Panel for the Future of Science and Technology
objectives ranged from using propaganda to attack political opposition (89 % of countries), spreading
pro-government or pro-party ideas (71 %), suppressing participation through personal attacks (63 %),
driving division and polarisation (34 %), and distracting conversations and criticism away from
important issues (20 %).
The most widely used communication strategy was the creation of disinformation and media
manipulation (75 % of countries). 73 % of countries contributed to disinformation campaigns by
amplifying their impact (for instance, using specific hashtags on a mass scale), 68 % used statesponsored trolls to attack political opponents, 27 % developed data-driven strategies to target specific
communities with disinformation and 16 % reported content or accounts on a mass scale (usually
critics of the government or political party) in order to get them taken down by social media platforms'
automated systems (Bradshaw, S. & Howard, P., 2019).
While the above figures refer to campaigns developed internally in each country, two of the main social
networks, Facebook and Twitter, have pointed to seven countries as the most active in foreign
influence operations through social media services: China, India, Iran, Pakistan, Russia, Saudi Arabia and
Venezuela (Bradshaw, S. & Howard, P., 2019). The following table summarises, based on the information
collected by the Oxford Internet Institute, the capacities, tools and strategies developed by these
countries to create disinformation campaigns.
Table 3: Capacities for developing disinformation campaigns in selected countries
CYBER TROOP
CAPACITY
China
India
TYPES OF
FALSE
ACCOUNTS
HIGH CAPACITY
Bots
Team size: estimates
of 300 000-2 000 000
people working in
local and regional
offices
Human
MEDIUM CAPACITY
Bots
Multiple teams
ranging in size from
50-300 people.
Multiple contracts
and advertising
expenditures valued
at over 1.4M USD
Human
HIGH CAPACITY
Bots
6 000 USD spent on
FB advertisements
Human
Iran
MESSAGING STRATEGIES
Spreading pro-government or
pro-party propaganda;
Creation of disinformation or
manipulated media;
Attacking the opposition or
mounting smear campaigns;
Mass-reporting of content or
accounts;
Distracting or diverting
conversations or criticism away
from important issues;
Data-driven strategies;
Trolling, doxing or
harassment;
Suppressing participation
through personal attacks or
harassment.
Amplifying content and media
online.
Spreading pro-government or
pro-party propaganda;
Creation of disinformation or
manipulated media;
Attacking the opposition or
mounting smear campaigns;
Data-driven strategies;
Driving division and
polarisation;
Stolen or hacked
accounts
COMMUNICATION
STRATEGIES
Trolling, doxing or
harassment;
Amplifying content and media
online.
Spreading pro-government or
pro-party propaganda;
Creation of disinformation or
manipulated media;
Attacking the opposition or
mounting smear campaigns;
Mass-reporting of content or
accounts;
Suppressing participation
through personal attacks or
harassment.
Data-driven strategies;
Trolling, doxing or
harassment;
Amplifying content and media
online.
Pakistan
14
MEDIUM
CAPACITY
Bots
Human
Spreading pro-government
or pro-party propaganda;
Creation of disinformation
or manipulated media;
Strategic communications as a key factor in countering hybrid threats
(No specific data)
Attacking the opposition or
mounting smear campaigns;
Suppressing participation
through personal attacks or
harassment.
HIGH CAPACITY
Bots
(No specific data)
Human
Cyborg
accounts
Stolen or
hacked
accounts
Russia
Data-driven strategies;
Amplifying content and
media online.
Spreading pro-government
or pro-party propaganda;
Creation of disinformation
or manipulated media;
Attacking the opposition or
mounting smear campaigns;
Mass-reporting of content
or accounts;
Distracting or diverting
conversations or criticism
away from important issues;
Data-driven strategies;
Driving division and
polarisation;
Trolling, doxing or
harassment;
Amplifying content and
media online.
Suppressing participation
through personal attacks or
harassment.
HIGH CAPACITY
Saudi
Arabia
Estimated costs of
150 GBP for Twitter
hashtag trends
Bots
Human
Cyborg
accounts
Spreading pro-government
or pro-party propaganda;
Attacking the opposition or
mounting smear campaigns;
Driving division and
polarisation;
Creation of disinformation
or manipulated media;
Trolling, doxing or
harassment;
Amplifying content and
media online.
Suppressing participation
through personal attacks or
harassment.
Venezuela
HIGH CAPACITY
Bots
Team size
estimates of
multiple brigades
of 500 people.
Evidence of formal
training
Human
Spreading pro-government
or pro-party propaganda;
Creation of disinformation
or manipulated media;
Attacking the opposition or
mounting smear campaigns;
Trolling, doxing or
harassment;
Distracting or diverting
conversations or criticism
away from important issues;
Amplifying content and
media online.
Suppressing participation
through personal attacks or
harassment.
Source: (Bradshaw, S. & Howard, P., 2019)
Disinformation campaigns are not only used in the civil sphere. The disinformation element is also
considered a major military component. Valery Gerasimov, the Chief of Staff of the Russian Armed
Forces since 2012, who is considered the father of using disinformation as an essential part of modern
military doctrine (McKew, M., 2017), pointed out the challenges of new forms of warfare in his essay
'The value of science is in the foresight'. He argued that 'the information space opens wide asymmetrical
possibilities for reducing the fighting potential of the enemy' (Gerasimov, V., 2013, p. 27).
The following figure summarises the main features of disinformation campaigns.
15
STOA | Panel for the Future of Science and Technology
Figure 4: Main features of disinformation campaigns
Source: own elaboration based on desk research and interviews
2.2. Taxonomy and key characteristics of response actions
Combating hybrid threats, especially when they include disinformation components, is a difficult task
and a great challenge for liberal democracies, since the measures adopted, in addition to being able to
neutralise the impacts of the threats, must respect the exercise of fundamental rights, such as the rights
to freedom of expression and freedom of information. These are restrictions that do not apply in
authoritarian and undemocratic states.
An effective way to classify the necessary countermeasures is by looking at when they should be
taken. Thus, they can be categorised as:
1
Preventive measures: aimed at taking all necessary precautions to ensure that hybrid threats
do not materialise or that, if they do, damage is eliminated or limited. Deterrence tools are
considered a kind of preventive measure.
2
Detection measures: aimed at discovering when one is a victim of a hybrid threat.
3
Response measures: aimed at responding effectively to a hybrid threat when it has already
materialised, including measures to restore affected systems to their original condition, and
even offensive actions against the attackers (diplomatic, economic, military, informative, etc.).
The following table shows a high-level taxonomy of measures that can be adopted at different levels
(political, diplomatic, informative, economic, intelligence and legal) to counteract hybrid threats
according to the described temporal model.
16
Strategic communications as a key factor in countering hybrid threats
Table 4: Taxonomy of measures to counter hybrid threats
Political or
diplomatic
actions
RESPONSE
measures
measures
measures
International agreements
on the limits of influence,
what interference is and
applicable sanctions.
•
Identification of potentially
harmful stakeholders and
clarifying their links with
the offending countries.
•
•
Collaborative
measures
with
international
organisations
for
the
defence
of
protected
interests, such as NATO.
•
Risk assessments to identify
vulnerabilities
(social,
economic, technical, etc.).
•
Awareness-raising
campaigns on the danger
of news spilled in unreliable
media, particularly in times
of special relevance (such
as election periods).
•
Increase media capacity to
detect
and
publicise
potential risks to the
reputation of a group,
organisation or even the
State itself.
•
•
Promote education in
detecting and preventing
hybrid threats from an early
age.
•
Develop training initiatives
amongst
vulnerable
groups: elderly people,
people with low digital
literacy skills.
•
Economic of
financial
actions
DETECTION
•
•
Informative
actions
PREVENTIVE
•
Increase economic, energy
and
technological
independence from risk
countries or providers.
Increase investments in
R&D
related
to
technologies that allow
detecting and preventing
Fast and efficient
supranational
communication
procedures
for
coordinated action.
Clarify the role of
social
media
platforms
in the
detection
of
disinformation
campaigns.
Promote the role of
and
fact-checkers
create
communication and
collaboration
channels with the
authorities
(government,
judiciary,
law
enforcement
agencies).
•
Foster
civil
engagement
to
detect disinformation
and exposure the
promoters.
•
Increase monitoring
of digital channels to
quickly
discover
disinformation
campaigns
•
Increase economic
resources allocated to
detection
of
disinformation.
•
International
sanctions
for
those countries
that have caused
a hybrid threat.
•
Personal
sanctions
for
'creators
or
inspirers'
of
hybrid
threats
(leaders, political
or
commercial
representatives,
etc.).
•
Publicise
and
disseminate the
attribution of a
threat.
•
Inform citizens of
behavioural
patterns
for
damage control.
•
Warn
the
attackers of the
consequences of
developing new
hybrid threats.
•
Increase
economic
resources
allocated
attribution
threats.
•
Economic
sanctions
to
of
for
17
STOA | Panel for the Future of Science and Technology
hybrid threats (AI, human
language
technologies,
5G,
cybersecurity,
blockchain).
Intelligence
actions
Legal
actions
Military
actions
offending
countries.
•
Increase budget for raising
awareness.
•
Expand
resources and
expert training, including
joint exercises between
Member States to learn
how to face hybrid threats
in a coordinated way.
•
Identification of domestic
stakeholders that could
collaborate
in
the
spreading of the hybrid
threat.
•
Development
of
detection
tools
against hybrid threats
and fake content.
•
Increase
publicprivate information
sharing.
•
Clarification of the legal
responsibilities of different
stakeholders.
•
•
Ensure that legislation is
appropriate for digital
environments
and
channels.
Ensure
that
legislation
is
appropriate
for
digital environments
and channels.
•
•
Harmonisation of the legal
framework in the EU.
•
Guarantee
appropriate
military expertise on the
whole scope of hybrid
threats.
•
Improve
coordination
between different corps
and
with
the
civil
authorities.
•
Source: own elaboration from desk research and interviews
18
Secure and rapid
communication
channels
with
stakeholders
to
provide information
on detected threats.
Rapid and cohesive
response plans and
strategies.
•
Economic
sanctions
for
stakeholders
(organisations,
groups
or
individuals,
domestic
or
foreign) that have
benefited from
the effects of a
hybrid threat.
•
Foster
international
information
sharing.
•
Enhanced
coordination
response
mechanisms
between Member
States and foreign
partners.
•
Ensure
that
legislation
is
appropriate for
digital
environments
and channels.
•
Legislative
simplification for
rapid response to
threats.
•
Proportional
military actions.
Strategic communications as a key factor in countering hybrid threats
3. Strategic communications as response to hybrid threats
The response to hybrid threats demands coordinated action in different domains. Response actions
alone are not enough to effectively counter the impacts of hybrid threats. If they are not adequately
communicated to the specific audiences, in a timely manner and with precise messages, through the
appropriate channels and formats, they will not meet their goals and the hybrid threat will be
successful. In a society overloaded with information and contradictory messages, strategic
communications are key to developing a retaining wall for countering the constant flow of
disinformation, misinformation, cyberespionage, leaks of stolen information, digital harassment,
manipulation and other forms of information used by promoters of hybrid threats. This chapter is
focused on analysing the concept of strategic communications, in other words, how strategic
communications can contribute to countering hybrid threats, what their main elements are and what
related initiatives have already been implemented. And all this without losing sight of the role played
by digital technologies as a support for any communication strategy.
3.1. Concept and scope of strategic communications
When analysing the concepts of hybrid threats and disinformation, there seem to be many definitions
of the term 'strategic communications'. In a report produced for the European Parliament by the
European Union Institute for Security Studies, strategic communications are defined as
'communications activities with an agenda or a plan' (European Union Institute for Security Studies,
2016, p. 4). Several sources (such as (Cornish, P. et al., 2011) and (Tasiu, A., 2018)) cite the following
definition: 'Systematic series of sustained and coherent activities, conducted across strategic,
operational and tactical levels, that enables understanding of target audiences, identifies effective
conduits, and develops and promotes ideas and opinions through those conduits to promote and
sustain particular types of behaviour' (Tatham, S., 2008, p. 3). NATO has also produced its own
definition: 'The coordinated and appropriate use of NATO communications activities and
capabilities -Public Diplomacy, Public Affairs, Military Public Affairs, Information Operations and
Psychological Operations, as appropriate- in support of Alliance policies, operations and activities, and
in order to advance NATO's aims' (NATO, 2009b). From these definitions, and the ideas collected from
interviews with experts, the essential characteristics of strategic communications can be summarised
as follows:
•
They are executed according to a predetermined and systematic plan, not only as a reaction to
current events;
•
They involve actions at strategic, operational and tactical levels;
•
They are developed in a competitive, and even conflictive, environment, where audiences are
subject to a constant buzz that can hamper meeting their goals;
•
They demand a high level of coordination and synchronisation between stakeholders;
•
They require specific definition of the targeted audiences;
•
They require selection of the most adequate communication channels;
•
They aim to inform, influence or promote behavioural changes in target audiences;
•
They must be aligned with the overall goals of the promoter country or organisation;
•
They must focus on both the short and long terms.
19
STOA | Panel for the Future of Science and Technology
Strategic communications are not only about words or messages. Actions can also be a powerful
communication tool and should be taken into account when defining a communication strategy
(Silvela, E., 2017).
Obviously, not all kinds of communication can be dubbed as strategic. Emily Goldman, current Director
of the US Cyber Command/National Security Agency Combined Action Group, has detailed the
differences between strategic and non-strategic communications:
Table 5: Strategic vs. non-strategic communications
Strategic
Scope
Time
Objective
Measure of effectiveness
Communication means
Non-strategic
Multiple and diverse audiences
Bounded and general audience
Continuous
Discrete
Advance policy goals
Deliver a specific message to a
specific audience at a specific time
Degree of policy advancement
Meeting deadlines
Receiver-centric
Sender-centric
Source: (Goldman, E., 2007)
Strategic communications target multiple audiences and are planned for long periods of time, with
continuous activities. Their main objective is to advance the policy goals for which they were defined,
and their effectiveness can be measured by the degree of progress towards those goals. Finally, they
adapt communication means (contents, channels) to the characteristics of the receiver. On the
contrary, non-strategic communications adopt a more generalist approach and encompass discrete
actions at certain moments without considering the specificities/characteristics of the audience.
It is important to note, mainly to understand the impact of digital technologies in the communication
process, that strategic communications are developed in four domains (Goldman, E., 2007), as it can be
seen in the following image.
20
Strategic communications as a key factor in countering hybrid threats
Figure 5: Strategic communications domains
Source: (Goldman, E., 2007)13
The events take place in the physical domain. The information domain processes data collected from
those events and creates the messages, which are mediated by the social domain through cultural,
political, social and historical visions. The mediated messages are interpreted by individuals in the
cognitive domain, becoming feelings (hope, concern, fear, etc.), changes in attitudes or behaviours, or
actions, whose interpretation derives in policy adjustments over the physical domain. A
comprehensive and successful strategic communication should work on and control the flow of
information in the four domains (Goldman, E., 2007).
Principles of strategic communications
According to the doctrine proposed by the US Department of Defence, strategic communications
should be developed under nine principles (US Department of Defence, 2008):
13
•
Leadership-driven. Organisation leaders must assume the responsibility of driving strategic
communications. Success heavily depends on a clear leadership, which should materialise in
the alignment of the organisation's overall goals with strategic communication objectives.
Leadership should also provide proper resources for strategic communications.
•
Credible. Credibility, accuracy, truthfulness, trustworthiness, consistency and respect are
essential premises for effective strategic communication.
•
Understanding. Strategic communications require making an effort to know and understand
cultures, visions, identities, history, attitudes, behaviours and social values of the targeted
audiences. This understanding is key to adapting messages and actions in order to be well
received by the targeted groups. Close collaboration with targeted communities (civil
Template designed by Showeet.com
21
STOA | Panel for the Future of Science and Technology
associations, academic institutions, economic agents, etc.) is necessary to better understand
audiences' beliefs and values.
•
Dialogue. The exchange of ideas and mutual comprehension between all parties involved
must be considered when building strategic communications. Promoters should listen and
respect audiences' opinions to create an adequate response.
•
Pervasive. Every action, word and image sends a message. Communication must be
permanent, and any organisation member can act as a messenger. Promoters of strategic
communications should be aware of the unintended consequences of the messages
transmitted and be capable of tackling them.
•
Unity of effort. The definition and execution of strategic communications is a collaborative
process where coordination and synchronisation are indispensable requirements, both from a
vertical (from tactical to strategic level within a department) and transversal perspective
(among different departments).
•
Results-based. Strategic communications must have a clear objective and must focus on
achieving the desired results.
•
Responsive. Although strategic communications must be focused on the long term, they
should be flexible enough to evolve rapidly in the short term when conditions change, or crises
appear.
•
Continuous. Strategic communication is a continuous process of research, data collection,
analysis, planning, implementation, assessment and adaptation.
Some of these principles would be almost impossible to implement without the incorporation of digital
technologies. They contribute to synchronising actions and messages, to better understanding the
audiences and continuously adapting the information to their particularities, and to creating the
adequate communication channels to enhance the effectiveness of the strategy.
Challenges of strategic communications
Large institutions, such as the EU or Member State governments, have many internal and foreign
interests, which usually involve multiple audiences and a great range of topics. Given the vast amount
of issues that these institutions must manage, they tend to adopt a reactive approach when
implementing strategic communications (European Parliament, 2016d). However, this also entails a
great risk of losing control of the communication process. Therefore, a new mindset is necessary
amongst leaders in order to drive strategic communications in a proactive way.
One of our main values is democracy. And democracy implies openness, transparency and debate,
attributes that promotors of hybrid threats can use to exploit the vulnerabilities of the democratic
system. However, strategic communications developed by democratic institutions (the EU, Member
States) cannot rely on measures, tools or techniques that betray democratic values. It is, therefore,
necessary to assume that democracies are facing an asymmetric fight between those who have no
objection to using illegitimate or illegal methods to achieve their goals, and those who must respect
democratic rules.
The last relevant challenge is bureaucracy. It hampers three of the above principles: leadership, unity
of effort and responsiveness. Managing strategic communications in large bureaucratic institutions
requires great leadership skills. It also demands a great capacity for rapid and coordinated reaction, for
which slow bureaucratic processes are not always ready.
Strategic communications at a glance
The following image summarises the main features of strategic communications.
22
Strategic communications as a key factor in countering hybrid threats
Figure 6: Main features of strategic communications
Source: own elaboration based on desk research and interviews
23
STOA | Panel for the Future of Science and Technology
After analysing the concept of strategic communications, Chapter 3.2 examines its constituent
elements, with special emphasis on the role of digital technologies.
3.2. Elements of strategic communications
The fundamental elements of strategic communications are the desired result, the audience, the
message, the methods to communicate and the impact assessment (Baños, P., 2011).
The precise definition of the pursued result is the cornerstone to building an effective strategic
communication. Not only must the desired results be appropriately identified, they must also be
included in the strategy plans from the very beginning. Thus, all agents involved can interiorise them
and focus all their activity on achieving them.
Audiences are probably the element that most influences the definition of strategic communications.
They can be defined in terms of geography (foreign or domestic audiences), type of relationship (allies,
adversaries) or type of groups (whole society, governments, supporters of adversaries, insurgent
groups, terrorist groups). Regarding domestic audiences, one of the main goals of strategic
communications is to improve society's resilience hybrid threats, informing the citizens about the risks
and how to deal with them. In the international sphere, strategic communications are aimed at gaining
the support of allied countries on specific actions (diplomatic, military, economic) to face hybrid
threats. Strategic communications must also target the promoter of hybrid threats, whether domestic
or foreign. Depending on the timing of the threat, they can range from deterrence campaigns
(threatening the attacker with economic sanctions, showing the military power, etc.) to more
aggressive measures. After being processed using big data tools, the vast amount of information about
individuals and communities collected from communication networks allows microtargeting
techniques to be used to segment audiences with an enormous precision. This contributes to
increasing the efficiency of messages and actions included in the communication strategy.
Messages can adopt multiple forms. From written information to videos, or even on-site operations,
they should be designed to provide a strategic narrative. This can be defined as 'a story designed to
provide an emotive justification for a policy goal, and in many cases how that goal is to be realised and
the moral authority for doing so' (UK Ministry of Defence, 2019, p. 6). A strategic narrative should
encompass the following content:
•
the current situation, describing what you want to modify or preserve;
•
the future state that you intend to achieve;
•
the pathway to get there;
•
and the justification, the reason why you seek to change the situation.
Within strategic communications, the methods used to communicate are as important as the
narratives. Methods refer to both communication models and technical means. Regarding
communication models, we can differentiate between monologue (unidirectional) and dialogue
(bidirectional). Monologue has been one of the most used communication models, although it can be
considered less effective, especially when dealing with foreign audiences (Goldman, E., 2007).
Effectiveness of monologue is limited to hierarchised environments (for instance, an army). On the
contrary, strategic communications regarding multicultural scenarios require dialogue techniques.
Any communication strategy should use all technical means at its disposal. However, they should be
adequately adapted to the preferences and needs of the targeted audiences. Both traditional means
such as live TV and radio, newspapers, magazines, etc., and online services (social networks, blogs,
podcasts, instant messaging apps, video platforms, etc.) can be useful to communicate the messages.
Chapter 3.2.1 analyses in detail the impact of the most recent technological developments (artificial
intelligence, IoT, 5G, blockchain) in the means and tools available for strategic communications.
24
Strategic communications as a key factor in countering hybrid threats
It is important to note that strategic communications not only entail the use of technical means for
remote communications. They can also require person-to-person interactions, reconnaissance trips,
personal meetings and any other kind of physical exchange of information.
The finally important element of any strategic communication is the impact assessment. It is
important to define strategies and metrics that allow evaluation of whether the messages transmitted
have achieved their objectives:
•
Have they reached the targeted audiences?
•
Have they been understood by the targeted audiences, who are behaving according to the
expected results?
•
Have they produced unintended consequences because they have reached unexpected
audiences?
Depending on the level of fulfilment of the objectives, the communication strategy can be maintained
or redefined.
Digital technologies are a constituent part of the elements of strategic communications. The following
chapter analyses how they are being used and the role that the latest technological developments are
playing.
3.2.1. Impact of digital technologies on strategic communications
Digital technologies impact strategic communications in several ways. From the communication
infrastructure itself to the most advanced communications services, digital technologies open up great
opportunities to spread messages amongst broad audiences in a rapid and inexpensive way, and to
create customised narratives for very specific audiences. It is important to note that digital technologies
can be used both by the promoters of hybrid threats, to fabricate and spread disinformation, and the
organisations that fight against them, to develop counter-narratives. In this chapter, both perspectives
are considered.
The level of digital interconnectedness represents an enormous challenge when building an effective
strategic communication to counter hybrid threats. More and more people are exposed to a constant
flow of information due to the combination of advanced telecommunication infrastructure, intelligent
devices and online services. In the field of telecommunication infrastructure, the rollout of 5G networks
will significantly enhance internet connection speed and the number of connected devices, amongst
other benefits. In such a scenario, written information and static images will be progressively
substituted by high-quality videos, which will be much easier to send and share, as main vehicles for
the transmission of information. Promoters of hybrid threats will be able to take advantage of the most
advanced AI techniques to create sophisticated false videos, thus enhancing the impact of
disinformation campaigns. Therefore, the combination of 5G networks, video sharing and artificial
intelligence would pose a severe risk to any institution or individual that is the victim of a
disinformation campaign. Communication strategies should consider these new risks and design
effective measures to deal with them.
Protecting information is an essential prerequisite to controlling the message. Information leaks can
severely damage any communication strategy. That is one of the reasons why the security of 5G
networks has become an intense battlefield between Western countries and China, where some of the
main providers of 5G network equipment are established. This issue, and those related to how other
technological advances impact strategic communications, is explained in the following paragraphs.
Security and competition issues in the 5G network rollout
Few technological innovations have aroused as much expectation as the 5G communication standard.
It allows data rates to be increased by up to 10 Gbps (between 10 and 100 times more than 4G and 4.5G
25
STOA | Panel for the Future of Science and Technology
networks) and the number of connected devices per cell. It reduces latency (to 1 millisecond) and
network energy consumption. It also improves spectrum efficiency and extends battery life in lowpower devices (ETSI, 2019). These characteristics make 5G a quantum leap in the field of
communication infrastructure, which is bound to revolutionise strategic sectors such as health
(improving remote health care, including surgery), mobility (allowing the proliferation of self-driving
cars) or industry (increasing monitoring capabilities in real time to improve the efficiency of industrial
processes), amongst others. It will also have significant implications in online communications, as 5G
standard will boost video consumption. Video traffic is forecast to grow around 30 % annually between
2019 and 2025. As a result, video traffic in mobile networks is expected to account for 76 % of total
mobile data traffic in 2025 (Ericsson, 2019). Therefore, any communication strategy must take into
account the growth of video formats as a way to transmit information, and should evolve in the same
direction.
The development of 5G infrastructure is mainly led by two countries (USA and China), with security
issues at the top of the list of concerns. Most of the infrastructure equipment providers come from both
countries, with some exceptions like Nokia, Ericsson and Samsung. While numerous European
telecommunication companies are relying on Chinese providers for deploying 5G systems, the US
government has enacted specific regulations to impede Chinese companies (formally 'foreign
adversaries') to sell 5G network equipment to US telecommunications operators, alleging risks to
national security, given the potential existence of backdoors in such equipment that would allow the
Chinese government to carry out surveillance activity (Executive Officer of the President, 2019).
In the European Union, Member States acted independently until 2019, although they felt pressure to
ban Chinese 5G vendors from the US government (Grieger, G., 2019). For instance, in early 2020
Germany was debating whether the Chinese company Huawei should be banned as a provider of 5G
infrastructure for German operators (Bennhold, K. & Ewing, J., 2020). On the contrary, France decided
not to prohibit French telecommunications operators working with Chinese providers to deploy 5G
networks (Vidalon, D., 2019). In Spain, telecommunications operator Telefónica awarded the
deployment of part of its 5G core network to this Chinese company, although Telefónica intends to
reduce its dependence on Huawei in the coming years (del Castillo, I., 2019).
In January 2020, the NIS Cooperation Group, established by the NIS Directive to improve coordination
and information exchange on cybersecurity matters amongst Member States and the European
Commission, launched the EU toolbox on 5G cybersecurity (NIS Cooperation Group, 2020). It includes
the results of the EU coordinated risk assessment of 5G network infrastructure in each Member State
and the means to address them. Following the launching of the EU toolbox, in the same month the
European Commission published a Communication aimed at defining a common European approach
regarding the security of 5G networks (European Commission, 2020b). Quoting the toolbox, the
communication recommended that Member States restrict the participation of high-risk suppliers in
the deployment of key assets of 5G networks, but without completely forbidding their participation in
the 5G network rollout. The Communication also encouraged Member States to ensure that
telecommunications operators follow a multi-vendor strategy to avoid the risks of depending on a
single provider.
Also, in January 2020, the UK adopted an intermediate and more precise position. Telecom vendors
classified as high-risk, like Huawei, were allowed to provide 5G network equipment, but with tight
restrictions. They could not sell equipment for the core of the UK's 5G network, and could not provide
more than 35 % of the equipment for other network functions (mainly the radio access network).
Additionally, high-risk vendors were banned from selling equipment for critical national infrastructure
(UK Government, 2020).
Telecommunications networks security is one of the main pillars where the success of strategic
communications is based. Without securing basic communication infrastructure, impeding intrusions,
surveillance and information theft, any other measure to counter hybrid threats would be useless. It is
26
Strategic communications as a key factor in countering hybrid threats
therefore not surprising that control of the greatest innovation in the field of communication
standards, 5G, is at the heart of the geopolitical struggle between the world's major economic powers,
the US and China. This struggle is leading European countries towards a great dilemma, as the adoption
of strict measures to secure network infrastructure (such as banning Chinese vendors) could notably
increase the cost and delay the 5G network rollout (GSMA, 2019).
Artificial intelligence: technology to create and counter disinformation
If 5G network security is attracting the attention of policymakers around the world, artificial intelligence
(AI) is another 'trendy' technological topic. AI-based tools can be used to carry out actions in each of
the five traditional instruments of power: military, political, economic, civil and informational (Guilong,
Y., 2019). In the military sphere, one of the main uses of AI is supporting operations by means of
unmanned aerial vehicles (UAV), unmanned underwater vehicles (UUV) or self-driving military vehicles,
as well as information and data management. In the other instruments of power, AI is basically focused
on information management. AI is playing a double role in these spheres of power, as it can be used
both by promoters of hybrid threats (for instance, carrying out disinformation campaigns by fabricating
and spreading false content) and the attacked actors in order to counter them. Therefore, AI-based
solutions will be key elements in creating counter narratives when developing communication
strategies.
From the perspective of the promoter of hybrid threats, AI opens up new opportunities to develop
more sophisticated attacks, as it contributes to creating more realistic fake content and improving its
spreading, by profiling potential targets and increasing the accuracy of disinformation campaigns.
Regarding the content, AI can be used to fabricate news without human intervention, which could
accelerate and reduce costs of disinformation campaigns. For instance, OpenAI, a research laboratory
based in San Francisco, has developed an unsupervised language model, called GPT-2, which can
generate coherent paragraphs of text. However, as OpenAI stated, 'due to our concerns about
malicious applications of the technology, we are not releasing the trained model' (Radford, A. et al.,
2019). A tool of this kind could flood the internet with false information in a very short time.
AI does not only contribute to creating false written content. Audio and video content can also be
manipulated through AI tools to create so-called deepfakes. Some notorious examples, including the
manipulated video of Mark Zuckerberg talking about the control of Facebook users' data 14, or the
proliferation of deepfake pornographic videos (Ajder, H. et al., 2019), some of which aim to destroy the
victim's reputation, show their potential danger.
The spread of disinformation and propaganda can also benefit from the potential of AI. By processing
the vast amounts of data that social media platforms have about their users, AI allows very detailed
segmentations that can contribute to increasing the effectiveness of disinformation campaigns.
Segmentation and microtargeting are recurrent marketing strategies that can also be used by
promoters of hybrid threats to reinforce the impact of their campaigns. The Cambridge Analytica
scandal is the best example of misusing AI-based segmentation techniques. This company collected
personal data from millions of Facebook users without their consent and used this data to profile and
segment the users into specific groups through AI tools. Some politicians, the best-known being 2016
US presidential elections candidates, Ted Cruz and Donald Trump, hired Cambridge Analytica's
services, based on illegally harvested users' data, to influence voters' choices (Granville, K., 2018).
Along with segmentation, AI can also be used to amplify the impact of disinformation campaigns. AI
bots are designed to simulate human behaviour on social media (for instance, commenting and
replaying posts, using hashtags, etc.) in order to deceive human users and accelerate the spread of fake
14
https://www.businessinsider.com/deepfake-video-mark-zuckerberg-inst agram-2019-6?IR=T
27
STOA | Panel for the Future of Science and Technology
content. They can also learn from previous situations to improve their outcomes (Center for
Information Technology and Society - University California Santa Barbara, 2019).
According to the experts interviewed, AI techniques are not yet being widely used by promoters of
hybrid threats to create and spread false information. Nowadays, attackers tend to rely on the easiest
and cheapest means to reach their goals. However, as the cost of AI technology decreases, its use for
malicious purposes will increase.
Artificial intelligence not only represents an opportunity for the development of hybrid threats. It is
also a relevant technology for countering them, especially in the creation of detection tools. AI
algorithms can evaluate and check news and accounts on social media to decide if they should be
classified as fake. One example is the Grover AI model, developed by the Allen Institute for AI, which
achieves over 92 % accuracy in classifying human-written and machine-written news (Allen Institute
for AI, 2019). These algorithms are usually referred to as Automated Content Recognition (ACR)
technologies (Marsden, C. & Meyer, T., 2019), and can act autonomously or as a supplement to human
content moderation.
Although AI has the potential to help in the fight against the automated spread of disinformation, its
use raises some ethical and legal concerns, mainly related to the ultimate responsibility of taking down
contents or accounts classified as fake (as there could be false positives). Removing fake contents or
accounts should be done in a way that preserves the right to freedom of expression, meaning human
supervision will always be necessary (Marsden, C. & Meyer, T., 2019). A technology as disruptive as AI
requires sufficient guarantees of its proper functioning. For that reason, proposals have been made for
the application of mechanisms of Certification of Conformity aimed at ensuring the aforementioned
guarantees (Galán, C., 2019).
Other technologies suitable for both creating and countering hybrid threats
There are other technological innovations that can act as a driver for the development of hybrid threats.
One of them is the Internet of Things (IoT). We are quickly moving towards a hyperconnected world,
with multiple devices (home and medical appliances, cars, clothes, etc.) and sensors connected to the
internet. A market research company has forecasted that there will be more than 41 billion connected
IoT devices worldwide by 2025 (IDC, 2019). Thus, attack vectors grow exponentially and can be targeted
towards very harmful actions against individuals or organisations. In such a scenario, network security
will become a major issue, as potential cyberattacks could be more dangerous than ever before (ENISA,
2017). Some real-life examples of this great menace could be hacking insulin pumps or pacemakers or
deliberately causing accidents with self-driving cars.
IoT technologies can also play a prominent role in the field of strategic communications. As described
above, any communication strategy must first interpret reality, based on data and information. Based
on this interpretation, narratives aimed at both informing or influencing targets and debunking
attackers' visions of reality can be built. IoT technologies can contribute to developing coherent
communication strategies by allowing collection of more data and information from the physical
domain, which will aid better understanding what is happening before creating the appropriate
narratives.
Blockchain technologies are the last technological hype that can collaborate in the fight against
disinformation. In comparison with the most common types of communication platforms,
blockchain-based systems provide enhanced security and allow traceability of the information
recorded through its decentralised peer-to-peer functioning scheme. Although development of these
technologies is still in its infancy, there is already some interesting academic research aimed at
certifying the veracity of news using blockchain systems.15 On a more practical level, the News
15
(Qayyum, A. et al., 2019); (Huckle, S. & White, M., 2017); (Shang, W. et al., 2018)
28
Strategic communications as a key factor in countering hybrid threats
Provenance Project, 16 launched by the New York Times Research and Development team, has
suggested using blockchain technology to store contextual information about news photos (when,
where and by whom they were taken, and how they have been used by news outlets) as a way to ensure
the veracity of images in the media. In 2019, the New York Times developed a proof-of-concept of the
technical solution proposed by that project, whose conclusions were expected for 2020 (Koren, S.,
2019). Another relevant example of the use of blockchain to certify sensitive information can be found
in Estonia. All official announcements and legislative documents published digitally in Riigi Teataja (the
Estonian official public journal), as well as the President's speeches published online, are signed with
blockchain technology in order to guarantee integrity and veracity (Krusten, M., 2019). This way, any
manipulation of the information can be easily detected and rejected.
Blockchain will undoubtedly contribute to improve strategic communications by ensuring the veracity
of information and helping to detect disinformation more quickly.
3.2.2. Influence of strategic communications on economic affairs
The economy is one of the fields that is most sensitive to the veracity and accuracy of information. Any
false, incomplete or even vague news may lead to negative fluctuations in the stock market, may
increase a country's risk premium, driving up the cost of its debt, or may deteriorate the credit score of
a company, preventing it from accessing funding at a reasonable cost. Trustworthiness is an essential
economic asset (Wilson, P. & Kennedy, A., 1999), so any hybrid threat, mainly in the form of
disinformation campaigns, aimed at undermining it represents a serious risk for the economic system.
Disinformation attacks in the economic sphere can pursue diverse objectives. They may sometimes be
part of a comprehensive strategy of destabilising the target. However, it is more common for attackers
to seek their own economic benefit. An example of the first objective (general destabilisation with
economic consequences) was the false news about explosions in the White House spread through
Twitter in 2013. A tweet with the false information was sent out from the Associated Press account (one
of the most reputed sources of information in the USA), which was hacked by the self-proclaimed Syrian
Electronic Army in the context of the Syrian civil war. In a matter of minutes, this false information
caused the momentary collapse of US stock markets and panic among investors. It was estimated that
more than US$130 billion of S&P 500 index's value was wiped out before the market recovered
(Selyukh, A., 2013).
There are also many examples of disinformation attacks pursuing economic benefit (Cheo, J., 2018). For
instance, in 2015 the US Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) filed securities fraud charges
against a trader who spread false information about two companies on Twitter, using accounts that
simulated those of reputed securities research companies. His intention was to artificially bring down
the companies' stock price to buy shares and sell them after the price recovered, obtaining a large
profit. The false tweets related to the two companies (Audience, Inc. and Sarepta Therapeutics, Inc.)
caused their stock price to fall 28 % and 16 %, respectively (Securities and Exchange Commission, 2015).
Recent academic research showed that false information about a firm increases trading activity and
stock price volatility compared to true information. Moreover, the study also concluded that the public
revelation of the existence of disinformation causes an immediate decrease in activity on the stock
market in reaction to all news, including the legitimate news, thus limiting their normal operation
(Kogan, S. et al., 2019). Another study estimated the global annual losses caused by disinformation to
the stock market at US$39 billion (Cavazos, R., 2019).
A coherent and coordinated communication strategy, aimed at building (or restoring) trust, is essential
for the proper functioning of the economic system. One of the best examples of the impact of strategic
communications on the economy was the famous 2012 discourse of the former President of the
16
https://www.newsprovenanceproject.com/
29
STOA | Panel for the Future of Science and Technology
European Central Bank, Mario Draghi, during the height of the Euro crisis (Draghi, M., 2012). When
financial markets were relentlessly attacking the Italian and Spanish economies, causing unbearable
increases in their risk premiums and questioning the viability of the Euro, only a few words ('the ECB is
ready to do whatever it takes to preserve the Euro') managed to dispel doubts about its survival. Shortly
after Draghi's discourse, the ECB announced diverse economic programmes to assist in the recovery of
the weaker economies of the Eurozone, reinforcing Draghi's message. The impact of this
communication strategy was so important that the words 'whatever it takes' have become the preferred
motto of the European leaders when managing the economic consequences of the Covid-19 crisis
(Briançon, P., 2020).
3.3. National initiatives
After describing how strategic communications can contribute to countering hybrid threats from a
theoretical perspective, this chapter is focused on showing practical implementations at the national
level. The analysis conducted has revealed that so far, no country has implemented a holistic
communication strategy that tackles all potential components of a hybrid threat. However, diverse
countries have already implemented public initiatives leveraging specific aspects within the realm of
strategic communications. The following paragraphs summarise the most relevant or novel policies
and initiatives aimed at addressing concrete impacts of hybrid threats at the national level.
The US, pioneer in the use of the strategic communications concept
The United States can be considered the pioneer country in the definition of strategic communications.
Since the Cold War era, the US has repeatedly highlighted the importance of having a coherent
communication strategy, both from political and military perspectives, in order to spread its vision of a
free and democratic world. The US vision regarding strategic communications has been consolidated
during the last four decades in the diverse updates of its National Security Strategy (NSS). That vision
has evolved in line with the threats the USA has faced and the means its enemies have used, from USSR
interference at the end of the Cold War, to the War on Terror against extremist groups after the 09/11
attacks, and now again the Russian meddling in Western democracies.
Each new edition of the US NSS has focused on different issues related to strategic communications.
The 1987 US National Security Strategy took into consideration the most relevant constituent
components of strategic communications and how they had to be used to disseminate Western values
and improve the reputation of the USA in the global context, which remained deeply damaged since
the end of the Vietnam War (Baños, P., 2011). 17 In 2008, in the context of the War on Terror against
extremist groups in Iraq and Afghanistan, the NSS recognised the need to improve coordination
between the different departments and agencies across the US government to build effective strategic
communications. In 2010, the NSS stressed the necessity of aligning actions and information.18 The last
17
In the National Security Strategy (NSS) of 1987, prior to the fall of the Iron Curtain, the US recognised that they were faced
with 'a profound challenge to our national security in the political field. This challenge is to fight the war of ideas and to help
support the political infrastructure of world democracies' (The White House, 1987, p. 13). The term strategic communications
didn't appear in the 1987 NSS. They used instead the political and informational strategy concept, that 'must also reach the
peoples of denied areas, particularly the USSR and Eastern Europe to encourage hope for change and to educate publics on
the benefits of free institutions. This is achieved through the electronic media, written materials, and the increased contact
and exchange of ideas that come from such contact… We must actively counter Soviet propaganda and active measures
using the full range of U.S. informational programs' (The White House, 1987, p. 13).
18
'Effective strategic communications are essential to sustaining global legitimacy and supporting our policy aims. Aligning
our actions with our words is a shared responsibility that must be fostered by a culture of communication throughout
government' (The White House, 2010, p. 16).
30
Strategic communications as a key factor in countering hybrid threats
edition of the US NSS, published in December 2017, focused on improving American influence through
coherent communication campaigns. 19
The recurrent inclusion of strategic communications as a key element of the National Security Strategy,
the cornerstone of all security policies in the USA, highlights the political relevance of this concept in
that country. The fact that strategic communications are being considered at the top political level
reflects the theoretical concern about foreign influence, although practical implementation has not
been able to avoid concrete cases such as Russian meddling in 2016 presidential elections.
Raising awareness amongst citizens in Sweden and Finland
As has been already analysed, strategic communications must be aimed at diverse kinds of targets, with
different approaches. One of the targets is the population of the country defining the strategy. Citizens
should be aware of the existence of disinformation campaigns aimed at influencing the society's
normal development (for instance, polarising opinions on hot topics like migrants, nationalisms, etc.)
and the political environment. Raising such awareness depends on massive educational initiatives and
communication campaigns to allow citizens and specific groups to identify disinformation and limit its
social influence. Within the European Union, two initiatives are worth mentioning: the role of the
Swedish Civil Contingencies Agency in countering disinformation and the Finnish and Swedish
government initiatives to educate citizens, students, journalists and politicians on how to detect
disinformation (Hanlon, B. & Rosenberger, L., 2019).
The Swedish Civil Contingencies Agency (MSB in Swedish) was established by the Swedish government
in 2009, combining the Swedish Rescue Services Agency, the Swedish Emergency Management
Agency and the Swedish National Board of Psychological Defence (Cederberg, G., 2018). Although its
initial mission was focused on the field of emergency management, after the Russian hybrid campaign
against Ukraine in 2014-2015 its competences were expanded to deal with disinformation and foreign
influence. In 2017, it was designated the primary authority for protecting the 2018 Swedish elections.
In the context of these elections, the MSB developed several information campaigns to warn diverse
collectives about potential foreign meddling. Regarding citizens, the MSB published and distributed a
reviewed edition of the brochure If Crisis or War Comes (Swedish Civil Contingencies Agency, 2018a) to
all Swedish households (around 4.7 million). This brochure explicitly mentioned disinformation and
included easy instructions for all to deal with it. Thus, each Swede was informed about the potential
existence of false information in order to reduce its influence in the elections. Another action, aimed
specifically at the group of communicators working with public administrations, was the production of
a handbook on countering information influence activities (Swedish Civil Contingencies Agency,
2018b). This handbook was intended to help communicators from public administrations to identify
disinformation and prepare their organisations to manage responses. The publication of the handbook
was complemented by training programs for over 10 000 public servants at the national, regional and
local levels, to improve their ability to detect foreign influence campaigns (Cederberg, G., 2018).
In the field of education, both Sweden and Finland have implemented reforms in their national
curriculums to increase the ability of children and young people to recognise false information.
Finland finished the deployment of its revised curriculum in 2016. The reform included new skills for all
Finnish students directly linked to the ability to detect misinformation (FactBar EDU, 2018):
19
•
Thinking and learning to learn;
•
Cultural competence, interaction and self-expression;
'Drive effective communications: we will craft and direct coherent communications campaigns to advance American
influence and counter challenges from the ideological threats that emanate from radical Islamist groups and competitor
nations. These campaigns will adhere to American values and expose adversary propaganda and disinformation' (The White
House, 2017, p. 35).
31
STOA | Panel for the Future of Science and Technology
•
Multiliteracy;
•
Participation, involvement and building a sustainable future.
Based on these transversal competencies, the ultimate goal of which is to improve the critical thinking
skills, fact-checking agencies such as FactBar20 have created media and information literacy training
programs for diverse educational levels to help students identify disinformation. The so-called voter
literacy toolkit follows the recommendation included in the European Commission Communication
European approach to tackle online disinformation that 'encourages independent fact-checkers and civil
society organisations to provide educational material to schools and educators' (European
Commission, 2018b).
In Sweden, the national curriculum was reformed in 2018 to increase computer science skills and the
ability to detect false information amongst elementary and secondary school students (Cederberg, G.,
2018). In this reform, institutions related to digital literacy and fact-checking, such as the Swedish Media
Council, the Internet Foundation in Sweden, the Swedish Institute and the fact-checking initiative
Viralgranskaren were involved. As in Finland, diverse educational toolkits were developed to foster
critical thinking when accessing online information. One example is the Fake ≠ Fact toolkit, designed
by the Swedish Institute. 21
Both countries currently lead the Media Literacy Index (Finland ranked 1st position and Sweden 4th),
which measures countries' resilience to disinformation (Lessenski, M., 2018).
Given the growing relevance of education to cope with disinformation, the OECD Program for
International Student Assessment (PISA) has assessed, for the first time in 2018, students' capacity to
distinguish between fact and opinion when reading about an unfamiliar topic. (Schleicher, A., 2019).
Raising awareness and coordination efforts to tackle online disinformation in Canada
In recent years Canada has implemented several initiatives to limit the effects of disinformation. From
public programmes aimed at raising awareness to coordination strategies between governmental
agencies, the Canadian initiatives can be considered a good, comprehensive communication strategy,
although some components are still missing.
In 2019, the Canadian government launched the Digital Citizens Initiative, an ambitious strategy aimed
at 'support[ing] democracy and social cohesion in Canada by building citizen resilience against online
disinformation and building partnerships to support a healthy information ecosystem' (Government of
Canada, 2019c). Through this strategy, the Canadian government finances diverse activities to improve
the digital literacy of citizens (citizen-focused activities) and help them understand the impact of
disinformation (Digital Citizen Research Program). The Digital Citizens Initiative as a whole can be
considered within the realm of awareness-raising measures.
The activities focused on citizens take place as part of three programmes:
•
Canada History Fund, which supports the production of learning materials and the
organisation of learning activities related to the Canada's history. It aims to improve the
Canadians' knowledge of their own history and values.
•
Collective Initiatives – Canada Periodical Fund, which provides funding for projects that
contribute to the sustainability of the Canadian magazine and newspaper industries.
•
Youth Take Charge, which encourages young people to strengthen their bonds with Canada
through arts and culture, civic engagement and other activities.
20
https://faktabaari.fi/in-english/
21
https://sharingsweden.se/toolkits/introducing-source-criticism-classroom/
32
Strategic communications as a key factor in countering hybrid threats
The Canadian government invested US$7 million in 2019 to fund these programs (Canadian Heritage,
2019).
Regarding the Digital Citizen Research Program, it has three main components:
•
Digital Citizen Contribution Program, which finances research projects to counter online
disinformation in order to support democracy and social cohesion in Canada.
•
Joint Initiative for Digital Citizen Research, which seeks to promote research activities to better
understand how online disinformation is affecting Canadian society and which
countermeasures can be applied, as well as supporting the Canadian research community on
digital citizenship and online disinformation.
•
Support to the Public Policy Forum's Digital Democracy Project, which brings together civil
society, academia and political practitioners to discuss how to address the online
disinformation.
The Canadian government has planned to invest US$19.4 million over four years to support the Digital
Citizen Research Program (Canadian Heritage, 2019).
Another recent initiative from the Canadian government in the field of strategic communications has
more to do with improving coordination between governmental agencies and bodies when tackling
foreign influence. The Security and Intelligence Threats to Elections (SITE) Task Force was established
in January 2019 to ensure a fair electoral process without foreign meddling (Hanlon, B. & Rosenberger,
L., 2019). This task force included intelligence services, foreign policy bodies, law enforcement and
cybersecurity agencies, working together to offer coordinated responses to foreign threats. Along with
the SITE Task Force, the Critical Election Incident Public Protocol was established in July 2019. Its
purpose was 'to ensure coherence and consistency in Canada's approach to publicly informing
Canadians during the writ period about incidents that threaten Canada's ability to have a free and fair
election' (Government of Canada, 2019b). The following image summarises the steps included in the
protocol:
Figure 7: Critical election incident public protocol in Canada
Source: Government of Canada
33
STOA | Panel for the Future of Science and Technology
Both the SITE Task Force and the Critical Election Incident Public Protocol can be deemed as good
practices in the use of coordinated communications strategies to counter hybrid threats, in this case
aimed at destabilising the electoral process.
An example of coordination to adjust management of strategic communications: Australia
Coordination between all stakeholders involved in responding to hybrid threats is an essential requisite
of any communication strategy. The Australian government, being aware of the necessity of tackling
foreign meddling in home affairs in a coordinated way, has carried out two main initiatives: the
development of Australia's Counter Foreign Interference (CFI) Strategy and the creation, in April 2018,
of the position of the National Counter Foreign Interference Coordinator (NCFIC).
The Australia's CFI Strategy is based on five principal pillars, aimed at 'enhancing capability, engaging
with at-risk sectors, deterring perpetrators, defending against acts of foreign interference, and
enforcing counter foreign interference laws' (Department of Home Affairs, 2019b). Two pillars are
directly linked to strategic communications (engage at-risk sectors to raise awareness and develop
mitigation strategies and defend directly against foreign interference activity through a coordinated
government response).
However, the most relevant initiative, which highlights the importance placed on coordination in order
to face hybrid threats by the Australian government, was the appointment of the NCFIC. The NCFIC is
responsible for the coordination of diverse government agencies to assess the risks and consequences
of foreign interference, the development of strategies to deter and prevent foreign interference, the
implementation and management of Australia's Counter Foreign Interference Strategy and
relationships with country allies to develop coordinated actions at the international level (Department
of Home Affairs, 2019a). Although the tasks of detecting and assessing the risks, and defining
countermeasures to cope with foreign interferences depends on different governmental bodies (the
Australian Federal Police, the Australian Security Intelligence Organisation, the Department of Defence,
the Department of Home Affairs and the Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade, amongst others),
coordination under a single manager allows for more effective responses.
Collaboration between governments and tech companies in Germany and the US
If coordination between stakeholders is key to developing a coherent communication strategy,
collaboration is no less important. Especially in the field of online disinformation, collaboration
between governments and tech companies, owners of digital services such as social networks or videosharing platforms, is crucial to hinder the spread of false information. Although some interesting
examples can be highlighted, the collaboration between governments and tech companies can be
considered so far as limited to electoral processes, one-way (from governments to tech companies),
ad-hoc and reactive (Hanlon, B. & Rosenberger, L., 2019).
Diverse national governments have approached tech companies such as Facebook, Twitter or Google
to involve them in the struggle against online disinformation during their electoral processes. For
instance, Facebook took down tens of thousands of fake accounts before the German federal elections
in 2017. In September 2019, members of several US federal agencies and governmental bodies met
with representatives from Facebook, Google, Twitter and Microsoft to discuss collaborative approaches
in order to prevent foreign interference through social networks and other digital services in the 2020
presidential elections (Isaac & Alba, 2019).
A comprehensive national strategy in countering hybrid threats: Lithuania's case
Lithuania, along with the other Baltic States, is one of the EU Member States most exposed to hybrid
campaigns originating in Russia. These campaigns try to interference in and influence Lithuanian
society, promoting social tensions and distrust in public institutions (Flanagan, S. et al., 2019). This fact
has led the country to develop, particularly since 2014 after Russia's hybrid campaign against Ukraine,
34
Strategic communications as a key factor in countering hybrid threats
a robust national defence strategy in which communication activities play a pivotal role. It includes
measures at different levels (Bajarūnas, E. & Keršanskas, V., 2018):
•
Political awareness and commitment, achieving a wide consensus on the importance of hybrid
threats.
•
Military readiness, ensuring a minimum allocation of national budgets to defence and restoring
military service to increase citizens' involvement in defending the nation.
•
Rapid reaction and establishment of crisis management mechanisms.
•
Enhancement of resilience, establishing the National Cyber Security Centre and reducing
energy dependence on Russia.
•
Adopting clearer regulations.
Regarding strategic communications, Lithuania has implemented a holistic set of measures to
countering disinformation, including:
1
'Enhancement of strategic communications capabilities (establishment of specialised
subunits at the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, the Ministry of National Defence, the Armed Forces,
intelligence institutions as well as other departments – e.g. the Ministry of Culture);
2
enhancement of society's awareness of informational warfare and propaganda;
3
preventing the dissemination of war and hatred propaganda' (Bajarūnas, E. & Keršanskas, V.,
2018, p. 157).
Some specific measures are worth noting, as they represent good examples of society's engagement
and international collaboration. For instance, some civil movements are taking responsibility for
tackling hybrid threats through communication initiatives. The Lithuanian Riflemen Union, a
paramilitary non-profit organisation, is actively taking part in patriotic education and civil resistance
activities (Bajarūnas, E. & Keršanskas, V., 2018). The so-called Lithuanian Elves is an army of volunteers
who fight online disinformation spread by Russian trolls. In the field of international collaboration,
Lithuania is actively participating in information sharing and coordination platforms between the Baltic
states, Nordic countries and Poland.
An example of public body exclusively focused on strategic communications: the UK Research,
Information and Communications Unit
The Research, Information and Communications Unit (RICU), created in 2007, is a specialised unit within
the National Counter Terrorism Security Office at the Home Office of the UK government. Its work is
focused on countering terrorism and extremism, as well as organised crime (UK Government, 2017). Its
most relevant characteristic is that the RICU's activities are aimed at challenging and countering
extremist propaganda from terrorists' groups such as Al-Qaeda or ISIS amongst their targeted
audiences (young British and non-British Muslims). The RICU produces and distributes online content
(social network posts, videos, films, etc.) in order to influence online conversations amongst a specific
target audience.
Although the RICU's work could be considered contentious, as it has been developed under the
umbrella of the controversial counter-radicalisation programme called Prevent Strategy (UK
Government, 2011), which has been repeatedly accused of not respecting human rights (Warrell, H.,
2019), it is a clear example of the use of strategic communications to reach potential supporters of
adversaries.
35
STOA | Panel for the Future of Science and Technology
Legislative initiatives across the EU
The struggle against the communicational components of hybrid threats, mainly online
disinformation, requires an appropriate legal framework. Some countries have recently endorsed new
laws in order to protect their citizens and institutions from foreign interference through digital means,
especially during electoral processes.
France has been one of the pioneer Western countries legislating to combat disinformation. After the
terrorist attack at the Charlie Hebdo magazine offices, France approved the Decree no. 2015-125 of
5th February 2015, allowing French police authorities to block websites containing materials inciting
terrorism or disseminating child pornography without a court order. In November 2018, the French
National Assembly approved a new law to combat disinformation during electoral processes, which
includes transparency obligations for digital platforms regarding sponsored ad campaigns and allows
the French Broadcasting Authority to suspend foreign-controlled broadcasters that spread false news
(Robinson, O. et al., 2019).
In Germany, the Act to Improve Enforcement of the Law in Social Networks
(Netzwerkdurchsetzungsgesetz or NetzDG) entered into force in January 2018. Its main purpose is to
engage online content distribution platforms (social networks, video platforms, etc.) in the fight against
disinformation, making them responsible for taking down illegal contents under the German laws
(Heidi T. & Leerssen, P., 2019). The law pursues crimes included in the Criminal Code such as
dissemination of propaganda or symbols of unconstitutional organisations; incitement to hatred;
dissemination of depictions of violence; defamation of religions; religious and ideological associations;
public incitement to crime or breach of the public peace by threatening to commit offences, amongst
others (European Commission, 2018f).
NetzDG obliges online platforms to create a procedure enabling users to report the existence of
potential illegal content. After a report is made, the online platform must investigate whether the
reported content is indeed illegal. If the content is manifestly unlawful, the platform must take the illegal
content down within 24 hours. Other illegal content must be removed within 7 days. (European
Commission, 2018f). Platforms that fail to comply with this requirement can be fined up to €50 million.
German law also imposes transparency obligations for online platforms. If an online platform receives
more than 100 complaints per calendar year about illegal content, it must produce a semi-annual
report detailing how it has managed such complaints. Although the law received great support from
German citizens, according to a poll conducted after its approval (Heidi T. & Leerssen, P., 2019), it has
also been criticised by several collectives (tech industry, digital activists, civil rights activists, journalists)
for 'jeopardising the core principles of free expression' (Digitale Gesellschaft, 2017).
Spain, in the context of the Catalonian conflict, passed a decree (14/2019 of 31st October 2019), allowing
administrative authorities to intervene in telecommunication networks and electronic communication
services, as well as to block potential illegal online activities, before a court order is granted, in the event
of imminent and serious threats to public order or national security.
Regarding the spread of disinformation and hate speech through audiovisual media services, the
Lithuanian Radio and Television Commission is legally allowed to temporarily ban programmes or
channels with those objectives (Bajarūnas, E. & Keršanskas, V., 2018). On several occasions, the
European Commission has supported Lithuania's decision to suspend broadcasting of the Russian
language channel RTR Planeta, considering such decisions as compatible with EU rules, particularly the
Audiovisual Media Services Directive, which forbids hate speech and incitement to hatred (a usual
objective of disinformation campaigns). 22
22
C(2015) 4609 Final https://ec.europa.eu/newsroom/dae/document.cfm?doc_id=10299
C(2017) 814 Final http://ec.europa.eu/newsroom/document.cfm?doc_id=42897
36
Strategic communications as a key factor in countering hybrid threats
Legislative initiatives outside the EU
Outside the EU, two legislative reforms aimed at hindering foreign meddling can be highlighted: The
National Security Legislation Amendment (Espionage and Foreign Interference) Act 2018 (the EFI Act)
in Australia and the Election Modernisation Act in Canada. The Australian EFI Act, approved in
June 2018, amends the Criminal Code to introduce new, or modify existing, espionage offences related
to managing information, as well as new offences related to foreign interference. It also introduces new
crimes related to national security such as interference with Australian democratic or political rights
(Parliament of Australia, 2018). In addition to the Criminal Code, the EFI Act amends many others
Australian laws (Australian Citizenship Act 2007, Australian Federal Police Act 1979, Commonwealth
Electoral Act 1918, Foreign Evidence Act 1994, Migration Act 1958, Surveillance Devices Act 2004,
among others) to create a modern legislative framework that allows Australia to properly cope with
foreign influence.
The Canadian Election Modernisation Act (EMA) entered into force in June 2019. The EMA is focused
on preventing foreign influence in electoral periods by means of:
•
prohibiting the use of foreign funds to pay for advertisement campaigns that attempt to
influence elections;
•
clarifying offences related to publishing of false statements aimed at interfering with election
results;
•
obliging online platforms to maintain and publish a registry of partisan advertising before and
during the electoral period (limited to a maximum of 50 days).
These legislative reforms show alternatives ways to approach the communicational component of
hybrid threats (the use of online platforms for spreading disinformation and foreign propaganda,
mainly during election periods).
Improving the country's image: the case of the España Global strategy in Spain
In 2012, still suffering the effects of its major economic crisis, the Government of Spain established the
High Commission of the Government for the Marca España (Spain Brand), with the objective of
improving the image of Spain abroad and promoting the coordinated action of all institutions
committed to 'Spain's interests in the economic, cultural, social, scientific and technological fields'
(Government of Spain, 2012, p. 1). In practice, Marca España had a clear focus on strengthening the
country's reputation as a key competitive factor for the Spanish economy and companies, as part of
Spanish economic diplomacy.
In October 2018, one year after the illegal referendum on the independence of Catalonia, and four
months since a new Government took office, the High Commission for the Marca España was
transformed into the State Secretariat for Global Spain (Government of Spain, 2018). Although the
overall objective of the institution did not formally change in substance (it is 'responsible for the
management of Spain's image and reputation' (Ministry of Foreign Affairs, European Union and
Cooperation, 2018)), the strategic shift was very clear. Its main objective was to improve the country's
image not only abroad, but also amongst Spanish citizens themselves, in clear response to the attacks
on Spain's reputation carried out by the Catalan independence movement and some populist groups.
The regional Catalan government had used strategic communications for nation-building purposes in
Catalonia since 1979 (García-Muñoz, C., 2018). In addition, the efforts made by the Catalan proindependence forces to internationalise the conflict intensified attacks on Spain's reputation,
C(2018) 2665 Final http://ec.europa.eu/newsroom/dae/document.cfm?doc_id=52093
37
STOA | Panel for the Future of Science and Technology
spreading doubts about the quality and solidity of its democratic institutions and culture, especially in
the run-up to the illegal referendum in 2017.
España Global's (Global Spain) strategy hinges on two fundamental pillars: coordinating external
communication instruments and monitoring the messages disseminated about the country. To this
end, it has developed arguments to counteract any negative messages, reinforced its strategy on social
networks and launched a communication campaign called This is the Real Spain.
This is the Real Spain was created as a blog to 'spread the word about the real Spain, with its strengths
and challenges within and outside our borders. Readers can find these strengths classified into three
main pillars: democracy, modernity and citizenship' (Global Spain, 2018). The campaign included a
video with relevant and internationally influential Spanish personalities.
In its aim of coordinating messages and provide foreign action with tools to counter attacks on the
country's reputation, the body collects and disseminates evidence on positive aspects of Spanish
culture, language, society or institutions, and has produced two reports: The truth about the Catalonia's
bid for independence (Global Spain, 2019b) and Spain: a global actor in the fight against climate change
(Global Spain, 2019a), in the context of the Spanish offer to hold the 25th Conference of the Parties (COP)
of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC), which was originally to be
held in Chile.
3.4. Initiatives from international bodies
Combating hybrid threats is not only taking place at the national level. Diverse international bodies are
proposing strategies to counter them at different levels, including communicational responses, relying
on international cooperation. This section will focus on the work done so far by the European Union, as
well as other institutions like NATO or the G7. Thus, we get an overview of the current guidelines and
the gaps that should be covered to set up a coherent and comprehensive strategy at the international
level.
3.4.1. EU efforts to tackle hybrid threats
In recent years, the European Union has carried out intense activity to address the issue of hybrid
threats. The following image summarises the main milestones of EU's activity:
38
Strategic communications as a key factor in countering hybrid threats
Figure 8: EU actions to counter hybrid threats
Source: own elaboration
39
STOA | Panel for the Future of Science and Technology
The main EU actions against hybrid threats related to strategic communications are the following:
2013
In 2013, EU concerns about hybrid threats were focused on cybersecurity. In order to address this
threat, the European Commission released a Joint Communication including a roadmap for action in
the immediate future, to ensure the development of a Network and Information Security policy. In this
document, the first signs of strategic communication can be found. On these matter, the
communication tasked the High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy,
Member States and European institutions with facilitating dialogue around the application of
international law in cyberspace, along with developing public guidelines to promote fundamental
rights such as freedom of expression and access to the internet. (European Commission, 2013).
2015
In March, the European Council's conclusions recommended an action plan on strategic
communication in order to challenge Russian disinformation campaigns (European Council, 2015). Two
months later, the East StratCom Task Force was created within the EEAS (European External Action
Service) to promote better communication of the EU policies, fight against disinformation campaigns
and improve free and independent media in eastern countries (Armenia, Azerbaijan, Belarus, Georgia,
Moldova and Ukraine). Promptly, the East StratCom released the Action Plan on Strategic
Communication in collaboration with other EU Institutions and Member States. The document
contains the main guidelines of the StratCom team in Eastern Europe:
•
Increase EU Strategic Communication capacity;
•
work with partners and develop networks;
•
communication activities on EU funded programmes, projects and activities in the Eastern
Neighbourhood;
•
support for freedom of the media and freedom of expression;
•
public diplomacy initiatives in the neighbourhood;
•
capacity building for journalists and media actors;
•
supporting pluralism in the Russian language media space;
•
engagement with civil society;
•
increase awareness, develop critical thinking and promote media literacy;
•
strengthen cooperation on regulatory issues in EU Member States (East StratCom Team, 2015).
2016
2016 could be described as the year in which hybrid threats were established as one of the main
concerns for EU security. In April, the European Commission published an ambitious communication
with an extensive framework for countering hybrid threats in the EU. Within its 22 actions, the
communication includes one directly concerning strategic communication: 'The High Representative
will explore with Member States ways to update and coordinate capacities to deliver proactive strategic
communications and optimise the use of media monitoring and linguistic specialists' (European
Commission, 2016a, p. 5).
In June, the European External Action Service released the document A Global Strategy for the
European Union's Foreign and Security Policy. Strategic communications are considered one of
priorities of external action, as a way to improve the EU's capacity to communicate its principles and
40
Strategic communications as a key factor in countering hybrid threats
actions and, also, to 'offer rapid, factual rebuttals of disinformation' (European External Action Service,
2016b, p. 23).
In July, the European Parliament published the NIS Directive, aimed at improving the common level
of cybersecurity in the EU. Among other instructions, Member States must have a CSIRT (Computer
Security Incident Response Team) to counter cyberattacks. Regarding strategic communications, the
NIS Directive creates a CSIRT network to connect Member States' CSIRTs and EU organisations (CERTEU, ENISA) in order to promote effective cooperation in cybersecurity matters. The directive also
establishes the NIS Cooperation Group in order to 'support and facilitate strategic cooperation and the
exchange of information among Member States and to develop trust and confidence amongst them'
(European Parliament, 2016c, p. 17).
Almost at the same time as the NIS Directive was enacted, the European Commission released the EU
Playbook, an operational protocol for countering hybrid threats between Member States, the
Commission itself and the High Representative. Within this protocol, it is worth mentioning the
creation of the EU Hybrid Fusion Cell, whose main task is to receive information and produce
intelligence related to hybrid threats, to inform decision-makers in EU institutions and Member States.
The protocol also defined EU crisis management procedures (European Commission, 2016b).
In November, the European Parliament published a resolution on EU strategic communication to
counteract propaganda against it by third parties. The document pointed Russia, ISIL/Daesh and AlQaeda as the main informational threats using propaganda in the EU. The resolution considered
strategic communication as a priority and encouraged responding to these threats with an offensive
(instead of defensive) strategic communication. It also called on EU institutions and partners to
coordinate a common strategic communication with both internal and external scope. In addition, the
resolution established the South StratCom Task Force, also known as the Arab StratCom Task Force.
(European Parliament, 2016d). 23
2017
In April, the European Centre of Excellence for Countering Hybrid Threats was established in
Helsinki. This centre was suggested by the European Commission and the High Representative in the
aforementioned Joint Framework on countering hybrid threats. The Hybrid CoE was conceived as a
research centre on hybrid threats, where EU Member States and partners (mainly NATO) could share
knowledge and experience on this kind of issue (Council of the European Union, 2016).
In June, the Commission and the High Representative published the joint communication A Strategic
Approach to Resilience in the EU's external action. The communication recalled the central role of
strategic communications for strengthening state and societal resilience and suggested specific
measures such as reinforcing the activity of Tasks Forces by increasing their resources (European
Commission, 2017a).
Later, in September, the European Commission and the High Representative announced the reform of
ENISA (European Union Agency for Network and Information Security) to extend its competences and
tasks. The joint communication Resilience, Deterrence and Defence: Building strong cybersecurity
for the EU, following the NIS Directive, stressed the necessity of building resilience through rapid
emergency response mechanisms as well as 'awareness-raising in relation to online disinformation
campaigns on social media' (European Commission, 2017b, p. 12).
23
Its role was redefined in 2019, while a new one task force was created: Task Force for Western Balkans. (European Parliament,
2019).
41
STOA | Panel for the Future of Science and Technology
2018
In 2018, the fight against hybrid threats focused on disinformation. In January, the Commission
organised a High-Level Group of Experts (HLEG) on Fake News and Disinformation, whose task was to
advise the Commission and the EU on those matters. In March, the HLEG released the report A multidimensional approach: report of the independent High-Level Group on fake news and online
disinformation. The report recommended a set of measures and concrete actions to counter the
threat of disinformation, which could be taken into account in the upcoming communication being
produced by the Commission. All were related to strategic communications: defining a multistakeholder Code of Practice for fighting disinformation on social media; supporting media and
information literacy for all citizens; supporting media innovation projects to empower journalists in
dealing with disinformation, amongst others (High Level Group on fake news and online
disinformation- European Commission, 2018).
In March, the European Council also reported its conclusions on the Salisbury chemical attack. The
Council encouraged the European Union and Member States to improve their capabilities to face
hybrid threats by means of strategic communications (European Council, 2018a).
In April, following the HLEG publication, the Commission released the communication Tackling online
disinformation: a European Approach. This document highlighted the importance of strategic
communication in tackling disinformation campaigns, emphasised the work already done (East
StratCom Task Force, Hybrid Fusion Cell, Hybrid CoE) and proposed new tools to counter
disinformation (creation of an independent European network of fact-checkers, launching a secure
European online platform on disinformation, leveraging the Horizon 2020 work programme to support
research on technologies such as artificial intelligence, blockchain, etc., amongst others) (European
Commission, 2018b).
In June, the European Commission and the High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and
Security Policy reviewed the EU policies and actions on countering hybrid threats through the joint
communication Increasing resilience and bolstering capabilities to address hybrid threats.
Regarding strategic communications, the document stressed the necessity of improved coordination
and cooperation across EU institutions, Member States and other partners, highlighting the importance
of safeguarding election periods from cyberattacks (European Commission, 2018e).
In the same month, the European Council invited the High Representative and the Commission to put
together an action plan against disinformation in cooperation with Member States, and to prepare the
StratCom teams with appropriate mandates and resources (European Council, 2018b)
In September, the EU Code of Practice on Disinformation, proposed by the HLEG on disinformation
and fake news and mandated by the Commission in the aforementioned communication24 was
published. It was signed by Facebook, Google, Twitter, Mozilla and other advertising companies in
October. Microsoft joined the signatory companies in May 2019 (European Commission, 2019b).
In December, the High Representative and the European Commission released a joint communication
containing an Action Plan against Disinformation, following the recommendations proposed in the
communication on tackling online disinformation. It was motivated by the growth of disinformation
strategies and the proximity of the European Parliament election (2019), plus more than 50 elections
that were to take place in the EU by 2020. The measures of the plan were organised in four main pillars.
The first was improving capabilities to detect, analyse and expose disinformation (the main proposed
action for this purpose was to provide StratCom teams, Union Delegations and the EU Hybrid Fusion
Cell with additional and specialised staff). The second pillar was strengthening coordinated and joint
responses to disinformation, by means of setting up a Rapid Alert System (finally launched in March
24
Tackling online disinformation: a European approach.
42
Strategic communications as a key factor in countering hybrid threats
2019) and contact points for coordination amongst Member States. The third pillar was aimed at
mobilising private sector to tackle disinformation, and the fourth was related to raising awareness and
improving societal resilience (European Commission, 2018h).
2019
In June, the Commission and the High Representative published the first report on the implementation
of the Action Plan against Disinformation, summarising the work done on the four pillars described
above (European Commission, 2019c).
In July, the Cybercrime Convention Committee (T-CY), which represents the members of the
Convention of Cybercrime of the Council of Europe, known as the Budapest Convention, adopted the
Guidance Note #9 Aspects of election interference by means of computer systems covered by
the Budapest Convention, noting that 'interference with elections through malicious cyber activities
against computers and data used in elections and election campaigns undermines free, fair and clean
elections and trust in democracy […] Domestic election procedures may need to be adapted to the
realities of information society, and computer systems used in elections and related campaigns need
to be made more secure' (Cybercrime Convention Committee (T-CY), 2019, p. 3). This guidance note
was aimed to analyse how the Budapest Convention might be applied to prevent the impact of
cyberattacks in electoral processes.
EU bodies specialised in strategic communications to counter hybrid threats
The EU's aforementioned activities focused on tackling hybrid threats have materialised in the creation
of diverse bodies, which address this issue from different perspectives. The following image depicts the
main stakeholders responsible for managing strategic communications applied to countering hybrid
threats at the EU level.
Figure 9: EU bodies to combat hybrid threats
Source: own elaboration based on (Fiott, D. & Parkes, R., 2019)
43
STOA | Panel for the Future of Science and Technology
3.4.2. NATO initiatives for leveraging strategic communications to counter
hybrid threats
NATO is one of the most active intergovernmental institutions in the application of strategic
communications as a tool to counteract hybrid threats. The first time NATO's leaders recognised the
relevance of strategic communications was in April 2009, during the celebration of the 60th anniversary
of the Alliance at the Strasbourg/Kehl Summit. The Summit Declaration stated, 'Strategic
communications are an integral part of our efforts to achieve the Alliance's political and military
objectives' (NATO, 2009a).
The overarching framework under which all of NATO's strategic communication activities have been
designed is the NATO Strategic Communications Policy (NATO, 2009b), launched in September 2009
to deal with the increasingly complex operational and informational environment. However, there
were intense debates and discrepancies within the Alliance on how to translate the overall strategy to
specific activities (Laity, M., 2018). Only after the Russian aggression against Ukraine, where Russia used
massive disinformation campaigns to influence diverse targets (civilians, Ukrainian soldiers, public
servants, politicians, etc.), did NATO become truly aware of the importance of the informational
responses to hybrid threats. In the declaration after the 2014 Wales Summit, NATO's leaders stated 'We
will ensure that NATO is able to effectively address the specific challenges posed by hybrid warfare
threats […] It is essential that the Alliance possesses the necessary tools and procedures required to
deter and respond effectively to hybrid warfare threats, and the capabilities to reinforce national forces.
This will also include enhancing strategic communications' (NATO, 2014).
One of the major steps to boost strategic communications as an effective tool against hybrid threats
was the creation of the NATO StratCom Centre of Excellence in 2014, based in Riga, Latvia. The NATO
StratCom CoE is aimed at providing 'a tangible contribution to the strategic communications
capabilities of NATO, NATO allies and NATO partners' (NATO StratCom CoE, 2020b). This contribution is
materialised in the design and development of training and education programs, research on how to
effectively apply strategic communications, analysis of the lessons learnt regarding communication
during NATO operations and dissemination of NATO doctrine on strategic communications. The
StratCom CoE was accredited by NATO as an international military organisation in September 2014 and
it does not directly depend on any NATO unit.
NATO strategic communications have been focused on the following domains:
Table 6: NATO strategic communications' domains
Public Diplomacy
Public Affairs
NATO civilian
communications for
promoting
awareness and
building
understanding and
support for NATO's
policies, operations
and activities
NATO civilian
engagement
through the media
to inform the public
of NATO policies,
operations and
activities
Source: (NATO StratCom CoE, 2020a)
44
Military Public
Affairs
Information
Operations
Psychological
Operations
Promoting NATO's
military aims and
objectives to
audiences in order
to enhance
awareness and
understanding of
military aspects
NATO military
advice and coordination of
military information
activities in order to
create desired
effects on the will,
understanding, and
capabilities of
adversaries
Planned
psychological
activities using
communication
methods and other
means directed at
approved audiences
in order to influence
perceptions,
attitudes and
behaviour
Strategic communications as a key factor in countering hybrid threats
3.4.3. Other intergovernmental initiatives
Diverse intergovernmental entities are implementing new mechanisms aimed at improving
coordination and effectiveness of communication actions. One example is the G7 Rapid Response
Mechanism (RRM), created by the G7 countries in 2018 after the annual meeting which took place in
Charlevoix (Canada). The G7 countries issued the Charlevoix Commitment on Defending Democracy
from Foreign Threats, where they committed to 'establish a G7 Rapid Response Mechanism to
strengthen our coordination to identify and respond to diverse and evolving threats to our
democracies, through sharing information and analysis, and identifying opportunities for coordinated
response' (G7, 2018). The RRM is managed by a coordination unit within the Canadian governmental
agency Global Affairs Canada. The coordination unit is responsible for sharing information between the
G7 partners, analysing potential threats and coordinating responses when attacks occur (Government
of Canada, 2019a).
The United Nations also has a Strategic Communications Division, whose mission is ensuring that UN
communications campaigns achieve their goals. This division coordinates a global network of 60 UN
information agencies.
45
STOA | Panel for the Future of Science and Technology
4. Description of case studies
After analysing the concepts of hybrid threats and strategic communications from a theoretical
perspective, this chapter addresses the study of these phenomena by presenting some recent
examples. Seven case studies of actual manifestations of hybrid threats, and how the victims have
leveraged communication strategies to implement their response, have been selected for analysis.
The following aspects have been considered in each case study:
•
The reasons why the case study can be considered an example of hybrid threat.
•
The goals pursued by promoters of hybrid threats: destabilise the target, spread their political
vision or ideology, exploit target vulnerabilities (economic, social, technological), etc.
•
The strategies implemented by perpetrators of hybrid threats to achieve their goals:
disinformation campaigns through digital means, cyberattacks, covert military operations,
economic or diplomatic pressure, etc.
•
The response to the hybrid threat by the targets, particularly those related to strategic
communications: creation of alternative narratives, development of fact checking mechanisms,
economic sanctions, diplomatic pressure, review and reinforcement of security strategies
(particularly related to cybersecurity), revaluation of risks posed by the hybrid threats, etc.
•
Lessons learned by the targets after suffering the hybrid threat.
Cases have been selected to fully reflect all the components and essential characteristics of hybrid
threats according to the most accepted definitions25 and to include responses in the field of strategic
communications.
The most paradigmatic case, which encompasses most of the features of hybrid threats, is the Russian
attacks against Ukraine. This case has been included as the best example of hybrid threat in recent few
years. Additionally, four cases from the NATO compendium of cases Hybrid Threats: A Strategic
Communications Perspective (NATO StratCom CoE, 2019), which include new (or enhanced) hybrid
mechanisms and innovative response measures based on strategic communications compared to
those used in the illegal annexation of Crimea by Russia, have been included. The selected cases are
the following:
•
Rise of religious extremism in The Netherlands due to financing and support of the Salafi
movement by the Gulf monarchies.
•
Saudi Arabian pressure on Pakistan in the context of the civil war in Yemen.
•
Foreign influence of Russia and China through academic institutions and think tanks.
•
Russian electronic warfare during Zapad 2017 military exercises.
Finally, two recent cases that have drawn the attention of policymakers and geopolitical analysts about
the danger that hybrid threats represent for EU countries and the necessity of developing good
strategic communications at the highest level have been analysed:
25
•
Disinformation campaigns against NATO operations in Lithuania.
•
Disinformation attacks in the Catalan conflict.
See Chapter 2.1
46
Strategic communications as a key factor in countering hybrid threats
The selection of these cases allows examination of the implementation of all components that may be
part of a hybrid threat and all potential countermeasures described in Chapters 2.1.1 and 3.2. From this,
we can obtain useful insights about the evolving nature of hybrid threats and the instruments used to
counter them from a practical perspective.
The following table summarises the components of hybrid threats and the countermeasures adopted
in each case.
Table 7: Summary of the case studies
Case study
Hybrid threat components
Rise of religious extremism
in The Netherlands due to
financing and support of the
Salafi movement by the Gulf
monarchies
Financing Salafist activities (building
mosques and cultural centres, training
radical preachers and imams).
Salafist afterschool education.
Saudi Arabian pressure on
Pakistan in the context of
the civil war in Yemen
Economic pressure of Saudi Arabia over
allies.
Religious influence of Saudi Arabia over
allies.
Spreading Salafist ideology through
social networks.
Target's strategies to counter the
hybrid threat
Creation of alternative narratives to
avoid radicalisation.
Monitoring hate speech in social
networks.
Reinforcing cooperation with the Muslim
community.
Diplomatic
neutrality).
measures
(Pakistan´s
Searching for new economic allies
(China).
Diplomatic pressure.
Foreign influence of Russia
and China through
academic institutions and
think tanks
Spreading Russian and Chinese political
vision.
Influencing academic production in
foreign countries.
Developing alternative narratives for
historical events.
Russian intervention in
Ukraine
Economic pressure.
Covert military actions: annexation of
Crimea and war in the Donbass region.
Use of a legal narrative to justify the
intervention.
Cyberattacks.
Disinformation campaigns.
Raising awareness about the real nature
and purposes of those academic
institutions.
Reforming the funding of academic
institutions controlled by foreign
countries, increasing transparency.
Diplomatic pressure.
Economic sanctions.
Launching fact checking platforms to
counter Russian disinformation.
Religious influence.
Disinformation campaigns
against NATO operations in
Lithuania
Disinformation campaign based on
false events.
Quick police investigation.
Leveraging citizens' awareness to reduce
the impact.
Good communication strategies and
coordination between all parties
involved (Lithuanian authorities, NATO
and German Army).
Russian electronic warfare
during Zapad 2017 military
exercises
Electronic warfare elements affecting
diverse regions in foreign countries.
Disinformation attacks in
the Catalan conflict
Foreign influence.
Disinformation campaigns using bots in
social networks.
Intimidation and coercion over
neighbouring countries.
Use of social influencers to spread
disinformation.
No measures were implemented as the
details of the electronic attacks were
discovered too late.
Creation of new public bodies to combat
disinformation and cyberattacks.
Revision of the national cybersecurity
strategy to include disinformation as a
real threat.
47
STOA | Panel for the Future of Science and Technology
Communication strategy to counter
independentist narrative, developed by
the Spanish Government.
Source: Iclaves
4.1. Case 1: Rise of religious extremism in The Netherlands due to
financing and support of the Salafi movement by the Gulf
monarchies
Since the beginning of the century, Dutch authorities have warned of the growing influence of
extremist branches of Islam among Dutch Muslims. One of those branches, the Salafi movement, which
advocates for a more rigorous interpretation of the Quran and Sunnah, is allegedly being promoted by
Gulf States (General Intelligence and Security Service, 2019). Although the Salafi movement and its
promoters do not intend to attack Dutch democracy as a specific and direct objective, it could lead to
the radicalisation of some Muslims, especially young people. In turn, this could result in the growth of
intolerant and antidemocratic attitudes that undermine social cohesion and threaten the proper
functioning of Dutch democratic institutions. In particular, Salafist radicalisation, and its most extreme
form, jihadism, has played a direct role in the increasing number of Dutch individuals who have fought
under the orders of terrorist organisations like the Islamic State. According to official estimations,
between 2012 and November 2018 more than 310 individuals travelled from the Netherlands to Syria
and Iraq to combat for the Islamic State, 85 of whom were killed and 55 are estimated to have returned.
Approximately 35 would have disappeared from the conflict areas. Thus, about 135 Dutch individuals
continued fighting in 2019 in those conflict zones (General Intelligence and Security Service, 2018). This
same source estimates that the Dutch jihadist movement is made up by of more than 500 supporters
and several thousand sympathisers, which represents a serious domestic threat to Dutch society. Since
2013, the threat level in the Netherlands has ranged from 3 to 4 on a scale of 1 to 5, with occasional
raises to level 5, for instance, after the tram attack in Utrecht on 18th March 2019 (National Coordinator
for Security and Counterterrorism, 2019).
This case, therefore, constitutes an example of a hybrid threat in which foreign actors (in this case some
Gulf monarchies) promote a religious belief (which is also intends to modelling social and economic
behaviours) that could collide with European democratic values and exacerbate social tensions and
polarisation in an EU country.
4.1.1. Geopolitical context
According to the Pew Research Centre (2017), in 2016 Muslims accounted for 7.1 % of the total
population in the Netherlands, becoming the EU country with the fifth largest percentage of Muslim
citizens after Bulgaria (11.1 %), France (8.8 %), Sweden (8.1 %) and Belgium (7.6 %). In the whole EU,
Muslims accounted for 4.9 % of the total population. In absolute terms, the Muslim population in the
Netherlands was estimated at 1.2 million people.
Muslim migrants began to arrive to the Netherlands in the 1960s, 1970s and 1980s. The main countries
of origin were Morocco and Turkey (Hoorens, S. et al., 2015). Migration from Muslim countries has been
constant in recent decades, with a relevant increase in recent years due to the Syrian civil war (Damhuis,
K., 2019). Thus, the current Muslim population in the Netherlands is shaped by the second and third
generations of descendants of the first migration wave in the previous century, and newcomers (mostly
asylum seekers) from conflict areas such as Syria, Afghanistan or Libya, amongst others.
Most Dutch Muslims are followers of the Sunni doctrine. Within Sunni Islam, the Salafi intellectual
current is considered one of the most conservative Islamic ideologies. Salafism seeks a return to the
pure and true Islamic faith practised in the times of the Prophet Mohammad, basing social and
economic relations on Sharia law. Salafists advocate a literal interpretation of the Quran and reject all
48
Strategic communications as a key factor in countering hybrid threats
attempts to adapt Islam to modernity. In consequence, they do not consider democracy as the best
way of ruling society (General Intelligence and Security Service, 2010). However, it is not a monolithic
movement, as it encompasses diverse groups, from non-violent devotees, who are integrated into and
live peacefully in Western countries, to Salafi jihadism, whose main example is the recently defeated
Islamic State (Center for International Security and Cooperation - Stanford University, 2019).
Salafism, as an expression of the Wahhabi current of Islam, has been actively promoted by Gulf States
such as Saudi Arabia since the 1970s (Hoorens, S. et al., 2015). Those countries have financed the
spreading of Salafi movements around the world, creating international Salafi networks as well as
supporting local branches.
4.1.2. Features of the hybrid threat
Since the late 2000s, Salafism has attracted Dutch political attention as a potential threat to democratic
values and social cohesion. The most recent crises in the Middle East (the Syrian civil war) and North
Africa (the Arab Spring and the subsequent power gaps in some Maghreb countries), as well as the
religious influence exerted by foreign countries like Saudi Arabia or Kuwait, triggered concerns in
countries with relevant Muslim minorities such as the Netherlands (General Intelligence and Security
Service, 2015).
Promoters of Salafism, mainly Saudi Arabia, Kuwait and other Gulf States, seek to spread this radical
interpretation of Islam amongst Muslims around the world. Although at a first sight this strategy could
be considered a merely religious goal, it has important societal and political implications, given that
Salafists do not only consider Islam as a faith, but also as a political system (ruled by the Sharia law).
Thus, the radicalisation of Dutch Muslims by embracing Salafism could lead to a deterioration of the
democratic legal order in the Netherlands (General Intelligence and Security Service, 2015). Salafism
rejects democracy as a political system, so its supporters may consider it both legitimate and necessary
to act to undermine it from within, using undemocratic methods. The risk of a direct or indirect
involvement of Salafist radicals in violent actions and terrorist activities must also be considered (NATO
StratCom CoE, 2019).
The means used to spread Salafism in the Netherlands are diverse. One of the most relevant has been
financing the construction of mosques, cultural centres and organisations throughout the whole
country, many of which are financed by foreign sources. For example, in 2018 a list of at least 30 Dutch
Islamic organisations that had received funding from Kuwait and Saudi Arabia since 2010 was revealed
(Holdert, M. & Kouwenhoven, A., 2018). While some funds came from charities and NGOs, others were
directly provided by government departments like the Ministry of Awqaf and Islamic Affairs in Kuwait.26
This ministry aims to spread Islamic culture and 'contribute to the development of society in
accordance with Islamic understanding, reality and realisation' (Ministry of Awqaf & Islamic Affairs, n.d.).
One of the charities that funded Dutch Islamic organisations was the Revival of Islamic Heritage Society,
which was included on the Al-Qaida Sanctions list by the UN in 2002 (United Nations Security Council,
2014). Although the direct participation of Gulf governments in charities that fund Western Islamic
institutions is difficult to prove, given the opacity about their financial sources, there are some cases
that seem to confirm it. For instance, the Blauwe Mosque in Amsterdam received €400 000 from the
Ministry of Awqaf and Islamic Affairs in Kuwait through an intermediary foundation, the European Trust
Network (Hoorens, S. et al., 2015, p. 16). Salafist mosques have been accused of 'propagating an
intolerant, isolationist and antidemocratic message' (General Intelligence and Security Service, 2015, p.
7). According to the National Coordinator for Security and Counterterrorism, the number of Salafist
26
http://download.omroep.nl/nos/docs/lijst-Koeweit-1.pdf
http://download.omroep.nl/nos/docs/lijst-Koeweit-2.pdf
http://download.omroep.nl/nos/docs/lijst-Saoedi-Arabie.pdf
49
STOA | Panel for the Future of Science and Technology
mosques in the Netherlands increased from 13 in 2014 to 27 in 2018 (Holdert, M. & Kouwenhoven, A.,
2018), mainly due to foreign funding.
Imams and preachers play a key role in guiding and encouraging Muslims to live according to Islamic
precepts. Promoters of Salafism are conscious of the influence their religious leaders are capable of
exerting, especially amongst young people. Therefore, another way of contributing to the spread of
Salafism is financing preachers' education and training. Salafist preachers are usually subsidised by
countries such as Saudi Arabia in an undercover manner (General Intelligence and Security Service,
2005).
Islamic education outside the Dutch educational system is another powerful tool used to radicalise
children and young people. Although it is difficult to conduct radicalisation activities within statefunded schools given the inspection of instructional content and teachers' backgrounds, Salafists have
developed other initiatives outside the formal education system. One of them is afterschool classes
about Islam and Islamic culture, which can be how Salafists inoculate intolerant and antidemocratic
feelings and thoughts amongst young people (General Intelligence and Security Service, 2019).
The last, and probably most effective, tools used to spread Salafist ideology are communication
strategies. According to the Dutch General Intelligence and Security Service (2015, p. 7), 'the movement
is professional in its communication activities: a large proportion of the information about Islam
available to the Dutch public, especially online, reflects a Salafist world view. This helps to explain the
popularity of Salafi ideas amongst young Dutch Muslims and converts, in particular'. Promoters of
Salafism have developed a coherent communication strategy where a wide range of media outlets are
used to reach concrete audiences. They create narratives aimed at presenting themselves as victims of
Western societies, and thus trying to exacerbate hostile feelings towards Western values amongst their
followers (NATO StratCom CoE, 2019).
Social networks have opened up great opportunities to spread Salafist views amongst Dutch Muslims
and potential converts. Before social networks, communication was one-way, from Salafist leaders to
followers. After the advent of social networks, communication has become much more horizontal, fast,
decentralised and fluid, where any follower can become a loudspeaker for Salafi ideas (Bertholee, R.,
2014).
The Dark Web 27 has also been used for Salafist radicalisation purposes in the Netherlands. Radical
Salafists often begin to interact through public Internet forums and social media platforms. However,
as the radicalisation process progresses, Salafists shift to more extremist forums on the Dark Web
(Counter Extremism Project, 2019).
Other traditional components of hybrid threats related to digital technologies, such as cyberattacks,
are less common. Radical Salafists have neither the resources nor advanced capabilities to develop
harmful cyberattacks, meaning so far action has been limited to a few denial-of-service attacks with
propagandistic purposes (Counter Extremism Project, 2019).
4.1.3. Strategy, tactics and tools to counter the hybrid threat
The Dutch authorities' efforts have been focused on countering jihadism, the most extreme level of
Salafist radicalisation. In 2014, the National Coordinator for Security and Counterterrorism and the
Ministry of Social Affairs and Employment launched the Netherlands Comprehensive Action
Programme to Combat Jihadism. It encompassed 38 measures aimed at tackling the jihadist threat in
27
The Dark Web is a specific part of the Deep Web. The latter refers to internet content that is not indexed by conventional
search engines. The Dark Web is a layer within the Deep Web, and it is made up of diverse darknets (TOR, I2P, etc.) that can
only be accessed through specific software and browsers which preserve the anonymity of users through encryption
systems. Darknets are usually used for malicious or illegal purposes: child pornography, arms and drug traffic, cyberdelinquency, terrorism, etc.
50
Strategic communications as a key factor in countering hybrid threats
Dutch territory (Inspectorate for Security and Justice, 2017). The measures were classified into five types
(Government of the Netherlands, 2014):
•
Risk reduction regarding jihadist travellers to conflict zones
•
Travel interventions
•
Combating radicalisation
•
Social media
•
Information-sharing and cooperation
While some measures can be considered as being within the realm of traditional counterterrorism
(limiting the mobility of alleged jihadists, intensifying prosecution of recruiters for armed struggle,
prosecution of hate speech on social networks, etc.) others are aimed at countering the threat of
radicalisation in the medium and long term by relying on communication strategies, using both offline
and online mechanisms.
One of the measures related to strategic communications to detect and prevent radicalisation is the
reinforcement of the communication channels between Dutch authorities and Muslim communities.
Engaging moderate imams and mosque administrators to present alternative counter-narratives and
increase transparency on Islamic education is an essential instrument to prevent young people of being
fascinated by extremist Islamic ideologies. The family and the educational communities were also
deemed key actors in preventing radicalisation, and were provided with specific communication tools
to help them countering radical ideas:
•
Development of networks and online communities to stimulate social integration of young
people.
•
Inclusion of information about radicalisation on the websites of educational institutions.
•
Appointment of a national radicalisation contact point, responsible for investigating reports
about alleged jihadist radicalisation.
The commissioning of a channel (a citizens' hotline) to report jihadist content was a prominent measure
to combat dissemination of jihadist propaganda through social networks. Although this measure may
now seem an obvious response, in 2014 mechanisms for reporting questionable content on social
networks were not as usual as they are today. Dutch authorities also proposed the creation of a
specialised team within the National Police to detect jihadist content and prosecute its dissemination.
Proposals also aimed to engage internet companies to remove jihadist content.
In addition to the measures defined by the Dutch authorities in their action programme to combat
jihadism, other stakeholders, from educational institutions to civil society organisations, have also
implemented interesting instruments to detect and prevent all kinds of radicalisation, including
Salafism. Some examples are showed below:
28
•
The School and Safety Foundation defined a programme to improve the competency of
teachers in managing radicalisation in schools. Between 2015 and 2019, more than 3 700
educators were trained to detect and respond to radicalisation in the classrooms
(Radicalisation Awareness Network, 2019, p. 110).
•
Echoes of IS 28 is a web documentary created by Submarine Channel, a production studio
focused on new ways of storytelling, with short films about the testimonies of people affected
http://www.echoesofis.nl
51
STOA | Panel for the Future of Science and Technology
by ISIS. The stories are aimed at counteracting the ISIS propaganda targeting young people
(Radicalisation Awareness Network, 2019, p. 583).
The strategies implemented by both the Dutch authorities and civil organisations try to address the
phenomenon of Salafist radicalisation, as well as other types of radicalisation, in a comprehensive way,
including detection, prevention and response actions. In the field of strategic communications, such
actions have been focused on debunking jihadist propaganda amongst the most influenceable targets:
young people.
4.1.4. Impact and consequences
The impact of Salafist radicalisation in the Netherlands can be noticed when comparing Muslim
migrants' feeling of attachment to their host country in the EU. The Netherlands is listed as one of the
EU countries where Muslims feel lowest attachment to the country (3.4 points on 5-point scale), along
with Italy (3.3 points), Austria (3.5 points) and Greece (3.6 points) (European Union Agency for
Fundamental Rights, 2017). As one of the goals of the Salafist movement is to create a society ruled by
Sharia law, opposed to Western democracy and values (exemplified by the Netherlands and its social
norms), this indicator could show that, to a greater or lesser extent, the Salafist message may receive
relative acceptance amongst the Muslim community in the Netherlands, leading to a potentially
dangerous rejection of the traditional core values of Dutch society.
It is also interesting to note that the Netherlands and France are the only EU countries where the level
of attachment to the country among second-generation migrants is lower than among first-generation
ones (European Union Agency for Fundamental Rights, 2017), suggesting that the social
disengagement strategies designed by promoters of Salafism and spread through digital means (the
means most preferred by young generations) could be succeeding in both countries. However, other
factors such as growing islamophobia, promoted by far-right movements and political parties
(Damhuis, K., 2019), might be also fuelling Dutch Muslims' lack of attachment to their country.
4.1.5. Conclusions of the case
This case study, in addition to encompassing multiple traditional characteristics of hybrid threats, also
presents especial connotations that make it very interesting for the aim of this study. Promoters of
Salafism in the Netherlands have used traditional means within the scope of hybrid threats to achieve
their goals: foreign support in the form of funding for Salafist organisations and the construction of
mosques and Islamic centres, foreign influence through imams and mosque administrators subsidised
and trained by the Gulf states, online platforms and digital media outlets to spread their messages and
radicalise their supporters, etc. Nevertheless, the major questions that must be asked in order to
consider this case study a true hybrid threat are: what are the main goals of promoter of Salafism (both
domestic promoters and the foreign countries that support them)? Do the Gulf monarchies want to
spread a religious belief or a political and social system that is incompatible with democracy? If the
response is that they only seek to promote a religious belief and encourage people to live in accordance
with its precepts, there would be no issue and the case could not be considered as a hybrid threat at
all. In fact, all religions do the same. However, if the response is that Salafist promoters seek to
substitute the liberal democracy established in the Netherlands with new laws and social rules
emanating from Salafist doctrine,29 this is a clear case of a serious threat that uses hybrid methods to
succeed.
Dutch authorities and civil society have adopted a cautious approach, facing the potential
consequences of the second possibility. Therefore, they have deployed diverse measures to counter
the threat that spreading radical Salafism represents for democratic values and social cohesion in the
29
It is worth noting that Salafism goes beyond religious beliefs, as it also implies a political vision and societal organisation
based on the Sharia (Islamic law).
52
Strategic communications as a key factor in countering hybrid threats
Netherlands. The wide range of actions implemented includes measures at the three stages defined in
Chapter 2.2 (preventive, detection and response measures). While response measures are mostly
related to punishment and subsequent social reintegration of Salafism supporters once they have been
radicalised and have committed illegal actions, preventive measures include all educational initiatives
aimed at avoiding radicalisation from infancy. Detection measures are focused on monitoring online
and offline activity of potential suspects, as well as Salafist forums and websites, to detect signs of
radicalisation.
It can be argued that the Dutch authorities have deployed a coherent communication strategy to
counter radicalisation in the information sphere, as the actions follow a systematic long-term plan,
involve all stakeholders (families, educational institutions, Islamic centres, imams, etc.), adopt a
proactive approach, use adequate channels and narratives, and try to convince the targets (mainly
young people) of the alternatives to radical doctrines.
4.2. Case 2: Saudi Arabian pressure on Pakistan in the context of the
civil war in Yemen
In the context of the civil war in Yemen, diverse regional powers like Saudi Arabia and Iran have
struggled to consolidate their influence. Although the Yemeni conflict has had an eminently local
character, it has been used as excuse by Saudi Arabia to exert new ways of influencing other Islamic
countries in order to reinforce its leading role in the region.
This case presents an example of a hybrid threat where a regional economic power (Saudi Arabia) tried
to influence, by means of economic and diplomatic pressure, the political decision-making process of
another country (Pakistan) by taking advantage of its economic weakness.
4.2.1. Geopolitical context
The Yemeni civil war, which is still ongoing, began in early 2015 after the takeover of the capital, Sana'a,
by one of the contenders, the Houthi militia. This group, belonging to the Zaidi branch of the Shia
confession, emerged in the 2000s as a response to the increasingly authoritative behaviour of the
former Yemeni president, Ali Abdullah Saleh, who was deposed in 2011 after the Arab Spring protests.
The Houthi militia takes its name from its first leader, Hussein Badreddin al-Houthi, who was a religious
leader opposed to the Saleh regime. He was killed by Yemen Army forces in 2004 after being accused
by Saleh of creating an armed group called Ansar Allah (Laub, Z. & Robinson, K., 2020).
The Houthi militia, along with other small northern groups and Saleh's supporters who became Houthis
allies again after Saleh was overthrown, has been fighting for the control of Yemen since 2015. Its
opponents are forces loyal to Saleh's successor, Abd Rabbu Mansour Hadi, who controls the South and
West of Yemen. While the Houthi militia has been supported by the Iranian regime, mainly through the
provision of weapons, Hadi's forces are backed by a coalition of Sunni-majority Arab states, led by Saudi
Arabia (Laub, Z. & Robinson, K., 2020). There are also other factions involved in this conflict, such as AlQaeda in the Arabian Peninsula (AQAP). AQAP, which has been responsible for some terrorist attacks
in Western countries,30 controls a small territory in central Yemen. Another group is the separatist
Southern Transitional Council (STC). In 2019, this faction was backed by the United Arab Emirates (UAE),
whose objective is to increase its influence in the South and, especially in the strategic ports along the
coast of southern Yemen, which constitute key infrastructure for UAE interests (Lackner, H., 2020). The
STC and president Hadi reached an agreement in late 2019 to share power in a Yemeni post-war
government and concentrate their efforts on defeating Houthi forces in the North and AQAP in the
centre of Yemen.
30
Charlie Hebdo shooting in Paris in 2015; Shooting in a classroom building at the Naval Air Station at Pensacola (USA) in
December 2019
53
STOA | Panel for the Future of Science and Technology
Soon after Sana'a was taken over by the Houthis, Saudi Arabia, where president Hadi was exiled,
launched a joint armed operation, called Operation Decisive Storm, for which it sought material and
logistical support from other Arab countries. The Saudi-led coalition that aimed to defeat the Houthis
and restore Hadi as Yemeni president, was initially made up of Bahrain, Egypt, Jordan, Kuwait, Morocco,
Qatar, Sudan and the United Arab Emirates (Laub, Z. & Robinson, K., 2020). Surprisingly, one of the Saudi
Arabia's closest allies, Pakistan, refused to join the coalition. The Pakistani Parliament voted to remain
neutral in the conflict (NATO StratCom CoE, 2019). It was not until 2018 that Pakistan decided to join
the coalition, but only by sending troops to Saudi Arabia in advisory and training roles.
Saudi Arabia exerted its economic and diplomatic influence to convince Pakistan to join the coalition.
Its resistance was derived from the intention of not interfering with its neighbour, Iran, by meddling in
its interests (Iran was allegedly supporting the Houthi armed group) (NATO StratCom CoE, 2019). In
particular, Pakistan did not want to put its diplomatic relationships with Iran at risk just when Western
sanctions on Iran, motivated by the Iranian nuclear programmes, seemed close to being lifted and
Pakistan could again expect to purchase fossil fuels from its neighbour (NATO StratCom CoE, 2019).
4.2.2. Features of the hybrid threat
Saudi Arabia was eager to get Pakistan involved in the armed coalition to increase its chances of success
in the Yemeni war. As a result of its longstanding latent conflict with India and the need to deal with
many domestic conflicts (religious tension between diverse Muslim confessions, extremist terrorism,
etc.), Pakistan has one of the strongest armies in the world. According to Global Firepower, an online
publication that assesses the strength of 138 military powers every year, in the last fifteen years the
Pakistani army has always ranked amongst the top 20 most powerful armies in the world
(GlobalFirePower, 2020). Of Muslim majority countries, Pakistan has always been in the top 4, along
with Egypt, Turkey and Iran. Therefore, it is not surprising that Saudi Arabia sought Pakistan's
participation in its coalition. Saudi Arabia combined economic and diplomatic pressures, as well as
religious affairs, to achieve its aim.
Saudi Arabia has become one of the biggest financial supporters of Pakistan, along with the US and
China. For instance, in early 2019, Saudi Arabia offered Pakistan an investment deal worth US$20 billion
(BBC, 2019). In 2018, Saudi Arabia granted financial support worth US$6 billion to help Pakistan avoid
a balance of payments crisis (Bokhari, F. et al., 2018). In late 2014, before the Yemeni civil war started,
Pakistan received US$3 billion from Saudi Arabia to stabilise the rupee's value against the US dollar.
Shortly afterwards, Pakistan confirmed its support for the Saudi position on the Syrian conflict (BBC,
2015). This last example shows how Saudi Arabia has traditionally used financial support to achieve its
strategic goals, in this case trying to engage Pakistan, the only Muslim majority country that is a nuclear
power, in the anti-Houthi coalition.
Another element of economic pressure that Saudi Arabia could have used to influence Pakistan is the
great number of Pakistani workers in Saudi territory. According to the Ministry of Overseas Pakistanis &
Human Resources Development of Pakistan (2019), in December 2017 there were 2.6 million Pakistanis
living, working or studying in Saudi Arabia. Between 2013 and 2018, Pakistani workers sent remittances
to Pakistan worth more than US$26.6 billion (about US$5 billion per year), a crucial source of income
for the Pakistani economy. Any decision that reduced the number of Pakistanis working in Saudi Arabia
and replaced them with workers from other countries could cause serious damage to Pakistan's
economy. There is no evidence that Saudi Arabia exerted this kind of economic pressure to convince
Pakistan to join the anti-Houthi coalition; however, it is a plausible scenario. Recent information
highlighted the fact that Saudi Arabia could have used this threat to impede Pakistan attending the
Kuala Lumpur Summit, a global platform for dialogue amongst Muslim countries that Saudi Arabia tried
to boycott (Altay, I., 2019). Saudi Arabia dismissed the accusations of pressure on Pakistan and dubbed
the information as false (Siddiqui, N., 2019).
Religious matters have also been used by Saudi Arabia to influence Pakistan. Although religious
influence is not limited to the specific case of Pakistani participation in the Operation Decisive Storm,
54
Strategic communications as a key factor in countering hybrid threats
it is interesting to analyse how Saudi Arabia has tried to expand Wahhabism throughout the Islamic
world to counter any pro-Iranian Shia expansion from its main rival in the Middle East (Afzal, M., 2019).
Since the 1970s, Saudi Arabia has been allegedly financing madrassas (Islamic schools) in Pakistan to
promote its conservative version of Sunni-Islam with a double objective: replace the traditional Sufi
Islam practised in many Pakistani regions and curb the Iranian expansion (Afzal, M., 2019). The result of
this radicalisation is an increase in attacks on religious minorities, including Shia populations (Yousaf,
F., 2016).
4.2.3. Strategy, tactics and tools to counter the hybrid threat
Pakistan deployed diverse strategies, ranging from diplomatic to economic tools, to counter Saudi
attempts to influence its decisions regarding participation in the Yemeni civil war. In the field of
diplomacy, Pakistan tried to remain neutral between the two regional powers, Saudi Arabia and Iran,
for whom the Yemeni civil war was merely another stage of their ongoing rivalry. As Pakistan's economy
depended on both continued Saudi financial support and access to Iranian crude oil, Pakistan sought
to remain neutral. The Pakistani Parliament passed a resolution refusing to help Saudi Arabia with
armed troops, stating that 'Pakistan should maintain neutrality in the Yemen conflict so as to be able
to play a proactive diplomatic role to end the crisis' (Mahmood, F. & Ali, A., 2015). However, the
resolution also highlighted Pakistan's firm commitment to Saudi Arabia and expressed 'unequivocal
support for the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia', and affirmed that 'in case of violation of its territorial integrity
or any threat to Islamic holy places, Pakistan will stand shoulder to shoulder with Saudi Arabia and its
people' (Mahmood, F. & Ali, A., 2015). Although the Pakistani Parliament initially refused supporting
Saudi Arabia, the Pakistani narrative left the option of future interventions open, so as not to upset the
Saudis too much.
In the economic sphere, Pakistan counted on another relevant ally: China (NATO StratCom CoE, 2019).
The Chinese government was very interested in ensuring peace and stability in the Middle East in order
to facilitate the development of large infrastructure projects linked to its Belt and Road Initiative 31. For
that reason, China backed Pakistan's decision to remain neutral in the Yemeni conflict, and was willing
to financially support Pakistan just in case its decision caused the withdrawal of Saudi funding (NATO
StratCom CoE, 2019). Therefore, Pakistan was able to risk facing a strategic economic partner, Saudi
Arabia, as its decision allowed it to strengthen the economic ties with another, China.
4.2.4. Impact and consequences
The immediate consequence of Pakistan's refusal to collaborate in Operation Decisive Storm was the
warning threats launched by one of the participants in the anti-Houthi coalition, the United Arab
Emirates, whose Ministry of State for Foreign Affairs declared, shortly after the approval of the Pakistani
parliament resolution, that Pakistan would pay a heavy price for its ambiguous stand on the Yemeni
conflict (Dawn.com, 2015). Although the Saudis did not comment on the rejection of its collaboration
request, the statement of the UAE Ministry was deemed as the official position of the coalition and its
leader, Saudi Arabia. Pakistan, given the great pressure exerted by some members of the anti-Houthi
coalition, had to send a delegation to Saudi Arabia to explain the terms of its resolution, claiming that
a nuclear power like Pakistan should act as responsible mediator (Shiraz, C., 2015).
Three years after it declined to participate in the coalition, Pakistan agreed to send troops to Saudi
Arabia on a training and advisory mission (Panda, A., 2018). This strategic movement could be seen as
a contradiction of the initial resolution. However, Pakistan's narrative explaining its change of mind
continued to focus on the idea of neutrality. The statement issued by the Pakistani army declared that
'the contingent already there [Saudi Arabia] will not be employed outside the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia',
31
The Belt and Road Initiative was launched in 2013 by the Chinese leader Xi Jinping to develop infrastructures (railways,
highways, power grids, etc.) to facilitate the flow of goods, persons and capital between China, the rest of Asia, Europe and
Africa in order to expand China's influence in the world (Chatzky, A. & McBride J., 2020).
55
STOA | Panel for the Future of Science and Technology
highlighting that Pakistani troops would not enter combat on Yemeni soil (Panda, A., 2018). Although
Pakistan finally bowed to Saudi Arabian demands (three years after the Yemeni civil war started and
only in a secondary role) its communication strategy was coherent over time, allowing its two main
objectives to be met: to present Pakistan as a neutral country in the Yemeni conflict to the international
community (and mainly to key stakeholders like Iran and China), and to continue being considered a
major and reliable partner by Saudi Arabia.
From the Pakistani perspective, its initial neutral position, upheld under the pressure of Saudi Arabia
and its allies in Operation Decisive Storm, opened up the possibility of tightening economic ties with
China, thus reducing its financial dependence on Western countries and Gulf monarchies.
4.2.5. Conclusions of the case
This case study analyses diverse ways of influencing sovereign decisions of a foreign country in a
complex geopolitical scenario. The hybrid threat was based on economic and diplomatic pressure.
Religious influence, although not explicitly designed for this specific hybrid threat, was also used.
The intervention of Saudi Arabia, trying to incorporate Pakistan in the armed coalition against the
Houthi militia in the Yemeni civil war, presents some of the essential characteristics of hybrid threats:
•
It was aimed at favouring the strategic goals of Saudi Arabia: to defeat the Houthi militia in
Yemen and become the leading partner in the reconstruction of the country.
•
It targeted Pakistan's systemic vulnerabilities: its economic weakness and foreign financial
dependence.
•
It was intended to influence the decision-making processes of Pakistani authorities regarding
the country's level of involvement in the Yemeni civil war.
Pakistan adopted a successful communication strategy to counter the pressure exerted by Saudi Arabia
and other members of the anti-Houthi coalition. It was focused on proclaiming the neutrality of
Pakistan in the Yemeni conflict. The Pakistani Parliament's own resolution based the rejection of the
Saudi request on the Pakistan's desire to remain neutral. Although Pakistan finally supported the armed
coalition (three years after its creation and only providing advisory and training support to the Saudi
army on its own soil), it kept stressing its neutral role in the conflict. This way, Pakistan was able to
preserve its longstanding and friendly relationship with its closest strategic partner, Saudi Arabia, and
contribute to the regional interests of its two other key partners, Iran and China, with its neutral
position.
4.3. Case 3: Foreign influence of Russia and China through academic
institutions and think tanks
As explained in Chapter 2.1, soft power is an important means of influence. When properly combined
with hard power, it can constitute a hybrid threat. A clear example of the use of soft power tools as part
of a hybrid threat is the influence exerted by foreign countries through government-funded
organisations. Countries create and finance different types of organisations that are similar in nature
(think tanks, NGOs, academic institutions) to spread a positive image of themselves, influence national
or regional policy-making, as well as to promote their views on a wide range of political and social
issues.
This case study addresses two examples of this strategy. The first is the Chinese Confucius Institute (CI).
In recent years, China has adopted new soft power strategies in line with its renewed and more
proactive foreign policy. CIs are language teaching institutions which have experienced great
proliferation around the world. The other case is the Russian think tank Institute of Democracy and
Cooperation (IDC). In contrast with China, Russia already has significant experience in foreign
56
Strategic communications as a key factor in countering hybrid threats
influencing strategies through soft power mechanisms. The IDC is one of the numerous institutions
funded by Russia to promote its desired international image.
4.3.1. Geopolitical context
Since the middle 2000s, the People's Republic of China has been gradually shifting its role in the
international scene. Under the current leadership of the President Xi Jinping, and based on its
economic strength, China is evolving from the low international profile maintained during the second
half of the last century towards a more relevant presence in global relations (Esteban, M., 2016). The
foreign policy of Xi Jinping, modelled on his predecessor's theory of peaceful rise (Brookings, 2005), is
based on the need for cooperation to face global challenges. In this sense, the image of China abroad
becomes especially relevant (Esteban, M., 2017). For that reason, China's foreign policymakers have
designed new strategies based on soft power tools.
Propaganda has been used by the communist regime since the 1930s (Starr, D., 2009). However, a new
soft power policy was designed under the presidency of Hu Jintao (Xi Jinping's predecessor). In 2006,
the former President of Xi'an International University, Du Ruiqing, gave some clues about China's new
attitude towards its soft power strategy: 'It is time to make ourselves better understood by the world's
people […] Once they come to know the Chinese people better, they will find out that harmony is an
essential part of Chinese tradition and a country that values harmony poses absolutely no threat to the
rest of the world […] Culture is a soft power that effectively penetrates to quench misunderstanding
and hostility between people of different races […] China should help people from other nations
acquaint themselves with Chinese culture, including traditions, religions and particularly the Chinese
way of thinking. This will help China overcome its cultural deficit' (China Daily, 2006).
At the 17th National Congress of the Communist Party of China, Hu Jintao recognised the importance
of Chinese culture as part of its development and growth: 'The great rejuvenation of the Chinese nation
will definitely be accompanied by the thriving of Chinese culture' (Jintao, H., 2007). Current president
Xi Jinping was more explicit some years later: 'We should increase China's soft power, give a good
Chinese narrative, and better communicate China's message to the world' (Biswas, A. & Tortajada, C.,
2018).
Russia has always understood conflict as a continuum. Since the times of Soviet Union, Moscow's longterm objective has been to shape opinions and public debate towards Russia's own interests and
'deposit an ideological base that eases the path for subsequent influence operations' (EPRS, 2018). In
order to restore Russian greatness, Russia is making use of the old Soviet influence toolbox, and has
renewed it in recent years with some measures such as cyberwar techniques. This toolbox includes
active measures, disinformation campaigns, agents of influence, reflexive control, forgeries,
propaganda and controlled international front groups (EPRS, 2018).
After the first negative experiences regarding the Colour Revolutions, 32 Russia became aware of the
importance of ideas and legitimacy. A favourable public opinion and/or a foreign elite without
legitimacy could be more effective than many weapons. In this sense, Russia decided to add a new
instrument to its influence toolbox, one based on a soft power: NGOs and Think Tanks to spread Russia's
vision around the world. (Popescu, N., 2006). Russia's intention was: 'To develop an efficient
infrastructure of ideas, institutions, networks and media outlets that can use the predictable crisis of
the current Orange-type regimes to regain influence not simply at the level of government but at the
level of society as well' (Krastev, I., 2005). Russia developed its NGO infrastructure and its channels to
spread the Kremlin's message everywhere (Popescu, N., 2006).
32
The 'Colour Revolutions' is the name given to a group of democratisation processes in the 1990s and 2000s which led to the
overthrow of authoritarian governments in the countries where they took place. Depending on the author, the list of Colour
Revolutions includes Serbia, Georgia, Ukraine, Romania, Slovakia and Kyrgyzstan. These processes were characterised as
being peaceful, and were carried out in former Soviet countries. (Stewart, 2009).
57
STOA | Panel for the Future of Science and Technology
Europe is the main objective of Russian pressure in its return to greatness. From the conflict in Ukraine
and Crimea to the Brexit process, passing through the Baltic region, many countries in Europe have
suffered or are suffering the effects of the Russian soft power. (NATO StratCom CoE, 2019).
4.3.2. Features of the hybrid threat
The Confucius Institutes
The First CI was established in Seoul, South Korea, in 2004. In 2017, the number of CIs in the world was
525, most of them distributed between Europe, America and, to some extent, Asia (NATO StratCom
Centre of Excellence, 2018).
According to the constitution and by-laws of the Confucius Institute, its main function is teaching the
Chinese language (Mandarin) in foreign countries. The objectives are not only to satisfy the demand of
people wanting to learn Chinese in different countries around the world but also to improve
educational and cultural cooperation between China and other nations. Another relevant goal is
'deepening friendly relationships with other nations, to promote the development of multi-culturalism,
and to construct a harmonious world' (Confucius Institute, n.d.). Management of the CI is centralised in
headquarters (known as Hanban), which are located in China and depends on the Ministry of
Education.
The CI is flexible in its configuration, which facilitates its proliferation. Any educational entity interested
in teaching Mandarin must meet only a few lax requirements before asking the headquarters for
permission to establish a CI branch. The new branch would then be co-directed by a member from the
host country and a Hanban officer.
Despite its benevolent and generally acceptable purposes, point six of its General Principles
(constitution and by-laws) has created mistrust in foreign stakeholders interested in the establishment
of CI branches. It states that the Institute should respect the law, the cultural and educational traditions
and social customs of the host country. However, it also adds that the Institutes cannot contravene
Chinese laws. Other points of the CI statutes also make it clear that Chinese representatives in each
branch are under the strict control of Hanban headquarters. (Confucius Institute, n.d.).
In practice, there have been some incidents related to the aforementioned clause that have concluded
in the non-renewal of several CI contracts. In 2013, McMaster University in Hamilton (Canada) ended its
contract with the Confucius Institute due to a legal issue with a former Chinese teacher, Sonia Zhao,
who made a complaint against the university to the Ontario Human Rights Tribunal because she was
obligated by contract to hide her creed, Falun Gong (a Chinese spiritual practise). Hanban hired the
teachers from China and therefore imposed this obligation (Bradshaw, J. & Freeze, C., 2013). Another
case took place during the European Association for Chinese Studies Conference in Braga (Portugal).
Xu Lin, at that time the Director-General of the Confucius Institute Headquarters, ordered some pages
of the Conference Programme to be cut. Those pages contained information related to the Chiang
Ching-Kuo Foundation, another academic institution focused on promoting Chinese culture around
the world, which is located in Taiwan, a Chinese region in permanent conflict with Beijing regarding its
political status. (EACS, 2014).
After the McMaster case, many other cases of CI branches meddling in order to influence activities,
events, or production of the host academic institutions have been reported. (Sahlins, M., 2014). As a
consequence, there is a growing common opinion of rejection towards the Confucius Institute in the
academic sphere.
In 2014, the Canadian Association of University Teachers called all universities to end relations with the
Institute (CAUT, 2014). Months later, the American Association of University Professors did the same.
(AAUP, 2014). In 2017, the American National Association of Scholars released an extensive report
about the Confucius Institute, arguing why all universities should terminate their relations with the
Chinese institution (Petterson, R., 2017).
58
Strategic communications as a key factor in countering hybrid threats
In Europe there have also been reactions to the potential risks of CI interference. In November 2019,
the Foreign Affairs Committee of the House of Commons drew attention to 'autocracies' influence on
academic freedom in the UK', and recommended further risk assessment, strengthening collaborations
and implementing a sanctions policy (House of Commons. Foreign Affairs Committee, 2019).
Universities in Sweden and the Netherlands have closed CIs in recent years (Bentzen, N., 2019). The Vrije
Universiteit Brussel announced in December 2019 that it will not extend its contract with the CI, which
expired in June 2020, and stated that 'The VUB is always open to new collaborations with Chinese
universities, scientists and students, on the condition that academic freedom and independence can
be guaranteed in mutual trust' (Vrije Universiteit Brussel, 2019).
Finally, a report from the USA's Senate stated that 'CI's funding comes with strings that can compromise
academic freedom' (Portman, R. & Carper, T., 2019). The report argued that: (1) USA's educational
institutions were accepting by contract China's legislation by contract; (2) China was trying to export
its censorship; (3) China wanted to change its image as an economic and security threat in Western
countries. This report suggested that the Confucius Institute may constitute a hybrid threat in the form
of a soft power tool.
Russian think tanks and NGOs
There are numerous and varied soft power organisations related to the Russian administration. These
organisations are characterised by three elements. First, location; they can be established in Russian
territory or abroad. Second, the nature of their economic relationship with the Russian Government
and the level of transparency of their funding, as the Kremlin sometimes prefers not to be directly
linked to these NGOs and think tanks. And third, their goals:
•
Many organisations are created to support what Russia calls compatriots abroad. Compatriots
are citizens of other countries (mainly former Soviet countries) with Russian roots, or who
belong to Russian speaking communities. These people are considered part of the country
even though they live abroad and the Government tries to keep their Russian identity and
feelings alive through these organisations. Functionally, these institutions are governmentalorganised non-governmental organisations (GONGOs). They receive funds from the Russian
government, normally via the Ministry of Foreign Affairs. There is a World Coordination Council
of Russian Compatriots to coordinate all these GONGOs. They include Russkiy Mir and the
Foundation for Supporting and Protecting the Rights of Compatriots Living Abroad. (Vojtískova, V.
et al., 2016).
•
Other Russian organisations abroad are dedicated to the production and dissemination of
Russian ideas and views, and to the promotion of a positive image of the country. Their aim is
to present an alternative to Western culture and liberal democracy. These organisations are
usually established as NGOs (undercover GONGOs) or think tanks. Their funding remains rather
opaque in their accountability. While some of them receive government financial support,
which sometimes is hidden through intermediaries, other institutions are funded by private
donations. For example, the Alexander Gorchakov Public Diplomacy Fund is financially
supported by the Ministry of Foreign Affairs. However, the only available information about
funding of the think tank Dialogue of Civilisations is the existence of a foundation with a similar
name in Switzerland (Vendil, C. & Oxenstierna, S., 2017).
Russia has deployed several GONGOs and/or think tanks in European territory: Dialogue of Civilisation
Research Institute (Berlin, 2016), and the Institute of Democracy and Cooperation (Paris, 2008), amongst
others. These institutions have the task of promoting the Russia's political vision as an alternative to
Western liberal democracies' narrative, as well as improving the image of Russia abroad. To accomplish
their mission, they produce knowledge in the form of studies and academic papers and organise
activities such as conferences and events. This modus operandi could be dubbed as an intellectual
lobbying (Vojtískova, V. et al., 2016). Let us look at a concrete example.
59
STOA | Panel for the Future of Science and Technology
The Institute of Democracy and Cooperation (IDC) is a think tank established in Paris in 2008. In 2015
the IDC received consultative status from the Economic and Social Council of the United Nations
(Institute of Democracy and Cooperation, 2016). The Institute can be considered as a GONGO.
According to Wikileaks 33, its foundation was the responsibility of the Government of Russia. Natalia
Narochnitskaya is the current Director. She is a Russian politician, historian and diplomat. She was an
elected representative at the Russian State Duma between 2003 and 2007, and served as vice chair of
the International Affairs Committee in the State Duma. The second in charge of the IDC is the director
of studies, John Laughland, a British Doctor of Philosophy specialising in international affairs. Before
working for the IDC, he directed the Eurosceptic think tank European Foundation34 (Vendil, C. &
Oxenstierna, S., 2017). According to its website, the IDC organises conferences and discussions on
contemporary matters of interest: the role of history in contemporary politics, East-West relations,
sovereignty and human rights, etc. (Institute of Democracy and Cooperation, 2016). The IDC intends to
provide another approach to human rights as an alternative to the Western one, as well as to present
Russia's vision of the main historical events of the last two centuries.
4.3.3. Strategy, tactics and tools to counter the hybrid threat
In its report on the Confucius Institute, NATO's Strategic Communication Centre of Excellence gave
three recommendations to counter its influence (NATO StratCom Centre of Excellence, 2018):
•
Raise awareness about the real status of Confucius Institutes. These institutions should be
considered centres to promote Chinese language and culture, but not providers of expertise in
other topics. Given its strong dependence on the Chinese Administration, objectivity regarding
sensitive topics must not be expected.
•
Reform the funding of CIs to achieve greater autonomy and financial independence for the
branches, whose funding strongly depended on China's headquarter budget.
•
Audits should be periodically conducted to ensure academic freedom and the absence of
censorship. Chinese studies programmes at the host institution should be completely separate
from CIs.
The National Association of Scholars report mentioned above, proposed recommendations to restrict
Chinese power over CI branches and ensure academic freedom. It also advised the US Congress to
investigate whether American interests could be threatened by the Confucius Institute. The most
energic recommendation was, however, to close all CI branches in the USA. (Petterson, R., 2017).
The Senate staff report China's Impact on the U.S. Education System also provided a set of
recommendations to several institutions. Most of them were related to the transparency and control of
CI branches. One of the recommendations urged the Justice Department to investigate whether the
Confucius Institute intended to influence the Government or public opinion, in order to register it
under the Foreign Agents Registration Act (Portman, R. & Carper, T., 2019).
In Australia, the Government announced a University Foreign Interference Taskforce to guarantee
academic freedom. In November 2019, it published Guidelines to counter foreign interference in the
Australian university sector, providing recommendations to safeguard a balance between the openness
of the university system and its quality and freedom (University Foreign Interference Taskforce, 2019).
33
34
The
Institute
for
Democracy
and
Cooperation:
Russia's
new
face
to
the
world:
https://wikileaks.org/plusd/cables/08MOSCOW375_a.html. Also referred to in (Vojtískova, V. et al., 2016) and (Vendil, C. &
Oxenstierna, S., 2017).
https://europeanfoundation.org/about/
60
Strategic communications as a key factor in countering hybrid threats
The European Parliament has called for actions to guarantee the autonomy of education institutions,
as a precondition for academic freedom, in the 2018 resolution Defence of academic freedom in the EU's
external action (European Parliament, 2018b).
Whatever strategy to counter the threat that NGOs and think tanks could represent to the sovereignty
of foreign countries should be based on respect for freedom of expression and association. This starting
point implies further difficulties in dealing with these hybrid threats when compared to other types.
Regarding pro-Russian think tanks, the NATO StratCom CoE suggested improving collaboration
between nations to investigate the relations around these organisations. It also proposed raising
awareness of their real aim and unclear links. The last NATO recommendation was to 'increase the level
of accountability and financial transparency' (NATO StratCom CoE, 2019), which would help to expose
the real objective of Russian think tanks and NGOs.
4.3.4. Impact and consequences
According to the NATO StratCom CoE report, in terms of informational impacts, the Confucius Institute
was a successful policy, given the great growth of China's presence in the USA. Even outside cities,
where there were fewer opportunities to expand Chinese learning, CI branches were proliferating. As
every CI centre was a hotspot for the transmission of China's message, the fact that so many branches
were opened could be considered a success (NATO StratCom Centre of Excellence, 2018).
One potential consequence of CI proliferation was its influence on public opinion, which in turn could
affect decision-making processes. Following this logic, it may affect or alter (NATO StratCom Centre of
Excellence, 2018):
•
the sovereignty of foreign policy and internal mechanisms of foreign policy decision-making;
•
the integrity and consistency of internal public opinion of external actors (other countries);
•
the integrity and consistency of academic research about China.
In the academic sphere, it was also possible to find some vulnerabilities revealed by the CIs' activity.
The collaboration between the CI and the host academic organisation involved sharing critical
infrastructure (digital academic networks) which, in turn, could allow China access to crucial data.
Another vulnerability was the limited budget that host academic institutions normally possessed. The
financial resources that usually accompanied the establishment of Confucius Institutes was a good
incentive for the host institution to give way to Chinese influence. (NATO StratCom Centre of
Excellence, 2018). As a result, the collaboration with the CI could represent a threat to the future of the
academic independence in the host countries.
The common guidelines ruling the CI centres (commanded from Hanban) regarding what to promote
or not could directly affect the freedom of academic production in the host country. Since the opening
of CI centres consisted of a partnership, the censorship imposed from China could also affect the host
institution and its academic cooperation with other partners that opposed to China's policies. (NATO
StratCom Centre of Excellence, 2018).
The conflicts between academic freedom and CI action seem to have been more evident in countries
with an Anglo-Saxon tradition such as Canada, the United States, Australia and the United Kingdom.
Higher education systems in these countries are highly dependent on private funding (OECD, 2019),
including tuition fees, grants and private benefactors. Foreign students comprise a great share of
tuition fees, particularly in top universities, and Chinese students represent an increasing part of
international students. In Australia, Chinese students represent 33% of all foreign enrolments (Maslen,
G., 2019) and their fees make up to a fifth of the total annual revenue of the University of Sydney
(Robinson, N., 2019). Chinese students contributed US$12 billion to the US higher education system in
2017 (Skinner, M., 2019).
61
STOA | Panel for the Future of Science and Technology
Although there are many differences between EU Member States, within the EU there is generally more
of a shared belief that higher educations should be largely financed through public resources (Arnhold,
N. et al., 2020). However, globalisation and economic crisis have pushed funding reforms in order to
increase diversification of revenues at European universities. Trends include an increase in private
funding compared to public funding, and a shift away from direct funding to indirect, competitive,
funding (Jongbloed, B., 2018). The shift towards a more market-oriented university may increase its
vulnerability to organisations such as the CI, which attract tuition fees from Chinese students, fund
scholarships for local students to study in China and offer financial incentives to host academic
institutions (Petterson, R., 2017).
Regarding Russian influence, the activity of the IDC in France may have had consequences for the
security and stability of the country. Consequences could also be applicable to Europe due to the
international diffusion of IDC activities (NATO StratCom CoE, 2019):
1
Some critical functions of French democracy could be affected by the IDC, mainly:
o
public opinion and debate, damaged by using heavily biased and manipulated arguments,
o
trust in government institutions,
o
and the health of civil society and its plurality and progress.
2
Regarding the alleged vulnerabilities of Western democracies exposed by the IDC activity,
NATO pointed out the proliferation of anti-American sentiments, as well as the exacerbation
of conservative-liberal cleavage due to the conservative character of the IDC on social issues.
3
The strengthening of far-right movements and political polarisation.
Regarding the effects of IDC activities, their limited scope must be taken into account. The
organisation's scarce resources and its low presence in mainstream media and social media led to a low
impact on society. The IDC's lobbying activity of the IDC may be more effective in decision-making
processes. However, in spite of the efforts of the IDC and in line with the low impact of the think tank,
French opinion surveys showed that anti-Russian feelings predominated in French society (NATO
StratCom CoE, 2019).
Despite China and Russia's efforts to improve their image abroad and influence local policy-making
processes, they appear at the bottom of the Soft Power 30 Index 35. China achieved its best position in
2017 (27th) while Russia occupied the last position of the ranking between 2016 and 2019, except for
2017, when it ranked 29th.
4.3.5. Conclusions of the case
Considered in isolation, cultural and academic influence cannot be strictly seen as a hybrid threat, but
it represents yet another hybrid tool, a key component of the threats eroding academic independence
and trying to influence public opinion and, as a consequence, public representatives. This kind of tool
is an example of how the line between influence and interference in national affairs is blurred by hybrid
threats.
The response from academic institutions, where they have occurred, to the risks to academic freedom
that these organisations pose to Western democracies has been to terminate relations. Countries such
as Australia, Canada and the United States, as well as NATO, have issued recommendations in that vein,
in addition to raising awareness about the threat.
The aforementioned Guidelines to counter foreign interference in the Australian university sector
(University Foreign Interference Taskforce, 2019) include 'Communication and education' as one of the
35
The Soft Power 30: https://softpower30.com/
62
Strategic communications as a key factor in countering hybrid threats
four strategic areas, with the objective of raising awareness about foreign interference amongst
university staff, students and decision makers, and increasing resilience. The Association of American
Universities has also published guidelines and good practices on awareness building and
communications to limit foreign interference, as well as strengthening cooperation with federal
security and intelligence agencies (American Association of Universities, 2019).
In Europe, the Covid-19 crisis has put extra pressure on academic institutions, which are facing a
complex financial situation derived from the drastic reduction of tuition fees (Arnhold, N. et al., 2020).
This crisis might increase the risks derived from the economic benefits of agreements with foreign
institutions such as the CI and internationalisation, at the expense of academic freedom.
A robust, diversified and sustainable funding system for European Universities, together with
appropriate measures to ensure transparency and awareness amongst the academic community and
society as a whole, are needed to guarantee their role as drivers of innovation, social cohesion,
knowledge generation and critical thinking in our democracy.
4.4. Case 4: Russian intervention in Ukraine
If a paradigmatic case where all the components of hybrid threats were put in place to influence the
target had to be selected, it would undoubtedly be the Russian intervention in Ukraine, especially
between 2013 and 2015. During that period, Russia developed an intense hybrid campaign in order to
impede Ukraine's geopolitical shift towards a tighter collaboration with the European Union. Russia
combined economic, diplomatic, military and legal action, as well as cyberattacks and disinformation
campaigns, to influence Ukrainian domestic and foreign affairs. As has been stated, 'Ukraine is
undoubtedly a very specific case and several specific factors enabled effective hybrid warfare in order
to achieve the political end: the annexation of Crimea and therefore the demonstration of great Russia
revival' (Rusnáková, S., 2017, p. 353).
In order to justify its intervention, Russia developed a narrative based on both preserving Russian
identity in Ukraine and defending Russian minorities.
4.4.1. Geopolitical context
Ukraine is one of the largest countries in Europe. Its geographical situation, between Russia and the
European Union, is strategic from an economic perspective, as it is crossed by several gas pipelines
through which a large part of the gas sold by Russia to Europe flows.
Prior to the 2014 crisis, Ukraine had moved closer to the EU using the framework of a possible
'Association Agreement' (a cooperation treaty between the EU, its Member States and a non-EU third
country), with the aim of eventually joining the Union. Surprisingly, on 21st November 2013, the
Ukrainian government, leaded by the President Victor Yanukovych, suspended the process of signing
the Association Agreement, which had been intensively negotiated over the past six years, yielding to
Russian pressure. The Ukrainian government also decided to resume economic negotiations with CIS
Member States (Interfax-Ukraine, 2013). The Kiev government justified itself by saying that the
agreement with the European Union would have an excessive cost to its economy, which heavily
depended on Russia (The Guardian, 2013). The Ukrainian government's decision gave rise to what was
called Euromaidan, massive demonstrations in Kiev's Independence Square in which the population
showed its disagreement with that decision.
Moscow's strategy was to attract the former Soviet Republics by creating a new economic alliance, the
Euroasian Economic Union (just like the EU). To reach this goal, Russia used all elements of the hybrid
threats to ensure that Ukraine would not enter into any agreement with the EU, since the former Soviet
Republic represented a major source of economic income for Russia that it could not afford to lose.
Apart from the fact that the Russian army depended partly on the Ukrainian military and aeronautical
industry (Recknagel, C., 2014), it is interesting to note that Russia's income from energy exports
63
STOA | Panel for the Future of Science and Technology
accounted for 22% of its GDP in 2014 (6.7% of GDP came from gas exports) and most of the gas supplied
by Russia to European countries was channelled through the Soyuz pipeline, which passes through
Ukraine (Álvarez, G., 2014). Both examples of Russian-Ukrainian economic interdependency show the
Russian need to keep Ukraine under its political influence.
4.4.2. Features of the hybrid threat
Russia developed an aggressive hybrid campaign against Ukraine by combining diverse components,
ranging from economic pressure to digital activities such as cyberattacks. All of them are analysed in
this section.
Economic pressure
After the break-up of the USSR, Ukraine, unlike Kazakhstan and Azerbaijan, had hardly any internal
reserves to finance any reforms, with its economy being particularly susceptible to external influence
(Wilson, A., 2014).
Prior to the 2014 Ukrainian crisis, the Kremlin used the asymmetric relationship of Ukraine's economic
dependence on Russia to influence Kiev; first, in the form of highly subsidised oil prices during
Kuchma's presidency; second, by punishing the Kiev government through supply disruptions and
raising oil prices during Yushchenko's more European-oriented presidency. In practice, Russia has
bought the loyalty of the Ukrainian government by subsidising oil and gas prices since the Orange
Revolution 36 in 2004 (Newnham, R., 2011).
At the peak of the crisis, many Ukrainian companies, whose only customer was Russia (Russia was by
far the largest market for Ukrainian products, with a 25 % share), could only survive with government
aid and subsidies, not to mention the loss of a third of their experts, who moved to Russia (Lázaro, A.,
2014).
To prevent the agreement being signed between the EU and Ukraine, Russia threatened the Ukrainian
economy by adopting a set of measures (Álvarez, G., 2014):
•
It suspended the tariff-free import quotas for Ukrainian steel pipes, which made the price on
the Russian market 20 % higher.
•
It banned the import of Roshen brand chocolates, which meant about US$100 million in losses
for the Ukrainian firm.
•
It changed the credit rating of Ukrainian importers to 'risky'.
•
It restricted the import of meat products from Ukraine.
•
It withdrew production licences from Ukrainian railway wagon manufacturers.
When the separatist movements began to take shape in the Donbass area, one of the areas where the
armed conflict was more intense, its industrial elite supported such (pro-Russian) actions, since a
rapprochement with the EU could infringe further damage to their local industry, given that their
exports were mainly directed towards Russia (Zhukov, Y., 2015). They also assumed that maintaining
the status quo in the region could only be achieved through closer cooperation with Russia rather than
the possible integration with the EU, which would force them to adopt stricter anti-corruption
standards (Sommerbauer, J., 2016).
36
The Orange Revolution is the name given to a series of non-violent demonstrations after the 2004 presidential elections,
where supporters of the opposition candidate Viktor Yushchenko protested against alleged electoral fraud, which would
have benefited the government-backed candidate Viktor Yanukovych. The elections were re-held in December 2004 and
Viktor Yushchenko became the legitimate president of Ukraine.
64
Strategic communications as a key factor in countering hybrid threats
Military actions
Within the framework of Russian pressure on Ukraine, military actions, overt and covert, were focused
on two specific events:
a) The illegal annexation of Crimea by Russia
The refusal to sign the Ukraine-EU Association Agreement gave rise to the Euromaidan protests
movement, which, in the end, caused the fall of the Yanukovych's government. In Crimea, the removal
of Viktor Yanukovych as Ukrainian president led to a political crisis, in which various pro-Russian groups
demonstrated against the new government and proclaimed their desire to strengthen their ties (or
even reintegrate) with the Russian Federation. As a result, Crimea witnessed numerous armed and
military revolts between pro-Russian and pro-European groups (Bebler, A., 2015). At the end of
February 2014, taking advantage of the political instability in Crimea, troops with unmarked uniforms
(called 'little green men') occupied strategic positions, cutting off communication between Ukraine
and Crimea. After the annexation, Russia eventually acknowledged that these troops belonged to the
Russian Special Forces (Schreck, C., 2019).
In March 2014, Crimean local authorities recognised Russian authority over the peninsula. Russia
consolidated the annexation by sending in official troops. The annexation of Crimea by Russia was
confirmed by a referendum of independence from Ukraine held on 16th March, which was deemed
illegal by the Ukrainian government and the UN, and the Treaty of Accession of the Republic of Crimea
to Russia, which was signed by Crimean and Russian representatives on 18th March (Bebler, A., 2015).
b) War in Donbass:
After Russia's annexation of Crimea, and as a reaction against the Euromaidan movement, a series of
armed clashes between separatist and pro-Russian groups and the new Ukrainian government took
place in the Donbass region, located in the eastern Ukraine and close to the Russian border. Separatists
proclaimed the independence of two areas within the Donbass region: the Donetsk and Luhansk
People's Republics. Although Russia repeatedly denied its involvement in this armed conflict, dubbing
it a 'civil war', both Ukraine and the NATO reported the presence of Russian troops and military
equipment supporting separatists in the Donbass region (Council on Foreign Relations, 2020). The
conflict has continued intermittently until now, and, according to the United Nations Office of the High
Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR), it is estimated that around 13 000 people have been killed:
at least 3 350 civilians, around 4 100 Ukrainian troops and around 5 650 members of armed groups.
Another 29 000-31 000 have been injured (Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human
Rights, 2020).
In July 2014, the local conflict escalated to an international crisis after flight MH17 was shot down over
the Donetsk Oblast region. Although Russia tried to elude its responsibility through an intense
disinformation campaign aiming to blame the Ukrainian government, the investigation conducted
during 2015 by the Dutch Safety Board and a joint investigation team (JIT) concluded that the
aeroplane was shot down by a surface-to-air missile (Dutch Safety Board, 2015). A subsequent criminal
investigation conducted in 2016 by international prosecutors of the JIT concluded that the missile was
provided by Russia and launched from a territory controlled by Russian-backed separatists. In 2018, the
JIT concluded that the missile came from a Russian Army unit, and accused several Russian Army
officials and separatist leaders of the murderer of all 298 persons on board (East StratCom Task Force,
2019a).
The case of flight MH17 unleashed one of the largest disinformation campaigns from the Kremlin, in
which the Russian media used a large amount of manipulated or directly false news to exempt
themselves from any type of responsibility. Pro-Kremlin narratives regarding this event occur even
today, as Russia continues to spread false or manipulated information, in which it tries to paint itself as
65
STOA | Panel for the Future of Science and Technology
a victim of an international plot against the country, or continues to argue that Ukraine was responsible
for shooting down the aeroplane.37
Legal
After the annexation of Crimea, Russia, taking advantage of loopholes in international law, tried to
justify its actions using a legal narrative. It attempted to give the appearance that such actions were
legally covered, highlighting that each people has the right to decide its own sovereignty. Russia used
a discourse analogous to that the EU could use in relation to the rights of minorities and separatist
movements in the former Soviet Republics (Allison, R., 2014). Russia took advantage of the illegal
referendum in which Crimean citizens could decide whether they wanted to remain part of Ukraine or
integrate into the Russian Federation (97 % voted in favour of annexation to Russia) to show the
international community that the annexation was justified by the feelings of citizens of the Crimean
Peninsula.
Cyberspace
In the case of Ukraine, diverse hybrid components from the digital domain were also deployed. The
two most significant are discussed:
1
Cyberattacks.
The following table shows some of the most relevant cyber-attacks during the crisis in Ukraine.
Table 8: Chronology of main cyber-attacks in the Russian-Ukrainian conflict
Date
37
Description
11. 2013
The websites of Ukrainian institutions were targeted by DDoS attacks, as a
consequence of the pro-European Euromaidan movement.
18-21.02.2014
DDoS attacks on Ukrainian websites and on Ukrainian Members of Parliament's
mobile phones.
07-14.03.2014
Various Russian websites were targeted by DDoS attacks in retaliation for the invasion
of Crimea.
16-18.03.2014
DDoS attacks on Ukrainian websites were reported.
24.05.2014
A pro-Russian hacker named CyberBerkut hacked the servers of the Central Election
Commission (CEC) of Ukraine and infected the election networks with malware.
25.10.2014
Several DDoS attacks and hacks were observed against Ukrainian institutions during
the Ukrainian parliamentary election campaign.
Some recent examples of disinformation campaigns related to flight MH17 can be found on the website
www.euvsdisinfo.eu:
66
•
The MH17 trial is a politically motivated process against Russia by the United
https://euvsdisinfo.eu/report/mh17- tribunal-is-a-politically-motivated-process-against -russia-and-dnr/
•
There is no valid evidence because the allegations were based
https://euvsdisinfo.eu/report/none-of-the-evidence-of-the-jit-are-valid-all-the
articles-in-the-media/
•
The evidence being presented at the trial has been altered or manipulated to blame Russia for what happened:
https://euvsdisinfo.eu/report/russian-expert-confirms-new-evidence-mh17-tampered/
States:
exclusively on digital articles:
-accusation-is-based-on-s ome -
Strategic communications as a key factor in countering hybrid threats
23.12.2015
A cyberattack on the Ukrainian power grid left approximately 250,000 inhabitants
without power for several hours.
Source: (Baezner, M., 2018)
Among the most significant impacts were the reputational costs of website defacement, the economic
costs of denial of service (DDoS) attacks and the need to replace affected equipment following the
cyberattacks on Ukraine's electricity grid.
2
Disinformation campaigns.
During the crisis in Ukraine, false information was widely used to add more confusion and aggravate
the conflict. Russian television and social networks (mainly Twitter) were the main distribution channels
of disinformation campaigns. Russian state TV channels helped to spread the Kremlin's strategic
narratives amongst the population, on the one hand focusing their discourse on Western hostility and
the existence of secret EU interests in Ukraine, and, on the other hand, deploying the idea that fascism
was slowly growing in Ukraine (Cottiero, C. et al., 2015).
A recent study proposed the hypothesis that not only could Russia have used social networks to spread
its narrative amongst Russian speakers in Ukraine, but also to gain military intelligence. By gauging
public opinion through social networks about the changes in the Russia-Ukraine border after Crimea's
annexation, Russia could have determined in which other territories they could have deployed troops
without resistance (Driscoll, J. & Steinert-Threlkeld, Z., 2020). Although researchers did not find
evidence of data from social networks being used in this way in this case, they did emphasise the
potential of real-time data collection and analysis from social networks for repurposing military actions.
Since the beginning of the Ukrainian conflict, Russia has spread numerous false stories through digital
means, attributing false actions or activities to the Ukrainian government (or government-sponsored
groups), including violent actions such as planting bombs or using firearms against opposition groups
(Snegovaya, M., 2015). The most relevant disinformation campaigns were those related to the downing
of the flight MH17 (discussed above), which aimed to hide the Russian origins of the attack, and the
case of the boy crucified by Ukrainian soldiers in Sloviansk, which was broadcasted through the Russian
state-owned Channel One during the war in Donbass (Tomkiw, L., 2018).
Religious affairs
President Putin has progressively replaced the communist revolutionary vision with the values of the
Russian Orthodox Church, and has established these values as an essential element of Russian identity,
creating a new morality, code, meaning and purpose for Russia (Dalla Mora, M., 2019). In line with this,
religious sentiments have also been used by the Kremlin to justify the annexation of Crimea, as this
region is a fundamental part of Russian religious and cultural heritage (Coyer, P., 2016).
The Russian Orthodox Church (ROC) has always been massively influential in all the decisions made by
Russian leaders, except for during the first decades of the communist revolution. Thus, religion has
been a significant factor in Russia's history. After the dissolving of the Soviet Union, the newly formed
Russia announced the ROC, the Army, and the state authority to be the pillars of the nation. Even today,
the ROC is closely tied to all the decisions made by the Kremlin, including the decisions made regarding
external affairs (East StratCom Task Force, 2019b).
Ukraine is a country of plural religious convictions. Ukrainians particularly disliked the power that the
ROC exerted amongst other orthodox churches and, even before the country became independent,
they believed that the ROC always sided towards the Russians. As a result, in December 2018, the
Ukrainian Orthodox Church (UOC) was instituted following the Unification Council held in Kiev,
reunifying two of the three orthodox congregations existing in the country (the third remained under
67
STOA | Panel for the Future of Science and Technology
the jurisdiction of the ROC). The new religious institution was granted the Tomos 38 of autocephaly by
the Ecumenical Patriarchate of Constantinople, re-establishing its jurisdiction over Kiev, instead of
Moscow.
The autocephaly of the UOC limited the Kremlin's ability to influence Ukraine through the ROC, so
Russia tried to disparage the new church, going so far as to qualify its creation as a 'CIA operation' (East
StratCom Task Force, 2018).
4.4.3. Strategy, tactics and tools to counter the hybrid threat
Ukraine and the international community tried to counter the hybrid warfare developed by Russia
using diverse strategies. In the military sphere, Ukraine, once the separatist movements began to act,
launched an anti-terrorist operation in response to the destabilisation actions that were taking place
(OSCE, 2014). However, this solution proved to be inappropriate, due in part to the poor training that
military forces had received, the scarce weaponry they had available and the low morale of troops due
to the annexation of Crimea.
At the international level, the EU decided to implement several soft power tools, with the aim of
preventing the escalation of tension:
•
Creation of the EU Advisory Mission in Ukraine (EUAM). It was set up in December 2014 and
aimed to help Ukrainian authorities achieve sustainable reform of the civil security sector
through strategic advice and practical support for specific reform measures based on EU rules
and international principles of good governance and human rights. EUAM's aid priorities in
Ukraine are: 39
o Human resource management to ensure that skilled people are deployed to help
develop the necessary reforms.
o Strengthen aid for criminal investigation to combat organised crime and corruption.
o Help Ukrainian authorities to maintain peace and public order while preserving the
right of citizens to express their disconformity with public action.
o Advise on the delimitation of competencies, to clarify the functions of each public
institution and avoid overlaps and excessive bureaucracy.
•
Imposition of restrictive measures against Russia (European Council, 2020a):
o Diplomatic measures: cancellation of the EU-Russia summit in 2014 and regular
bilateral summits with Member States. EU countries also agreed to suspend
negotiations on Russia's entrance to the OECD and the International Energy Agency
(IEA).
o Individual restrictive measures: 170 individuals and 44 entities were subject to asset
freezes and travel bans, due to their responsibility in undermining the territorial
integrity, sovereignty and independence of Ukraine.
o Restrictions on economic relations with Crimea and Sevastopol: import bans on goods
from that region; restrictions on trade and investment; prohibiting supply of tourist
services; and export bans on certain goods.
38
Tomos, is a decreee issued by heads of particularn Eastern Orthodox Churches on such issues as the level of dependence an
autonomous church may enjoy from its mother church.
39
https://www.euam-ukraine.eu/our-mission/our-priorities/
68
Strategic communications as a key factor in countering hybrid threats
o Economic sanctions: applicable to trade with Russia in certain economic sectors
(financial, energy and defence).
o Economic cooperation restrictions: the European Investment Bank (EIB) suspended the
signing of new financing operations in the Russian Federation; the implementation of
EU regional and bilateral cooperation programmes with Russia were reassessed and
other economic cooperation programmes were also suspended.
The Organisation for Security and Co-operation in Europe (OSCE) created the OSCE Special Monitoring
Mission to Ukraine, whose tasks were to observe and report on the situation in Ukraine from a neutral
perspective and facilitate dialogue amongst all parties involved.
In March 2014, the European Commission approved a first aid package with various concrete measures
of economic and financial assistance to Ukraine (European Commission, 2014b). Since then, the EU and
their Member States have provided financial and humanitarian aid worth €1 billion (European
Commission, 2020e).
The European Parliament has also played a key role in supporting and promoting the Ukrainian people:
• Reiterating its commitment to the sovereignty and territorial integrity of Ukraine within its
internationally recognised borders, and with its choice to follow a European path (European
Parliament, 2016b).
•
Pointing out that restoring Ukrainian control over the peninsula is one of the prerequisites for
restoring cooperative relations with the Russian Federation (European Parliament, 2016a).
•
Calling on Russia to release all Ukrainian citizens illegally and arbitrarily detained, both in Russia
and in the occupied territories of Ukraine; to stop issuing Russian passports to all Crimean
people; to stop systematically intimidating local citizens opposed to the annexation of Crimea;
to investigate all cases of human rights violations; to respect the fundamental freedoms of all
residents, including freedoms of expression, religion or belief and association; and the right to
peaceful assembly (European Parliament, 2017b).
•
Proposing the amendment of Regulation (EC) No 539/2001 to allow Ukrainian citizens to be
exempt from the requirement to have a visa when travelling to EU Member States (European
Parliament, 2017a).
•
Proposing the application of the EU Association Agreement with Ukraine (European
Parliament, 2018a).
Another soft power measure implemented by the international community was the suspension of
Russia's participation in the G8 group of leading economies in March 2014 (Acosta, J., 2014).
In the field of digital communications, several initiatives were launched to combat pro-Russian
disinformation. One of the most relevant was the fact-checking website StopFake, created by students,
graduates and lecturers of the Kyiv Mohyla Journalism School (StopFake.org, 2020). Although the site
was created with the intention of denouncing Russian propaganda on the Ukrainian conflict, it has
become an information hub for analysing all types of Kremlin disinformation campaigns. The site is
currently researching, fact-checking, translating and disseminating information about Russian
propaganda in 13 languages.
4.4.4. Impact and consequences
Prior to its intervention in Ukraine, Russia had already assessed the economic sanctions and military
responses that could be triggered as a result of such intervention. Nevertheless, after balancing the
possible costs and the potential benefits, it concluded that it was worth acting as it did against the
former Soviet Republic (Lázaro, A., 2014). Russia did not hesitate to use hard power tools, in both a
covert and overt manner, when all other soft power measures (economic, diplomatic, informative) did
69
STOA | Panel for the Future of Science and Technology
not ensure its interests. Instead, it considered that the benefits of such actions would come before any
sanction imposed in the international arena (Stratpol, 2016).
Although the annexation of Crimea remains unrecognised under international law, there is wide
consensus that this situation cannot be reversed in the short and medium term (Sasse, G., 2017). After
the imposition of sanctions, economic ties and diplomatic relations between the West and Russia
deteriorated to a point comparable only to the end of the Cold War.
The main consequences of the crisis in Ukraine at the international level can be summarised as follows
(Stratpol, 2016):
1
To a large extent, Russia's narrative was able to alter the international community's political
sentiment towards Ukraine, painting it as a country without the capacity to protect its people
and portraying it as a failed, fascist state.
2
Russia blocked most of the international community's efforts to manage and attempt to solve
the Ukraine problem, using its position in the permanent UN Security Council. Russia vetoed
any effort to deploy a UN peacekeeping mission in Ukraine, which resulted in the OSCE being
the only international organisation with sufficient supervisory capacity present in Ukraine.
3
Although Russia tried to improve its image with an expensive public diplomacy campaign,
taking advantage of the Sochi Olympic Games (Marcin, M., 2016), the annexation of Crimea
greatly damaged its public image and its official discourse. Russia never accepted the role of
aggressor, and instead presented itself as a victim of the aggressive policies of the West
(mostly promoted by NATO).
In the field of strategic communications, the Russian intervention in Ukraine triggered the launch of
several fact-checking initiatives aimed at debunking Russian propaganda. In fact, the creation of the
East StratCom Task Force by the European Union External Action Service was indirectly linked to the
Russian-Ukrainian conflict, as its launch was one of the conclusions of the European Council held on
this conflict in March 2015 (European Council, 2015).
4.4.5. Conclusions of the case
As described above, the beginning of the conflict can be established at the Euromaidan protests from
November 2013. The actions that the Kremlin has used in this conflict have been multiple and very
diverse, but it has always refrained from employing military action from its regular armed forces.
The preparation of the hybrid attack against Ukraine, that is, the identification of Ukrainian weaknesses
was largely based on the Russian Federation's traditional foreign policy activities. Russia developed a
large number of elements to undermine Ukrainian integrity, from intelligence operations, stimulation
and logistical support for the establishment of pro-Russian volunteer forces, use of electronic warfare
systems (computer attacks), proselytising in the field of social networks, orchestrated use of media
disinformation campaigns and propaganda through digital means, as well as economic pressure and
blackmail.
The aggression started by Russia against Ukraine was a relative success, because despite the threats at
an international level after the illegal annexation of Crimea, Russia does not seem to have changed its
attitude regarding both actors (Ukraine and Crimea).
An important lesson to be learned from the events in Ukraine is that an adequate legislative framework
and enforcement mechanisms, as well as clear communication strategies, must be established to
efficiently counteract separatism, unconstitutional acts, hate speech and other actions that can serve
as the roots for hybrid war attacks from abroad.
70
Strategic communications as a key factor in countering hybrid threats
4.5. Case 5: Disinformation campaigns against NATO operations in
Lithuania
In the context of NATO operations in Lithuania (the Enhanced Forward Presence mission), 40 designed
as a deterrence campaign against Russian pressure on Baltic countries' borders, diverse disinformation
campaigns against NATO soldiers tried to undermine local citizens' trust in such operations. The rapid
and straightforward response of the authorities concerned is one of the best recent examples of a
successful communication strategy to counter a hybrid threat.
This case addresses the analysis of a hybrid threat where the main component used was disinformation
campaigns. The goal of the hybrid threat was destabilising the work and eroding the image and
reputation of an international organisation, NATO, whose mission was to reinforce the security of the
Lithuanian 41-Russian border.
This case shares similarities with a previous case that took place in Germany. Both cases refer to
disinformation campaigns about similar facts (alleged teenage rapes) and involve, directly or indirectly,
the German authorities. The comparison of the response measures adopted in each case will allow the
key elements in effectively countering disinformation campaigns to be identified.
4.5.1. Geopolitical context
After Russia's illegal invasion and annexation of the Crimean Peninsula and the city of Sevastopol in
Ukraine, concerns about the Russian threat increased in the Baltic countries. Estonia, Latvia, and
Lithuania were under the influence and domination of Russia for several periods during the last
century. The Baltic countries, along with Poland and Ukraine, were historically connected and sharing
borders with Russia. Now, they are the main objectives of the Russian influence strategies in Europe,
and the West in general. However, following their independence from Russia, the three Baltic countries
developed a foreign policy of alignment with the European Union and the USA, which led them to join
the EU and NATO in 2004.
In the context of growing Russian pressure, highlighted in the national threat assessment reports from
recent years (Ministry of national defence & State security department of the Republic of Lithuania,
2020), Lithuania asked for help at the NATO Wales Summit (2014) and at the NATO Summit in
June 2016, which took place in Warsaw (Supreme Headquarters Allied Powers Europe, 2018). At this
last Summit, the Enhanced Forward Presence (EFP) mission was approved. The aim of the EFP mission
was to strengthen the security of Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania and Poland by deploying battlegroups from
NATO's allies. It consisted of a deterrence mission to tackle Russian pressure in the region. In particular,
the force under rotation deployed in Lithuania was led by Germany with the contribution of Belgium,
Croatia, France, the Netherlands and Norway (Lenoir-Grand, R., 2017).
4.5.2. Features of the hybrid threat
Along with NATO's mission (Enhanced Forward Presence), Lithuania continued reinforcing its defence
capabilities to face the Russian threat. Therefore, Lithuania sought to strengthen the ties with the USA
in terms of military cooperation. On 14th February 2017, the Lithuanian Parliament (Seimas) ratified the
Defence Cooperation Agreement with the USA. Until then, the presence of USA's troops had been
under NATO legal framework (Trembo, S., 2017).
The same day, after the ratification, the Chairman of the Seimas and some local media outlets received
an email stating that a group of German-speaking men raped a girl from an orphanage in the city of
Jonava, near the position of the German soldiers participating in the EFP mission. While local pro-
40
https://shape.nato.int/operations/enhanced-forward-presence
41
NATO member.
71
STOA | Panel for the Future of Science and Technology
Russian media outlets in the region (Vesti.lv and Baltnews.lt) gave credibility to the information and
published the news, the main Lithuanian media outlets reacted by dismissing the information
(Andriukaitis, L., 2018).
The Lithuanian police' investigation found out that the email was false, and the rape did not happen.
In addition, the police concluded that the email came from a country outside of the EU. As a
consequence, the prosecutor's office started a criminal investigation into the false report to clarify
responsibility for it (Sytas, A. et al., 2017).
Reactions to the information attack were varied. Lithuanian public officials did not blame anyone and
referred to the open investigation of the case. Meanwhile, NATO officials pointed at Russia as the most
probable source of the false information. Lithuanian and NATO representatives agreed that the email
was a deliberate attempt to spread false information in order to disrupt and create instability between
NATO and Lithuania (DW, 2017). However, the disinformation campaign was addressed quickly, and it
had no impact on Lithuanian media and society.
The alleged rape was not the only disinformation campaign against the NATO troops stationed in
Lithuania. In March 2017, a new email was sent to members of the Lithuanian parliament's Committee
on National Security and Defence, accusing the commander of the NATO troops, Lieutenant Colonel
Christoph Huber, of being a Russian agent (Stern, D., 2017).
The Atlantic Council's Digital Forensic Research Lab 42 conducted interesting research into the online
coverage of the EFP missions in the countries concerned (Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, Poland and Russia).
The research concluded that the EFP missions had triggered a relevant number of hostile posts and
articles, most of them based on false information, around four main narratives: (1) the Baltic States are
paranoid or Russophobic; (2) NATO is unwelcome; (3) NATO cannot protect the Baltic States; and (4)
NATO is the aggressor (Nimmo, B. et al., 2017). The disinformation campaigns described above are
clearly aligned with the pro-Russian narratives that try to discredit NATO work supporting the Baltic
States in general, and Lithuania in particular.
4.5.3. Strategy, tactics and tools to counter the hybrid threat
Stakeholders have developed coordinated strategies to counter the effects of disinformation
campaigns.
Lithuanian authorities
The strategy used by the Lithuanian authorities to debunk the false information can be divided into
three phases:
•
First, armed forces, media outlets and the government put the information in quarantine and
pointed to it as a possible case of disinformation, preventing it from spreading through social
media;
•
second, an investigation was quickly launched by the Lithuanian police to clarify the origin and
veracity of the emails. The investigation rapidly concluded that the accusations were false;
•
and third, the contribution of citizens, whose awareness reduced the chances of the
disinformation campaigns succeeding (Schultz, T., 2017).
The success of the responses to the fake rape story and the false accusation about the commander of
NATO forces of being a Russian agent was a result of the experience and preparation of the agents
involved, as well as their rapid reaction. According to the Defence Ministry Spokeswoman at that time,
Lithuanian authorities expected attacks of this type around the time of arrival of EFP troops. She also
42
https://medium.com/dfrlab
72
Strategic communications as a key factor in countering hybrid threats
stated that this kind of threat was detected more than a decade ago, and counter-propaganda
measures were taken. Once the false stories were detected, armed forces, police, government
institutions and NATO were warned. The Spokeswoman also pointed out that Lithuanian citizens'
awareness about disinformation was one of the main keys to the successful response, as they did not
contribute to spreading the false information. (Schultz, T., 2017).
In the field of awareness-raising initiatives, fact-checking tools played a relevant role. In this sense,
several fact-checking outlets has been developed in Lithuania in recent years. For instance,
Debunk.eu 43 is a fact-checking initiative where the main media outlets, fact-checkers, IT professionals
and StratCom units of the Ministries of Foreign Affairs and National Defence and the armed forces
cooperate to counter disinformation campaigns (Debunk, n.d.).
Another key point in Lithuania's response to these attacks was the awareness of politicians, police and
Army representatives about Russia's role as a major threat to the national security in the Baltic
countries. As mentioned above, the National Security Strategy recognised Russia's capacity to
endanger Lithuania via non-military means. Along with conventional military power, the document
also considered information war as a threat which could lead to disruption of and disaffection with
state's institutions, democracy and national defence. (Ministry of National Defence of the Republic of
Lithuania, 2017). Even more clear and explicit was the National Threats Assessment 2019 (State Security
Department of the Republic of Lithuania, 2019), mostly focused on Russian threats, as well as the three
manuals of civil resistance (2014, 2015, 2016) in the case of military occupation of Lithuania. The last
version of the manual, as well as the documents mentioned above, identified neighbouring Russia as a
possible nation invader (Aleksa, C. et al., 2016).
German authorities
Germany was the second most involved country in the disinformation campaigns, as the soldiers
accused of rape were German, as well as the accusation that the NATO troops commander was a
Russian agent. Additionally, the disinformation campaign against the German soldiers came a year after
a similar case of an alleged rape in Germany, the Lisa case.
The Lisa case
On 11th January 2016, the family of Lisa F. reported her missing. Lisa appeared thirty hours later. The
Russian media outlet First Russian TV claimed that the girl, from a Russian speaking family, was raped by
several migrants of Arab origin during the hours she was missing. Quickly, the foreign Russian media
outlets Sputnik, Russia Today (RT), and RT Deutsch issued further coverage of the incident. The story also
spread through social media, especially on posts from right wing and xenophobic groups (Treverton, G.
et al., 2018).
German police issued a report soon after Lisa’s reappearance clarifying that she had not been raped and
confirming that the earlier reports were false. Due to her young age, special safeguards regarding her
privacy were applied, and the local authorities prevented the information going public. However, the hoax
had already spread through social networks and caused widespread impacts on Russian-speaking
Germans and far right sectors, leading to street demonstrations against the German government and its
policy of accepting immigrants or refugees from Arab countries. The German mainstream media reported
on these events and spread the news nationwide while the Russian Foreign Affairs Minister, Sergey Lavrov,
encouraged demonstrators, claiming the German legal system had failed because of its political
correctness (Janda, J., 2016). This case was later seen by German authorities as a Russian attack, a response
to Germany’s role as the main supporter of Ukraine in its conflict with Russia (Meister, S., 2016).
43
https://debunk.eu/
73
STOA | Panel for the Future of Science and Technology
Although both cases had different backgrounds, the lessons learnt after the Lisa case allowed Germany
to more adequately address the false accusations that German soldiers committed rape in Lithuania.
As the German Federal Academy for Security Policy recognised with regards to the Lisa case, 'since the
German Government was structurally unable to swiftly react to the unfounded allegations, the case got
disproportionate national and international attention' (Janda, J., 2016).
In the Lithuanian case, the Ministry of Defence and the Ministry of Foreign Affairs led the German
response, seamlessly coordinated with the other stakeholders (Lithuania and NATO). It allowed false
accusations to be debunked before they could be spread through social networks, where they would
have been virtually uncontrollable, and could have caused similar damage to the Lisa case in terms of
national reputation.
While a lack of coordination between authorities at different levels (local, regional and federal) and
relevant delays in responding to the false accusations contributed to magnifying the impact of the Lisa
case on social networks and in the mass media, in this case federal German authorities reacted
promptly, asking Lithuania and NATO for all the information needed to debunk the false story and limit
its effects.
After countering these disinformation attacks, Germany implemented new measures aimed at
addressing new potential hybrid threats based on digital means. Two months after the attacks, the
Cyber and Information Space (CIR) unit was created within the Bundeswehr (German Army), unifying all
Army units in charge of cybersecurity, military reconnaissance and psychological warfare (Gotkowska,
J., 2017).
In September 2018, the German Chancellor Angela Merkel visited Lithuania and had the opportunity
to speak directly to the German troops involved in the EFP mission. In her speech, Angela Merkel
recognised the exposure to Russian hybrid threats and highlighted the ongoing work done by the CIR
to tackle them (Agence France Presse, 2018).
A year later (2019), the Chief of Defence in Germany, General Eberhard Zorn, stated that German troops
in Lithuania were being instructed on how to use their smartphones and social networks to avoid
cyberattacks and information theft. He also pointed out that German soldiers were one of the main
targets of hybrid threats. Since the EFP mission started in Lithuania in January 2017, leaded by the
German Army, there have been many more cyber and disinformation aggressions against German
troops in addition to the first one analysed in this chapter (Baltic News Service, 2019).
4.5.4. Impact and consequences
In general, disinformation attacks carried out by state or non-state actors aim to produce confusion and
instability in target societies or environments. In the Lithuanian case, the objective was to create
distrust amongst the population towards German NATO soldiers, who were deployed in the country to
deter Russia. The ultimate goal was to destabilise and harm the cooperation between Lithuania and
NATO in security matters. As NATO's Assistant Secretary General for Emerging Security Challenges said:
'it really was supposed to affect the perception about the presence of German troops within the EFP
framework in Lithuania. It was supposed to affect morale; it was supposed to affect everything – the
operational functioning' (Schultz, T., 2017).
Because of the similarities, attackers may have expected similar consequences as in the Lisa case. The
false information was quickly spread by pro-Russian media outlets and by specific groups on social
media platforms, drawing the attention of German mass media and fuelling the protests by outraged
Russians and far-right extremists in Germany, encouraged by the Russian Foreign Affairs Minister,
Sergei Lavrov. (Treverton, G. et al., 2018). But, due to the failure of the disinformation attack, thanks to
the coordination between all the parties involved and their rapid reaction, it could be argued that the
image of Lithuania and NATO was reinforced by successful resolution of the crisis.
74
Strategic communications as a key factor in countering hybrid threats
4.5.5. Conclusions of the case
Pro-Russian disinformation campaigns against the presence of foreign soldiers under NATO mandate
on Lithuanian soil include most of the characteristics that allow such campaigns to be classified as
hybrid threats. Disinformation campaigns were launched in a timely manner, shortly after the arrival of
the troops led by Germany. They were launched through several channels, from email campaigns to
key Lithuanian representatives and media outlets, to posts and articles on online platforms. The
attackers fabricated a false narrative around one of the most nefarious crimes, rape, appealing to the
citizens' most profound emotions and feelings to create mistrust and rejection of German soldiers. In
the end, what pro-Russian attackers sought to do was undermine a sovereign decision of Lithuania (the
request for help to NATO, latter resulting in the EFP mission), blaming NATO soldiers for crimes that
were never committed and thus creating bias towards them.
The response measures implemented were focused on swiftly debunking false information and
impeding its spreading through online means. Proper coordination between the stakeholders involved
(Germany, Lithuania and NATO) was the essential feature that allowed the threat to be addressed in a
swift and effective way. Other measures related to prevention were implemented, like the training
provided to soldiers to properly manage their smartphones and social network profiles in order to
avoid cyberattacks and information theft. However, this case particularly stands out due to the
coordinated and prompt response, especially when compared to the deficient communication
management of previous cases, such as the Lisa case.
It is worth noting that prevention measures adopted by Lithuania regarding raising awareness
amongst citizens about Russian disinformation were also very effective, as Lithuanians were capable to
detect and reject false information related to this case.
4.6. Case 6: Russian electronic warfare during Zapad 2017 military
exercises
The Russian army has always been convinced that the success of its military operations depends not
only on how well equipped its members are, but also on well-planned and executed operations. This is
why Russia has been preparing for possible military conflicts of all kinds for years (Norberg, 2018). In
relation to this preparation, every four years Russia carries out the Zapad's military exercises, which
have involved elements of technologic and electronic warfare since 2009 (Petraitis, D., 2019).
The Zapad 2017 exercises were more than military manoeuvres 'of a strictly defensive nature', as
Russian Defence Minister Sergei Shoigu claimed (AFP, 2017). On the contrary, it was an example of
strategic deterrence: displaying Russia's growing military power and willingness to use it as an
instrument of intimidation and coercion over neighbouring countries, NATO and the EU, to foster fear
and unease.
Meanwhile, in addition, Moscow used a narrative in which it presented itself as a victim of a conspiracy
to undermine its values. It initiated counterattack by denouncing the West's fantasy of starting an
armed conflict against Russia (European Journalists Association, 2017). The fear that Russia might start
a war was especially evident in Poland, Lithuania and Ukraine, where diverse theories on how Russia
could exploit troop movements during Zapad exercises to gain some kind of military advantage were
developed (Center for European Policy Analysis, 2017).
During these Zapad exercises, the accumulation of reports from Western media and even official
statements succumbed to a spiral of alarm and speculation. Instead of raising awareness, some media
outlets increased anxiety by overreacting, thus magnifying the intimidating potential of the exercise
(Lasconjarias, G. & Dyčka, L., 2017). This is why the Zapad 2017 exercises were more than mere military
exercises, and instead became a hybrid threat to neighbouring countries.
75
STOA | Panel for the Future of Science and Technology
4.6.1. Geopolitical context
Zapad military exercises are some of the most realistic trainings carried out by the Russian army, in
which simulations that are very close to reality are carried out, with the aim of testing the army's
capabilities in the case of an hypothetical armed confrontation with the West (Johnson, D., 2018).
Zapad training is usually carried out in three phases (Petraitis, D., 2019):
•
The first involves basic entrenchment and defence exercises.
•
The second phase aims to protect the achievements of the previous phase and try to extend
the control zone. In this stage, strategies necessary to stabilise the conflict or even to conclude
it are employed.
•
The third phase is called the mass phase, when the main activity is to use all the resources
available to defend the objectives achieved. This may even involve the use of nuclear weapons
if all other defensive techniques fail.
During every Zapad exercise, there are rest periods, used to:
•
Reinforce forces/get teams to execute the next task/mission objective.
•
Reflect on resources and strategies to persuade the opponent to resolve the conflict through
non-military means.
The Zapad 2009 exercises were the first exercises after the military reforms in Russia. At that time,
Russian forces and their capabilities were weak and limited. Military leaders thought that such
weakness might give their opponents a chance to attack Russia. The Zapad 2009 exercises were mainly
a theoretical simulation of the application of tactical nuclear weapons (Petraitis, D., 2019). As Dmitry
Medvedev (President of Russia at the time) pointed out, 85 % of the military equipment was obsolete
or unusable (Petraitis, D., 2019, p. 10).
Subsequently, in March 2013, the military exercise Zapad 2013 took place, shortly after Russian Army
General S. Shoigu was appointed defence minister. The Zapad 2017 exercise was carried out with the
help of the Belarusian Armed Forces and the 1st Russian Guard Tank Army.
These exercises represented more than simple military manoeuvres. They were used as a strategic
deterrent tool, in which Russia exhibited its military power and its willingness to use it when the time
comes. The exercise was an example of intimidation and coercion (Milosevich-Juaristi, M., 2017a). The
main objective of Zapad 2017 exercise was to improve the levels of preparation and integration of
various military bodies, and to enhance Russia's nuclear, military and non-military capabilities (Warsaw
Institute, 2017).
The Zapad 2017 exercises involved 12 700 soldiers (according to the data provided by Russia), a figure
that is not irrelevant. It remained just below the number of 13 000, which the 2011 Vienna Document
on Confidence and Security-Building Measures, drawn up by the Organisation for Security and Cooperation
in Europe (OSCE), established as the threshold above which the military exercises should be subject to
international observation. Russia held onto the fact that the numbers shown were real, and it therefore
did not have to provide access to international observers beyond the opening day (Leonir-Grand, R.,
2017). Regarding the effective number of military personnel who participated in the exercise, there
were always suspicions that many more would participate than Moscow claimed. One of the critics was
Tomáš Valášek, a former Slovakian ambassador to NATO, who pointed out that special care should be
taken, since in uncertain political times an accidental conflict is more likely to occur (Heath, R., 2017).
Also, the NATO Secretary General, Jens Stoltenberg, noted that 'the number of troops participating in
76
Strategic communications as a key factor in countering hybrid threats
the exercises significantly exceeded the number announced before the exercise; the scenario was
different and the geographical scope was greater than previously announced' (Emmott, R., 2017).
4.6.2. Features of the hybrid threat
The main threat of the Zapad 2017 exercises came from the use of elements of electronic warfare. The
countries affected by the military exercises were Latvia and Norway:
•
Two weeks before the start of the Zapad 2017 exercises, Latvia's western district suffered a
seven-hour interruption of its telephone networks. Several studies indicated that it was a
collateral damage of an electronic attack from a warship aimed at Swedish military exercises on
the island of Öland (Diena, 2017).
•
Before the start of the exercises, Norwegian commercial aircraft flying over the Finnmark region
of Norway reported a complete loss of GPS signal, which lasted a week. This GPS outage forced
the planes to use alternative means of navigation. Several analyses of the signals showed that
the interference came from the Russian border region in the East (newsinenglish.no staff, 2017).
•
Violation of Lithuanian airspace by two Russian planes, which according to Moscow, was
caused by adverse weather, forcing the pilots to take a detour (The Lithuania Tribune, 2017).
Both Norway and Latvia pointed out that the disruptions to their infrastructure were probably side
effects of actions taken by the Russian Armed Forces when jamming the systems of their own troops
near the border. However, the Latvian Foreign Minister called the incident 'a symbolic political gesture
against the Baltic States, which showed that Russia was doing its best to intimidate NATO', and recalled
that Article V of the North Atlantic Treaty (which stipulates that an attack on one ally is considered an
attack on all allies) could also be invoked in cases of technological warfare attacks (Vikmanis, V., 2017).
In addition to the physical electronic damage suffered by Latvia and Norway, there were also
psychological consequences of the Zapad 2017 exercises, such as fear caused by the deployment of
strength shown by Russia, and the spread of uncertainty and anxiety in the populations of both
countries. Psychological damage could have been even greater if the effects of electronic warfare had
affected public infrastructure (NATO StratCom CoE, 2019). Moreover, Zapad 2017 manoeuvres raised
the suspicion among Western analysts that Moscow could use them to attack a NATO member country.
Russia's lack of transparency about these military exercises encouraged Western media, including even
reliable sources, to do its job for it, by circulating speculation and alarmist theories that left Europe
alarmed at the prospect of a new military attack. A position which, in turn, was entirely comfortable for
Moscow's objectives of generating fear and anxiety amongst Europeans (The Economist, 2017).
4.6.3. Strategy, tactics and tools to counter the hybrid threat
Due to the ambiguous nature of the threat and the significant delay in determining the origin of the
aforementioned technological problems with a high degree of certainty, it was not possible to attribute
responsibility and respond in a timely and decisive manner.
4.6.4. Impact and consequences
Apart from the damage already identified in Norway and Latvia, and the fear caused to people in
neighbouring countries, these exercises led to a serious reflection on the following issues in the
international sphere:
•
Relevance of electronic warfare in future conflicts: Information-psychological operations (and
reflective control) are the backbone of Russian information warfare against the West today.
Zapad 2017 became a peculiar mix of intimidation and defence-related rhetoric, thus serving
both internal and external purposes. In particular, it is worth noting the increasing priority
Russia gave to its electronic warfare capabilities (both offensive and defensive) and how this
77
STOA | Panel for the Future of Science and Technology
element of electronic warfare was also widely tested in various regions of Russia before and
during the exercises (Sukhankin, S., 2017).
•
Need to improve coordination between security strategies in the countries under Russian
influence (Conley, H. et al., 2018).
According to the NATO Strategic Communications Centre of Excellence, deterioration of relations
between the Russian Federation and the West mainly affects the way in which events such as territorial
violations and military exercises are interpreted. NATO countries should be prepared for disturbing
events such as cyberattacks or disinformation attacks, whose authorship is difficult to determine, and
which can cause serious ecological, social and political damage. Coherent responses and appropriate
strategic communication plans are needed to counteract potential damage of those military exercises
(NATO StratCom CoE, 2019).
4.6.5. Conclusions of the case
As described above, the elements of hybrid threats used in this case were mainly three: technological
disruption, invasion of airspace and military pressure, with the latter undoubtedly being the most
important, aimed at intimidating neighbouring countries and NATO members. While Russia's overt
objective regarding the Zapad exercises was to improve its defence capability, they were also covertly
aimed at spreading fear and anxiety amongst neighbouring populations.
From Moscow's perspective, the justification for this type of exercises was based on the fact that
Russian security on its Western borders was deteriorating as a result of increased NATO activity in
Eastern Europe countries (improving the infrastructure of their seaports, airfields and other military
facilities), even if these modest preparations could not pose a real threat to Russia.
The strategic communications made by the Western media were unfortunate, as they effectively and
unintentionally collaborated with Russia's objectives of conveying and amplifying its message of
intimidation. The alarmist information spread by Western media could, in turn, contribute to their
sources being discredited and making them less reliable in the future.
4.7. Case 7: Disinformation attacks in the Catalan issue
The political conflict that occurred in Spain in 2017, climaxing in the Regional Government of
Catalonia's attempt to push for the region's independence, was fuelled by hybrid tactics including
disinformation campaigns and foreign influence. Social networks became an essential tool in spreading
false information aimed at exacerbating independentist sentiments and portraying Spain as a nondemocratic state, seeking international support for secessionists. This case describes how strategic
communications were used by both parties and the relevant role that digital technologies played
during the political crisis.
4.7.1. Geopolitical context
After years of fuelling independentist sentiments amongst Catalonians, the government of the
Autonomous Community of Catalonia (known as the 'Generalitat') organised a referendum which was
intended to solicit the opinion of the citizens of this Spanish region on their desire for Catalonia to
become an independent state. The referendum was to take place on 1st October 2017 (1-O).
The Government of Spain, understanding that such a claim was contrary to the Spanish Constitution,
lodged an appeal with the Constitutional Court. On 7th September 2017, this court cautiously
suspended the Catalan law calling for the referendum and warned the 948 Catalan mayors and 62
officials of the Catalonian Government that they could not participate in organising the referendum.
Likewise, the General State Prosecutor's Office presented a complaint to the Constitutional Court
claiming disobedience, prevarication and misappropriation of public funds by the President of the
78
Strategic communications as a key factor in countering hybrid threats
Catalan Parliament, the members of the Bureau who voted in favour of processing the Referendum Bill,
the President of the Generalitat and all members of his Government, by considering that law, and its
associated expenses, unconstitutional.
Despite all the warnings, the Catalan Government decided to go ahead with the referendum, which
finally took place without due legal guarantees, in an atmosphere of tension that included certain
episodes of violence. On the planned date, Catalan citizens could respond 'yes' or 'no' to the question:
Do you want Catalonia to be an independent state in the form of a republic?
Social tension and division between those in favour of and those against the referendum being held
was significantly widened as a result of the false news that was spread before, during and after the 1O.
4.7.2. Features of the hybrid threat
Several components of hybrid threats were used by the Catalonian independentist movement and its
foreign supporters to achieve its goals:
•
To present the holding of the referendum as the right of Catalan citizens, despite it violating
the Spanish Constitution;
•
to present Spain as an anti-democratic and oppressive state that prevents Catalan citizens from
exercising their democratic rights;
•
to internationalise the conflict.
The most relevant hybrid tactics are described in the following sections.
Foreign influence
Diverse foreign actors supported the independentist movement before and during referendum. One
of the most significant supporters was Julian Assange, founder of Wikileaks. Indeed, he became one of
the most influential figures on social networks in relation to the Catalan conflict. Although Assange had
not shared any message on Twitter on the subject prior to the suspension of the Catalonian
Referendum Bill by the Spanish Constitutional Court, from that day until the date of the referendum he
shared around 48 messages in English, Spanish and Catalan. All of them supported, directly or
indirectly, the claims of those who encouraged the independence of Catalonia. His allegations included
spreading the idea that the use of violence by the police in charge of preventing the consultation was
extreme, even comparing Spanish police action to the repression by Chinese authorities at Tiananmen
Square.
In addition, on 27th September, four days before the illegal referendum, Julian Assange participated in
a video conference in support of Catalan separatist claims. The logistics of this conference were
handled by the independence group Universitats per la República and it was broadcasted on a giant
screen in Plaça Universitat in Barcelona (Segura, C., 2017).
Another foreign actor involved in the Catalan issue was Russia (Alandete, D., 2017c). Russia has been
promoting secessionist movements to destabilise other countries for years. One of the first
international events where the Catalan separatist movement could express its claims internationally
was the congress entitled 'Dialogue of nations and the right of peoples to self-determination and the
construction of a multipolar world', promoted by the Russian government in 2015 and 2016, which
brought together representatives of independence movements from all over the world (Luhn, A.,
2015).
79
STOA | Panel for the Future of Science and Technology
One of the first pieces of false information about Catalonia that expanded internationally ('An
independent Catalonia will recognise that Crimea is Russian') 44 was posted by several media outlets
such as Sputnik, quoting the Russian media outlet Izvestia as the alleged source of the information.
According to the National Cryptologic Centre, (a body attached to the Spanish National Intelligence
Centre), 'the presence of activists sponsored by Russian institutions in the media, expression of the
conflict derived from the situation created in Catalonia during 2017 as a consequence of the distancing
of certain Catalan autonomous institutions from the constitutional legality in force, seems to have been
demonstrated' (CCN-CERT, 2018).
Investigations carried out by the Ministry of Defence had also reached the same conclusions (Alandete,
D., 2019). They were ratified by Jens Stoltenberg, Secretary General of NATO, who confirmed
interference from Russian organisations (RTVE, 2018).
Janis Sarts, Director at the NATO Strategic Communications Centre of Excellence, pointed out that the
ultimate intention of the Russian networks is not to encourage Catalonia's independence but to
deepen divisions in society in order to weaken the EU and NATO itself. Their aim is to confuse and
aggravate existing problems in society, not to achieve a result that favours one or the other (Alandete,
D., 2019). In the same vein, another report noted Moscow's aspirations to foster disagreements in
Catalonia in order to weaken a NATO member (Baqués, J., 2018).
Disinformation
In the weeks prior to the illegal referendum, the East StratCom Task Force, through the website
euvsdisinfo.eu, showed an increase in disinformation campaigns aimed at aggravating the crisis in
Catalonia, triggered by various Russian media outlets. According to the East StratCom Task Force,
mentions of Catalonia in Russian disinformation media outlets had increased from 4 to 241 per week
(Alandete, D., 2017b).
The pro-independence narrative's main argument when creating disinformation was that
contemporary Spain is in fact a whitewashed substitute for Franco's regime, and has inherited its
authoritative and oppressive ways, an idea that Russian media outlets such as Sputnik or RT constantly
repeated during 2017.
The alleged use of violence by the Spanish Government to suppress the independentist movement
was another recurrent topic for disinformation. For instance, on 28th October 2017, Russian media
outlet RT published this news: 'Tanks in the streets of Barcelona: Spain and Catalonia on the verge of a
violent end'. 45 A few hours after its publication the news triggered 11 800 Facebook interactions, an
impact three times higher than the average for information from RT on this platform. On Twitter, in
turn, RT's profile was shared up three times more than usual, which caused some 12 000 people to react
to that news, sharing it or commenting on it. 46
Police interventions, in compliance with the sentences from the courts, were the most delicate
moments of the day of the illegal referendum. RT drew on this situation to build false media coverage
with the title: 'HARD VIDEOS: Brutal police repression against Catalan referendum voters'. This
information achieved 11 400 interactions on Facebook and 3 300 on Twitter (Alandete, D., 2019).
According to what the General State Prosecutor's Office expressed in its accusation during the trial
against those responsible for organising of the referendum, the figure 'close to a thousand injured'
provided by the Generalitat de Catalunya in the day of the illegal referendum 'was manipulated to
44
https://sputniknews.com/world/201609281045773918-catalonia-recognize-crimea-russian/
45
https://actualidad.rt.com/actualidad/253812-espana-cataluna-violencia-conflicto
46
These measurements were conducted with the service NewsWhip Analytics, which measures news interactions on five social
platforms, including Facebook and Twitter (Alandete, D., 2019).
80
Strategic communications as a key factor in countering hybrid threats
magnify the police repression, since it has been proved that in a high percentage of cases the medical
attention received was exclusively as a consequence of dizziness and anxiety crisis, and not for injuries
caused by the police officers' (Supreme Court Prosecutor, 2018, p. 116). In fact, the Supreme Court
Prosecutor's Office stated that 'only four people were admitted to hospitals: two slightly and two
seriously injured' (Supreme Court Prosecutor, 2018, p. 116). During the trial, the former head of the
Catalan Public Health Service, David Elvira, explained to the court that on the day of the referendum,
only five people were severely injured, representing 0.5% of the 991 people who received care
throughout Catalonia on that day (Berbell, C., 2019).
Bots and social networks
Distribution of disinformation is usually done through social networks, using automated profiles or
bots, and using mechanisms to mask their geographical origin, such as proxies and VPN servers. This
was proven in the Catalan issue thanks to the tool Hamilton 68, 47 created by the Alliance for Securing
Democracy. According to this tool, which monitors the daily information released by six hundred
Twitter accounts managed from Russia, a 2 000 % increase in activity related to Catalonia was detected
on the day of the referendum, using, especially, the hashtag #Catalan.
A study on bot activity over the days leading up to and after the Catalan referendum was published in
November 2018. It analysed 3.6 million messages on Twitter, published by 523 000 users between 22nd
September and 3rd October 2017, with the hashtags #Catalunya, #Catalonia, #Catalogna, #1Oct,
#votarem, #referendum and #1O. The study showed that 33 % of users were bots aimed at spreading
negative content and inciting hatred and confrontation (Stella, M. et al., 2018).
According to another study, between 29th September and 5th October 2017 news and information
referring to Catalonia produced by RT and Sputnik (in Catalan, Spanish and English) was shared a total
of 47 964 times through social networks, with an audience of up to 125 million users. This is ten times
more than the information produced and distributed by the Spanish public media, RTVE and the EFE
public news agency (Lesaca, J., 2017). The study concluded that only 9 of the 100 most active accounts
sharing RT and Sputnik content seemed to follow a human behaviour.
Other studies published by prestigious entities, such as the Elcano Royal Institute, insisted that the
presence of Catalonia on social networks increased by 2 000 % in September 2017. For example, some
messages from Julian Assange criticising the attitude of the Spanish Government were retweeted 60
times per second, actions that could only be carried out by bots (Milosevich-Juaristi, M., 2017b).
4.7.3. Strategy, tactics and tools to counter the hybrid threat
The events around 1-O revealed that without a specific strategy to counteract digital interference,
democratic states are at serious risk. Some specialised journalists have pointed out that the Spanish
Government's narrative was absent from the conversation on social networks. The Spanish public
media, including radio, television and the news agency EFE, did not even have a planned information
strategy to counter the independentist discourse (Alandete, D., 2019). As a result, the independentist
narrative won the first battle of disinformation in the days leading up to 1-O, mainly at the international
level. Although the Spanish Government was slow to react to the challenge posed by the Catalan
independentist movement in the realm of communication, it finally implemented several tools to
counter future hybrid threats.
After the Catalan crisis, the Spanish government defined diverse measures aimed at preventing and
counteracting the impact of disinformation campaigns and cyberattacks, putting both issues on the
political agenda. On 13th December 2017, the creation of a Cybersecurity Operations Centre was
announced to protect the General State Administration's computer networks from cyberattacks,
47
https://securingdemocracy.gmfus.org/hamilton-dashboard/
81
STOA | Panel for the Future of Science and Technology
although the fight against false news on social networks was not specifically mentioned amongst its
responsibilities (Spanish Government, 2019).
In light of the upcoming elections, in March 2019, the Spanish government launched a unit against
hybrid threats, with early response procedures to help to mitigate both cyberattacks and
disinformation. Experts from the Department of National Security, the Secretariat of State for
Communication and the most involved ministries led these efforts. Evidence of the existence of
distorted messages that aggravated the Catalan crisis and the certainty that the elections could
constitute a fertile juncture for distortion meant the level of alert was raised, and encouraged the
creation of the aforementioned body (Abellán, L., 2019).
In April 2019, the Spain's latest National Cybersecurity Strategy addressed the problem of
disinformation for the first time (Spanish National Security Department, 2019).
In the legislative field, Spain has adopted measures to combat disinformation, such as the Royal
Decree-Law promulgated at the end of 2019, which included tackling risks derived from false
information amongst its objectives.48 The most recent legislative attempt to deal with disinformation
in Spain was the 'Action Procedure against Disinformation' (Ministry of the Presidency, Relations with
the Courts and Democratic Memory, 2020). Approved by the National Security Council, it has served as
the basis for creating a national system for preventing, detecting, alerting, monitoring and responding
to causes, means and/or consequences related to disinformation. This Action Procedure establishes the
necessary instruments to participate in the mechanisms that the European Union has made available
to Member States. It also reinforces the capacities for coordinated and joint responses to disinformation
campaigns, thus increasing the exchange of information with the bodies and agencies with
competence in this matter, through the Permanent Commission against Disinformation.
Finally, in the informational sphere, the former Secretary of State of España Global developed a
comprehensive communication plan to counter independentist propaganda between 2018 and 2019.
It comprised the following activities:
•
Launching the platform ThisIsTheRealSpain, 49 aimed at promoting Spain's strengths, which are
categorised into three main pillars: democracy, modernity and citizenship. Based on objective
and independent indicators, the platform shows how Spain stands in the international arena in
terms of economic and social development, democratic and institutional quality, culture,
respect for human rights, etc.
•
Coordinated external action through the network of embassies to transmit the Spanish
government's narrative regarding the Catalan issue across the world.
•
Production and diffusion of several reports and studies debunking independentists messages
against Spanish democracy (Global Spain, 2019c).
4.7.4. Impact and consequences
The threat developed by the Catalan separatist movement against Spain before and after the illegal
referendum, basically by means of disinformation campaigns, partially achieved its goals. One of them
was to increase independentist sentiments amongst Catalan citizens. According to the quarterly
barometer produced by the Catalan Government's Centre d'Estudis d'Opinió (a regional public body
for sociological studies), the percentage of Catalans that wanted Catalonia to become an independent
48
The Decree states: 'Among the main challenges that new technologies pose from the point of view of public security are
disinformation activities, interference in the processes of political participation of citizens and espionage. These activities
benefit from the possibilities offered by computer sophistication to access huge volumes of information and sensitive data'.
(Real Decreto-Ley 14/2019, de 31 de octubre, por el que se adoptan medidas urgentes por razones de seguridad pública en
materia de administración digital, contratación del sector público y telecomunicaciones., 2019).
49
https://www.thisistherealspain.com/
82
Strategic communications as a key factor in countering hybrid threats
state peaked in October 2017 (48.7 %), the month in which the illegal referendum took place. Moreover,
the percentage of people who supported Catalan independence exceeded those in favour of
remaining part of Spain in all quarterly barometers until March 2019 (Centre d'Estudis d'Opinió, 2020,
p. 12). The independentist narrative managed to convince many Catalans, attracting them with its
postulates for almost two years.
However, in the arena of foreign policy, independentists were not successful in their attempt to
internationalise the conflict. Apart from some tepid messages of support from countries such as
Venezuela (Cembrero, I., 2017), Russia (Alandete, D., 2017a) or South Ossetia (Ministry of Foreign Affairs,
2017), no country in the world recognised Catalonia's independence (Elcano Royal Institute, 2018).
In the European Union, both the Parliament and the Commission positioned themselves in opposition
to the illegal referendum. The former president of the EU Parliament, Mr. Antonio Tajani, in a letter
addressed to Ms. Beatriz Becerra, MEP, recalled that 'any action against the constitution of a Member
State was an action against the European Union's legal framework' and warned that the independence
of Catalonia would imply its exit from the EU (Tajani, A., 2017).
Although the Catalan independentist movement did not achieve its fundamental objective,
independence, its narrative about the illegal referendum did affect Spain's international image. The
images of alleged police violence (most of them false or manipulated) being used to prevent the illegal
referendum being held and the Spanish authorities' failure to quickly refute such alleged violence
undermined the reputation of Spain abroad.
At the national level, the conflict led to an increase in political and social polarisation, not only in
Catalonia but in the whole country. It has also contributed to the fragmentation of the Parliament,
hampering the creation of governments based on solid majorities, and the appearance, for the first
time in Spanish democracy since 1979, of a far-right political party with parliamentary representation
(Vox). As a result of this political instability, and for the first time in its recent history, Spain is currently
ruled by a coalition government that has needed the support of Catalan pro-independence parties,
and other nationalist parties, to be formed. In order to gain the support of Catalan independentist
parties, the coalition government, formed by the Socialist Party and the far-left party Podemos, agreed
to enter into a dialogue process with the Catalan Government to analyse its demands for more
autonomy.
4.7.5. Conclusions of the case
Disinformation campaigns launched during the events in Catalonia in 2017 had most of the essential
components of this type of hybrid threat50 (manipulated content, attribution of fake content to reputed
sources, use of social media, use of bots), but it also included an interesting component in spreading
disinformation: the participation of international influencers. 51 Its goals, which were partially achieved,
clearly correspond to those of a hybrid threat, particularly (1) erosion of citizens' trust in their
institutions (2) generation of mistrust in the democratic system, (3) undermining social cohesion or
social models of states, (4) weakening the system of government of its victims, and (5) convincing
people of the decay of the political system (both the victims' population and its own).52
The measures adopted by the Spanish government to counter the threat were reactive, and focused
on two types of action: (1) informative actions, mainly through the España Global agency and
diplomatic means and (2) legal actions, with the creation of new public bodies to combat
disinformation and cyberattacks, the revision of the national cybersecurity strategy to include
50
See Figure 4.
51
An example of this type of influence, in addition to the aforementioned case of Juliane Assange, was Pamela Anderson's
position on the Catalan issue. See for example: https://www.pamelaandersonfoundation.org/news/2017/11/6/catalonia
52
See Chapter 2.1.
83
STOA | Panel for the Future of Science and Technology
disinformation as a real threat, and the production of a new Decree (Real Decreto-Ley 14/2019, de 31
de octubre). 53
But can the informative actions implemented be considered strategic communications? According to
the definition of strategic communications, 54 the Spanish response cannot be fully considered as part
of a strategic communication. Its scope was limited as it mostly focused on the international sphere,
while it did not include specific targets at the national level. Spanish media coverage was very scarce,
and coordination only occurred latter in the process through the foreign service and diplomatic corps,
but not with other state institutions. Although communication channels were adequate (diplomatic
means, social media and online platforms), the impact on traditional media was small. While other
measures adopted do have a long-term preventive objective, the actions taken in the field of
communication have been considerably diluted in recent months. In general, the narrative at the
national level was mitigated, probably because the minority government formed after June 2018
required the Catalan nationalist parties' votes in the National Parliament.
53
For a complete taxonomy see Table 4.
54
See Chapter 3.1.
84
Strategic communications as a key factor in countering hybrid threats
5. Challenges in effectively countering hybrid threats
Hybrid threats are a serious menace to the proper functioning of democratic systems, in general, and
the EU in particular. Promoters of hybrid threats try to exploit the vulnerabilities of EU institutions and
Member States with the aim of undermining citizens' trust in such institutions, exacerbating social and
political polarisation, deepening social tensions, generating economic losses, or interfering in the
political decision-making process. In the end, what promoters of hybrid threats, mainly Russia and
more recently China, seek is to weaken the EU and its values, in an attempt to reduce its influence and
leadership. Some of the case studies described in the previous chapter are good examples of attempts
at undermining the EU.
Although the EU has already implemented different measures to counter hybrid threats, vulnerabilities
still persist. These vulnerabilities, and the challenges that they represent, are briefly described in the
following sections.
5.1. Lack of harmonised regulation against hybrid threats,
particularly against disinformation and foreign influence
The cross-cutting and interconnected nature of hybrid actions limit the effectiveness of the measures
used to counter them when taken in isolation. A comprehensive harmonised legal and regulatory
framework would make it possible to improve the protection of European institutions and citizens, and
should be the foundation of all policies and measures to deal with hybrid threats.
Promoters of hybrid threats take advantage of the disparity of legal regimes in the EU regarding key
aspects such as disinformation and foreign influence. They also benefit from the slowness of legal
systems in adapting to new phenomena in the digital world. In order to address these challenges, the
EU should advance in what could be called legal resilience. This concept may be defined as the capacity
of a legal system to resist, recover from and adapt to internal and external disturbances while
maintaining its key functions and features, and its capacity to contribute to the resilience of other
natural or social systems (Sari, A., 2019). Strengthening EU legal resilience will be key to properly
dealing with hybrid threats.
5.2. The effectiveness of the measures depends on the identification
of perpetrators
One of the elements that characterise hybrid threats is the difficulty in identifying their origin and
attributing responsibility for the attack or threat. Most countermeasures to hybrid threats requires the
prior identification of the promoter (foreign or domestic) and the potential local proxies that
collaborate in their development. Attributing hybrid threats to their real perpetrators is therefore
essential to the success of measures adopted by the victims. It can help identify the ultimate targets of
attacks. It can also facilitate public awareness of the nature of threats. But, above all, establishing
responsibility for threats is the only way to demand accountability and, if necessary, impose sanctions.
However, attribution is probably the most difficult task when dealing with hybrid threats, especially
those that include elements related to cyberspace (cyberattacks, information theft, disinformation
campaigns, etc.) (Gressel, G., 2019). Growing technological sophistication and the use of channels such
as social networks make identification complex.
85
STOA | Panel for the Future of Science and Technology
5.3. Disinformation is spread through digital means with scarce
control by social media platforms
Promoters of hybrid threats are leveraging the enormous potential of digital means, particularly social
networks, to spread disinformation among targeted societies. Disinformation campaigns benefit from
the nature of social networks, digital platforms that connect audiences without liability for the content,
according to the e-Commerce Directive (European Parliament and the Council, 2000). Social networks'
tepid attempts at preventing the dissemination of harmful content are limited to illegal categories such
as hate incitement, violence, child pornography, terrorism, and cruel and insensitive content. Social
networks are allowed to delegate the responsibility of detecting and reporting harmful content to users
or, more ambiguously, the 'community', following notice-and-action mechanisms.
While the aforementioned categories are thoroughly explained in the social networks' rules and
policies, 55 false information is not considered as harmful content by social networks, and they only
include some references to the authenticity of information in specific contexts like election periods,
intellectual property or impersonation. Therefore, reporting and taking down false information on
social networks is not possible if it does not involve any of the above categories. In addition, as false
information is normally very sensationalist and thus more likely to be shared than legitimate
information (Peter, M. et al., 2019), 'social media platforms' incentives are not always prioritised to limit
disinformation. In some respects, their incentives are aligned with spreading more of it. Tech giants'
revenues are generated almost entirely through advertising, which depends on maximising user
engagement with the platform (Nemr, C. & Gangware, W., 2019, p. 26).
According to the Special Eurobarometer devoted to analysing attitudes of EU citizens towards the
impact of digitalisation on their daily lives (European Commission, 2020d), 48 % of respondents believe
social media platforms should be responsible for combatting false information. Europeans give social
networks a prominent role in the fight against disinformation. However, their incentives in the digital
arena does not seem the most appropriate for such a task. There is an open debate, fuelled by the
Executive Order on Preventing Online Censorship of the US President (The White House, 2020) and the
proposal to amend regulation for digital services in the EU, called the 'Digital Services Act' 56, about
social media platforms' liability for the content spread through them, the protection of the freedom of
expression and the role that such platforms should assume in the fight against disinformation, which
would require further clarifications about their legal status (Hybrid CoE, 2019).
5.4. Citizens' lack of awareness about the existence and potential
damage of disinformation
One of the objectives of disinformation campaigns is to hamper citizens' ability to make informed
decisions. Lack of awareness amongst the targeted group stands out as one of the main drivers for
disinformation success.
At the European level, awareness about the existence of false information does not seem to be
increasing. While there is no evidence of a reduction of disinformation activities between 2018 and
2020, two surveys conducted by the Eurobarometer 57 show a decline in the EU citizens' awareness
about the presence of false news or information. The percentage of EU citizens who declared to have
found false information or news every day or almost every day has dropped from 37 % to 30 %. The
percentage of those who reported finding false information at least once a week also decreased (31 %
in 2018; 25 % in 2020). On the contrary, the percentage of EU citizens who seldom or never found false
55
For instance: www.facebook.com/communitystandards/; https://help.twitter.com/en/rules-and-policies/twitter-rules
56
https://ec.europa.eu/digital-single-market/en/digital-services-act-package
57
(European Commission, 2018c); (European Commission, 2020d)
86
Strategic communications as a key factor in countering hybrid threats
information increased 2 points, up to 19 % in 2020. Finally, the percentage of those who did not know
if they came across false news or information increased 6 points, up to 9 % in 2020. The reduction of
awareness is more worrying when considering specific population groups who are more vulnerable to
disinformation, such as elderly people. In 2018, 61 % of people aged 55 or over declared having found
false news or information at least once a week. In 2020, this percentage fell 14 points to 47 %.
The decrease in the levels of awareness about disinformation amongst European citizens shows the
urgent need for public policies aimed at reverting this trend. Moreover, citizens themselves consider
public intervention as the best way to raise awareness. 46 % of respondents to the Special
Eurobarometer on the impact of digitalisation on their daily lives consider that public authorities
should help citizens to better identify disinformation, with this being the most frequently mentioned
public policy.
5.5. Current mechanisms of information sharing and coordination
are proving insufficient
In recent years, the EU has developed a wide network of units, teams, agencies and other advisory
bodies aimed at tackling the complex phenomenon of hybrid threats and one of its main components,
disinformation. Additionally, Member States have also created specific units to combat hybrid threats
at the national level involving different institutions (presidential cabinet, ministries of home affairs,
foreign affairs, defence, etc.) and with diverse responsibilities (monitorisation, detection, attribution,
response, etc.). The private sector is also collaborating through observatories, fact-checking networks
and think tanks.
Notwithstanding EU efforts to create a comprehensive architecture to deal with hybrid threats, a better
coordinated response is still lacking (Fiott, D. & Parkes, R., 2019). Although disinformation and
cybersecurity are closely related, they are usually addressed in an isolated manner (Scheidt, M., 2019).
Information sharing is also crucial to better address hybrid threats. However, sharing sensitive
information between EU bodies, agencies and Member States remains difficult (Fiott, D. & Parkes, R.,
2019). It is, therefore, necessary to design and implement new mechanisms of coordination and
information sharing that allow hybrid threats to be countered in an effective and timely manner. Such
mechanisms should consider the role of private agents, which must also act in coordination with public
authorities.
5.6. The EU is falling behind its main competitors (the US and China)
in the development of key digital technologies to tackle hybrid
threats
The EU's technological dependence on foreign providers, mainly the US and China (Ortega, A., 2020),
regarding sensitive areas like cyber-intelligence, cybersecurity, 5G infrastructure, and artificial
intelligence can make it difficult to counter hybrid threats while respecting EU values and principles
(right to the protection of personal data, rule of law, democracy, respect for individual freedoms, etc.).
It also entails the risk of leaving very sensitive information in foreign hands, which could be misused
against the EU's interests. Both reasons, along with others of a strategic and economic nature, make it
necessary to lay the foundations and support the development of a robust European industry in key
technological areas. As the President of the European Commission stated in her political guidelines for
the next term, 'it may be too late to replicate hyperscalers, but it is not too late to achieve technological
sovereignty in some critical technology areas' (von der Leyen, U., 2019, p. 13). Fortunately, critical
technology areas where the EU can still contest the leadership of its competitors coincide with those
that can contribute most to the fight against hybrid threats: artificial intelligence, blockchain and 5G.
87
STOA | Panel for the Future of Science and Technology
5.7. Narratives of EU institutions and Member States try to debunk
disinformation in retrospect
One of the main components of hybrid threats from the communication perspective is disinformation
campaigns. They try to mislead citizens about current events by mixing false information with distorted
interpretations of that reality. One of the most recently examples were the false accusations that to 5G
networks are responsible for spreading the Covid-19 virus. Disinformation is quickly spread through
digital platforms with the aim of amplifying their impact. According to a 2017 estimation, citizens in
advanced countries might be consuming more false than true information by 2022 (Panetta, K., 2017).
The agents involved in the fight against disinformation normally adopt a reactive approach, trying to
debunk false information once it has already been published and spread (Peter, M. et al., 2019). Thus,
attackers usually take the lead and the victims (EU institutions and Member States) concentrate their
efforts on refuting disinformation ex post and then deal with its effects. It is, therefore, necessary to
adopt more proactive approaches to combatting disinformation, by leveraging strategic
communications to anticipate the malicious actions of promoters of hybrid threats or, at least, limit
their effects.
88
Strategic communications as a key factor in countering hybrid threats
6. Policy options
The EU is currently undertaking diverse legislative amendments and policy actions to fight hybrid
threats more effectively. It is worth mentioning the so called 'Digital Services Act Package' (European
Commission, 2020f), which intends to reform the legal framework for digital services to boost the
European digital economy. It also includes proposals to unify responses and actions across the EU
against false content and disinformation spread through online platforms. In light of the recent
Covid-19 crisis, the European Commission and the High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs
and Security Policy have launched a communication summarising the work done so far by the EU to
combat disinformation around the pandemic (European Commission and the High Representative,
2020). The communication also includes the new actions that the EU should carry out to improve its
response against disinformation. Finally, the EU Action Plan on Human Rights and Democracy 20202024 intends to reinforce the role of the EU as a global leader in promoting human rights and
democracy across the world (European Commission and the High Representative, 2020a). The policy
options proposed are aligned with these initiatives and provide a comprehensive framework to guide
policymakers' action to better address hybrid threats affecting the EU and its Member States.
6.1. Assessment criteria
Policy options are grouped based on the challenges they seek to address, described in Chapter 5. They
are analysed and assessed according to the following assessment criteria:
•
Costs and benefits: whether the benefits obtained from the policy outweigh the costs and
whether the policy is affordable for both public and private agents.
•
Feasibility: whether the policy can be easily implemented, and it is likely to be supported by
diverse stakeholders (politicians, civil society, economic sector) at both EU and national levels.
•
Effectiveness: whether the policy is expected to achieve its goals.
•
Sustainability: whether the policy can be maintained from an economic and political
perspective until it achieves its objectives.
•
Risks and future uncertainties: whether there are risks or uncertainties that can hinder the
impact of the policy or create negative externalities.
•
Coherence with EU objectives: whether the policy is aligned with the EU's vision and values.
•
Potential ethical, social or regulatory impacts: whether the policy might have unexpected (or
unwanted) ethical, social and regulatory impacts that may affect its effective completion.
The different policy options are assessed against each of these criteria by using a three-level scale: low
if the policy does not adequately meet the criteria, high if the policy is likely to meet the criteria, and
medium if the policy is somewhere in between. Table 9 summarises all proposed policy options.
89
STOA | Panel for the Future of Science and Technology
Table 9: Summary of policy options
Policies related to regulation against hybrid threats
•
Development of the European Strategy against Hybrid Threats, Disinformation and Foreign Interference
(EU-HTDFI Strategy)
•
Regulation of risk analysis for hybrid threats
•
Improvement and harmonisation of the European legal framework against hybrid threats,
disinformation and foreign interference
•
Adaptation of a sanction regime against promoters of hybrid threats, disinformation and foreign
interference
•
Update of the interpretation made by the Cybercrime Convention Committee (T-CY) regarding
interference in electoral processes
•
Improvement of regulation of artificial intelligence to address hybrid threats, disinformation and foreign
interference
Policies related to attribution of hybrid threats
•
Increasing economic resources allocated to the attribution of threats
•
Increasing economic resources allocated to the detection of disinformation
Policies related to the role of social media platforms in the fight against hybrid threats
•
Making the Code of Practice on Disinformation mandatory, and adding periodic external audits
Policies aimed at raising awareness about hybrid threats
•
Incorporation of critical information analysis competencies in school curriculums
•
Introduction of teacher training and ongoing development of educational resources and content
•
Introduction of policy-maker training
•
Introduction of digital literacy programmes for people with low digital competency
•
Promotion of citizen guides to detecting disinformation
Policies related to coordination and information sharing between stakeholders
•
Creation of a coordination unit at the EU level to unify responses against hybrid threats
•
Creation of common response mechanisms at the EU level
•
Intensified cooperation between the EU and NATO
•
Development of training exercises on countering hybrid threats involving all stakeholders
•
Increased operational intelligence capability at the EU level
•
Development of the European Cybersurveillance Tool (ECT)
•
Increased public-private collaboration
Policies related to the digital technology gap between the EU and its competitors
90
•
Increased R&D investment and financial support for start-ups, and scaling up companies related to
digital technologies
•
Development of industrial policies for key technologies (5G, AI, IoT, blockchain)
Strategic communications as a key factor in countering hybrid threats
Policies aimed at supporting the use of digital channels to fight against hybrid threats
•
Allowing public authorities to exceptionally intervene in digital services to counteract hybrid threats
•
Improving law enforcement in 5G networks
Policies aimed at defining proactive approaches to dealing with hybrid threats
•
Strengthening the EU's vision and values outside the EU borders
•
Supporting free journalism against disinformation
•
Mandatory creation of StratCom units at the highest level in EU countries and institutions
•
Creation of an EU news agency to ensure veracity of information
•
Improvement of diplomatic relations with countries considered strategic challenges
Source: own elaboration
6.2. Policies related to regulation against hybrid threats
6.2.1. Development of the European Strategy against Hybrid Threats,
Disinformation and Foreign Interference (EU-HTDFI Strategy)
The EU, aware of the dangerousness of hybrid actions and disinformation campaigns, has been working
on different policy actions aimed at combating such threats: an action plan against disinformation,
joint framework on countering hybrid threats, communication for tackling online disinformation,
communication for increasing resilience and bolstering capabilities to address hybrid threats,
communication for a strategic approach to resilience in the EU's external action, etc. These initiatives
have been focused on implementing of practical measures such as the creation of the Hybrid Fusion
Cell, the Hybrid CoE and the Rapid Alert System, the establishment of the StratCom Task Forces, the
definition of the Code of Practice on Disinformation, etc. However, there has not been regulatory
proposals (regulations, directives, etc.) to address this issue. In the fight against hybrid threats, the EU
should follow the roadmap undertaken in the field of cybersecurity, where a cybersecurity strategy was
firstly defined as the basis for the subsequent legal framework (NIS Directive, Cybersecurity Act, etc.),
which allowed harmonisation of the legal response to cybersecurity issues in all Member States.
In order to define a coherent legal framework to allow Member States to tackle hybrid threats in a
coordinated and harmonised way, the prior development of a European Strategy against Hybrid
Threats, Disinformation and Foreign Interference (EU-HTDFI Strategy), which would act as the
regulatory basis for the further implementation of specific legal instruments, would be advisable. The
strategy would also serve to clarify all the work already done by the EU to counter hybrid threats, to
evaluate the results and to define new practical tools when necessary.
91
STOA | Panel for the Future of Science and Technology
Table 10: Assessment matrix for the policy option 'Development of the European Strategy
against Hybrid Threats, Disinformation and Foreign Interference (EU-HTDFI Strategy)'
Criteria
Adequacy
Argument
Costs and benefits
High
The cost of enacting the European Strategy against Hybrid Threats,
Disinformation and Foreign Interference (EU-HTDFI Strategy) would
be very low. On the other hand, the benefits derived from its
implementation would be very high because the Strategy would
precisely delimit the future legal scope of EU operations against
hybrid threats, disinformation and foreign interference.
Feasibility
Medium
The adoption of a strategic regulation as proposed would require a
strong and unwavering commitment from all Member States.
Effectiveness
High
The effectiveness of the measure would be presumably be very high;
not only because of the effectiveness of the Strategy itself, but also
because it would be the basis for the enactment of the entire
subsequent regulatory framework.
Sustainability
High
There would be no obstacles (economic or political) to maintaining
the proposed Strategy in the future.
Risks and
uncertainties
High
The risks and uncertainties of adopting a strategy such as the one
proposed would be low, except for those inconveniences that might
arise from those parties interested in maintaining the current status
quo.
Coherence with EU
objectives
High
The proposed strategy would be consistent with previous EU
initiatives and could act as a driver for further actions.
Potential
ethical, social and
regulatory impacts
Medium
Given the absence of such a strategy in the current European legal
system, it is to be expected that the impact would be appreciable
from a social and regulatory point of view.
6.2.2. Regulation of risk analysis for hybrid threats
Risk assessments to identify vulnerabilities (social, economic, technical, etc.) should be one of the
priority tasks addressed when dealing with hybrid threats at both the EU and the Member States levels.
Knowing the risk to which society's essential assets are exposed is crucial in order to manage them. The
need to use risk analysis mechanisms has already been highlighted in many European regulations such
as the GDPR, the eIDAS Regulation, the NIS Directive, etc.
The risk analysis for hybrid threats, and especially for disinformation campaigns, should consider the
following elements:
•
Assets: the valuable components to be protected (confidence in the democratic political
system and its institutions, social cohesion, independence and sovereignty of own decisions,
maintenance of economic order, etc.).
•
Threats: circumstances that may affect the assets, causing damage (caused by the EU and its
Member States' own vulnerabilities).
•
Safeguards (or countermeasures): protection measures deployed to eliminate or reduce the
damage of threats.
In order to be effective, conducting risk analysis to counteract hybrid threats and disinformation should
be a permanent activity (continuous monitoring) and should be legally regulated at the EU level and in
92
Strategic communications as a key factor in countering hybrid threats
each Member State. Furthermore, taking advantage of the legal regulation of risk analysis, a common
Risk Analysis Tool could be developed in relation to hybrid threats, disinformation and foreign
interference.
Table 11: Assessment matrix for the policy option 'Regulation of risk analysis for hybrid threats'
Criteria
Adequacy
Argument
Costs and benefits
High
The costs of planning and implementing (on an ongoing basis continuous monitoring) risk analysis for hybrid threats would be very
low in relation to the expected benefits of its implementation, which
will allow the threats that pose a greater risk as well as the
probability of their occurrence to be identified.
Feasibility
High
There would be no significant drawbacks to implementing such a
measure.
Effectiveness
High
If it is developed in a rigorous way, and in a permanent way, the
effectiveness of the measure in reaching the indicated objectives
would be very high.
Sustainability
High
There are no significant drawbacks that would limit the sustainability
of the measure.
Risks and
uncertainties
High
Conducting risk analysis for hybrid threats would not pose any
significant risk to the EU, beyond the need to keep some results of
the risk analysis confidential.
Coherence with EU
objectives
High
Maintaining continuous monitoring of the risks posed by hybrid
threats to the EU is perfectly aligned with the objectives of the EU
and its action plan against disinformation.
Medium
Regarding ethical and social issues, continuous monitoring of risks
should respect privacy and personal data protection. The greatest
impact could come from the need to adopt complementary legal
measures, by virtue of the results of such a risk analysis.
Potential
ethical, social and
regulatory impacts
6.2.3. Improvement and harmonisation of the European legal framework
against hybrid threats, disinformation and foreign interference
Combating the communications components of hybrid threats, especially when they come from
foreign states, requires an appropriate legal framework. Being aware of this necessity, certain EU
Member States (such as France and Germany) 58 have incorporated norms into their own legal systems
to regulate the response to disinformation or foreign interference aimed at undermining confidence
in national institutions and endangering the quality of democratic processes. The European
Commission also addressed this issue in its package of measures to protect the 2019 European
elections (European Commission, 2018g). However, a harmonised legal framework to fight
disinformation at the EU level is still lacking. It should be drafted, discussed and approved within the
EU institutions (in the legal form of a directive or a regulation), to be applied to digital sources,
platforms and social networks, with the following essential objectives:
58
In France: Decree no. 2015-125 of 5 February 2015 or the new laws approved by the National Assembly in November 2018
(Loi organique n° 2018-1201 (et 2018-1202) du 22 décembre 2018 relative à la lutte contre la manipulation de l'information). In
Germany: Act to improve Enforcement of the Law in Social Networks (Netzwerkdurchsetzungsgesetz or NetzDG), entered into
force in January 2018.
93
STOA | Panel for the Future of Science and Technology
•
Clarifying the liability regime for online intermediaries regarding false content.
•
Ensuring the commitment of digital social sources and online content distribution platforms
(social networks, video platforms, etc.) in the fight against disinformation, making them
responsible for the removal of illegal, harmful or false content.
•
Unifying notice-and-action procedures that allow users to report the existence of possible
illegal, harmful or false content so that the platforms can quickly investigate the reported
content and, if necessary, remove it.
•
Imposing transparency obligations for online platforms about their activity against
disinformation.
•
Allowing Member States to suspend foreign-controlled digital sources or platforms that spread
false news, considering such decisions as compatible with EU rules, particularly the Audiovisual
Media Services Directive.
In addition, this new regulatory framework should pay particular attention to preventing foreign
influence in electoral periods by means of:
•
Prohibiting foreign funds to pay advertising campaigns trying to influence elections or obliging
online platforms to maintain and publish a registry of partisan advertising before and during
the electoral period.
•
Clarifying offences related to publishing of false statements aimed at interfering in election
results.
This new regulation should also consider the development of indicators of reliability and transparency
of information sources, as well as allowing the research community to access relevant public databases
in order to detect and analyse disinformation campaigns more rigorously and effectively.
Table 12: Assessment matrix for the policy option 'Improvement and harmonisation of the
European legal framework against hybrid threats, disinformation and foreign interference'
Criteria
Costs and benefits
Feasibility
94
Adequacy
Argument
High
The law has always served as a strategic enabler and constraint in
international relations (Sari, A., 2020). The proposed policy option, as
a direct consequence of the enactment of the European Strategy
against Hybrid Threats, Disinformation and Foreign Interference (EUHTDFI Strategy) which has been outlined above, will regulate those
behaviour of digital sources and online platforms (internal and
external to the EU) and also others that should be subject to legal
reproach, always maintaining the maximum respect for the rights
and freedoms of EU citizens. This regulation would imply extra costs
for online platforms operating in the EU, but the benefits for the
society as a whole would be much higher.
Low
A legislative package such as the one proposed involves previous
actions at different levels (political, economic and social) which, in
the end, will have to be discussed in the European Parliament. All
this involves certain difficulties. At present, the position of Member
State governments is divided on the need to adopt specific
regulations to tackle disinformation campaigns and foreign
interference. Finally, if legislative proposals are adopted in the form
of a European directive, it will also be necessary to consider the
disadvantages arising from their transposition into Member States'
legal systems.
Strategic communications as a key factor in countering hybrid threats
Effectiveness
High
The legal measures, formally approved by the European Parliament,
constitute one of the greatest guarantees for combating hybrid
threats.
Sustainability
Medium
Like any Europe-wide regulatory package, this proposal will require
additional and ongoing efforts to ensure its sustainability over time.
Low
As this is an unprecedented regulatory package at the EU level, there
may be risks and uncertainties at all stages of its development: prior
analysis, drafting, adoption and entry into force of the draft
legislation. There are also other related legislative amendments in
course (like the Digital Services Act Package) which could collide
with this proposal.
Coherence with EU
objectives
High
The development of a legislative package such as the one proposed
is in line with the European Strategy against Hybrid Threats,
Disinformation and Foreign Interference (EU-HTDFI Strategy)
mentioned above and with the EU action plan against
disinformation.
Potential
ethical, social and
regulatory impacts
Low
Since this is the development and approval of a policy package, the
regulatory impact would presumably be high.
Risks and
uncertainties
6.2.4. Adaptation of a sanction regime against promoters of hybrid threats,
disinformation and foreign interference
As the European Council states, 'restrictive measures or sanctions are an essential tool of the EU's
Common Foreign and Security Policy (CFSP). They are used by the EU as part of an integrated and
comprehensive policy approach, involving political dialogue, complementary efforts and the use of
other instruments at its disposal' (European Council, 2020b). Sanctions have been widely used as a
foreign policy instrument at both international (the UN) and regional (the EU) levels in recent years.
Whereas previously the sanctioning regimes were comprehensive, and thus affected the civilian
population, now they tend to be more accurate (smart sanctions), targeting specific individuals or
entities (Happold, M., 2016).
Strict and effective enforcement of the regulatory package outlined in the previous policy option
would require the imposition of sanctions on actors who fail to comply with its provisions, i.e. those
who encourage, promote or carry out hybrid actions, disinformation campaigns or illegally interfere
with the normal functioning of the EU institutions or Member States. Hybrid threats and their
components should, therefore, be considered as a cause that could lead to a sanction. The regulatory
package developed in the previous policy option should contain a specific chapter dedicated to
detailing such sanctions.
Table 13: Assessment matrix for the policy option 'Adaptation of the legal framework for
sanctions against promoters of hybrid threats, disinformation and foreign interference'
Criteria
Costs and benefits
Adequacy
High
Argument
The regulatory package outlined in the previous policy option
should be complemented with a clear proposal of sanctions for
those (inside or outside the EU) who do not comply with this
regulation. This policy would not entail any cost to the EU or its
Member States.
95
STOA | Panel for the Future of Science and Technology
Feasibility
Medium
The determination of sanctions is always a thorny issue with many
facets, which hampers their development and adoption, especially
when, as in the present case, there may be difficulties in the
attribution of authorship. Some countries would be reluctant to
support sanctions to counter hybrid threats.
Effectiveness
High
The imposition of rigorous and proportionate sanctions for
promoting hybrid threats would undoubtedly contribute to
reducing their presence and impact.
Sustainability
Medium
Determining which conduct deserves legal reproach should be an
issue agreed on by all Member States. It would also need to be
periodically updated, which would entail the continuous effort of
assessing the results of the sanctions regime.
Risks and
uncertainties
Medium
All proposals involving the establishment of a sanctioning regime
are uncertain as to the appropriateness of the sanction, its
proportionality, its enforcement and its ultimate effectiveness.
Coherence with EU
objectives
Medium
Only in certain cases has the EU opted for sanctions against third
states, companies or even individuals, so the adoption of such a
measure, although not far removed from EU objectives, should be
considered an exception.
Potential
ethical, social and
regulatory impacts
Medium
The regulation of a sanctioning regime always has a significant
impact on the applicable legal regime, as well as on the society.
6.2.5. Update the interpretation made by the Cybercrime Convention
Committee (T-CY) regarding interference in electoral processes
The Cybercrime Convention Committee (T-CY) issued the Guidance Note #9 'Aspects of election
interference by means of computer systems covered by the Budapest Convention' with the aim of
addressing 'how articles of the Convention may apply to aspects of election interference by means of
computer systems' (Cybercrime Convention Committee (T-CY), 2019).
The T-CY stated that the substantive crimes in the Convention may be carried out to facilitate,
participate in or prepare acts of election interference and the procedural and mutual legal assistance
tools in the Convention may be used to investigate election interference, its facilitation, participation
in it, or preparatory acts.
The T-CY pointed out the following types of crime that interfere in electoral processes, using
information systems:
96
•
Illegal access (art. 2): A computer system may be illegally accessed.
•
Illegal interception (art. 3): Non-public transmissions of computer data to, from, or within a
computer system may be illegally intercepted.
•
Data interference (art. 4): Computer data may be damaged, deleted, deteriorated, altered, or
suppressed.
•
System interference (art. 5): The functioning of computer systems used in elections or
campaigns may be hindered for the purpose of interference.
•
Misuse of devices (art. 6): The sale, procurement for use, import, distribution or other acts
making computer passwords, access codes, or similar data available.
Strategic communications as a key factor in countering hybrid threats
•
Computer-related forgery (art. 7): Computer data (for example the data used in voter
databases) may be input, altered, deleted, or suppressed with the result that inauthentic data
is considered or acted upon for legal purposes as if it were authentic.
All the previous assumptions of interference are based on damage to the information systems used in
electoral processes, negatively affecting the dimensions of security: availability, confidentiality and
integrity.
However, disinformation campaigns and foreign interference also impact a new dimension of security:
the truthfulness of the information poured into digital sources, on-line platforms or social networks.
Therefore, it is advisable to create a new T-CY activity to study the incorporation of the lack of
truthfulness as an element that, in certain cases, can constitute a crime.
Table 14: Assessment matrix for the policy option 'Update the interpretation made by the
Cybercrime Convention Committee (T-CY) regarding interference in electoral processes'
Criteria
Adequacy
Argument
High
The inclusion of the requirement to maintain the truthfulness of the
information in digital sources, in accordance with the Budapest
Convention, would make it possible to better address electoral
interference. This policy would not entail additional costs.
Low
Updating of the interpretation of the postulates of the Budapest
Convention requires prior analysis by all signatory parties, which
makes its adoption difficult, without prejudice to the transfer of the
new postulates to the regulations of the Member States and their
judicial administrations.
Effectiveness
High
If an agreement was reached on the interpretation of lack of
truthfulness as a crime, the effectiveness of the measure would be
very high, because it would allow for the formal prosecution of
certain behaviours that are currently interfering in elections in
Europe.
Sustainability
High
Once the agreement is reached, the sustainability of the agreement
would be high.
Risks and
uncertainties
High
Once the agreement is reached, the risks and uncertainties would be
like any other risks arising from the adoption of new regulations or
legal interpretations.
Coherence with EU
objectives
High
As the EU is the promoter of the Budapest Convention, it has the
greatest interest in keeping it up-to-date by considering new
behaviours that could be considered crimes.
Potential
ethical, social and
regulatory impacts
Low
The impact, in terms of criminal law, will be very high, as the
measure could introduce new types of crimes.
Costs and benefits
Feasibility
6.2.6. Improving regulation of artificial intelligence to address hybrid threats,
disinformation and foreign interference
Artificial intelligence plays a double role in the realm of hybrid threats. It can be used for criminal
purposes to deceive people by creating and spreading false information, and it can also contribute to
the fight against disinformation, especially in key areas such as prevention, detection and attribution.
97
STOA | Panel for the Future of Science and Technology
Delivering on its AI strategy adopted in April 2018 (European Commission, 2018d), in December 2018
the Commission presented a coordinated plan, prepared together with the Member States, to foster
the development and use of AI in Europe (European Commission, 2018i). This plan comprised some
70 joint actions for boosting AI development and increasing market uptake in Europe. One of the key
areas stressed by the Commission was the use of AI solutions for improving public services and, in
general, the performance of EU and Member States institutions. Within this area, it is advisable to
develop an adequate legal framework capable of regulating the use of IA by the public sector with the
triple purpose of preventing, detecting and responding to hybrid threats, disinformation and external
interference.
Table 15: Assessment matrix for the policy option 'Improve regulation of artificial intelligence
to address hybrid threats, disinformation and foreign interference"
Criteria
Adequacy
Argument
Costs and benefits
High
AI will continue to grow and develop in the coming years, and the
benefits derived from its adoption as a support tool for countering
hybrid threats through strategic communications would gradually
increase without raising significant costs.
Feasibility
High
The EU is already working on AI regulation. This would involve
regulating its use for one particular aspect: the fight against hybrid
threats, disinformation and foreign interference.
Effectiveness
High
The possibilities of AI are enormous and are in full development.
Therefore, it seems reasonable to expect this measure to be highly
effective.
Sustainability
High
Once the corresponding regulations are enacted, the sustainability
of the measure is high, beyond the necessary updating required by
technological evolution.
Risks and
uncertainties
Medium
Any activity that implies the use of technologies, products or
services based on AI poses risks and uncertainties in its
development, due to it being a disruptive technology,
Coherence with EU
objectives
High
The EU has embarked on a determined path towards the use and
regulation of AI, so the measure proposed is perfectly consistent
with EU objectives.
Potential
ethical, social and
regulatory impacts
Medium
As mentioned above, any activity involving the use of AI-based
technologies, products or services poses risks and uncertainties that
should be mitigated by the proposed regulation.
6.3. Polices related to attribution of hybrid threats
6.3.1. Increasing economic resources allocated to the attribution of threats
Identifying the source of hybrid threats requires adequate resources, both human and technical.
Hybrid threats evolve rapidly alongside new technologies, so investment in resources must be
constant. The technological tools available to agencies investigating threat authorship need to be kept
up-to-date. Human resources (digital forensic researchers, journalists, psychologists, sociologists,
lawyers, law enforcement corps, intelligence analysts, etc.), properly trained and with the right skills,
must also be suitable for the task of research and analysis.
98
Strategic communications as a key factor in countering hybrid threats
There is no data on Europe's actual spending on investigating hybrid threats and identifying
perpetrators, but if current investment in cyber security, one of the most important frameworks for
combating these threats, is considered, it is clear that there is room for improvement. The European
Court of Auditors, in a briefing paper named Challenges to Effective EU Cybersecurity Policy states the
following regarding cybersecurity spending in Europe: 'Spending in the EU has been low by
comparison, fragmented and often not backed by concerted government-led programmes. Figures are
hard to come by, but EU public spending on cybersecurity is estimated to range between €1-€2 billion
per year. Some Member States' spending as a percentage of GDP is one-tenth of US levels, or even
lower' (European Court of Auditors, 2019).
Resources for the attribution of threats should be made available at both the EU and national levels,
and investment from the private sector is also required.
In addition to increasing economic resources, the EU could also work on the definition of a Model for
the Authorship of Hybrid Threats and Disinformation, aimed at achieving a common European position
on attributing and sanctioning of hybrid threats, disinformation and foreign interference.
Table 16: Assessment matrix for the policy option 'Increasing economic resources allocated to
the attribution of threats'
Criteria
Adequacy
Argument
Medium
Increasing technological sophistication would require technical and
human resources. The cost of keeping the available resources
properly trained and updated can be high.
Feasibility
Low
The current health-related economic crisis in Europe may make it
difficult to allocate sufficient resources for the identification of
perpetrators. Rising expenditure might be particularly complicated
for those Members States that have suffered a high impact due to
the Covid-19 crisis.
Effectiveness
High
Identifying the perpetrator would allow responsibilities to be
clarified and sanctions to be applied, as well as raising public
awareness about the real objectives behind the attacks.
Sustainability
Medium
Sustainability of investments will depend on the availability of funds
and the political commitment of governments. Solutions would
need to be updated very regularly and human supervision is still
necessary.
Risks and
uncertainties
High
No particular risks have been identified.
Coherence with EU
objectives
High
Identifying the perpetrator is the first step towards accountability
and transparency, therefore it is totally in line with the EU principles
and policies.
Medium
No ethical, social or regulatory impacts have been identified as
resulting from increasing economic resources allocated to the
attribution of threats. The European agreement on the attribution of
authorship of hybrid threats, disinformation and foreign interference
would have a significant impact on the implementation of
regulatory measures that may subsequently be developed.
Costs and benefits
Potential
ethical, social and
regulatory impacts
99
STOA | Panel for the Future of Science and Technology
6.3.2. Increasing economic resources allocated to the detection of
disinformation
A 2019 study from the company CHEQ and the University of Baltimore estimated the cost of
disinformation at US$78 000 million annually. This amount includes losses in stock market value, costs
derived from health misinformation, reputation management and brand equity costs, financial
misinformation (only in the US) and election costs of fake political advertisements. Furthermore, it only
refers to the direct losses and opportunity costs imposed on society by disinformation (Cavazos, R.,
2019).
In contrast, in 2019 the European External Action Service strategic communication budget reached
€5 million (Scheidt, M., 2019).
Investments need to be increased at the national level, but also at the EU level, both from public
authorities and the private sector.
This investment should include, but not be limited to:
•
Development and support of fact checkers.
•
Research and development of new tools for identifying and tracking disinformation, including
support for start-ups.
•
Skill development for key agents and public servants.
Efforts should be made in two directions: disproving disinformation, and identifying disinformation
sources and means of transmission to label the content and warn users of its dubious origin.
While exposing disinformation through fact checkers can be a useful tool to stop the spread of
disinformation and therefore limit the damage it causes, the impact of denials is often much less than
that of the false news itself. Therefore, advisory labels for suspicious content coming from dubious
sources could be helpful in minimising the impact of disinformation in a more effective way than
retroactive measures.
Table 17: Assessment matrix for the policy option 'Increasing economic resources allocated to
the detection of disinformation"
Criteria
Adequacy
Argument
Medium
The costs of identifying and tracking disinformation can be very
high, as media, channels and technologies change and evolve very
quickly. Also, the benefits of identifying disinformation may be
limited. While stopping its spread is very important and can have a
high impact, exposing and disproving disinformation often does not
have the same impact as the disinformation itself, so the cost-benefit
of doing so may be limited.
Feasibility
Low
The current health-related economic crisis in Europe may make it
difficult to allocate sufficient resources to the detection of
disinformation. Rising expenditure might be particularly
complicated for those Member States that have suffered a high
impact due to the Covid-19 crisis.
Effectiveness
Medium
Specific news denials may be ineffective. However, identifying
sources of disinformation and labelling dubious information can be
very effective tools in curbing disinformation.
Costs and benefits
100
Strategic communications as a key factor in countering hybrid threats
Sustainability
Medium
Sustainability of investments will depend on the availability of funds
and the political commitment of governments. Solutions will need to
be updated very regularly and human supervision is required to
ensure respect for fundamental rights.
Risks and
uncertainties
High
No particular risks have been identified.
Coherence with EU
objectives
High
Disinformation is a major challenge for democratic values and
systems and tackling its spread through detection is a priority for the
EU.
Potential
ethical, social and
regulatory impacts
It may imply the need for legal changes, as well as changes to the
terms and conditions of use of some services.
Medium
Potential conflicts with data protection regulations and limitations of
freedom of speech may also arise.
6.4. Policies related to the role of social media platforms in the fight
against hybrid threats
6.4.1. Making the Code of Practice on Disinformation mandatory, and adding
periodic external audits
At present, European regulation (particularly the eCommerce Directive) guarantees digital platforms
an exemption of responsibility as providers of an intermediary service, while ensuring their
collaboration with authorities on fighting against illegal content. However, the special nature of
disinformation, which may be legal but potentially harmful, requires the issue to be addressed through
a different approach. This debate is taking place in Europe with the current discussions over the new
Digital Service Act, but also in the USA, where public controversy around labelled and removed
publications on Twitter led the former Trump Administration to start a debate on the legal
consideration of digital platforms and their responsibilities regarding the content (The White House,
2020). In Europe, and regardless of what is finally established by the Digital Services Act, the Code of
Practice on Disinformation can be a powerful tool in fighting disinformation on social media platforms.
The code was an important step in the fight against disinformation. Through the code, signatories
committed to implementing self-regulatory measures to counter false information. The code includes
several commitments considered of critical importance in countering flows of disinformation on social
media platforms:
•
Control of the use of bots that allows massive diffusion of disinformation. This includes identity
theft through fake accounts.
•
Transparency of algorithms that decide which news or advertising to display to users.
•
Different strategies to deal with dubious content by means of alerts or labels.
In order to leverage the full potential of the code, signing it could be a precondition for operating in
the EU for digital platforms and related companies. At the same time, to improve the effectiveness of
the code, independent external audits and sanctions for non-compliance should be applied. Such
measures (mandatory adhesion to the code and independent audits on compliance with
commitments) were mentioned in the conclusions of the Council of the European Union at the end of
2019 (European Council, 2019b).
101
STOA | Panel for the Future of Science and Technology
Regarding implementation of this policy option, special attention should be paid to the upcoming
audit of the European Court of Auditors of the Action Plan against Disinformation, which will assess the
results of implementing the Code (European Court of Auditors, 2020).
Table 18: Assessment matrix for the policy option 'Making the Code of Practice on
Disinformation mandatory, and adding annual external audits'
Criteria
Costs and benefits
Feasibility
Adequacy
Medium
High
Argument
For potential new signatories, the mandatory character of the code
would imply extra effort and investment in order to comply with
commitments. But the possibility of operating in the EU is probably
attractive enough to make the necessary investment.
The code has already been signed by the main digital companies and
social media platforms, and the third-party revision of the
implementation reports is currently a possibility. The policy option
recommended would not pose great changes for current or new
signatories, while it could mean an important boost to the
implementation of the code.
The main social media platforms are part of multinational
companies, thus the relevance of applying changes to the code
remain at the EU level.
High
The simple fact of signing the code supposes a qualitative important
step in countering disinformation on social media platforms. The
independent audit ensures that efforts to comply with commitments
are real.
Sustainability
High
For both the EU and multinational companies in charge of digital
platforms, actions to comply with the code should not involve a
great economic cost. Even though the Code of Practice seems to be
a permanent measure. For smaller companies, however, the cost
could imply a greater economic effort.
Risks and
uncertainties
Medium
New social media platforms could decide to not start operating in
Europe due to the mandatory adhesion to the Code of Practice.
Coherence with EU
objectives
High
The Council of the European Union has already suggested these
specific policies.
Potential
ethical, social and
regulatory impacts
Medium
Sanctions should be regulated adequately. Limitations or actions
contrary to popular social networks can generate social discomfort.
Effectiveness
6.5. Policies aimed at raising awareness about hybrid threats
6.5.1. Incorporation of critical information analysis competencies in school
curriculums
The objective of including competencies in critical analysis of information in school curriculums is to
provide citizens with tools to identify disinformation and develop critical thinking skills and media
literacy from a young age. Today, critical thinking requires considering the relevance of the digital
environment, and the values it should encompasses: participation, transparency and accountability.
102
Strategic communications as a key factor in countering hybrid threats
Developing critical thinking skills to counter disinformation has proven to be effective by helping
people identify this type of information and reduce its impact on personal beliefs and values. For
example, the non-governmental organisation IREX trained 15 000 people to identify disinformation
and recognise manipulation and hate speech. Subsequent evaluation of the programme confirmed a
24 % increase in participants' ability to distinguish trustworthy news from false news, a 22 % increase
in information cross-checking, and a 26 % increase in participants' confidence (Buluc, R., 2018).
Critical thinking is one of the competencies included in the Council Recommendation of 22 May 2018
on key competencies for lifelong learning (European Council, 2018b, p. 9). However, it has not yet been
incorporated into the formal education curriculum of many of EU countries.
Finland was the first European country to implement a nationwide initiative against disinformation in
2014. In 2016, right after the US election campaign, the critical thinking curriculum was revised to
prioritise skills to identify disinformation. As a result, according to the Media Literacy Index from the
European Policies Initiative (EuPI) at the Open Society Institute (Sofia), Finland is ranked top of the
35 countries, and is 'considered the best equipped to withstand the impact of disinformation due to
the quality of education, free media and high trust among people' (Open Society Institute Sofia, 2019).
Critical thinking and information analysis competencies should include the development of the skills
needed to evaluate sources, use text responsibly, better understand the impact of disinformation and
identify one's own biases and ideology.
Table 19: Assessment matrix for the policy option 'Incorporation of critical information analysis
competencies in school curriculums'
Criteria
Costs and benefits
Adequacy
High
Argument
The benefits of developing critical thinking and digital skills amongst
children and young people are very high, as it is the most effective
way to build a resilient society for the future. Costs may include
reviewing school curricula and, in some cases, developing
educational materials, but this can be done at a very low cost
through open educational resources at the European level.
Education is a national competence and therefore such policies are
implemented at the national or regional levels.
The political feasibility of the measure may be constrained in some
countries due to ideological struggles, particularly in decentralised
countries and places where disinformation is highly politicised.
Feasibility
Medium
Effectiveness
High
Education and awareness at an early age is probably one of the most
effective policies in terms of strengthening the resilience of society.
High
The education of young people is a medium- and long-term policy
that guarantees the sustainability of the action in the future, since it
is not a one-off action, but one that has a sustained impact over
time.
Sustainability
There is a risk of content being politicised in training of this nature.
Risks and
uncertainties
Medium
Coherence with EU
objectives
High
Additionally, educational policies require the participation of
multiple stakeholders with varying interests and achieving
compromises may be difficult.
Awareness-raising and resilience building have been key policies for
the EU in tackling the spread and impact of disinformation and
ensuring European values and democratic systems are protected.
103
STOA | Panel for the Future of Science and Technology
Potential
ethical, social and
regulatory impacts
Medium
High levels of politicisation of the topic in certain countries might
cause social tensions.
6.5.2. Teacher training and ongoing development of educational resources and
content
Teacher training is a prerequisite for the inclusion of critical thinking competencies in schools
curriculums. Teachers must develop their own skills and understand the methodologies and tools in
order to educate their pupils.
This training should be part of continuous on-the-job teacher training as the content needs to be
regularly updated to keep up with technological developments and changes in attackers' strategies.
Table 20: Assessment matrix for the policy option 'Teacher training and ongoing development
of educational resources and content'
Criteria
Costs and benefits
Adequacy
High
Argument
Teacher training is an essential prerequisite for the proper training of
students. In-service teacher training could include this type of
training at reduced costs thanks to new technologies.
Education is a national competence and therefore such policies are
implemented at the national or regional levels.
The political feasibility of the measure may be constrained in some
countries due to ideological struggles, particularly in decentralised
countries and places where disinformation is highly politicised.
Feasibility
Medium
Effectiveness
High
Effectiveness is very high, greater than that of communication
campaigns. Moreover, it is essential for the correct training of the
citizenship.
Sustainability
High
Educating young people is a medium- and long-term policy that
guarantees the sustainability of the action in the future, since it is not
a one-off action, but one that has a sustained impact over time.
Teacher training is a prerequisite for training children.
Risks and
uncertainties
Medium
There is a risk of content being politicised in training of this nature.
Coherence with EU
objectives
High
Awareness-raising and resilience-building have been key policies for
the EU in tackling the spread and impact of disinformation, and
ensuring European values and democratic systems are protected.
Potential
ethical, social and
regulatory impacts
Medium
High levels of politicisation of the topic in certain countries might
cause social tensions.
104
Strategic communications as a key factor in countering hybrid threats
6.5.3. Policy-maker training
Legislators and policy-makers have a fundamental role, not only in the production of laws and public
policies, but also as opinion leaders.
The participation of decision-makers in the dissemination of hoaxes is an important element of political
destabilisation and polarisation of society, and therefore their role in raising awareness in society is very
important.
Policy-makers must be champions in the fight against disinformation, and they must have the right
skills and tools to do so.
Table 21: Assessment matrix for the policy option 'Policy-maker training'
Criteria
Adequacy
Argument
Costs and benefits
High
There are currently very low-cost training tools and methodologies
with very low costs that make this policy very suitable due to its high
benefit.
Feasibility
High
Training for policy-makers at all levels can be easily provided
through online or face-to-face training conducted by their working
institutions as part of their duties.
Effectiveness
High
Policy-makers have an impact both on policies and on public
opinion. Making them aware of the importance of stopping
disinformation and giving them the skills and tools to do so would
have a very high impact.
Sustainability
High
Training needs to be updated and costs can be very limited thanks
to online training methodologies. The impact will be sustained over
time.
Risks and
uncertainties
High
No particular risk has been identified.
High
Better policy-making is highly coherent with EU objectives and
values. Awareness-raising and resilience-building have been key
policies for the EU in tackling the spread and impact of
disinformation, and ensuring European values and democratic
systems are protected.
Coherence with EU
objectives
Potential
ethical, social and
regulatory impacts
High
Policy-makers are expected to lead by example. Additionally, they
have a responsibility towards citizens regarding the veracity of the
information they manage in their decision-making processes.
The impact of the information they manage is critical to the quality
of regulations.
6.5.4. Digital literacy programmes for people with low digital competency
Strategic communication actions aimed at raising awareness amongst citizens have proven to be an
effective way to tackle hybrid attacks in two domains:
1. Reducing the expansion of disinformation. When people acknowledge that information is false
or misleading, the spread of disinformation can be stopped.
2. Limiting the damage of disinformation. Inflaming the feelings of the population at critical
moments, increasing the polarisation of society, and destabilising democratic institutions by
105
STOA | Panel for the Future of Science and Technology
attacking their legitimacy are some of the objectives of disinformation that can be prevented
by building understanding and consciousness.
Understanding the impact of disinformation impacts and the aims behind it improves societal
resilience. This requires not only communication campaigns, but also training in critical skills. In this
sense, media literacy is a vital tool in fighting the proliferation of disinformation through online means.
This fact has already been acknowledged by the EU, and the Commission has put initiatives into place
to improve media literacy among the elderly, such as the Media Literacy Expert group (European
Commission, 2019a) and the Preparatory Action 'Media Literacy for All' (European Commission, 2020a).
However, digital literacy is worsening. In 2017, the EU27 average of people with low overall digital skills
between 55 and 74 years old was 28 %, while in 2019 this average rose to 34 % (Eurostat, 2020). The
widening of this gap shows the need to increase efforts and investment.
Table 22: Assessment matrix for the policy option 'Digital literacy programmes for people with
low digital competency'
Criteria
Adequacy
Argument
Medium
Digital literacy programmes aimed at reducing the digital skill gap
exist around the EU, so programmes do not need to be created from
scratch, only updated. However, the benefits are difficult to assess in
the short term and the costs of massive programmes may be high.
Feasibility
Medium
Europe has funding mechanisms for training people, and digital
literacy programmes are already in place in many EU
countries. There are, however, differences between countries that
authorities (national and regional) and sectorial associations should
take into account, thus challenging the execution and follow-up of
the policy.
Effectiveness
Medium
Effectiveness of these programmes is difficult to assess in the short
term.
Sustainability
Medium
Digital literacy programmes aimed at reducing the digital skill gap
are common in Europe and tend to be sustained over time. However,
doing it on a large scale is costly.
Risks and
uncertainties
High
No particular risks are identified.
Coherence with EU
objectives
High
The EU is strongly committed to promoting digital skills and
reducing the skills gap.
Potential
ethical, social and
regulatory impacts
High
No ethical, social or regulatory impacts have been identified.
Costs and benefits
6.5.5. Promoting citizen guides to detecting disinformation
The production of informative guides to help detect hoaxes and disinformation would increase
awareness of these practices and provide citizens with tools to prevent their spread.
To be effective from the point of view of strategic communications, two elements are necessary. The
first concerns their format and style. They must be sufficiently attractive and accessible to all citizens.
The second concerns their dissemination, which must be massive in order to fulfil their objective.
106
Strategic communications as a key factor in countering hybrid threats
Therefore, different versions adapted to different targets should be developed, especially taking into
account age and educational level. Formats and distribution channels should be appropriate for this
purpose.
Making these resources directly available through the main channels of dissemination of
disinformation, such as social media or media outlets, would be desirable.
Table 23: Assessment matrix for the policy option 'Promoting citizen guides to detecting
disinformation'
Criteria
Adequacy
Argument
Costs and benefits
High
The cost of producing the guides is low. Distribution can be done
through collaboration with national, regional and local authorities,
and with the private sector, in particular social media providers and
the other stakeholders involved.
Feasibility
High
Feasibility is higher if guidelines are produced at the EU level and
distributed locally and in collaboration with the private sector.
Effectiveness
High
Guidelines elaborated in the correct format (visual, intuitive,
attractive) can have a very high impact in raising awareness amongst
citizens.
However, massive dissemination is essential for them to be effective.
Sustainability
Medium
Guides need to be constantly updated and their impact of its
communication is difficult to sustain over time.
Risks and
uncertainties
High
No particular risks are identified.
Coherence with EU
objectives
High
Awareness-raising and resilience-building have been key policies for
the EU in tackling the spread and impact of disinformation and
ensuring European values and democratic systems are protected.
Potential
ethical, social and
regulatory impacts
High
No ethical, social or regulatory impacts have been identified.
6.6. Policies related to coordination and information-sharing
between stakeholders
6.6.1. Creation of a coordination unit at the EU level to unify responses against
hybrid threats
In recent years, the EU has developed diverse bodies to address hybrid threats from different
perspectives: cybersecurity, information, crisis management, diplomacy, etc. (Scheidt, M., 2019). Some
of these bodies also involve Member States. However, a specific unit that coordinates all efforts in the
fight against hybrid threats is still lacking. This coordination unit would contribute to unifying
responses and actions to counter hybrid threats that aim to destabilise any Member State or the EU as
a whole. The coordination unit would allow better effectiveness of the measures adopted to mitigate
and even prevent the effects of hybrid threats, as well as to send a clear message of firmness to the
attackers. It should also undertake the creation of secure and rapid communication channels to inform
stakeholders of the threats identified.
107
STOA | Panel for the Future of Science and Technology
The coordination unit would also assume the responsibility of engaging the private sector and civil
society to collaborate in the overall strategy to counter hybrid threats.
The coordination unit could be made up of representatives from all EU bodies currently involved in
dealing with hybrid threats (European Commission, European Parliament, European Council, EEAS,
ENISA, etc.), as well as Member States and representatives of critical companies from the private sector.
However, to ensure its agility and effectiveness it should be managed by a reduced committee led by
an experienced person who could come from the public or private sector: the EU Counter Hybrid Threat
Coordinator (EU-CHTC).
The coordination unit's work should not be limited to occasional and isolated actions (such as
responding to a specific crisis) but should be developed continuously over time.
Table 24: Assessment matrix for the policy option 'Creation of a coordination unit at the EU
level to unify responses against hybrid threats'
Criteria
Adequacy
Argument
Costs and benefits
High
The existence of a coordination unit at the highest level would
improve the EU's response to hybrid threats. Although such a unit
should be provided with sufficient resources to function properly,
the cost would be outweighed by the benefits that it could have for
the whole EU.
Feasibility
Medium
Creation of the coordination unit would imply that departments and
agencies at both the EU and Member State level should cede key
parts of the strategy for countering hybrid threats to that unit.
High
The coordination unit would allow the EU to demonstrate and exert
unified action against hybrid threats, improving its response
capabilities. It could also be used as a deterrence measure by
showing attackers a firm determination to counter their threats.
Sustainability
High
The coordination unit should be maintained over time. However, by
its nature, the structure should not be very large as it is not created
to replace the work of other bodies and agencies but to coordinate
their efforts.
Risks and
uncertainties
Medium
Some EU countries could interpret the creation of the coordination
unit as a loss of sovereignty regarding foreign affairs and the
responses they can develop.
Coherence with EU
objectives
High
The coordination unit is highly aligned with EU objectives, as it
would allow reinforcement of the unity of EU action against hybrid
threats. It would respect the principle of subsidiarity and only
provide further coordination to enhance the effectiveness of
responses.
Potential
ethical, social and
regulatory impacts
Medium
National regulations could make it difficult to share sensitive
intelligence information, an essential asset in coordinating
responses, with an EU body.
Effectiveness
6.6.2. Creation of common response mechanisms at the EU level
The response to hybrid threats is mainly a national competence, and it is carried out almost entirely by
Member States. Each country defines its own response measures and the strategies to address hybrid
threats. The European Commission itself acknowledges this fact: 'Strengthening resilience to these
108
Strategic communications as a key factor in countering hybrid threats
threats and bolstering capabilities are predominantly Member State responsibilities' (European
Commission, 2018e). However, a common framework to harmonise national responses to hybrid
threats would be advisable. It would allow hybrid threats to be addressed in a homogeneous way in
any EU country. This kind of common framework would send a clear warning to attackers: all Member
States are fully committed to the fight against hybrid threats, and attacks will receive the same
response no matter where they occur. The common framework to address hybrid threats should
encompass responses in the following fields:
•
Creation of analogous criminal offences in all EU countries to combat hybrid threats.
•
Definition of guidelines to develop common communication strategies at the national level.
•
Coordination of diplomatic actions between Member States.
•
Unification of sanction regimes against promoters of hybrid threats.
The EU could recommend (or even mandate) Member States to push forward in the adoption of
common responses to hybrid threats.
Table 25: Assessment matrix for the policy option 'Creation of common response mechanisms
at the EU level'
Criteria
Adequacy
Argument
High
The adoption of common response mechanisms by all Member
States will benefit the EU as whole, demonstrating an image of unity
in confronting hybrid threats. The implementation of responses at
the national level could have a relevant cost. However, the benefits
far outweigh the potential costs.
Feasibility
Low
The creation of common response mechanisms might be hampered
by the diverse nature of the hybrid threats faced by each Member
State. While some countries are addressing hybrid threats promoted
by domestic actors, other countries are more exposed to foreign
influence. Additionally, cultural, social and legal differences between
EU countries would make it difficult to address all hybrid threats in a
similar way.
Effectiveness
High
A common response by all EU countries would increase the
effectiveness of the measures adopted against hybrid threats,
regardless of which country was attacked.
High
A common set of response measures should be developed. Once
such measures are defined, it would only be necessary to monitor
them to ensure they meet their objectives, which could be done at a
low cost.
Costs and benefits
Sustainability
Hybrid threats are not static. They evolve over time, becoming more
sophisticated. There is a risk that reaching a common response
framework between all Member States will take so long that it will
become obsolete.
Risks and
uncertainties
Medium
The post-coronavirus geopolitical landscape could modify the
current alliances between Member States and other countries
traditionally considered hybrid threat sponsors (the best example
could be China), posing new challenges to the creation of common
responses to hybrid threats.
109
STOA | Panel for the Future of Science and Technology
Coherence with EU
objectives
Potential
ethical, social and
regulatory impacts
High
This policy is aimed at providing a common European response to
the phenomenon of hybrid threats, strengthening ties between
Member States.
The production of common responses to hybrid threats do not raise
ethical and social issues, as long as such responses respect civil rights
and European values.
Medium
At the regulatory level, this policy option could have a great impact.
Unifying legal regimes in all Member States could be a very highly
complex task and could take a long time.
6.6.3. Intensifying cooperation between the EU and NATO
International cooperation is essential to counter hybrid threats. Addressing this global phenomenon
requires collaboration between the EU and international organisations such as the UN and the OSCE to
uphold the rule of law and setting the limits on foreign influence. However, when it comes to practical
measures to prevent, detect and respond to hybrid threats, the EU-NATO cooperation is the most
relevant, and should be strengthened. In 2017, a common set of proposals for the implementation of
the Joint Declaration on EU-NATO cooperation, related to countering hybrid threats, was defined:
•
Creation of the European Centre of Excellence for Countering Hybrid threats.
•
Enhanced staff-to-staff sharing of time-critical information between the EU Hybrid Fusion Cell
and its relevant NATO counterparts.
•
Development of technical systems to allow systematic exchange of information.
•
Intensified cooperation and undertake shared trend analysis of disinformation.
•
Encouragement of cooperation between the NATO Strategic Communication Centre of
Excellence and the EEAS StratCom Task Forces.
•
Enhanced preparedness for crisis response, seeking to synchronise the two organisations' crisis
response activities.
•
Raised awareness amongst EU countries and NATO allies on existing and planned resilience
requirements, and help them to improve such resilience.
•
Implementation of parallel and coordinated exercises (PACE), including hybrid elements.
Since 2017, both institutions have been working hard to implement these proposals. Several progress
reports 59 have shown the results of the collaboration between NATO and the EU to counter hybrid
threats. However, further efforts are still needed in specific aspects, such as the joint development of
automated systems to exchange information and analyse disinformation. Such systems could
dramatically improve the capability to prevent and detect hybrid threats.
One of the main instruments to deepen and strengthen such collaboration is the European Centre of
Excellence for Countering Hybrid Threats (Hybrid CoE), which has hosted many meetings, forums,
workshops and seminars where both institutions have exchanged their knowledge. However, some EU
countries (namely Belgium, Bulgaria, Croatia, Slovakia, Ireland and Malta) do not yet participate in
Hybrid CoE activities. These countries are missing out on great opportunities to enhance their ability
to counter hybrid threats. The EU should encourage these Member States to participate in Hybrid CoE
activities, to ensure similar levels of preparedness to counter hybrid threats as in the EU as a whole.
59
(NATO - EU Council, 2017a); (NATO - EU Council, 2017b); (NATO - EU Council, 2018); (NATO - EU Council, 2019)
110
Strategic communications as a key factor in countering hybrid threats
Table 26: Assessment matrix for the policy option 'Intensifying cooperation between the EU
and NATO'
Criteria
Adequacy
Argument
High
Intensifying the collaboration between NATO and the EU by using
advanced technologies to exchange and analyse information would
benefit both partners. Although the development of such
technologies could be expensive, the benefits would far exceed the
costs.
Low
Despite the good relationship between NATO and the EU, the
creation of new technical mechanisms to exchange information is
limited by political obstacles. Some NATO Allies (mainly the USA)
could be reluctant to share information with EU countries that use
Chinese technology in their communications infrastructure.
High
Improving cooperation between NATO and the EU in an issue as
crucial as information sharing would undoubtedly contribute to
enhancing capabilities in countering hybrid threats. The
participation of all Member States in the Hybrid CoE would also
increase the EU's resilience as a whole.
Medium
Strengthening collaboration between NATO and the EU by
developing technological systems to exchange information would
involve significant initial investments. In the medium and long term,
those systems should be constantly updated to cope with both the
natural progress of digital technologies and the evolving nature of
hybrid threats.
Medium
Past tensions between NATO allies (specifically between the USA
and EU countries) regarding public spending on defence could arise
again after the Covid-19 crisis, as countries will dedicate further
public investment to economic recovery and to improving public
health systems, to the detriment of defence spending. The 2020 US
presidential election is another relevant milestone for testing NATO
allies' willingness to deepen information-sharing.
Coherence with EU
objectives
High
This policy is totally coherent with EU objectives, as it seeks to
enhance the protection of Member States against hybrid threats. The
improvement of international cooperation is highlighted in all EU
recommendations and plans as one of the main means to achieve
and adequate level of protection.
Potential
ethical, social and
regulatory impacts
Medium
Strengthening bonds with NATO could provoke social rejection in
some EU countries.
Costs and benefits
Feasibility
Effectiveness
Sustainability
Risks and
uncertainties
6.6.4. Development of training exercises on countering hybrid threats involving
all stakeholders
In 2018, the EU Hybrid Exercise Multilayer 18 (EU HEX-ML 18), the first parallel and coordinated exercise
(PACE) including hybrid elements, took place. The overall objective was 'to improve and enhance, in a
safe-to-fail environment, the EU's ability to respond a complex crisis of a hybrid nature with an internal
and an external dimension, as well as to improve cooperation with NATO' (European Council, 2018d,
p. 7). The exercise tried to test the EU's ability to deal with international crises that involve components
111
STOA | Panel for the Future of Science and Technology
of hybrid threats such as disinformation, foreign influence, cyberattacks, etc. The exercise involved
diverse EU departments from the European External Action Service, the European Commission, the
European Council, Member States, and other non-EU participants. However, as hybrid threats affect the
whole economy and society, participation in future exercises should not be limited to public bodies
but should also include private stakeholders from both fields, particularly those directly involved in
dealing with key components of hybrid threats such as disinformation (media outlets, social platforms,
etc.) or cybersecurity.
Table 27: Assessment matrix for the policy option 'Development of training exercises on
countering hybrid threats involving all stakeholders'
Criteria
Adequacy
Argument
Medium
Organising training exercises at the EU level involves relevant costs,
while the benefits are difficult to estimate.
Medium
Developing training exercises that involve the private sector is a
difficult task. It would entail selecting some representatives who
would need to devote significant efforts to preparing themselves for
the training exercise, and informing the whole sector about the
results.
Medium
Training exercises can improve the preparedness of public
institutions and private stakeholders. However, as the success of
hybrid threats is based on their constant evolution (both in terms of
content and technical means), the lessons learnt from the training
exercises can quickly become obsolete.
Sustainability
Medium
Preparation of training exercises involves great effort for all
stakeholders involved, particularly for private companies. Therefore,
the periodicity of these exercises would need to be greater than if
they only involved public institutions.
Risks and
uncertainties
Medium
Private stakeholders could be reluctant to participate in training
exercises. Such exercises could be considered an unproductive task
with low economic return.
Coherence with EU
objectives
High
As hybrid threats try to destabilise the EU and its Member States as a
whole, all stakeholders, public and private, should participate in any
initiative aimed at countering them. Thus, this policy is aligned with
the EU objective of involving the whole economy and society in the
fight against hybrid threats.
Potential
ethical, social and
regulatory impacts
High
This policy does not entail any potential ethical, social or regulatory
impact at the EU or national level.
Costs and benefits
Feasibility
Effectiveness
6.6.5. Increasing operational intelligence capability at the EU level
Intelligence services are essential in the fight against hybrid threats. They detect malicious activities in
the digital domain that may be related to hybrid attacks, as well as attributing such activity to its real
perpetrator. Intelligence services are primarily a national competence and play a key role in the national
security strategy of each Member State. The EU Intelligence Analysis and Situation Centre (INTCEN) is
the EU body responsible for providing intelligence services in the civilian sphere. The Hybrid Fusion
Cell was established in 2016 as part of the EU INTCEN to enhance EU intelligence capabilities and to
improve cooperation with Member States' intelligence services.
112
Strategic communications as a key factor in countering hybrid threats
The EU INTCEN's mandate focuses on providing intelligence-based analysis and assessments (mainly
reports and briefings) to EU bodies and policymakers, based on the information collected through
open-source intelligence tools (OSINT) and information provided by Member States on a voluntary
basis (European Council, 2019a). However, countries are usually only willing to share intelligence
information or participate in joint intelligence bodies if they consider that it benefits their interests
(Fägersten, B., 2016). Thus, the EU's ability to access intelligence information is limited to what Member
States are willing to share, and to the collection through OSINT tools. In this scenario, given that the EU
as a whole is increasingly being targeted by promoters of hybrid threats, it would be advisable to
increase its operational intelligence capabilities through diverse options:
•
Transforming the EU INTCEN into an EU Intelligence Agency with an appropriate budget and
resources. The new agency should only be aimed at dealing with EU-related issues, without
interfering national intelligence services.
•
Leveraging the wide network of EU delegations in third countries to incorporate intelligence
staff dependent on the EU INTCEN or the proposed EU Intelligence Agency.
Table 28: Assessment matrix for the policy option 'Increasing operational intelligence
capability at the EU level'
Criteria
Argument
Medium
Although the costs of improving the EU's operational intelligence
capabilities would be very high, it would allow the EU to be better
prepared to tackle hybrid threats and support Member States to deal
with them.
Low
Intelligence services remain a national competence and Member
States could interpret the reinforcement of EU intelligence
operational capabilities as interference in their own intelligence
services. In fact, some countries have already showed their
reluctance towards the creation of an EU Intelligence Agency. 60
Effectiveness
Medium
The EU's new operational capabilities in the field of intelligence
services should be coordinated with national intelligence services.
There would be a risk of duplicating structures, which can reduce the
effectiveness of the measures adopted.
Sustainability
Low
Increasing operational intelligence capability at EU level could be
very expensive in the mid and long term.
Risks and
uncertainties
Medium
Bureaucracy could limit the benefits posed by the enhanced
operational intelligence capabilities of the EU, as it may slow down
responses and reduce their effectiveness.
Coherence with EU
objectives
High
As EU institutions and bodies are also being targeted by hybrid
threats, the EU itself should have its own operational intelligence
capability, in order to address them without having to depend on
the willingness of Member States to share information.
Potential
ethical, social and
regulatory impacts
Medium
Increasing EU operational intelligence capabilities would involve
redefining the current role of diverse EU bodies, and new regulation
should be enacted to that end.
Costs and benefits
Feasibility
60
Adequacy
https://www.politico.eu/article/germany-rejects-creating-european-intelligence-agency/
113
STOA | Panel for the Future of Science and Technology
6.6.6. Development of the European Cybersurveillance Tool (ECT)
An intelligence unit like the Hybrid Fusion Cell, or the intelligence agency proposed in the previous
policy option, should encompass involving activities of information collection, processing and analysis
as well as reporting for decision making. To achieve their objectives, intelligence units could be
supported by a European Cybersurveillance Tool (ECT), which is proposed with the aim of
establishing the preventive markers, presence indicators and constituent features that will make it
possible to identify the new threats looming over cyberspace in an early, consensual and evidencebased manner. The Computer Emergence Response Team for EU institutions (CERT-EU) manages a
cyber threat intelligence service (CERT-EU, 2019) and Europol operates the European Cybercrime
Centre (EC3). 61 Both services could be the basis for the European Cybersurveillance Tool.
This cybersurveillance tool would facilitate monitoring of open sources, as well as profiling media and
social networking entities. To this end, it should have a standardised database for information
exchange and data exploitation using mistrust indicators. In this way, the tool would contribute to
improving cybersurveillance capacities, allowing what is happening in cyberspace to be monitored and
interpreted from a digital perspective.
The modules of this tool may be:
•
Collection and analysis of digital sources with harmful content.
•
A scorecard, containing all the information necessary for decision-making.
•
Risk-based predictive analysis.
•
Mechanisms for dissemination of the results obtained to the institutional actors involved
(strategic communications).
The European Cybersurveillance Tool should be available to any EU institution or Member State.
Table 29: Assessment matrix for the policy option 'Development of the European
Cybersurveillance Tool (ECT)'
Criteria
Argument
High
The design, development and operation of the ECT, which is
continuously fed with data from the EU and its Member States,
would be a significant step forward in countering the threats
identified. Although the cost could be high, the benefits would far
outweigh it.
Feasibility
Medium
Although the development of the ECT will not entail excessive
difficulties, the tool will only be useful if it is permanently fed with
data, in near-real time, which may lead to difficulties in
implementation.
Effectiveness
High
Real-time analysis of events affecting the EU and its Member States
would significantly help the fight against these threats.
Sustainability
Medium
The ECT should be technologically up-to-date, so constant
investments would be required.
Risks and
uncertainties
Medium
The implementation of a cybersurveillance tool such as the one
proposed would require the permanent participation of Member
Costs and benefits
61
Adequacy
https://www.europol.europa.eu/about-europol/european-cybercrime-centre-ec3
114
Strategic communications as a key factor in countering hybrid threats
States, especially in data feeding, which brings a certain degree of
uncertainty to the initiative.
Coherence with EU
objectives
High
The development and implementation of the ECT is consistent with
the EU's objectives, as it would contribute to improving the EU's
capabilities in countering hybrid threats.
Potential
ethical, social and
regulatory impacts
Medium
Enhanced cybersurveillance capacity at the EU level could raise
social and ethical concerns regarding respect for fundamental rights
such as privacy, freedom of expression, etc.
6.6.7. Increasing public-private collaboration
Private stakeholders are an essential part of the solution to hybrid threats. Most of the information used
to prevent, detect, attribute and respond to hybrid threats comes from the private sector.
Telecommunication operators, cybersecurity firms, media outlets, social media platforms, utility
companies or financial companies, amongst others, have relevant information that would help fight
against hybrid threats.
Cooperation between private companies and public authorities in the prosecution of crimes is clearly
regulated by national and EU legislation. However, mechanisms for sharing information, gathering
evidences or verifying authorship of hybrid threats, which may not be a crime or may not yet have been
committed, are less clear. It is, therefore, necessary to create the appropriate regulatory framework and
foster dialogue between public authorities and private companies to find the best ways to increase
information sharing. In order to encourage the private sector to share the information it collects, public
institutions should be able to adequately respond to private companies' legitimate concerns, such as
legal liability, and brand reputation due to potential exposure of their own vulnerabilities (Kremidas, C.,
2019).
Cooperation between the private sector and public institutions regarding the management of
information to counter hybrid threats is not limited to information sharing. Private companies could
also collaborate in analysing of such information to detect trends and patterns that could help to
prevent hybrid threats. To this end, public and private datasets should be made available to companies,
academic and research institutions, civil society organisations and individual researchers. While the reuse of public sector information has mainly been for commercial purposes, it can also be applied to
countering hybrid threats. Public institutions should create enough incentives for private agents to
collaborate.
Table 30: Assessment matrix for the policy option 'Increasing public-private collaboration'
Criteria
Costs and benefits
Feasibility
Adequacy
Argument
High
Fostering the participation of private agents by both encouraging
them to share their information and engaging them in the analysis
of public information would undoubtedly contribute to improving
the EU's capabilities in tackling hybrid threat s. This policy may have a
cost for some private companies, but the benefit to the common
good far exceeds these costs.
Medium
The EU should create interesting incentives (public recognition,
economic support, etc.) to encourage private actors to share their
information. However, companies could be reluctant to do so if it
affects their business model or puts them at a competitive
disadvantage.
115
STOA | Panel for the Future of Science and Technology
Effectiveness
Sustainability
Risks and
uncertainties
Coherence with EU
objectives
Potential
ethical, social and
regulatory impacts
High
Combination of public and private information, as well as increasing
the information analysis capability by adding private resources could
substantially improve the EU's preparedness to face hybrid threats.
High
Once possible legal barriers are overcome and a cooperation
agreement is reached, sustainability over time depends solely on
parties' commitment and maintenance of the investment necessary
for implementation.
Medium
Collaboration requires trust. Once the terms of the public-private
collaboration have been established, and all parties respect such
terms, there should not be any problem.
Uncertainties may arise, particularly in certain Member States and/or
regions due to a lack of legal certainty and political stability.
High
Medium
This policy is perfectly aligned with EU objectives, as the fight
against hybrid threats involves the whole economy and society.
Incentivising the private sector's participation in such a fight is
coherent with the holistic approach to tackling hybrid threats that
the EU seeks to create.
The private sector's collaboration in identifying authors of hybrid
threats may imply the need for legal changes, as well as changes to
the terms and conditions of use of some services.
Potential conflicts with data protection regulations and limitations
to freedom of speech may also arise.
6.7. Policies related to the digital technology gap between the EU
and its competitors
6.7.1. Increasing R&D investment and financial support for start-ups, and
scaling up companies related to digital technologies
Digital technologies are essential tools in the fight against hybrid threats. However, key applications
supporting the creation of strategic communications are developed outside the EU's borders. This
increases the risks of misuse of information and data. The recent controversy about the participation
of Chinese 5G equipment vendors in the development of European 5G networks is a clear example of
the problems that the digital technological gap between the EU and its main competitors can cause.
With regards to another technology essential to supporting strategic communications, artificial
intelligence, around €3.2 billion was invested in research and innovation in Europe in 2016 by both the
public and private sectors. In the same period, around €12.1 billion and €6.5 billion was invested in
North America and Asia, respectively (European Commission, 2020c). Clearly, the EU is falling behind
when it comes to supporting a critical industry for the security of the Union.
Supporting tech start-ups and helping promising ones to scale up is also indispensable in order to
ensure appropriate technological sovereignty and protect the EU against hybrid threats without
having to rely on foreign technology. In 2019, European investment in start-ups reached
US$34.3 billion, while Asia and the USA reached US$62.5 and US$116.7 billion, respectively (Atomico,
2020). Although the EU has launched diverse funding opportunities for start-ups (like the programme
Startup Europe), further support is needed if the EU wants to reduce its dependence on foreign
technology to protect itself against hybrid threats.
116
Strategic communications as a key factor in countering hybrid threats
Table 31: Assessment matrix for the policy option 'Increasing R&D investments and financial
support for start-ups and scaling up companies related to digital technologies'
Criteria
Adequacy
Argument
Medium
The benefits resulting from investment should balance out the
economic efforts. A strong European IT industry in key areas to
counter hybrid threats and independence from other countries in
key infrastructures should be expected. However, initial costs are
high while results are expected in the medium and long term.
Feasibility
Medium
These policies have already been developed by the EU. The political
commitment of EU Member States should remain unchanged.
However, the upcoming economic crisis caused by Covid-19 adds
uncertainty to any European budgetary issue.
Effectiveness
Medium
Public funds are expected to produce positive outputs. But
economic uncertainty makes it difficult to ensure the effectiveness of
policies directly related to the market and industries.
Sustainability
Low
Economic uncertainty makes difficult to guarantee a constant flow of
funding in the medium and long term.
Risks and
uncertainties
Low
The upcoming economic crisis due to the impact of the Covid-19
puts both the viability of increasing funding and the positive outputs
expected from investments at risk. In addition, there are
uncertainties surrounding the real and feasible applications of these
advanced technologies.
Coherence with EU
objectives
High
The options suggested are aligned with the EU's position regarding
the relevance of investing in digital technologies for the future of the
Union.
Potential
ethical, social and
regulatory impacts
High
No ethical, social or regulatory impacts have been identified.
Costs and benefits
6.7.2. Developing industrial policies for key technologies (5G, AI, IoT,
blockchain)
The development of industrial policies for key digital technologies is needed to increase the
competitiveness of the EU ICT sector and to leverage the impact of economic investments in R&D.
According to a recent ENISA Consultation Paper (ENISA, 2019), there are some aspects of the European
ICT industry where the EU can act proactively in order to stablish an ICT industrial policy. As ENISA
mentions, the first issue is identifying market segments where the EU ICT industry has the possibility to
be competitive. In this case, the segments could include advanced technologies that help counter
hybrid threats. The second is keeping the intellectual property developed in Europe within the EU, as
well as avoiding the loss of European businesses with high potential by them being taken over by big
companies from outside the EU. The third is the use of European standards to turn European diversity
(several countries and languages) into a strength. Such issues should be taken into account to develop
coherent industrial policies in key technologies for countering hybrid threats, which would
undoubtedly contribute to an increase in European technological sovereignty.
117
STOA | Panel for the Future of Science and Technology
Table 32: Assessment matrix for the policy option 'Developing industrial policies for new
technologies (5G, AI, IoT, blockchain)'
Criteria
Adequacy
Argument
High
Despite the high costs of investments, the benefits obtained from a
Tier 1 ICT industry and ICT EU sovereignty would be greater.
Feasibility
Medium
New industrial policy means new negotiations and commitments
between Member States. Since certain countries would benefit more
than others due to the irregular distribution of the European ICT
industry between countries, some Member States could be less
willing to commit. In addition, a shift towards national protectionism
in order to face the economic consequences of Covid-19 could
increase resistance to supporting industrial policies at the EU level.
Effectiveness
Medium
Due to fact that other parties, apart from the EU, participate in ICT
competition, the outputs of the policy do only not depend only on
the EU performance.
Sustainability
Medium
An ambitious ICT industrial policy involves a huge amount of initial
investment, with the expectation of wealth creation in the medium
term. With the upcoming economic crisis due to Covid-19, the
capacity and willingness of Member States and the EU to carry out
such investment could decrease.
Risks and
uncertainties
Medium
The main risks and uncertainties come from the performance of EU
competitors in the ICT sector (the USA and China) and the current
economic and political uncertainty due to Covid-19.
High
The Communication from the Commission for a European Industrial
Renaissance set out the key priorities for industrial policies. It
included innovation and technological advancement as a main
source of competitiveness for EU industry (European Commission,
2014a).
Costs and benefits
Coherence with EU
objectives
Potential
ethical, social and
regulatory impacts
Some inequalities between Member States can be displayed and even
produced from the development of ICT industrial policies. Developing
ICT industrial policies could also lead to the rise of competition issues.
Medium
New industrial policies could feed protectionist tendencies in
Member States, which are already appearing during the
management of the Covid-19 crisis.
6.8. Policies aimed at supporting the use of digital channels to fight
against hybrid threats
6.8.1. Allowing public authorities to exceptionally intervene in digital services
to counteract hybrid threats
Electronic communication laws usually allow public authorities to exceptionally intervene in
telecommunication networks and services when specific events affecting public order or national
security take place. This authorisation could be extended to also encompass digital services such as
messaging services (WhatsApp, Line, Facebook Messenger, etc.), social networks and other widely used
applications, with the intention of limiting action taken by promoters of hybrid threats, or warning the
population about the effects of such threats.
118
Strategic communications as a key factor in countering hybrid threats
Table 33: Assessment matrix for the policy option 'Allowing public authorities to exceptionally
intervene in digital services to counteract hybrid threats'
Criteria
Adequacy
Argument
High
Benefits of the intervention would be high, as it would allow the
majority of the population to be informed about an exceptional
event related to hybrid threats at a very low cost.
Feasibility
Low
Any private service intervention should be proportionated, carefully
assessed and well justified. The intervention can be contested by
civil society and providers. Not all EU countries may agree with such
interventionist measures.
Effectiveness
High
The effectiveness of the policy would be high, as public authorities
could warn large population groups rapidly and at a very low cost.
Sustainability
High
The policy does not involve economic expenditure for public
authorities. It could entail costs for digital service providers, but they
would not be high.
Risks and
uncertainties
Low
This regulation could be risky, as it opens up opportunities for
authoritarian governments to use intervention not only when
exceptional circumstances occur, but also to suppress any attempt at
protest.
Coherence with EU
objectives
High
The policy is aligned with the Security Union Strategy 2020-2025.
Potential
ethical, social and
regulatory impacts
Low
The amendment of telecommunication regulation to extend
intervention to digital services could have great regulatory impacts,
as well as facing strong social rejection.
Costs and benefits
6.8.2. Improving law enforcement in 5G networks
According to the report Internet Organised Crime Threat Assessment (IOCTA) 2018¸ produced by Europol,
'5G poses a number of particular challenges for law enforcement. The ability of 5G technology to
download data from multiples sources (such as Wi-Fi, network towers and satellite) simultaneously will
make the investigation of communication events increasingly complex. Moreover, with current 4G
technology law enforcement is able to use the unique identifier assigned to a device to attribute the
device to an individual, but 5G replaces this with a temporary identifier, making attribution challenging'
(Europol, 2018, p. 60). Lawful interception of communications will be more difficult in 5G networks,
hindering police work. Promoters of hybrid threats could leverage this issue to act with greater
impunity.
The EU should promote the development of tools that help overcome these disadvantages of 5G
networks in terms of law enforcement.
119
STOA | Panel for the Future of Science and Technology
Table 34: Assessment matrix for the policy option 'Improving law enforcement in 5G networks'
Criteria
Adequacy
Argument
Costs and benefits
Medium
Development costs of technological tools to facilitate lawful
intervention in communications could be very high. However, the
benefits of improving law enforcement would also be high for
society security.
Feasibility
Medium
5G networks are already operative in many countries and standards
are not easy to modify. Additional technical solutions will have to be
developed to support police work.
Effectiveness
High
Improving law enforcement in 5G networks will contribute to
detecting and preventing attempts to use such networks for
developing hybrid attacks.
Sustainability
Low
Technical solutions may require constant updates to cope with
criminals' ability to leverage the potential of 5G networks. This could
involve high costs.
Risks and
uncertainties
Medium
Criminals are increasingly sophisticated and could be capable of
leveraging 5G networks get ahead while the police try to catch up
technologically.
Coherence with EU
objectives
High
The policy is aligned with the Security Union Strategy 2020-2025.
Potential
ethical, social and
regulatory impacts
High
No ethical, social or regulatory impacts are identified, as this is a
technical upgrade to systems and applications that already work in
4G networks.
6.9. Policies aimed at defining proactive approaches to dealing with
hybrid threats
6.9.1. Strengthening the EU's vision and values outside the EU borders
The EU carries out an intense external action through CFSP (Common Foreign and Security Policy) and
CSDP (Common Security and Defence Policy) instruments to help foreign countries deal with
humanitarian crises, stand for human rights, reinforce democratic institutions and peace processes in
conflictive areas, and to strengthen close cooperation and engagement with neighbouring countries.
The following figure summarises the CSDP's ongoing missions and operations:
120
Strategic communications as a key factor in countering hybrid threats
Figure 10: EU CSDP missions and operations 2020
Source: European External Action Service
Regarding the global strategy of the EU's Foreign and Security Policy, mechanisms such as those
included in the FPI's (Foreign Policy Instruments) financial toolbox and the FPI's regulatory toolbox62
are used to promote democracy, build alliances, prevent conflicts and respond to crises.
All these instruments should be used to spread the EU's vision and values across the world. Specific
communication strategies should be included, with adequate budget and staff, to promote the EU's
principles and worldview amongst diverse audiences (citizens, policy-makers, politicians, civil society
organisations) in the countries where such instruments are deployed. The Strategic Communications
division at the EEAS, as well as its task forces, should actively collaborate in the definition and
implementation of such strategies.
Table 35: Assessment matrix for the policy option 'Strengthening the EU's vision and values
outside EU borders'
Criteria
62
Adequacy
Argument
Costs and benefits
Medium
The cost of implementing effective strategic communications in
CFSP missions can be high. Additionally, the benefits of such
strategy are usually expected in the mid and long term.
Feasibility
High
As strategic communications are gaining momentum to counter
hybrid threats, it is a good time to incorporate them into the EU's
external action missions.
Effectiveness
Medium
Changing minds and beliefs is a complex and long-term task.
Communication strategies should not be limited to occasional and
isolated activities to be effective.
https://ec.europa.eu/fpi/what-we-do_en
121
STOA | Panel for the Future of Science and Technology
Sustainability
Low
Proactive strategic communications should be maintained over a
long time to be effective. This would imply sustained economic
effort after the mission is accomplished.
Risks and
uncertainties
Medium
Policy-makers usually seek results in the short term, so they may rule
out measures whose goals can only be achieved in the mid and long
term.
Coherence with EU
objectives
High
The spreading of the EU's values and worldview is totally coherent
with EU objectives, which seek to extend democracy and the rule of
law all over the world.
Potential
ethical, social and
regulatory impacts
Medium
The EU could be accused of wanting to extend its worldview without
respecting local characteristics and traditions.
6.9.2. Supporting free journalism against disinformation
Free journalism and media freedom are key pillars of democracy and essential instruments to counter
hybrid threats, particularly disinformation. Free journalism contributes to developing better informed
and more engaged citizens, who are more aware of the existence of disinformation and, therefore, less
likely to be influenced by it. Free journalism is also necessary to guarantee freedom of expression and
the ideological plurality that characterises democracies. In this sense, supporting free journalism can
be deemed a proactive measure to improve society's resilience to disinformation and any attempt to
restrict freedom of expression.
The EU has already defined diverse tools to promote and support free journalism:
•
In 2014, the Council enacted the EU human rights guidelines on online and offline freedom of
expression (European Council, 2014). The guidelines included diverse instruments
(monitorisation, financial aids, diplomatic support, etc.) to improve free journalism in EU and
candidate countries.
•
The European Commission has implemented several actions to promote media freedom and
pluralism: support for the Centre for Media Pluralism and Media Freedom63 to monitoring risks
for free journalism; definition of guidelines for EU support for media freedom and media
integrity in enlargement countries; economic support for media freedom projects. 64
•
The European External Action Service annually supports World Press Freedom Day.
Despite these efforts, free journalism and media freedom are still threatened in many countries.
Although there are significant levels of free journalism within the EU (with some exceptions), 65 press
freedom in the main promoters of disinformation is almost inexistent. While Russia ranks 149th out of
180 countries, in the 2020 World Press Freedom Index of the NGO Reporters Without Borders, China
ranks 177th. In the countries where most disinformation is created, there is hardly any counterbalance
in the form of free journalism.
Acknowledging the great work done by the EU to promote free journalism across the world, further
efforts are still needed in the countries most vulnerable to disinformation. Although the EU may have
63
https://cmpf.eui.eu/media-pluralism-monitor/
64
https://ec.europa.eu/digital-single-market/en/media-freedom-projects
65
According to the 2020 World Press Freedom Index, produced by the NGO Reporters Without Borders, 15 of the top-30
countries are EU countries. However, 5 EU countries (Poland, Greece, Malta, Hungary, Bulgaria) are outside the top-60. For
more information visit: https://rsf.org/en/ranking_table?sort=asc&order=Ranking
122
Strategic communications as a key factor in countering hybrid threats
little opportunity to support free journalism in countries that lead in terms of disinformation (Russia
and China), it should focus its efforts on those countries under the influence of disinformation leaders,
mainly former Soviet Republics and African countries.
Table 36: Assessment matrix for the policy option 'Supporting free journalism against
disinformation'
Criteria
Adequacy
Argument
High
Improving media freedom and free journalism in the countries most
vulnerable to disinformation can contribute to limiting its effects.
The cost would not be too high.
Feasibility
High
This policy option should not raise any concern at the political level.
Its practical implementation could be more difficult and adequate
instruments (funds, collaboration with EU journalists and media
outlets, etc.) should be defined.
Effectiveness
Medium
Free journalism can improve citizens' levels of awareness about
disinformation and thus hamper its goals. However, the results are
not immediate and could take a long time to materialise.
Sustainability
High
As costs to support media freedom would not be very high, actions
could be maintained over time.
Medium
Some current policy trends (rising populist movements, polarisation
of society, shifts in the geopolitical arena after the Covid-19 crisis)
can lead to reduced citizens' confidence in media outlets and press.
Thus, measures to promote media freedom could be useless.
Coherence with EU
objectives
High
Freedom of expression and information is enshrined as a
fundamental right in the EU, so any measure aimed at promoting
such freedom, both inside and outside EU borders, is totally
coherent with EU objectives.
Potential
ethical, social and
regulatory impacts
High
This policy option would not involve any ethical, social or regulatory
concern.
Costs and benefits
Risks and
uncertainties
6.9.3. Mandatory creation of StratCom units at the highest level in EU countries
and institutions
Any EU country or institution that seeks to adapt its response to hybrid threats in the informational
arena from a reactive to a proactive approach should have a coherent and clear communication
strategy. Strategic communications are key elements in countering disinformation, and all EU countries
and the main EU institutions should create units devoted to defining, implementing and monitoring
them at the highest level. Such units should control the flow of information from the country or
institution to the public. They should also be responsible for coordinating all activities related to
collecting intelligence and knowledge about potential threats, defining the appropriate strategy and
timing to spread the information, and engaging diverse stakeholders (media outlets, civil society,
influencers, enterprises, etc.) to improve the impact of communications. These units should be made
up of communication professionals, intelligence experts, military experts, technicians specialised in
data analytics and artificial intelligence, representatives from the civil society and the economic sector,
amongst others. The units should have enough competencies to access information, to some extent,
from different departments (domestic and foreign affairs, defence, economy, and others) and to lead
123
STOA | Panel for the Future of Science and Technology
them when specific campaigns are developed. The EU should urge Member States and its own
institutions and agencies to create such units. In order to improve their efficiency and coordination,
specific guidelines about the objectives, competences, structure, and operation should be prepared by
the EU.
Table 37: Assessment matrix for the policy option 'Mandatory creation of StratCom units at the
highest level in EU countries and institutions'
Criteria
Adequacy
Argument
Medium
The costs of creating StratCom units at the highest level in all EU
countries and institutions would be high while the benefits would
depend on how such units are managed.
Feasibility
Low
Member States could consider strategic communications as a
national competence, and the EU could not oblige them to create
such units. Additionally, other institutions inside national
governments may not be willing to share information with those
units, hampering its operations.
Effectiveness
High
StratCom units could help Member States and EU institutions to
improve their communication capacities, unifying actions in a single
body and making them more effective.
Sustainability
Low
The costs of maintaining StratCom units would increase over time, as
they would have to be technologically up-to-date to properly deal
with evolving hybrid threats.
Risks and
uncertainties
Low
StratCom units should be left out of the political struggle and should
maintain stability beyond each term, avoiding their politicisation.
Coherence with EU
objectives
High
StratCom units in Member States and EU institutions would facilitate
the fight against disinformation, improving coordination and unified
responses in the whole EU.
Potential
ethical, social and
regulatory impacts
Low
The creation of StratCom units would have relevant regulatory
impact, as diverse national legislation should be modified to
facilitate information-sharing between departments.
Costs and benefits
6.9.4. Creation of an EU news agency to ensure veracity of information
After 2019, when measures to combat disinformation linked to the numerous electoral processes
throughout the EU seemed to have been successful, the Covid-19 crisis has led to the outbreak of
harmful disinformation campaigns that have affected diverse Member States and the EU as a whole.
Recent examples, such as the false accusation that 5G networks spread the coronavirus, which has led
to arson attacks against mobile phone masts in several EU countries (Cerulus, L., 2020), or the false
recommendation to drink bleach to protect oneself against the coronavirus, show their growing
danger. As the High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy declared,
'disinformation can kill' (disinfo.eu, 2020).
EU attempts to debunk disinformation have been so far limited and with scarce impact on public
opinion. The most important initiative (the website EUvsDISINFO, created by the EEAS East StratCom
Task Force) is only focused on debunking Kremlin disinformation operations against the EU, and it only
offers all the information in English and Russian (a small amount of content related to the Covid-19 has
been translated into German, French, Italian and Spanish). Given the growing impact of disinformation
related to Covid-19 amongst European citizens, the European Parliament itself, in a resolution on the
124
Strategic communications as a key factor in countering hybrid threats
EU coordinated action to combat the Covid-19 pandemic and its consequences, urged the EU 'to
establish a European information source, in all official languages to ensure that all citizens have access
to accurate and verified information' (European Parliament, 2020, p. 11). This kind of European
information source, which could take the form of an EU news agency, should be the official voice of the
EU and all EU institutions should follow its guidelines when communicating, not only during the
Covid-19 crisis but also when dealing with future disinformation campaigns.
Table 38: Assessment matrix for the policy option 'Creation of an EU news agency to ensure
veracity of information'
Criteria
Adequacy
Argument
Medium
The costs of creating a unique source of information for the whole
EU in all EU official languages would be very high. However, it would
allow to offer an image of unity of all EU institutions which could
reinforce the messages transmitted.
Feasibility
Low
It would be very difficult for all EU institutions to leave their
communication in the hands of an independent body. Coordination
between the new EU news agency and other institutions would be
highly complex.
Effectiveness
High
Journalists, media outlets, policy-makers and any other stakeholder
could have a unified source of information related to EU matters, and
verifying of the information would be much easier.
Sustainability
Low
The creation of this kind of EU body would involve high costs in a
context of budget reduction and economic crisis due to the Covid-19
pandemic.
Risks and
uncertainties
Low
The creation of this kind of EU body would involve high costs and
some political parties may prefer to allocate their budget to other
areas.
Coherence with EU
objectives
High
The EU news agency would be highly aligned with EU objectives of
combating disinformation and reinforcing the EU's image abroad.
Medium
The EU news agency could collide with national public agencies and
other institutions devoted to ensuring the veracity of information
(fact-checking initiatives). The creation of such an agency would also
require intense regulatory work to oblige other EU institutions to
collaborate.
Costs and benefits
Potential
ethical, social and
regulatory impacts
6.9.5. Improving diplomatic relations with countries considered strategic
challenges
The European Union's values in the field of security and diplomacy include promoting stability, security,
prosperity, democracy, fundamental freedoms and the rule of law at the international level. That is why
the EU cannot remove any country from its diplomatic work, even if its activity could be considered a
strategic challenge. Additionally, the economic ties between the EU and some of the countries most
actively promoting hybrid threats (China and Russia) are so tight that the best way to reduce such
threats could be to improve diplomatic relations.
Relation with Russia, which was a 'strategic partner' of the EU between 1991 and 2014, has become 'the
most important strategic challenge for the EU' (European External Action Service, 2016a). At the
international level, both the United States and France have made diplomatic approaches to Russia, in
125
STOA | Panel for the Future of Science and Technology
an attempt to re-integrate it again as a member of the G8, from which it was expelled after the
annexation of Crimea (Atwood, K. & Klein, B., 2019).
Over the last few years, China and the EU have also moved closer together on major issues on the global
agenda such as the defence of free trade, global sustainable development and multilateralism
(European Commission and the High Representative, 2019). At the press conference on the EU-China
Strategic Dialogue in June 2020, the High Representative, Josep Borrell, highlighted the need to have
a balanced and reciprocal approach to this cooperation, in areas such as connectivity, free trade,
scientific cooperation, and also media and cultural cooperation. He stressed the need to 'engage with
China to achieve our global objectives, based on our interests and values' (European External Action
Service, 2020).
Further development of diplomatic relationships with both countries could be a way to reduce the
state-sponsored hybrid threats coming from them.
Table 39: Assessment matrix for the policy option 'Improving diplomatic relations with
countries considered strategic challenges'
Criteria
Adequacy
Argument
High
Establishing protocols and diplomatic measures in order to be able
to solve possible disputes without resorting to hybrid threats could
benefit the EU without incurring excessive costs.
Feasibility
Low
Although the EU and some of its Member States are gradually trying
to draw closer to certain countries that are considered a strategic
challenge, it is important that the EU does not give in on its
principles, values and organisational cohesion. The EU's vision and
values are so different from those of challenging countries that
diplomacy alone would not be enough to prevent hybrid threats
from those countries.
Effectiveness
High
If certain diplomatic approaches could be reached between the EU
and Russia and China, the hybrid attacks from those countries
against the EU and its Member States could decrease.
Sustainability
Low
While ideally all disputes would be resolved through diplomatic
channels, not all problems can be solved equally. New controversies
between the EU and Russia and China, which might not be solved by
diplomatic means, could periodically trigger new hybrid threats.
Risks and
uncertainties
Low
The risks are also high as diplomatic solutions can lead to the EU
being perceived as weak in the international sphere.
Medium
As we have already pointed out, the EU cannot surrender its
principles to countries whose democracy is questioned (or is not
democratic at all) and whose values may not coincide with those of
the Union. That is why establishing a dialogue with actors who may
attack the basic pillars of the rule of law or democratic principles
cannot always be possible.
Medium
Dialogue and diplomacy are essential and unquestionable values
within the EU and should always be the first option considered when
resolving any kind of international conflict. However, entering into
dialogue with countries that have little respect for human rights
might be perceived as inconsistent by European society.
Costs and benefits
Coherence with EU
objectives
Potential
ethical, social and
regulatory impacts
126
Strategic communications as a key factor in countering hybrid threats
7. Conclusions
Hybrid threats: a growing menace to the EU
The hybrid threats that European countries have faced, and still face, have specific objectives that seek
to harm them as individual targets, but they are also part of an overall strategy to destabilise the EU
(Fiott, D. & Parkes, R., 2019). As a result, the EU has launched numerous initiatives 66 at the strategic,
tactical and operational levels, especially since 2014, aimed at responding to the hybrid threats faced
by its Member States and its neighbouring countries.
From the point of view of information and communications, the main pillar of EU action to counter
hybrid threats is the fight against disinformation. As we have already seen, disinformation is defined by
the European Commission as 'verifiably false or misleading information created, presented and
disseminated for economic gain or to intentionally deceive the public, and may cause public harm'
(European Commission, 2018b, p. 3). It seeks to undermine citizens' trust in democratic processes and
institutions, including electoral systems, intensifying political polarisation, challenging social cohesion
or social models and generating confusion about geopolitical events. Its ultimate goal is to destabilise
the target: both the country or region attacked and the EU as a whole.
Strategic communications: an appropriate means to deal with disinformation
Strategic communications comprise a 'systematic series of sustained and coherent activities,
conducted across strategic, operational and tactical levels, that enables understanding of target
audiences, identifies effective conduits, and develops and promotes ideas and opinions through those
conduits to promote and sustain particular types of behaviour' (Tatham, S., 2008, p. 3). They are
considered one of the main ways to respond quickly and effectively to disinformation campaigns.
Therefore, they have become one of the top priorities of European security policy and external action.
In brief, the actions implemented by the EU so far aim at:
•
Enhancing cooperation and information-sharing between Member States and EU institutions
to identify and jointly respond to disinformation.
•
Mobilising the private sector to tackle disinformation (technology providers, digital platforms,
social networks, advertisers and the advertising industry).
•
Supporting high quality information by empowering journalists and fact-checkers to deal with
disinformation.
•
Raising awareness and media literacy amongst citizens.
Nevertheless, analysis of the evolution and chronology of Europe's response to the growing impact of
hybrid threats shows that it has been largely reactive, and the EU still lacks an offensive, and not merely
defensive, strategic communication response to these threats (European Parliament, 2016d).
As Daniel Fiott and Roderick Parkes pointed out in a recent Chaillot Paper from the European Union
Institute for Security Studies (EUISS), some relevant aspects of European action against hybrid threats
remain to be addressed:
•
66
The exchange of information and intelligence between Member States and between the
institutions of the European Union is still an incipient work.
See chapter 3.4.1
127
STOA | Panel for the Future of Science and Technology
•
The need to overcome EU institutions' fragmentation and silo mentalities when developing
their strategies.
•
Risk assessments are often based on a minimum level of information exchange.
•
Appropriate and coordinated responses are still hindered by a significant lack of trust (Fiott, D.
& Parkes, R., 2019).
An overall strategy to tackle hybrid threats is needed
A European response must include joint political and diplomatic, informative and intelligence,
economic, legal and military actions. These actions have to focus on the case investigation and
clarification of responsibilities, as well as the deployment of sanctions, as well as on identifying future
risks and increasing the European economic and technological independence from risk countries or
providers. Adequate investment in technological developments to anticipate new threats is at the core
of a preventive policy.
Currently, the main source of disinformation in Europe is Russia (European Parliament, 2019). However,
shifts in the international balance of power raise concerns about China's growing soft power and
capacity for influence capacity. Unlike Russia, China is playing a critical role in the global digital sector,
particularly in the deployment of 5G networks in Europe. As both hybrid threats and strategic
communications to counter them rely more and more on digital means, China is increasingly becoming
a major actor when dealing with such topics.
The double role played by digital technologies regarding hybrid threats
As previously described, digital technologies open up great opportunities to spread messages
amongst broad audiences in a rapid and inexpensive way, and to create customised narratives for very
specific audiences. Digital technologies can be used by both the promoters of hybrid threats, to
fabricate and spread disinformation, and by the institutions that fight them to develop counternarratives. The following table summarises the diverse characteristics, as highlighted in previous
sections, of the most relevant technologies and applications (5G networks, social media, artificial
intelligence and blockchain), and the benefits they bring to both promoters and defenders.
Table 40: Potential usefulness of digital technologies in the realm of hybrid threats
5G
Characteristic
Increase in connection
speed
Reduction of latency
time
128
Benefits for attackers
Benefits for defenders
Possibility to increase the
dissemination of harmful/malicious
content or disinformation in high
quality video format.
Possibility of responding to attacks with mass
fact-checking campaigns, or the rapid
dissemination of truthful messages in highbandwidth consumption formats (for instance,
high quality videos).
Increased communication capabilities
amongst malicious actors, for the
purposes of preparation,
dissemination and attack.
Increase in strategic communication capacities
amongst different EU actors, for the purposes
of prevention, detection and response.
Possibility to increase the
dissemination of harmful/malicious
content or disinformation with fewer
delays.
Possibility of increasing the response to
attacks with fewer delays.
Strategic communications as a key factor in countering hybrid threats
Reduction of energy
consumption
Possibility of increasing attacks, at a
lower cost, or helping attackers keep
a low exposure profile.
Possibility of increasing response mechanisms
(strategic response communications) to
attacks, at a lower cost.
Increase in the number
of devices supported by
a network
Increased ability to develop multiple
attacks, using a multiplicity of devices.
Possibility for a multiplicity of devices to
cooperate in mitigating the effects of attacks.
Integration with the
Internet of Things
Possibility that the attacks also target
smart devices, or that such devices
may be part of a larger scale attack.
Increase in elements aimed at counteracting
the effects of attacks.
Social Media
Characteristic
Universality and mass
usage
Benefits for attackers
Benefits for defenders
Possibility of greatly increasing the
dissemination of harmful/malicious
content or disinformation.
Possibility of responding to attacks with
massive fact-checking campaigns or
dissemination of truthful messages.
Increased communication capabilities
amongst malicious actors, for the
purposes of preparation,
dissemination and attack.
Increase in strategic communication
capabilities between different EU actors, for
the purposes of prevention, detection and
response to attacks.
Possibility of using social networks as
a mechanism for the dissemination of
malicious code (malware) and the
perpetration of other types of attacks
(e.g. ransomware).
Access from multiple
devices (PCs, tablets,
smartphones)
Development of attacks with multiple
origin, using a multiplicity of devices.
Possibility for a multiplicity of devices to
cooperate in mitigating the effects of attacks.
Artificial Intelligence
Characteristic
Benefits for attackers
Benefits for defenders
Adaptive technology
Possibility of designing tailor-made
attacks (evading detection, hiding
where they cannot be found and
automatically adapting to
countermeasures), taking into
account the specific characteristics of
the victims and their environment.
Possibility of designing tailor-made defence
mechanisms, taking into account previous
knowledge of the attackers, behaviour
patterns, etc.
Ease of access to AI
systems and
applications
Possibility of increasing the
dissemination of harmful/malicious
content or disinformation, with
greater guarantees of success.
Possibility of responding to disinformation
campaigns or cyberattacks, with greater
guarantees of success
Natural language
processing and machine
translation
Increase in the capacity for
relationships and communication
between international attacking
groups.
Increase in the relationship and
communication capacities between the
different EU actors responsible for preventing,
detecting or mitigating the effects of attacks.
129
STOA | Panel for the Future of Science and Technology
Deepfakes and GAN
networks
Increased impact of attacks and
disinformation, with the use of audio,
photo or video deepfakes, and the
use of GAN networks to crack
passwords, evade malware detection
or trick facial recognition.
GAN networks can also be used for the
opposite purpose: to avoid password cracking,
malware detection or deepfake detection.
Possibility to increase analysis of
disinformation campaigns in real time and in
an early manner, responding immediately and
facilitating decision-making.
Cybervigilance
Technology
Observatories
Blockchain
Characteristic
Benefits for attackers
Monitoring of
transactions and
content
Less dependence on
media
Benefits for defenders
Possibility of designing mechanisms to track
the origin and destination of the contents of
disinformation campaigns.
Possibility of developing attacks
without the need to link the content
to any media.
Possibility of decentralised verification of the
contents of disinformation campaigns.
Source: Own elaboration
According to different sources, 67 Europe is falling behind (or at risk of falling behind) its main
competitors (the USA and China) regarding the development of such technologies, leaving the control
of essential digital tools used to counter hybrid threats and, particularly disinformation, in foreign
hands. Thus, further EU efforts to achieve technological sovereignty in these crucial technologies
(von der Leyen, U., 2019), boosting research and development as well as the creation of European
digital leader companies, are also critical to address these threats.
Some challenges remain unresolved
In summary, the main challenges faced by the European Union in facing regarding the communication
aspects of hybrid threats are:
•
Better and faster coordination amongst EU institutions and national authorities: sharing high
quality intelligence and information and common actions against promoters of hybrid threats.
•
Adopting more proactive approaches instead of reactive measures.
•
Counterbalancing effective measures with key European democratic values such as freedom of
expression and transparency, in a context of a lack of clear leadership.
•
Reinforcing the role of private actors in the fight against disinformation:
o Social media
o Traditional media, journalists, fact checkers and civil society
o The digital industry
•
67
Improving EU technology sovereignty and reducing technological dependence on other
countries, mainly the USA and China.
(Bughin, J. et al., 2019); (Northstream, 2019); (Ekholm, B., 2019);
130
Strategic communications as a key factor in countering hybrid threats
•
Strengthening the role of citizens: raising awareness, literacy.
Actual implementations of hybrid threats usually rely on a limited set of actions
Some interesting questions arise from analysis of the case studies, with the following being the most
relevant: at what point can an attempt to meddle in the victims' interests be classified as a hybrid
threat? Where is the line between a legitimate foreign influence and a hybrid threat? While the most
accepted definitions of hybrid threats 68 give some clues about the characteristics that any action
should fulfil to be considered as such, it is also true that there are very few examples of hybrid threats
that meet most of these features. Probably the only example of a hybrid threat that encompasses all
the characteristics is the illegal Russian attack against Ukraine to conquer Crimea. This case, the most
paradigmatic one, implemented a wide array of coordinated and synchronised actions (cyberattacks,
covert armed groups, disinformation campaigns, economic pressure, psychological operations against
Ukrainian soldiers, religious matters, etc.). It had a clear strategic goal (to achieve the annexation of
Crimea at minimum cost in military terms), and exploited the target's vulnerabilities (political instability
after the Euromaidan demonstrations), and influenced the political decision-making process (reversing
the rapprochement to the EU in Ukrainian regions under Russian influence). No other case has
deployed so many components of hybrid threats. However, all the cases considered help us draw useful
conclusions about the use of strategic communications to counter hybrid threats.
The blurred line between influence and interference
The cases analysed reflect the difficulty of differentiating between foreign influence and foreign
interference when hybrid tools are used. While all governments in the world seek to influence others,
which is not necessarily bad practice, foreign interference also includes coercive, corrupting, deceptive
and clandestine activity, and it is contrary to the victim's sovereignty, values and national interests. The
cases show how actions that could be considered as legitimate foreign influence (spreading a religious
belief, seeking military support) end up becoming foreign interference by adopting the form of a hybrid
threat.
Two complimentary objectives of hybrid threats
Hybrid threats are always deployed to achieve a strategic goal while undermining the target, aiming to
interfere in decision-making or democratic processes. However, as the cases analysed (except for the
case of Ukraine) are what we could call 'partial' examples of hybrid threats, 69 some of them are more
oriented towards strengthening one's own position while others are aimed at destabilising the victim.
We can, therefore, distinguish between two types of cases. On the one hand, we find cases where the
threat is focused on undermining the target and the final strategic objective is not so direct or
immediate (the case of Lithuania, the Netherlands or Spain). In these cases, the perpetrator tries not to
be detected and attribution is complex, as the lack of attribution is in itself a key component in these
attacks. Knowing that a disinformation campaign on a regional issue was of foreign origin would, for
example, detract from its credibility and impact, and its intention to interfere in internal affairs would
be evident.
On the other hand, threats oriented towards reinforcing the strategic position or amplifying the
influence of the attacker on a country or region (like Chinese and Russian soft power in Western
democracies through academic institutions and think tanks, Saudi pressure on Pakistan or the Zapad
military exercises) can also be found. In these cases, the perpetrator is known, but the intentions and
strategies exploit the thresholds between legitimate influence and interference.
68
See Chapter 2.1
69
We have used the term 'partial' as each hybrid threat analysed only encompasses a limited number of components
compared to the most paradigmatic case, the Russian aggression against Ukraine.
131
STOA | Panel for the Future of Science and Technology
Different attack vectors aimed at diverse objectives and targets
Analysis of the cases shows an interesting relationship between the means (or attack vectors) deployed
over the course of a hybrid threat, and the nature of the targets. When the purpose of the hybrid threat
is to destabilise the victim by generating confusion, mistrust or social disapproval of its government or
institutions, it is aimed at broad targets (for instance the Muslim community in the Netherlands, the
Ukrainian population in Crimea and neighbouring areas, the Lithuanian and Catalonian populations).
In these cases, promoters use massive online media outlets and social networks to spread their
narratives. These means of action facilitate concealment of the authorship of the attack.
However, when it comes to strengthening one's position and increasing one's influence, specific
targets are preferred (Pakistani authorities, academic institutions and academic and political elites in
the case of the Confucius Institute and Russian think tanks and NGOs), and the attackers rely more on
face-to-face communication (meetings, conferences, seminars, diplomatic channels, etc.) and financial
pressure.
In the realm of communication, disinformation campaigns are the most frequent component
At least four out of the seven case studies involve any kind of disinformation campaign. Promoters of
hybrid threats take advantage of the great opportunities opened up by social networks to spread false
content aimed at supporting their claims and goals. All disinformation campaigns share similar
characteristics: they are built around false news related to nefarious crimes ('crucifixion of a boy by
Ukrainian soldiers', 'rape of a teenage girl by German soldiers') or exacerbated confrontations ('tanks
on the streets of Barcelona'); they appeal to people's feelings and sentiments, inciting hatred of the
other (Dutch society, Ukrainians, the German soldiers, the Spanish government, etc.); they use false
accounts and bot networks to amplify the impact of the false information. Of all the disinformation
campaigns analysed, one stands out for its use of innovative elements to amplify its impact: the one
promoted by the Catalan pro-independence movement. They used public figures with allegedly great
credibility and reputation on social networks (Julian Assange) or with many followers
(Pamela Anderson) to support their claims and achieve high impact.
One of the case studies only involved disinformation campaigns: the attempts to discredit the NATO
mission (Enhanced Forward Presence) in Lithuania by making false accusations of German soldiers
raping a teenage girl. The question that arises here is: can a disinformation campaign constitute a
hybrid threat on its own? In our opinion the response should be affirmative, and that is how the
authorities who had to deal with it understood it. If a disinformation campaign seeks to undermine
citizens' trust in democratic institutions and related organisations, like NATO, and tries to meddle in
democratic processes and decisions (such as Lithuania's request for NATO's help), it fulfils two of the
essential characteristics of hybrid threats and should be considered as such.
Proactivity and cooperation, key elements of strategic communications to counter hybrid
threats
Few examples of the communication strategies developed to counteract the attacks in the case studies
can be considered successful. In the case of the illegal annexation of Crimea by Russia, Ukraine could
hardly respond to such a demonstration of hybrid force. Moreover, the fact that Ukraine did not have a
clear communication strategy with specific objectives and preventive informative actions for the
diverse stakeholders involved (Ukrainian citizens, soldiers, international community) also contributed
to the success of the Russian narrative presenting Ukraine as a failed country unable to help its citizens,
which, in turn, was used as an excuse to annex Crimea. In Catalonia, the Spanish authorities did not
have a communication strategy to counteract secessionist disinformation until well after the illegal
independence referendum. Only in the face of the deterioration of Spain's public image in the
international arena following the events of the illegal referendum, was a tepid reactive communication
strategy defined. Both examples show the difficulty of creating an effective communication strategy
when the promoters of hybrid threats have long-term objectives. However, adopting a merely reactive
132
Strategic communications as a key factor in countering hybrid threats
attitude, leaving the initiative to the promoters of hybrid threats and focusing on debunking
disinformation, helps the attacks to achieve their objectives.
In two cases, the Pakistan's refusal to participate in the Yemeni Civil War and the disinformation
campaigns against NATO in Lithuania, the victims adopted successful strategic communications to
counter threat promoters' objectives. In both cases, these objectives were specific and short-term. In
the case of the disinformation campaigns against NATO in Lithuania, the previous work (preventive
measures) conducted by the Baltic country to raise awareness amongst its citizens, politicians and civil
servants about potential Russian meddling in its home affairs was very effective in swiftly reacting to
and limiting the effects of false information. Close cooperation amongst the main stakeholders
(Lithuanian authorities, German Army and NATO) was another key to success.
In the case of Pakistan, the main driver behind its communication strategy was the coherence of the
message. Pakistan insisted on its intent to remain neutral in the Yemeni conflict, despite the intense
pressure it was subjected to. Even when it conceded to the Saudi requirements and finally sent troops
to the Arab country, it remarked that they were not going to participate in the war.
Another case with a relatively successful communication strategy is the Dutch strategy to counter Salafi
propaganda. Although it is not yet possible to verify its effectiveness, it does include most of the
elements of strategic communications, as it has long-term aims (beginning to debunk Salafi
propaganda from childhood), intends to address diverse groups (young people, families, imams,
mosque administrators, teachers, etc.) with specific messages for each of them, built on tailored
narratives and provided through a full spectrum of means (offline and online).
Analysis of these cases has revealed strategic communications' potential to counter hybrid threats.
However, few victims (whether they are countries, academic institutions, specific groups, etc.) have
been able to take advantage of this potential so far. More proactive approaches, better cooperation
and more intensive use of digital technologies are needed to provide more efficient and effective
responses to hybrid threats.
Comparative analysis of the policy options
After individual analysis of the proposed policy options, conducted in Chapter 6, a comparative
assessment of these policy options may help policy-makers to identify which are most suitable for
development. The following table shows the ranking of the policy options according to their adequacy
in accordance with the assessment criteria. Each criterion has been given a weight based on its
relevance, which has been used to calculate the overall score for each policy. The score also depends
on how adequate (high: green arrow; medium: orange dash; low: red arrow) the policy is for the specific
criteria.
133
STOA | Panel for the Future of Science and Technology
Policy
P. ethical, social and regul.
Coherence with EU objectives
Sustainability
Effectiveness
Criteria weigth
(1 to 10)
8
10
10
6
4
6
4
Type
Feasibility
Costs and benefits
Proposed policies
Risks and uncertainties
Criteria
Overall assessment (1 to 100)
Table 41: Summary of the policy option assessment
Awareness
raising
Policymaker training
Regulation
Regulation of risk analysis for hybrid threats
96
Awareness
raising
Promoting citizen guides to detecting disinformation
94
Regulation
Regulation
Proactive
approach
Awareness
raising
Social media
platforms
Awareness
raising
Improving regulation of artificial intelligence to address hybrid threats,
disinformation and foreign interference
Development of the European Strategy against Hybrid Threats,
Disinformation and Foreign Interference (EU-HTDFI Strategy)
Supporting free journalism against disinformation
Teacher training and ongoing development of educational resources and
content
Making the Code of Practice on Disinformation mandatory, and adding
periodic external audits
Incorporation of critical information analysis competencies in school
curriculums
Creation of a coordination unit at the EU level to unify responses against
Coordination
hybrid threats
Coordination Increasing public-private collaboration
Coordination Development of the European Cybersurveillance Tool (ECT)
Coordination Creation of common response mechanisms at the EU level
Regulation
Regulation
Awareness
raising
Technology
gap
Update the interpretation made by the Cybercrime Convention Committee
(T-CY) regarding interference in electoral processes
Adaptation of a sanction regime against promoters of hybrid threats,
disinformation and foreign interference
92
85
85
83
83
81
81
81
75
71
71
69
Digital literacy programmes for people with low digital competency
65
Developing industrial policies for key technologies (5G, AI, IoT, blockchain)
65
Coordination Intensifying cooperation between the EU and NATO
65
Use of digital
Improving law enforcement in 5G networks
channels
65
Use of digital Allowing public authorities to exceptionally intervene in digital services to
channels
counteract hybrid threats
Development of training exercises on countering hybrid threats involving
Coordination
all stakeholders
63
60
Attribution
Increasing economic resources allocated to the attribution of threats
60
Proactive
approach
Strengthening the EU's vision and values outside the EU borders
60
Regulation
Improvement and harmonisation of the European legal framework against
hybrid threats, disinformation and foreign interference
56
Attribution
Increasing economic resources allocated to the detection of disinformation
50
Technology
gap
Proactive
approach
Proactive
approach
Proactive
approach
Increasing R&D investment and financial support for start-ups, and scaling
up companies related to digital technologies
Improving diplomatic relations with countries considered strategic
challenges
50
48
Creation of an EU news agency to ensure veracity of information
46
Mandatory creation of StratCom units at the highest level in EU countries
and institutions
42
Coordination Increasing operational intelligence capability at the EU level
134
100
40
Strategic communications as a key factor in countering hybrid threats
REFERENCES
AAUP. (2014). On Partnerships with Foreign Governments: The Case of Confucius Institutes. American
Association of University Professors. https://www.aaup.org/file/Confucius_Institutes_0.pdf
Abellán, L. (2019, March 11). El Gobierno activa una unidad contra la desinformación ante las elecciones. El País.
https://elpais.com/politica/2019/03/10/actualidad/1552243571_703630.html
Acosta,
J.
(2014, March).
U.S.,
other
powers
kick
Russia
https://www.cnn.com/2014/03/24/politics/obama-europe-trip/index.html
out
of
G8.
CNN.
Adamsky, D. (2019). Russian Nuclear Orthodoxy: Religion, Politics, and Strategy. Stanford University Press.
AFP. (2017, September). Russia's joint military exercise with Belarus rattles NATO; Moscow claims drills 'strictly
defensive'. World News - Firstpost. https://www.firstpost.com/world/russias-joint-military-exercise-w ithbelarus-rattles-nato-moscow-claims-drills-strictly-defensive-4044143.html
Afzal, M. (2019). Saudi Arabia's hold on Pakistan [Policy Brief]. Brookings. https://www.brookings.edu/w pcontent/uploads/2019/05/FP_20190510_saudi_pakistan_afzal.pdf
Agence France Presse. (2018, September 15). German Troops Face Russian 'Hybrid War' in Lithuania: Merkel |
Military.com. Military.Com. https://www.military.com/daily-news/2018/09/15/german-troops-face-russi anhybrid-war-lithuania-merkel.html
Ajder, H., Patrini, G., Cavalli, F., & Cullen, L. (2019). The state of deepfakes. Landscape, threats and impact.
Deeptrace. https://deeptracelabs.com/resources/
Alandete, D. (2017a, October). Putin alienta la independencia con un enviado a Cataluña. El País.
https://elpais.com/politica/2017/10/25/actualidad/1508958307_955473.html
Alandete, D. (2017b, November 10). European Union fights the Kremlin's propaganda machine. El País.
https://english.elpais.com/elpais/2017/11/09/inenglish/1510218067_521677.html
Alandete, D. (2017c, November 20). El Centro de Comunicación Estratégica de la OTAN pide a España que se
proteja
ante
la
injerencia
rusa.
El
País.
https://elpais.com/politica/2017/11/19/actualidad/1511112485_977295.html?rel=mas
Alandete, D. (2019). Fake news: La nueva arma de destrucción masiva. Cómo se utilizan las noticias falsas y los
hechos alternativos para desestabilizar la democracia. Deusto.
Aleksa, C., Kuprienė, P., & Keršytė, L. (2016). What we need to know about resistance. Active Guidelines. Ministry
of National Defense of the Republic of Lithuania.
Allen Institute for AI. (2019). Grover—A State-of-the-Art Defense against Neural Fake News.
https://grover.allenai.org/
Allison, R. (2014, November). Russian 'deniable' intervention in Ukraine: How and why Russia broke the rules.
International Affairs, 90(6), 1255–1297. https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/1468-2346.12170
Altay, I. (2019, December 20). Cooperation with Malaysia, Qatar, Iran will continue, Erdoğan says. Daily Sabah.
https://www.dailysabah.com/diplomacy/2019/12/20/cooperation-with-malaysia-qatar-iran-will-continueerdogan-says
Álvarez, G. (2014). Los factores de riesgo económico en la crisis de Ucrania (No. 32/2014). Instituto Español de
Estudios
Estratégicos.
http://www.ieee.es/Galerias/fichero/docs_opinion/2014/DIEEEO3 2 2014_Ucrania_GregorioAlvarez.pdf
Alvargonzález, A. (2018, May 18). NATO Deputy Secretary General Presentation. Hybrid Warfare; New Threats,
Spain Senate.
135
STOA | Panel for the Future of Science and Technology
American Association of Universities. (2019). Actions Taken by Universities to Address Growing Concerns about
Security Threats and Undue Foreign Influence on Campus. https://www.aau.edu/sites/default/files/Bli ndLinks/Effective-Science-Security-Practices.pdf
Andriukaitis, L. (2018). Lisa's Case Repeated: German Soldiers Accused of Rape. Vilniaus politikos analizės
institutas. https://vilniusinstitute.lt/en/lisas-case-repeated-german-soldiers-accused-of-rape/
AOAV. (2017, May). 'Soft power' financing of religious, cultural and educational networks that nurture the jihadi
ideology: Mosques and Islamic centres in the West. https://aoav.org.uk/2017/soft-power-financing-religi ouscultural-educational-networks-nurture-jihadi-ideology-mosques-islamic-centres-west/
Arnhold, N., Ziegele, F., & Kivistö, J. (2020, June). Under pressure: Covid-19 and the funding of European
higher education. World Bank Blogs. https://blogs.worldbank.org/education/under-pressure-Covid-19-andfunding-european-higher-education
Atomico. (2020). The state of European tech. https://2019.stateofeuropeantech.com/
Atwood, K., & Klein, B. (2019, August). G7 2020: Trump and Macron agree that Russia should be invited to
conference.
CNNPolitics.
https://edition.cnn.com/2019/08/20/politics/donald-trump-russia-g8 g7/index.html
Baezner, M. (2018). Cyber and Information warfare in the Ukrainian conflict. Center for Security Studies (CSS),
ETH.
https://css.ethz.ch/content/dam/ethz/special-interest/gess/cis/center-for-securitie sstudies/pdfs/20181003_MB_HS_RUS-UKR%20V2_rev.pdf
Bajarūnas, E., & Keršanskas, V. (2018). Hybrid Threats: Analysis of content, challenges posed and measures
to
overcome.
Lithuanian
Annual
Strategic
Review,
16(1),
123–171.
https://content.sciendo.com/configurable/contentpage/journals$002flasr$002f16$002f1$002farticlep123.xml
Baltic News Service. (2019, December 16). German troops taught to resist cyber attacks in Lithuania. Lithuanian
Radio and Television (LRT). https://www.lrt.lt/en/news-in-english/19/1125722/german-troops-taught-toresist-cyber-attacks-in-lithuania
Baños, P. (2011, April). Comunicación Estratégica. La clave de la victoria en el siglo XXI. XVIII Curso Internacional
de Defensa “Medios de Comunicación y Operaciones Militares”.
Baqués, J. (2018). Análisis de tendencias geopolíticas a escala global (DIEEEINV18/2017). Instituto Español de
Estudios
Estratégicos.
http://www.ieee.es/Galerias/fichero/docs_investig/2018/DIEEEINV1 8 2017_Analisis_Tendencias_Geopoliticas_EscalaGlobal_JosepBaques.pdf
BBC. (2015, April 10). Yemen conflict: Pakistan
https://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-32246547
rebuffs
Saudi
coalition
call.
BBC
News.
BBC. (2019, February). Saudi Arabia signs $20bn in deals with Pakistan. https://www.bbc.com/news/business47274672
Bebler, A. (2015). The Russian-Ukrainian conflict over Crimea. International Institute for Middle East and Balkan
Studies. https://www.ifimes.org/en/9035
Bennhold, K., & Ewing, J. (2020, January). In Huawei battle, China threatens Germany 'Where it hurts':
Automakers. The New York Times. https://www.nytimes.com/2020/01/16/world/europe/huawei-germanychina-5g-automakers.html
Bentzen, N. (2019). The sharp power of knowledge: Foreign authoritarian meddling in academia.
https://www.europarl.europa.eu/RegData/etudes/ATAG/2019/644207/EPRS_ATA(2019)644207_EN.pdf
Berbell, C. (2019, April). Sólo hubo 5 heridos graves en el referéndum de 1 de octubre, según el exdirector de
CatSalud. Confilegal. https://confilegal.com/20190430-solo-hubo-5-heridos-graves-en-el-referendum-de 1-de-octubre-segun-el-exdirector-de-catsalud/
136
Strategic communications as a key factor in countering hybrid threats
Bertholee, R. (2014, December). Jihadism on the Rise in Europe: The Dutch Perspective—The Washington
Institute for Near East Policy. https://www.washingtoninstitute.org/policy-analysis/view/jihadism-on-t he rise-in-europe-the-dutch-perspective
Biswas, A., & Tortajada, C. (2018, February 23). China's soft power is on the rise. China Daily.
http://www.chinadaily.com.cn/a/201802/23/WS5a8f59a9a3106e7dcc13d7b8.html
Bokhari, F., Politi, J., & Raval, A. (2018, October). Saudi Arabia agrees to give $6bn financial support for Pakistan.
Financial Times. https://www.ft.com/content/18549b9c-d6e0-11e8-ab8e-6be0dcf18713
Bradshaw, J., & Freeze, C. (2013, February 7). McMaster closing Confucius Institute over hiring issues. The Globe
and Mail. https://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/national/education/mcmaster-closing-confuciusinstitute-over-hiring-issues/article8372894/
Bradshaw, S., & Howard, P. (2019). The global disinformation order. 2019 global inventory of organised social
media manipulation (Working Paper 2019.2). Oxford Internet Institute. https://comprop.oii.ox.ac.uk/w pcontent/uploads/sites/93/2019/09/CyberTroop-Report19.pdf
Briançon, P. (2020, March). How Mario Draghi's 'Whatever it takes' became Europe's antivirus mantra.
MarketWatch.
https://www.marketwatch.com/story/how-mario-draghis-whatever-it-takes-became europes-antivirus-mantra-2020-03-20
Brookings. (2005). China's Peaceful Rise: Speeches of Zheng Bijian 1997-2004.
https://www.brookings.edu/wp-content/uploads/2012/04/20050616bijianlunch.pdf
Brookings.
Bughin, J., Seong, J., Manyika, J., Hämäläinen, L., Windhagen, E., & Hazan, E. (2019). Notes from the AI frontier.
Tackling
Europe's
gap
in
digital
and
AI.
McKinsey
Global
Institute.
https://www.mckinsey.com/~/media/McKinsey/Featured%20Insights/Artificial%20Intelligence/Tackling%
20Europes%20gap%20in%20digital%20and%20AI/MGI-Tackling-Europes-gap-in-digital-and-AI-Feb-2019vF.ashx
Buluc, R. (2018). Critical Thinking in the fight against fake news. Mediating Globalisation: Identities in Dialogue.
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/326573452_Critical_Thinking_in_the_Fight_against_Fake_Ne
ws
Canadian Heritage. (2019, July 2). Helping Citizens Critically Assess and Become Resilient Against Harmful
Online
Disinformation.
Government
of
Canada.
https://www.canada.ca/en/canadianheritage/news/2019/07/helping-citizens-critically-assess-and-become-resilient-against-harmful-onlinedisinformation.html
CAUT. (2014). Canadian campuses urged to end ties with Confucius Institutes. Canadian Association of
University Teachers. https://bulletin-archives.caut.ca/bulletin/articles/2014/01/canadian-campuses-urge dto-end-ties-with-confucius-institutes
Cavazos, R. (2019). The economic cost of bad actors on the Internet: Fake news. CHEQ & University of Baltimore.
https://s3.amazonaws.com/media.mediapost.com/uploads/EconomicCostOfFakeNews.pdf
CCN-CERT. (2018). Ciberamenazas y Tendencias Edición 2018 (CCN-CERT IA-09/18). Centro Criptológico
Nacional.
https://www.ccn-cert.cni.es/en/reports/public/2835-ccn-cert-ia-09-18-ciberamenzas-ytendencias-edicion-2018-1/file.html
Cederberg, G. (2018). Catching Swedish Phish—How Sweden is Protecting its 2018 elections. Harvard Kennedy
School
Belfer
Center
for
Science
and
International
Affairs.
https://www.belfercenter.org/sites/default/files/files/publication/Swedish%20Phish%20-%20final2.pdf
Cembrero, I. (2017, October). Consulta catalana 1-O: Ni siquiera Andorra: Solo Maduro y Kosovo dudan si
reconocer la república catalana. El Confidencial. https://www.elconfidencial.com/espana/2017-10 25/independencia-cataluna-maduro-kosovo_1466357/
137
STOA | Panel for the Future of Science and Technology
Center for European Policy Analysis. (2017). Combined Strategic Command-Staff Exercise (CSCSE) of Armed
Forces of Belarus and Russia 'Zapad-2017'. https://cepa.ecms.pl/files/?id_plik=4118
Center for Information Technology and Society - University California Santa Barbara. (2019). How is fake news
spread? Bots, people like you, trolls, and microtargeting. https://www.cits.ucsb.edu/fake-news/spread
Center for International Security and Cooperation - Stanford University. (2019). Islamic State.
https://cisac.fsi.stanford.edu/mappingmilitants/profiles/islamic-state#text_block_18356
Centre d'Estudis d'Opinió. (2020). Barómetro de opinión política 1a ola 2020. Generalitat de Catalunya.
http://upceo.ceo.gencat.cat/wsceop/7548/Resumen%20en%20espa%C3%B1ol%20-962.pdf
CERT-EU. (2019). RFC 2350. https://cert.europa.eu/static/RFC2350/RFC2350.pdf
Cerulus, L. (2020, May). How anti-5G anger sparked a wave of arson attacks. Politico.Eu.
https://www.politico.eu/article/coronavirus-5g-arson-attacks-online-theories/
Chatzky, A., & McBride J. (2020). China's Massive Belt and Road Initiative. Council on Foreign Relations.
https://www.cfr.org/backgrounder/chinas-massive-belt-and-road-initiative
Cheo, J. (2018, April). Fake news can make—Or break—Stock prices. The Business Times.
https://www.businesstimes.com.sg/opinion/fake-news-can-make-or-break-stock-prices
China Daily. (2006, May 29). 'China threat' fear countered
http://www.chinadaily.com.cn/china/2006-05/29/content_602226.htm
by
culture.
China
Daily.
Confucius Institute. (n.d.). Constitution and By-Laws of the Confucius Institutes. Confucius Institute. Retrieved
19 February 2020, from http://english.hanban.org/node_7880.htm
Conley, H., Rathke, J., & Melino, M. (2018). Enhanced Deterrence in the North: A 21st Century European
Engagement Strategy (CSIS Europe Program). Center for Strategic and International Studies. https://csisprod.s3.amazonaws.com/s3fspublic/publication/180119_Conley_EnhancedDeterrenceNorth_Web.pdf?uIa_1usRa2.PdrR4pnJvjLKFPN3t
FDYQ
Cornish, P., Lindley-French, J., & Yorke, C. (2011). Strategic communications and national strategy. Chatham
House. https://www.chathamhouse.org/sites/default/files/r0911es%E2%80%93stratcomms.pdf
Cottiero, C., Kucharski, K., Olimpieva, E., & Orttung, R. W. (2015). War of words: The impact of Russian state
television on the Russian Internet. Nationalities Papers, 43(4). https://doi.org/p
Council of the European Union. (2016). Council Conclusions on the Implementation of the Joint Declaration by
the President of the European Council, the President of the European Commission and the Secretary General of
the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (No. 15283/16). http://data.consilium.europa.eu/doc/document/ ST15283-2016-INIT/en/pdf
Council on Foreign Relations. (2020). Conflict in Ukraine.
https://cfr.org/interactive/global-conflict-tracker/conflict/conflict-ukraine
Counter Extremism
Project. (2019). The Netherlands:
https://www.counterextremism.com/countries/netherlands
Global
Extremism
&
Conflict
Tracker.
Counter-Extremism.
Coyer, P. (2016). The Patriarch, The Pope, Ukraine And The Disintegration Of 'The Russian World'. Forbes.
https://www.forbes.com/sites/paulcoyer/2016/03/20/the-patriarch-the-pope-ukraine-and-thedisintegration-of-the-russian-world/#10471ebd2523
Cubeiro, E. (2018). Hybrid Warfare and Cyberspace. 2018 Cyber Defence Conference, Spain.
https://jornadasciberdefensa.es/documents/22_05_00_Conferencia_Guerra_hibrida_y_ciberespacio.pdf
Cybercrime Convention Committee (T-CY). (2019). Aspects of election interference by means of computer
systems covered by the Budapest Convention (Guidance Note No. 9). Council of Europe. https://rm.coe.int/tcy-2019-4-guidance-note-election-interference/1680965e23
138
Strategic communications as a key factor in countering hybrid threats
Dalla Mora, M. (2019). From the Euromaidan to the Hybrid War in the Donbass: An Analysis of the Ukraine Crisis
and the Determinants of Russian Foreign Policy (AV Akademikerverlag).
Damhuis, K. (2019). “The biggest problem in the Netherlands”: Understanding the Party for Freedom's
politicization of Islam. Brookings. https://www.brookings.edu/research/the-biggest-problem-in-t he netherlands-understanding-the-party-for-freedoms-politicization-of-islam/
Darczewska, J. (2017). Putin's Cossacks, Folklore, Business or Politics? Center for Eastern Studies.
https://www.osw.waw.pl/sites/default/files/pw_68_putin_cossacks_net_0.pdf
Davis, J. R. (2015). Continued evolution of hybrid threats. The Russian hybrid threat construct and the need
for
innovation.
The
Three
Swords
Magazine,
28,
19–25.
http://www.jwc.nato.int/images/stories/threeswords/JWC_Magazine_May2015_web_low.pdf
Dawn.com. (2015, April 11). UAE minister warns Pakistan of 'heavy price for ambiguous stand' on Yemen—
Pakistan. Dawn - World. https://www.dawn.com/news/1175284
Debunk. (n.d.). About DEBUNK [Debunk.eu]. Retrieved 12 March 2020, from https://debunk.eu/
del Castillo, I. (2019, December). Telefónica contrata a Huawei una parte de su red de 5G en España. Expansión.
https://www.expansion.com/empresas/tecnologia/2019/12/06/5de9788e468aebe15a8b45fb.html
Department of Home Affairs. (2019a, August 19). National Counter Foreign Interference Coordinator.
Australian
Government.
https://www.homeaffairs.gov.au/about-us/our-portfolios/natio nalsecurity/countering-foreign-interference/cfi-coordinator#
Department of Home Affairs. (2019b, August 29). Australia's Counter Foreign Interference Strategy.
https://www.homeaffairs.gov.au/about-us/our-portfolios/national-security/countering-foreigninterference/cfi-strategy
Diena. (2017, October 8). Broadcast: The mobile interference observed in Kurzeme may have been caused by a
Russian device. Diena.lv. https://www.diena.lv/raksts/latvija/zinas/raidijums-kurzeme-noverotos-mobilosakaru-traucejumus-iespejams-radijusi-krievijas-ierice-14182244
Digitalle Gesellschaft. (2017).
meinungsfreiheit.de/en/
Declaration
on
disinfo.eu.
(2020,
March).
Disinformation
https://euvsdisinfo.eu/disinformation-can-kill/
freedom
can
of
kill.
http://deklaration-fue r-
expression.
EU
vs
DISINFORMATION.
Draghi, M. (2012, July 26). Verbatim of the remarks made by the President of European Central Bank, Mario
Draghi—Speech at the Global Investment Conference in London. European Central Bank.
https://www.ecb.europa.eu/press/key/date/2012/html/sp120726.en.html
Driscoll, J., & Steinert-Threlkeld, Z. (2020). Social media and Russian territorial irredentism: Some facts and a
conjecture.
Post-Soviet
Affairs,
36(2),
101–121.
https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/1060586X.2019.1701879
Dutch
Safety
Board.
(2015).
MH17
Crash.
https://www.onderzoeksraad.nl/en/media/attachment/2018/7/10/debcd724fe7breport_mh17_crash.pdf
DW. (2017, February 17). Lithuanian authorities launch investigation into fake German rape story. Deutsche
Welle (DW). https://www.dw.com/en/lithuanian-authorities-launch-investigation-into-fake-german-ra pe story/a-37608180
EACS. (2014, July 30). Letter of Protest at Interference in EACS Conference in Portugal, July 2014. European
Association for Chinese Studies. http://chinesestudies.eu/?p=585
East StratCom Task Force. (2018). Ukrainian Church's demand for autocephaly is a CIA special operation, not
a religious conflict or a split. EU vs DISINFORMATION. https://euvsdisinfo.eu/report/ukrainian-churchsdemand-for-autocephaly-is-a-cia-special-operation-not-a-religious-conflict-ora-split/
139
STOA | Panel for the Future of Science and Technology
East StratCom Task Force. (2019a, September). Disinfo: JIT conclusions on the downing of MH17 are not
objective -. EU vs DISINFORMATION. https://euvsdisinfo.eu/report/jit-conclusions-on-the-downing-ofmh17-are-not-objective/
East StratCom Task Force. (2019b, October 31). Attacking Ukrainian church: The Kremlin turns the Orthodox
world into a battlefield. Euromaidan Press. http://euromaidanpress.com/2019/10/31/attacking-ukraini anchurch-the-kremlin-turns-the-orthodox-world-into-a-battlefield/
East StratCom Team. (2015). Action Plan on Strategic Communication (Ref. Ares(2015)2608242).
http://archive.eap-csf.eu/assets/files/Action%20PLan.pdf
Ekholm, B. (2019, December). The real reason Europe is falling behind in 5G.
https://www.ericsson.com/en/blog/2019/12/Borje-Ekholm-5G-Europe-falling-behind
Ericsson.
Elcano
Royal
Institute.
(2018).
The
conflict
in
Catalonia.
http://www.realinstitutoelcano.org/wps/wcm/connect/c0f90dae-76d1-4a8e-8f780058f048a44b/Catalonia-Dossier-Elcano-October-2017.pdf?MOD=AJPERES&CACHEID=c0f90dae-76d14a8e-8f78-0058f048a44b
Emmott, R. (2017, October). NATO says Russia misled West over scale of Zapad war games. Reuters.
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-nato-russia/nato-says-russia-misled-west-over-scale-of-zapad-wargames-idUSKBN1CV2K4
ENISA. (2016). Threat Taxonomy. https://www.enisa.europa.eu/topics/threat-risk-management/threats-a ndtrends/enisa-threat-landscape/threat-taxonomy/at_download/file
ENISA. (2017). Baseline security recommendations for IoT in the context of critical information infrastructures.
https://www.enisa.europa.eu/publications/baseline-security-recommendations-foriot/at_download/fullReport
ENISA. (2019). CONSULTATION PAPER - EU ICT INDUSTRIAL POLICY: BREAKING THE CYCLE OF FAILURE. ENISA.
https://www.enisa.europa.eu/publications/enisa-position-papers-and-opinions/eu-ict-industryconsultation-paper
EPRS.
(2015).
At
a
glance:
Understanding
hybrid
threats.
http://www.europarl.europa.eu/RegData/etudes/ATAG/2015/564355/EPRS_ATA(2015)564355_EN.pdf
EPRS. (2018). Foreign influence operations in the EU [Briefing]. European Parliament Research Service.
https://www.europarl.europa.eu/RegData/etudes/BRIE/2018/625123/EPRS_BRI(2018)625123_EN.pdf
Ericsson. (2019). Ericsson Mobility Report. https://www.ericsson.com/4acd7e/assets/local/mobil ityreport/documents/2019/emr-november-2019.pdf
Esteban, M. (2016). The new drivers of Asia's global presence (ARI 9/2016). Royal Institute Elcano.
http://www.realinstitutoelcano.org/wps/wcm/connect/605105804b648beaae83bfeeaa369edc/ARI9-2016Esteban-New-drivers-Asia-globalpresence.pdf?MOD=AJPERES&CACHEID=605105804b648beaae83bfeeaa369edc
Esteban, M. (2017). The foreign policy of Xi Jinping after the 19th Congress: China strives for a central role on the
world
stage
(ARI
87/2017).
Royal
Institute
Elcano.
http://www.realinstitutoelcano.org/wps/wcm/connect/cf3c30c6-a9c5-4524-b099-57fa42e2bc7a/ARI872017-Esteban-Foreign-policy-Xi-Jinping-19th-Congress-China-central-role-worldstage.pdf?MOD=AJPERES&CACHEID=cf3c30c6-a9c5-4524-b099-57fa42e2bc7a
ETSI.
(2019).
ETSI
Mobile
https://www.etsi.org/technologies/5g
Technologies—5g,
5g
Specs
|
Future
Technology.
Euroactiv. (2018). Migration and security in Europe: Is immigration a threat or an asset?
https://en.euractiv.eu/wp-content/uploads/sites/2/special-report/EURAC TIV-Special-Report-Migrationand-security-in-Europe.pdf
140
Strategic communications as a key factor in countering hybrid threats
Eurobarometer. (2019). Public opinion in the European Union (Standard Eurobarometer No. 92).
https://ec.europa.eu/commfrontoffice/publicopinion/index.cfm/ResultDoc/download/DocumentKy/8884
8
European Commission. (2013). Joint Communication to the European Parliament, the Council, the European
Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions. Cybersecurity Strategy of the European
Union: An Open, Safe and Secure Cyberspace (JOIN(2013) 1 final). https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legalcontent/EN/TXT/PDF/?uri=CELEX:52013JC0001&from=EN
European Commission. (2014a). Communication from the Commission to the European Parliamentmthe
Council, the European Economic and Social Committee and the Committiee of the Regions—For a European
Industrial Renaissance (COM(2014) 14 final). European Commission. https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legalcontent/EN/TXT/PDF/?uri=CELEX:52014DC0014&from=EN
European Commission. (2014b, March). European Commission's support to Ukraine. European Commission Press Corner. https://ec.europa.eu/commission/presscorner/detail/en/IP_14_219
European Commission. (2016a). Joint communication to the European Parliament and the Council: Joint
Framework on countering hybrid threats, a European Union Response (JOIN(2016) 18 final). https://eurlex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/PDF/?uri=CELEX:52016JC0018&from=EN
European Commission. (2016b). Joint Staff Working Document EU operational protocol for countering hybrid
threats 'EU Playbook' (No. 11034/16). http://statewatch.org/news/2016/jul/eu-com-countering-hyb ridthreats-playbook-swd-227-16.pdf
European Commission. (2017a). Joint Communication to the European Parliament and th Council—A Strategic
Approach
to
Resilience
in
the
EU's
external
action
(JOIN(2017)
21
final).
https://eeas.europa.eu/sites/eeas/files/join_2017_21_f1_communication_from_commission_to_inst_en_v
7_p1_916039.pdf
European Commission. (2017b). Joint Communication to the European Parliament and the Council—
Resilience, Deterrence and Defence: Building strong cybersecurity for the EU (JOIN(2017) 450 final). https://eurlex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/PDF/?uri=CELEX:52017JC0450&from=en
European Commission. (2018a). Synopsis report of the public consultation on fake news and online
disinformation. https://ec.europa.eu/digital-single-market/en/news/synopsis-re port-public-consultationfake-news-and-online-disinformation
European Commission. (2018b). Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament, the
Council, the European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions: Tackling online
disinformation: A European Approach (COM(2018) 236 final). https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legalcontent/EN/TXT/PDF/?uri=CELEX:52018DC0236&from=EN
European Commission. (2018c). Fake news and disinformation online (Flash Eurobarometer No. 464).
https://data.europa.eu/euodp/en/data/dataset/S2183_464_ENG
European Commission. (2018d). Artificial Intelligence for Europe (Communication from the Commission to
the European Parliament, the European Council, the Council, the European Economic and Social Committee
and the Committee of the Regions COM(2018) 237). https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legalcontent/EN/TXT/PDF/?uri=CELEX:52018DC0237&from=EN
European Commission. (2018e). Joint Communication to the European Parliament, the European Council and
the Council—Increasing resilience and bolstering capabilities to address hybrid threats [JOIN(2018) 16 final].
https://eeas.europa.eu/sites/eeas/files/joint_communication_increasing_resilience_and_bolstering_capa
bilities_to_address_hybrid_threats.pdf
European Commission. (2018f). Proposal for a Regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council on
preventing the dissemination of terrorist content online (Commission Staff Working Document SWD(2018) 408
final). https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/PD F/?uri=CELEX:52018SC0408&from=EN
141
STOA | Panel for the Future of Science and Technology
European Commission. (2018g, September 12). State of the Union 2018: European Commission proposes
measures for securing free and fair European elections. European Commission - Press Corner.
https://ec.europa.eu/commission/presscorner/detail/en/IP_18_5681
European Commission. (2018h). Joint Communication to the European Parliament, the European Council, the
Council, the European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions—Action Plan against
Disinformation (JOIN(2018) 36 final). https://ec.europa.eu/commission/sites/beta-political/files/e ucommunication-disinformation-euco-05122018_en.pdf
European Commission. (2018i). Coordinated Plan on Artificial Intelligence (Communication from the
Commission to the European Parliament, the European Council, the Council, the European Economic and
Social
Committee
and
the
Committee
of
the
Regions
COM(2018)
795).
https://ec.europa.eu/newsroom/dae/document.cfm?doc_id=56018
European Commission. (2019a). Media literacy. Shaping Europe's Digital Future. https://ec.europa.eu/digitalsingle-market/en/media-literacy
European Commission. (2019b, June). Code of Practice on Disinformation | Digital Single Market.
https://ec.europa.eu/digital-single-market/en/news/code-practice-disinformation
European Commission. (2019c). Joint Communication to the European Parliament, the European Council, the
Council, the European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions—Report on the
implementation of the Action Plan Against Disinformation (JOIN(2019) 12 final). https://eurlex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/PDF/?uri=CELEX:52019JC0012&from=EN
European Commission. (2019d, September). Tackling online disinformation | Shaping Europe's digital future.
https://ec.europa.eu/digital-single-market/en/tackling-online-disinformation
European Commission. (2020a). 2018 – 2019 Call for proposals for Preparatory Action on Media Literacy for All.
Shaping Europe's Digital Future. https://ec.europa.eu/digital-single-market/en/news/2018-2019-callproposals-preparatory-action-media-literacy-all
European Commission. (2020b). Secure 5G deployment in the EU - Implementing the EU toolbox
(Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament, the Council, the European Economic
and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions COM(2020) 50 final).
https://ec.europa.eu/newsroom/dae/document.cfm?doc_id=64481
European Commission. (2020c). White paper On Artificial Intelligence—A European approach to excellence and
trust (COM(2020) 65 final). https://ec.europa.eu/info/sites/info/files/commission-white-paper-artificialintelligence-feb2020_en.pdf
European Commission. (2020d). Attitudes towards the impact of digitalisation on daily lives (Special
Eurobarometer
No.
503).
https://ec.europa.eu/commfrontoffice/publicopinion/index.cfm/ResultDoc/download/DocumentKy/8980
0
European Commission. (2020e). European Civil protection and humanitarian aid operations: Ukraine.
https://ec.europa.eu/echo/where/europe/ukraine_en#:~:text=Since%202014%2C%20the%20European%2
0Union,humanitarian%20and%20early%20recovery%20aid.&text=The%20EU%20is%20one%20of,13%20
million%20allocated%20in%202020
European Commission. (2020f, June). The Digital Services Act package. Shaping Europe's Digital Future.
https://ec.europa.eu/digital-single-market/en/digital-services-act-package
European Commission and the High Representative. (2019). EU-China – A strategic outlook.
https://ec.europa.eu/commission/sites/beta-political/files/communication-eu-china-a-strategicoutlook.pdf
142
Strategic communications as a key factor in countering hybrid threats
European Commission and the High Representative. (2020). Tackling Covid-19 disinformation—Getting the
facts right. https://ec.europa.eu/info/sites/info/files/communication-tackling-Covid-19-disinformationgetting-facts-right_en.pdf
European Council. (2014). EU human rights guidelines on freedom of expression online and offline.
https://eeas.europa.eu/sites/eeas/files/eu_human_rights_guidelines_on_freedom_of_expression_online_
and_offline_en.pdf
European Council. (2015). European Council meeting (19 and 20 March 2015)—Conclusions (EUCO 11/15).
https://www.consilium.europa.eu/media/21888/european-council-conclusions-19-20-march-2015-en.pdf
European Council. (2018a). European Council conclusions on the Salisbury attack. European Council - Council
of the European Union. https://www.consilium.europa.eu/en/press/press-releases/2018/03/22/europe ancouncil-conclusions-on-the-salisbury-attack/
European Council. (2018b). Council recommendation of 22 May 2018 on key competences for lifelong learning
(2018/C
189/01).
https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legalcontent/EN/TXT/PDF/?uri=CELEX:32018H0604(01)&from=es
European Council. (2018c). European Council meeting (28 June 2018)—Conclusions (EUCO 9/18).
https://www.consilium.europa.eu/media/35936/28-euco-final-conclusions-en.pdf
European Council. (2018d). EU HEX-ML 18 (PACE): European Union hybrid exercise multilayer 18 (parallel and
coordinated exercise). https://data.consilium.europa.eu/doc/document/ST-13577-2018-INIT/en/pdf
European Council. (2019a). Non paper on attribution of malicious cyber activities in the context of the
framework
for
a
joint
EU
diplomatic
response
to
malicious
cyber
activities.
http://www.statewatch.org/news/2019/mar/eu-council-cyber-6852-REV-1-19.pdf
European Council. (2019b). Complementary efforts to enhance resilience and counter hybrid threats—Council
conclusions (10 December 2019)
(No. 14972/19). Council of the European
Union.
https://data.consilium.europa.eu/doc/document/ST-14972-2019-INIT/en/pdf
European Council. (2020a). EU restrictive measures in response
http://www.consilium.europa.eu/en/policies/sanctions/ukraine-crisis/
to
the
crisis
in
Ukraine.
European Council. (2020b, March). Sanctions: How and when the EU adopts restrictive measures. Policies.
https://www.consilium.europa.eu/en/policies/sanctions/
European Court of Auditors. (2019). Challenges to effective EU cybersecurity policy.
https://www.eca.europa.eu/Lists/ECADocuments/BRP_CYBERSECURITY/BRP_CYBERSECURITY_EN.pdf
European Court of Auditors. (2020). Audit preview—Action Plan Against Disinformation. European Court of
Auditors. https://www.eca.europa.eu/lists/ecadocuments/ap20_04/ap_disinformation_en.pdf
European External Action Service. (2016a). Shared vision, common action: A stronger Europe. A global strategy
for
the
European
Union's
foreign
and
security
policy.
https://eeas.europa.eu/sites/eeas/files/eugs_review_web_0.pdf
European External Action Service. (2016b). A Global Strategy for the European Union's Foreign And Security
Policy. https://eeas.europa.eu/sites/eeas/files/eugs_review_web_0.pdf
European External Action Service. (2020, June). EU-China Strategic Dialogue: Remarks by High
Representative/Vice-President Josep Borrell at the
press conference.
EEAS
Homepage.
https://eeas.europa.eu/headquarters/headquarters-homepage/80639/eu-china-strategic-dialogueremarks-high-representativevice-president-josep-borrell-press_en
European Journalists Association. (2017). XXIX Seminario Internacional de Seguridad y Defensa. ¿Hacia un
nuevo (des)orden mundial? http://www.apeuropeos.org/xxix-seminario-internacional-de-segurida d-ydefensa-hacia-un-nuevo-desorden-mundial/
143
STOA | Panel for the Future of Science and Technology
European Parliament. (2016a). European Parliament resolution of 4 February 2016 on the human rights
situation in Crimea, in particular of the Crimean Tatars.
European Parliament. (2016b). European Parliament resolution of 12 May 2016 on the Crimean Tatars.
https://www.europarl.europa.eu/doceo/document/TA-8-2016-0218_EN.html?redirect
European Parliament. (2016c). Directive (EU) 2016/1148 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 6 July
2016 concerning measures for a high common level of security of network and information systems across the
Union (L 194/1). https://eur-lex.europa.eu/eli/dir/2016/1148/oj
European Parliament. (2016d). European Parliament resolution of 23 November 2016 on EU strategic
communication to counteract propaganda against it by third parties (P8_TA(2016)0441).
http://www.europarl.europa.eu/doceo/document/TA-8-2016-0441_EN.pdf
European Parliament. (2017a). European Parliament legislative resolution of 6 April 2017 on the proposal for a
regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council amending Regulation (EC) No 539/2001 listing the third
countries whose nationals must be in possession of visas when crossing the external borders and those whose
nationals
are
exempt
from
that
requirement
(Ukraine).
https://www.europarl.europa.eu/doceo/document/TA-8-2017-0129_EN.html?redirect
European Parliament. (2017b). European Parliament resolution of 16 March 2017 on the Ukrainian prisoners in
Russia and the situation in Crimea. https://www.europarl.europa.eu/doceo/document/TA-8-20 1 7 0087_EN.html?redirect
European Parliament. (2018a). European Parliament resolution of 12 December 2018 on the implementation of
the EU Association Agreement with Ukraine. https://www.europarl.europa.eu/doceo/document/TA-8-20 1 8 0518_EN.html?redirect
European Parliament. (2018b). Defence of academic freedom in
https://www.europarl.europa.eu/doceo/document/TA-8-2018-0483_EN.pdf
the
EU's
external
action.
European Parliament. (2019). European Parliament recommendation of 13 March 2019 to the Council and the
Vicepresident of the Commission / High Follow up taken by the EEAS two years after the EP report on EU strategic
communication to counteract propaganda against it by third parties Representative of the Union for Foreign
Affairs and Security Policy concerning taking stock of the follow-up taken by the EEAS two years after the EP report
on EU strategic communication to counteract propaganda against it by third parties (2018/2115(INI) )
(P8_TA(2019)0187). https://www.europarl.europa.eu/doceo/document/TA-8-2019-0187_EN.pdf
European Parliament. (2020). EU coordinated action to combat the Covid-19 pandemic and its consequences
Parliament
Resolution
P9_TA(2020)0054).
(European
https://www.europarl.europa.eu/doceo/document/TA-9-2020-0054_EN.pdf
European Parliament and the Council. (2000). Directive 2000/31/EC of the European Parliament and the Council
of 8 June 2000 on certain legal aspects of information society services, in particular electronic commerce, in the
Internal Market. https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/PDF/?uri=CELEX:32000L0031&from=EN
European Union Agency for Fundamental Rights. (2017). Second European Union Minorities and
Discrimination Survey. Muslims – Selected findings. https://fra.europa.eu/sites/default/files/fra_uploads/fra2017-eu-minorities-survey-muslims-selected-findings_en.pdf
European Union Institute for Security Studies. (2016). EU strategic communications with a view to
European
Parliament.
counteracting
propaganda.
http://www.europarl.europa.eu/RegData/etudes/IDAN/2016/578008/EXPO_IDA(2016)578008_EN.pdf
Europol.
(2018).
Internet
organised
crime
threat
https://www.europol.europa.eu/sites/default/files/documents/iocta2018.pdf
Eurostat. (2020). Individuals' level of digital skills.
144
assessment
2018.
Strategic communications as a key factor in countering hybrid threats
Executive Officer of the President. (2019). Securing the information and communications technology and
services supply chain (Executive Order No. 13873). https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/FR-2019-0 5 17/pdf/2019-10538.pdf
FactBar EDU. (2018). Elections approach – are you ready? Fact-checking for educators and future voters.
https://www.faktabaari.fi/assets/FactBar_EDU_Factchecking_for_educators_and_future_voters_13112018.pdf
Fägersten, B. (2016). For EU eyes only? Intelligence and European security (Brief Issue No. 8–2016). European
Union
Institute
for
Security
Studies.
https://www.iss.europa.eu/sites/default/files/EUISSFiles/Brief_8_EU_Intelligence_Cooperation. pdf
Fine, S. (2019). All at sea: Europe's crisis of solidarity on migration. European Council on Foreign Relations.
https://www.ecfr.eu/page/-/all_at_sea_europes_crisis_of_solidarity_on_migration.pdf
Fiott, D., & Parkes, R. (2019). The EU's response to hybrid threats (Chaillot Paper No. 151). EU Institute for
Security Studies. https://www.iss.europa.eu/sites/default/files/EUISSFiles/CP_151.pdf
Flanagan, S., Osburg, J., Binnendijk, A., Kepe, M., & Radin, A. (2019). Deterring Russian aggression in the Baltic
States
through
resilience
and
resistance.
RAND
Corporation.
https://www.rand.org/pubs/research_reports/RR2779.html
Foster, P., & Holehouse, M. (2016, January 16). Russia accused of clandestine funding of European parties as US
conducts
major
review
of
Vladimir
Putin's
strategy.
The
Telegraph.
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/russia/12103602/America-to-investigate-Russianmeddling-in-EU.html
G7. (2018). Charlevoix Commitment on
https://www.mofa.go.jp/files/000373846.pdf
Defending
Democracy
from
Foreign
Threats.
Galán, C. (2019, September 11). Certification as a control mechanism of Artificial Intelligence in Europe. SSRN.
https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=3451741
García-Muñoz, C. (2018). Achievements and limits of strategic communication for nation-building: The case
of Spain's Catalan region (1979-2017). Revista Internacional de Relaciones Públicas, VIII(15), 129–152.
https://dialnet.unirioja.es/descarga/articulo/6488996.pdf
General Intelligence and Security Service. (2005). Saudi influences in the Netherlands. Links between the
Salafist mission, radicalisation processes and Islamic terrorism. https://english.aivd.nl/binaries/ai vden/documents/publications/2005/01/06/saudi-influences-in-thenetherlands/saudiinfluencesinthenetherlands.pdf
General Intelligence and Security Service. (2010). Resilience and Resistance. Current trends and developments
in Salafism in the Netherlands. Government of the Netherlands. https://english.aivd.nl/binaries/ai vden/documents/publications/2010/04/14/resilience-and-resistance/resilienceandresistancedefpfdeng. pdf
General Intelligence and Security Service. (2015). Salafism in the Netherlands: Diversity and dynamics.
Government
of
the
Netherlands.
https://english.aivd.nl/binaries/ai vden/documents/publications/2015/09/24/salafism-in-the-netherlands-diversity-and-dynamics/salafism-inthe-netherlands.pdf
General Intelligence and Security Service. (2018). Syria's Legacy. Global jihadism remains a threat to Europe.
Government
of
the
Netherlands.
https://english.aivd.nl/binaries/ai vden/documents/publications/2018/11/09/the-legacy-of-syria-global-jihadism-remains-a-threat-toeurope/Legacy+of+Syria+-+Global+jihadism+remains+a+threat+to+Europe.pdf
General Intelligence and Security Service. (2019). AIVD Annual Report 2018. Ministry of the Interior and
Kingdom Relations - Government of the Netherlands. https://english.aivd.nl/binaries/ai vden/documents/annual-report/2019/05/14/aivd-annual-report-2018/AIVD+Annual+Report+2018.pdf
145
STOA | Panel for the Future of Science and Technology
Gerasimov, V. (2013, February). The value of science is in the foresight. New challenges demand rethinking
the forms and methods of carrying out combat operations. Military-Industrial Kurier.
https://jmc.msu.edu/50th/download/21-conflict.pdf
Gibson, K. H. (2019, September). Lessons learned from NATO's hybrid battlefield [Panel]. Defence News
Conference.
Gil, T. (2020, March 18). Coronavirus: Cómo el virus se volvió parte de la 'guerra' política entre EE.UU. y China.
BBC News Mundo. https://www.bbc.com/mundo/noticias-internacional-51938799
Global Spain. (2018). Who we are | #ThisIsTheRealSpain. https://www.thisistherealspain.com/en/quie ne ssomos/
Global Spain. (2019a). Spain: A global actor in the fight against
https://www.thisistherealspain.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/11/DOSIER-COP25INGL%C3%89S_web.pdf
climate
change.
Global
Spain.
(2019b).
The
truth
about
Catalonia's
bid
for
independence.
https://www.thisistherealspain.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/11/THE-TRUTH-ABOUT-THE-CATALANINDEPENDENCE-BID-28-nov-2019.pdf
Global
Spain.
(2019c).
Information
about
the
Catalan
independence
bid.
https://www.thisistherealspain.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/09/THE-TRUTH-ABOUT-THE-CATALANINDEPENDENCE-BID.pdf
GlobalFirePower.
(2020).
GFP
power
ranking
https://www.globalfirepower.com/global-ranks-previous.asp
index
of
nations
since
2005.
Real Decreto-ley 14/2019, de 31 de octubre, por el que se adoptan medidas urgentes por razones de
seguridad pública en materia de administración digital, contratación del sector público y
telecomunicaciones., BOE-A-2019-15790 20 (2019). https://www.boe.es/diario_boe/txt.php?id=BOE-A2019-15790
Goldman, E. (2007). Strategic communication: A tool for asymmetric warfare. Small Wars Journal.
https://smallwarsjournal.com/blog/strategic-communication-a-tool-for-asymmetric-warfare
Gotkowska, J. (2017, April 12). The Cyber and Information Space: A new formation in the Bundeswehr. Centre
for Eastern Studies - OSW. https://www.osw.waw.pl/en/publikacje/analyses/2017-04-12/cyber-andinformation-space-a-new-formation-bundeswehr
Government
of
Canada.
(2019a,
January).
G7
Rapid
Response
Mechanism.
https://www.canada.ca/en/democratic-institutions/news/2019/01/g7-rapid-response-mechanism.html
Government of Canada. (2019b, July 9). Cabinet Directive on the Critical Election Incident Public Protocol.
Government
of
Canada.
https://www.canada.ca/en/democratic-institutions/services/protectingdemocracy/critical-election-incident-public-protocol/cabinet.html
Government of Canada. (2019c, August 30). Online disinformation. https://www.canada.ca/en/canadianheritage/services/online-disinformation.html#a2
Government of Spain. (2012). Royal Decree 998/2012 of 28 June establishing the High Commission of the
Government for the Spain Brand and amending Royal Decree 1412/2000 of 21 July establishing the Foreign Policy
Council. https://www.boe.es/boe/dias/2012/06/29/pdfs/BOE-A-2012-8672.pdf
Government of Spain. (2018). Royal Decree 1266/2018 of 8 October amending Royal Decree 355/2018 of 6 June
restructuring
ministerial departments. https://www.boe.es/boe/dias/2018/10/09/pdfs/BOE-A-20 1 8 13715.pdf
Government of the Netherlands. (2014). The Netherlands comprehensive action programme to combat
jihadism. Overview of measures and actions. https://data2.unhcr.org/en/documents/download/44369
146
Strategic communications as a key factor in countering hybrid threats
Granville, K. (2018, March). Facebook and Cambridge Analytica: What You Need to Know as Fallout Widens. The
New York Times. https://www.nytimes.com/2018/03/19/technology/facebook-cambridge-analyticaexplained.html
Gressel, G. (2019). Protecting Europe against hybrid threats. European Council on Foreign Relations.
https://www.ecfr.eu/publications/summary/protecting_europe_against_hybrid_threats
Grieger, G. (2019). 5G in the EU and Chinese telecoms suppliers. European Parliamentary Research Service.
https://www.europarl.europa.eu/RegData/etudes/ATAG/2019/637912/EPRS_ATA(2019)637912_EN.pdf
GSMA. (2019, February 14). GSMA Calls on Europe to Safeguard Network Security and Competition in the Supply
of Telecommunications Infrastructure. Newsroom. https://www.gsma.com/newsroom/statement/gsmacalls-on-europe-to-safeguard-network-security/
Guilong,
Y. (2019). The impact of Artificial Intelligence
10.1080/09592318.2019.1682908).
https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/09592318.2019.1682908
on
hybrid
warfare
(DOI:
Hanlon, B., & Rosenberger, L. (2019). Countering Information Operations Demands A Common Democratic
Strategy. Alliance for Securing Democracy. https://securingdemocracy.gmfus.org/countering-informationoperations-demands-a-common-democratic-strategy/
Hansen, F., van der Noordaa, R., Bogen, O., & Sundbom, H. (2018). The Kremlin's trojan horses. Russian influence
in
Denmark,
The
Netherlands,
Norway
and
Sweden.
Atlantic
Council.
https://www.atlanticcouncil.org/publications/reports/the-kremlins-trojan-horses-3-0
Happold, M. (2016). Economic sanctions and international law: An introduction. Hart Publishing.
https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2837786
Heath, R. (2017, September). Russia 'downright lying' about military exercises: Slovak ex-envoy. POLITICO.
https://www.politico.eu/article/zapad-russia-downright-lying-about-military-exercises-zapad-tomasvalasek-eu-confidential-belarus-estonia-latvia-lithuania/
Heidi T., & Leerssen, P. (2019). An Analysis of Germany's NetzDG Law. Transatlantic High Level Working Group
on
Content
Moderation
Online
and
Freedom
of
Expression.
ivir.nl/publicaties/download/NetzDG_Tworek_Leerssen_April_2019.pdf
High Level Group on fake news and online disinformation- European Commission. (2018). A multidimensional approach to disinformation—Report of the independent High Level Group on fake news and online
disinformation (doi:10.2759/739290). https://op.europa.eu/en/publication-detail/-/publication/6ef4df8 b4cea-11e8-be1d-01aa75ed71a1
Hoffman, F. G. (2018). Examining Complex Forms of Conflict: Gray Zone and Hybrid Challenges. PRISM National Defense University, 7(4), 18. https://cco.ndu.edu/News/Article/1680696/examining-complex-formsof-conflict-gray-zone-and-hybrid-challenges/
Holdert, M., & Kouwenhoven, A. (2018, April). Geheime lijsten financiering moskeeën onthuld. Nieuwsuur.
https://nos.nl/nieuwsuur/artikel/2228686-geheime-lijsten-financiering-moskeeen-onthuld.html
Holroyd, M. (2019, June). Why did Sea-Watch 3 decide to enter Italian territorial waters? Euronews.
https://www.euronews.com/2019/06/26/why-did-sea-watch-3-decide-to-enter-italian-territorial-waters
Hoorens, S., Krapels, J., Long, M., Keatinge, T., Van der Meulen, N., Kruithof, K., Bellasio, J., Psiaki, A., & Aliyev,
G. (2015). Foreign financing of Islamic institutions in the Netherlands. RAND Europe.
https://www.rand.org/content/dam/rand/pubs/research_reports/RR900/RR992/RAND_RR992.pdf
House of Commons. Foreign Affairs Committee. (2019). A cautious embrace: Defending democracy in an age
of autocracies. https://publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm201919/cmselect/cmfaff/109/109.pdf
Huckle, S., & White, M. (2017). Fake news: A technological approach to proving the origins of content, using
University
of
Sussex.
blockchains.
147
STOA | Panel for the Future of Science and Technology
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/321790598_Fake_News_A_Technological_Approach_to_Provi
ng_the_Origins_of_Content_Using_Blockchains
Hybrid CoE. (2019). Countering disinformation: News media and legal resilience [COI Records]. European
Centre of Excellence and the Media Pool, part of the Finnish Emergency Supply Organization in Helsinki.
https://www.hybridcoe.fi/wp-content/uploads/2019/11/News-Media-and-Legal-Resilience_2019_rgb.pdf
Hybrid CoE. (2020a). Hybrid threats—Hybrid CoE. https://www.hybridcoe.fi/hybrid-threats/
Hybrid CoE. (2020b, June 25). The Covid-19 crisis situation – a hybrid warfare perspective. Hybrid CoE.
https://www.hybridcoe.fi/news/the-Covid-19-crisis-situation-a-hybrid-warfare-perspective/
IDC. (2019, June 18). The Growth in connected IoT devices is expected to generate 79.4ZB of data in 2025,
according
to
a
new
IDC
forecast.
IDC
Media
Center.
https://www.idc.com/getdoc.jsp?containerId=prUS45213219
Inspectorate for Security and Justice. (2017). Evaluation of the Netherlands comprehensive action programme
to combat jihadism. Government of the Netherlands. https://www.inspectie-jenv.nl/binaries/inspectie venj/documenten/rapporten/2017/09/06/evaluation-of-the-netherlands-comprehensive-actionprogramme-to-combatjihadism/Evaluation+of+the+Netherlands+comprehensive+action+programme+to+combat+jihadism.pdf
Institute of Democracy and Cooperation. (2016). Institut de la Democratie et de la Cooperation.
http://www.idc-europe.org/en/The-Institute-of-Democracy-and-Cooperation
Interfax-Ukraine. (2013, November 21). Ukrainian government issues decree to suspend preparations for
signing of association agreement with EU. https://en.interfax.com.ua/news/general/176073.html
Isaac, M., & Alba, D. (2019, September 4). Big Tech Companies Meeting With U.S. Officials on 2020 Election
Security. The New York Times. https://www.nytimes.com/2019/09/04/technology/2020-election-facebookgoogle.html
Janda, J. (2016). The Lisa Case—STRATCOM Lessons for European states (Security Policy Working Paper No.
11/2016).
Federal
Academy
for
Security
Policy.
https://www.baks.bund.de/sites/baks010/files/working_paper_2016_11.pdf
Jintao, H. (2007, October 25). Hu Jintao's report at 17th
http://www.china.org.cn/english/congress/229611.htm#7
Party
Congress.
China.Org.Cn.
Johnson, D. (2018, December). VOSTOK 2018: Ten years of Russian strategic exercises and warfare
preparation. NATO Review. https://www.nato.int/docu/review/articles/2018/12/20/vostok-2018-ten-ye arsof-russian-strategic-exercises-and-warfare-preparation/index.html
Jongbloed, B. (2018). Public Funding of Higher Education. In Encyclopedia of International Higher Education
Systems and Institutions (Teixeira, P., Shin, J.). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-017-9553-1_74-1
Karnitschnig, M. (2020, March 18). China is winning the coronavirus propaganda war. POLITICO.
https://www.politico.eu/article/coronavirus-china-winning-propaganda-war/
Kogan, S., Moskowitz, T., & Niesnner, M. (2019). Fake News: Evidence from Financial Markets.
https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/Delivery.cfm/SSRN_ID3375153_code2148550.pdf?abstractid=3237763&mirid
=1
Koren,
S.
(2019,
July).
Introducing
the
News
Provenance
Project.
https://open.nytimes.com/introducing-the-news-provenance-project-723dbaf07c44
Krastev,
I.
(2005,
October
19).
Russia's
post-orange
https://www.opendemocracy.net/en/postorange_2947jsp/
148
empire.
Open
NYT
Open.
Democracy.
Strategic communications as a key factor in countering hybrid threats
Kremidas, C. (2019, November). The vital role of public-private partnerships in countering hybrid threats.
Friends of Europe. https://www.friendsofeurope.org/insights/the-vital-role-of-public-private-partnershi psin-countering-hybrid-threats/
Krusten, M. (2019, November). Fighting fake news with blockchain [E-Estonia]. https://e-estonia.com/fightingfake-news-with-blockchain/
Lackner, H. (2020). Yemen: Why the Riyadh Agreement is collapsing. European Council on Foreign Relations.
https://www.ecfr.eu/article/commentary_yemen_why_the_riyadh_agreement_is_collapsing
Laity, M. (2018). NATO and Strategic Communications: 'The Story So Far'. The Three Swords Magazine, 33, 65–
73.
http://www.jwc.nato.int/images/stories/threeswords/THREESWORDSMARCH2018_Websitereleased.pdf
Lannes, B. (1999). Propaganda. Britannica. https://www.britannica.com/topic/propaganda
Lasconjarias, G., & Dyčka, L. (2017). Dealing with the Russian Bear: Improving NATO's Response to Moscow's
Military
Exercise
Zapad
2017.
Istituto
Affari
Internazionali.
https://www.iai.it/sites/default/files/iaicom1718.pdf
Laub, Z., & Robinson, K. (2020). Yemen
https://www.cfr.org/backgrounder/yemen-crisis
in
crisis.
Council
on
Foreign
Relations.
Lázaro, A. (2014). Ucrania, entre Rusia y Occidente (UOC).
Lenoir-Grand, R. (2017, July 6). 'Enhanced Forward Presence', la respuesta disuasoria de la OTAN ante la
amenaza
rusa.
73/2017.
http://www.ieee.es/Galerias/fichero/docs_opinion/2017/DIEEEO7 32017_Respuesta_disuasoria_OTAN_Amenaza_Rusia_RicardoLenoir.pdf
Leonir-Grand, R. (2017). Zapad 2017: Contexto, impacto y posibles consecuencias de los ejercicios militares
rusos.
Instituto
Español
de
Estudios
Estratégicos.
http://www.ieee.es/Galerias/fichero/docs_opinion/2017/DIEEEO1022017_Zapad_Rusia_RicardoLenoir_Grand.pdf
Lesaca, J. (2017). Why did Russian social media swarm the digital conversation about Catalan independence?
https://www.societatcivilcatalana.cat/sites/default/files/russian-social-media-intervention.pdf
Lessenski, M. (2018). Common sense wanted. Resilience to 'post-truth' and its predictors in the new media literacy
Open
Society
Institute.
index
2018.
http://osi.bg/downloads/File /2018/MediaLiteracyIndex2018_publishENG.pdf
Luhn, A. (2015, September). Russia funds Moscow conference for US, EU and Ukraine separatists. The Guardian.
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2015/sep/20/russia-funds-moscow-conference-us-eu-ukraineseparatists
Mahmood, F., & Ali, A. (2015, April 10). Pakistan MPs draft resolution urging neutrality in Yemen crisis. Reuters.
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-yemen-security-pakistan/pakistan-mps-draft-resolution-urgingneutrality-in-yemen-crisis-idUSKBN0N10NP20150410
Marcin, M. (2016). Russia and its international image: From Sochi Olympic Games to annexing Crimea.
International
Studies. Interdisciplinary
Political
and Cultural
Journal,
18(2),
165–186.
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/315823482_Russia_and_Its_International_Image_From_Sochi_
Olympic_Games_to_Annexing_Crimea
Marcos, J. (2016, June). Podemos: Venezuela Assembly probes Podemos funding from Chávez regime. El País.
https://elpais.com/elpais/2016/06/17/inenglish/1466151454_189201.html
Marsden, C., & Meyer, T. (2019). Regulating disinformation with artificial intelligence. European Parliamentary
Research
Service.
https://www.europarl.europa.eu/RegData/etudes/STUD/2019/624279/EPRS_STU(2019)624279_EN.pdf
149
STOA | Panel for the Future of Science and Technology
Martens, B., Aguiar, L., Gómez-Herrera, E., & Mueller-Langer, F. (2018). The Digital Transformation of News
Media and the Rise of Disinformation and Fake News (JRC Digital Economy Working Paper No. 2018–02).
European Commission, Joint Research Centre. https://www.ssrn.com/abstract=3164170
Maslen, G. (2019, September). Sharp fall in number of visas issued to Chinese students. University World News.
https://www.universityworldnews.com/post.php?story=20190925132954975
McKew,
M.
(2017).
The
Gerasimov
Doctrine.
POLITICO
Magazine.
https://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2017/09/05/gerasimov-doctrine-russia-foreign-policy-215538
Milosevich-Juaristi, M. (2017a). Zapad-2017: Las maniobras militares rusas como ingrediente de la disuasión
estratégica
(ARI
64/2017).
Royal
Instituto
Elcano.
http://www.realinstitutoelcano.org/wps/wcm/connect/3aaf1c78-3fe8-4245-b01b-a6ab449401f0/ARI642017-MilosevichJuaristi-Zapad-2017-maniobras-militares-Rusia-disuasionestrategica.pdf?MOD=AJPERES&CACHEID=3aaf1c78-3fe8-4245-b01b-a6ab449401f0
Milosevich-Juaristi, M. (2017b). La “combinación”, instrumento de la guerra de la información de Rusia en
Cataluña
(ARI
86/2017).
Elcano
Royal
Institute.
http://www.realinstitutoelcano.org/wps/wcm/connect/da86de12-7bb7-43cd-9b5e-72a4b8e9c351/ARI862017-MilosevichJuaristi-Combinacion-instrumento-guerra-informacion-RusiaCataluna.pdf?MOD=AJPERES&CACHEID=da86de12-7bb7-43cd-9b5e-72a4b8e9c351
Ministry of Awqaf & Islamic Affairs. (n.d.). About the Ministry. Retrieved 13 July 2020, from
http://islam.gov.kw/Pages/en/AwqafDetails.aspx?id=7
Ministry of Defence of Georgia. (2017). Strategic
https://mod.gov.ge/uploads/2018/pdf/SDR-EN G.pdf
Defence
Review
2017-2020
(p.
38).
Ministry of Foreign Affairs. (2017, October). Foreign Minister Dmitriy Medoev's Answers to Questions from TASS.
Ministry of Foreign Affairs - Republic of South Ossetia. http://www.mfa-rso.su/en/node/2347
Ministry of Foreign Affairs, European Union and Cooperation. (2018). España Global.
Https://Www.Thisistherealspain.Com/En/.
http://www.exteriores.gob.es/Portal/en/PoliticaExteriorCooperacion/MarcaEsp/Paginas/inicio.aspx
Ministry of National Defence of the Republic of Lithuania. (2017). National Security Strategy. Seimas of the
Republic
of
Lithuania.
https://kam.lt/en/defence_policy_1053/important_documents/strategical_documents.html
Ministry of national defence, & State security department of the Republic of Lithuania. (2020). National threat
assessment 2020. https://www.vsd.lt/wp-content/uploads/2020/02/2020-Gresmes-En.pdf
Ministry of Overseas Pakistanis & Human Resource Development. (2019). Year Book 2017-2018. Government
of Pakistan. http://ophrd.gov.pk/SiteImage /Misc/files/Year-Book-2017-18.pdf
Ministry of the Presidency, Relations with the Courts and Democratic Memory. (2020). Orden PCM/1030/2020,
de 30 de octubre, por la que se publica el Procedimiento de actuación contra la desinformación aprobado por el
Consejo de Seguridad Nacional. https://www.boe.es/diario_boe/txt.php?id=BOE-A-2020-13663
Mueller, R. (2019). Report On The Investigation Into Russian Interference In The 2016 Presidential Election. US
Department of Justice. https://www.justice.gov/storage/report.pdf
National Coordinator for Security and Counterterrorism. (2019). Terrorist Threat Assessment for the
Netherlands
51.
Government
of
the
Netherlands.
https://english.nctv.nl/documents/publications/2019/12/19/terrorist-threat-assessment-netherlands-51
NATO. (2009a, April). NATO - Official text: Strasbourg / Kehl Summit Declaration Issued by the Heads of State and
Government participating in the meeting of the North Atlantic Council in Strasbourg / Kehl.
https://www.nato.int/cps/en/natolive/news_52837.htm
NATO. (2009b). NATO Strategic Communications Policy (PO(2009)0141).
150
Strategic communications as a key factor in countering hybrid threats
NATO. (2014, September). NATO - Official text: Wales Summit Declaration issued by the Heads of State and
Government participating in the meeting of the North Atlantic Council in Wales.
https://www.nato.int/cps/en/natohq/official_texts_112964.htm
NATO - EU Council. (2017a). Progress report on the implementation of the common set of proposals endorsed
by
NATO
and
EU
Councils
on
6
December
2016.
https://www.nato.int/nato_static_fl2014/assets/pdf/pdf_2017_06/20170619_170614-Joint-progressreport-EU-NATO-EN.pdf
NATO - EU Council. (2017b). Second progress report on the implementation of the common set of proposals
endorsed
by
NATO
and
EU
Councils
on
6
December
2016.
https://www.consilium.europa.eu/media/35577/report-ue-nato-layout-en.pdf
NATO - EU Council. (2018). Third progress report on the implementation of the common set of proposals
endorsed by EU and NATO Councils on 6 December 2016 and 5 December 2017.
https://www.consilium.europa.eu/media/35578/third-report-ue-nato-layout-en.pdf
NATO - EU Council. (2019). Fourth progress report on the implementation of the common set of proposals
endorsed by NATO and EU Councils on 6 December 2016 and 5 December 2017.
https://www.nato.int/nato_static_fl2014/assets/pdf/pdf_2019_06/190617-4th-Joint-progress-report-EUNATO-eng.pdf
NATO StratCom Centre of Excellence. (2018). Hybrid Threats: Confucius Institute. NATO StratCom Centre of
Excellence. https://www.stratcomcoe.org/hybrid-threats-confucius-institutes
NATO StratCom CoE. (2019). Hybrid Threats: A Strategic Communications Perspective. NATO.
https://www.stratcomcoe.org/download/file/fid/80212
NATO
StratCom
CoE.
(2020a).
About
Strategic
https://www.stratcomcoe.org/about-strategic-communications
Communications
|
StratCom.
NATO StratCom CoE. (2020b). About us | StratCom. https://www.stratcomcoe.org/about-us
Nemr, C., & Gangware, W. (2019). Weapons of mass distraction: Foreign State-sponsored disinformation in the
digital age. Park Advisors. https://www.state.gov/wp-content/uploads/2019/05/Weapons-of-M assDistraction-Foreign-State-Sponsored-Disinformation-in-the-Digital-Age.pdf
Newnham, R. (2011, February). Oil, carrots, and sticks: Russia's energy resources as a foreign policy tool.
Journal
of
Eurasian
Studies,
2,
134–143.
https://www.academia.edu/16662374/Oil_carrots_and_sticks_Russia_s_energy_resources_as_a_foreign_
policy_tool
newsinenglish.no staff. (2017, October). Russians jammed flights'
https://www.newsinenglish.no/2017/10/06/russians-jammed-flights-gps/
GPS
[News in
English].
Nimmo, B., Barojan, D., & Aleksejeva, N. (2017). Russian Narratives on NATO's Deployment. DFRLab.
https://medium.com/dfrlab/russian-narratives-on-natos-deployment-616e19c3d194
NIS Cooperation Group. (2020). Cybersecurity of 5G networks EU Toolbox of risk mitigating measures (No.
01/2020). https://ec.europa.eu/newsroom/dae/document.cfm?doc_id=64468
Norberg, J. (2018). Training for War—Russia's Strategic-level Military Exercises 2009-2017 (FOI-R--4627--SE; p.
110). Swedish Defence Research Agency - Ministry of Defence. https://www.foi.se/rest-api/report/FOI-R-4627--SE
Northstream.
(2019).
5G
Outlook
in
Europe.
content/uploads/2019/09/5G_Northstream_Opinion_.pdf
http://northstream.se/northstreamwp /w p-
OECD. (2019). Education at a glance 2019. OECD indicators. https://doi.org/10.1787/f8d7880d-en
151
STOA | Panel for the Future of Science and Technology
Office of the Director of National Intelligence. (2017). Background to “Assessing Russian Activities and
Intentions in Recent US Elections”: The Analytic Process and Cyber Incident Attribution [Intelligence Community
Assessment]. https://www.dni.gov/files/documents/ICA_2017_01.pdf
Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights. (2020). Report on the human rights
situation
in
Ukraine
16
November
2019
to
15
February
2020.
https://www.ohchr.org/Documents/Countries/UA/29thReportUkraine_EN.pdf
Oliveira, I. (2016, February). National Front seeks Russian cash for election fight. Politico.Eu.
https://www.politico.eu/article/le-pen-russia-crimea-putin-money-bank-national-front-seeks-russian-cashfor-election-fight/
Open Society Institute Sofia. (2019, November). The Media Literacy Index 2019: Just think about it. Open
Society Institute Sofia. https://osis.bg/?p=3356&lang=en
Ortega, A. (2020, February). Digital decolonisation: The EU's new ideas on data and artificial intelligence.
European
Council
on
Foreign
Relations.
https://www.ecfr.eu/article/commentary_digital_decolonisation_the_eus_new_ideas_on_data_and_artifi
cial
OSCE. (2014). Report of the Chief Monitor for the OSCE Special Monitoring Mission to Ukraine, Ambassador
Ertugrul Apakan, to the OSCE Permanent Council.
Ottis, R. (2008). Analysis of the 2007 Cyber Attacks Against Estonia from the Information Warfare Perspective.
Cooperative
Cyber
Defence
Centre
of
Excellence.
https://ccdcoe.org/uploads/2018/10/Ottis2008_AnalysisOf2007FromTheInformationWarfarePerspective.p
df
Panda, A. (2018, February 20). Three Years After Declaring Neutrality in Yemen Conflict, Pakistan to Send Troops
to Saudi Arabia. The Diplomat. https://thediplomat.com/2018/02/three-years-after-declaring-neutrality-inyemen-conflict-pakistan-to-send-troops-to-saudi-arabia/
Panetta, K. (2017). Gartner top strategic predictions for 2018 and beyond. Gartner.
https://www.gartner.com/smarterwithgartner/gartner-top-strategic-predictions-for-2018-and-beyond/
Parker, N., Landay, J., & Walcott, J. (2017, April 19). Putin-linked think tank drew up plan to sway 2016 US
election—Documents. Reuters. https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-russia-election-exclusive/pu tinlinked-think-tank-drew-up-plan-to-sway-2016-us-election-documents-idUSKBN17L2N3
Parliament of Australia. (2018). National Security Legislation Amendment (Espionage and Foreign Interference)
Bill
2018.
https://www.aph.gov.au/Parliamentary_Business/Bills_LEGislation/Bills_Search_Results/Result?bId=r6022
Peter, L. (2018, July). Slovakia alarmed by pro-Putin Night Wolves bikers' base. BBC News.
https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-45019133
Peter, M., Alexander, S., Cambridge, A., Renee, S., Kang, R., Kiefer, S., Takayama, K., Laci, F., Michael, G., & Katie,
M. (2019). Combating targeted disinformation campaigns. A whole-of-society issue. 2019 Public-private
analytic exchange program. https://www.dhs.gov/sites/default/files/publications/ia/ia_combatti ngtargeted-disinformation-campaigns.pdf
Petraitis, D. (2019). The Anatomy of Zapad-2017: Certain Features of Russian Military Planning. Lithuanian
Annual Strategic Review - The Journal of Military Academy of Lithuania, 16. https://doi.org/10.2478/lasr-2018 0009
Petterson, R. (2017). Outsourced to China. Confucius Institutes and Soft Power in American Higher Education.
National Association of Scholars. https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED580866.pdf
Pew Research Center. (2017). Europe's growing Muslim population. https://www.pewforum.org/wpcontent/uploads/sites/7/2017/11/FULL-REPORT-FOR-WEB-POSTING. pdf
152
Strategic communications as a key factor in countering hybrid threats
Popescu, N. (2006). Russia's Soft Power Ambitions (Policy Brief No. 115). Centre for European Policy Studies.
http://aei.pitt.edu/11715/1/1388.pdf
Portman, R., & Carper, T. (2019). China's Impact on The U.S. Education System—Staff Report. United States
Senate - Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations - Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental
Affairs.
https://www.hsgac.senate.gov/imo/media/doc/PSI%20Report%20China's%20Impact%20on%20the%20U
S%20Education%20System.pdf
Qayyum, A., Qadir, J., Janjua, M. U., & Sher, F. (2019). Using Blockchain to rein in the new post-truth world
and check the spread of fake news. IT Professional, 21(4), 16–24. https://arxiv.org/pdf/1903.11899.pdf
Radford, A., Wu, J., Amodei, D., Clark, J., Brundage, M., & Sutskever, I. (2019, February 14). Better language
models and their implications. OpenAI. https://openai.com/blog/better-language-models/
Radicalisation Awareness Network. (2019). Preventing radicalisation to terrorism and violent extremism.
https://ec.europa.eu/home-affairs/sites/homeaffairs/files/what-wedo/networks/radicalisation_awareness_network/ran-best-practices/docs/ran_collectionapproaches_and_practices_en.pdf
Recknagel, C. (2014, March 28). Complex Ties: Russia's Armed Forces Depend On Ukraine's Military Industry.
RadioFreeEurope. https://www.rferl.org/a/russia-ukraine-military-equipment/25312911.html
Rivera, R., Tarín, C., Villar, J. P., Ribagorda, A., Estévez, J. M., De Fuentes, J., & González, L. (2017). Achieving a
sovereign and trustworthy ICT industry in the EU. European Parliament Research Service.
http://www.europarl.europa.eu/RegData/etudes/STUD/2017/614531/EPRS_STU(2017)614531_EN.pdf
Robinson, N. (2019, August). Australian universities risk catastrophe due to over-reliance on Chinese students,
expert warns. ABC News. https://www.abc.net.au/news/2019-08-21/australian-universities-too-depende nton-chinese-students-report/11427272
Robinson, O., Coleman, A., & Sardarizadeh, S. (2019). A report of anti-disinformation initiatives. Oxford
Technology
&
Elections
Commission.
https://comprop.oii.ox.ac.uk/w pcontent/uploads/sites/93/2019/08/A-Report-of-Anti-Disinformation-Initiatives
RTVE. (2018, January 25). Stoltenberg sobre Cataluña: 'Es un asunto doméstico de España y la OTAN no debe
involucrarse'—RTVE.es. https://www.rtve.es/alacarta/videos/telediario/td2-otan-250118/4438218/
Rusnáková, S. (2017). Russian New Art of Hybrid Warfare in Ukraine. Slovak Journal of Political Sciences, 17(3),
343–380.
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/321955926_Russian_New_Art_of_Hybrid_Warfare_in_Ukraine
Sahlins, M. (2014, November 16). Confucius Institutes: Academic Malware. The Asia-Pacific Journal. Japan
Focus,
12.
https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/409b/c95e0f51e092652552c85e9f639b11c3fb5d.pdf?_ga=2.261689166.
2125407473.1582539775-42699789.1579782498
Sanders, L. (2019, June). Germany mulls requests to host Sea-Watch migrants. Deutsche Welle (DW).
https://www.dw.com/en/germany-mulls-requests-to-host-sea-watch-migrants/a-49243085
Sari, A. (2019). Legal resilience in an era of grey zone conflicts and hybrid threats (Working Paper No. 2019/1).
Exeter Centre for International Law. https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=3315682
Sari, A. (2020). Hybrid threats and the law: Concepts, trends and implications. Hybrid CoE.
https://www.hybridcoe.fi/wp-content/uploads/2020/04/Hybrid-CoE-Trend-Report-3.pdf
Sasse, G. (2017). Revisiting the 2014 Annexation of Crimea. Carnegie Europe - Carnegie Endowment for
International Peace. https://carnegieeurope.eu/2017/03/15/revisiting-2014-annexation-of-crimea-p ub68423
153
STOA | Panel for the Future of Science and Technology
Scheidt, M. (2019). The European Union versus external disinformation campaigns in the midst of information
warfare: Ready for the battle? College of Europe. https://www.coleurope.eu/system/files_force/researchpaper/edp_1_2019_scheidt.pdf?download=1
Schleicher,
A.
(2019).
PISA
2018—Insights
and
interpretations.
OECD.
https://www.oecd.org/pisa/PISA%202018%20Insights%20and%20Interpretations%20FINAL%20PDF.pdf
Schreck, C. (2019). From 'Not us' to 'Why hide it?': How Russia denied its Crimea invasion, then admitted it.
https://www.rferl.org/a/from-not-us-to-why-hide-it-how-russia-denied-its-crimea-invasion-then-admittedit/29791806.html
Schultz, T. (2017, February 23). Why the 'fake rape' story against German NATO forces fell flat in Lithuania.
Deutsche Welle (DW). https://www.dw.com/en/why-the-fake-rape-story-against-german-nato-forces-fe llflat-in-lithuania/a-37694870
Sciorilli, S. (2019, July). Italian prosecutors investigate reports that League sought Russian funding. Politico.Eu.
https://www.politico.eu/article/italian-prosecutors-investigate-reports-that-league-sought-russianfunding-matteo-salvini-aide-gianluca-savoini/
Securities and Exchange Commission. (2015, November). Securities and Exchange Commission v. James Alan
Craig,
(Civil
Action
No.
3:15-cv-05076)—Litigation
Release
No.
23401.
https://www.sec.gov/litigation/litreleases/2015/lr23401.htm
Segura, C. (2017, September). Assange alienta que la rebelión en Cataluña se extienda a nivel global. El País.
https://elpais.com/ccaa/2017/09/26/catalunya/1506456387_836185.html
Selyukh, A. (2013, April 23). Hackers send fake market-moving AP tweet on White House explosions. Reuters.
https://www.reuters.com/article/net-us-usa-whitehouse-ap/hackers-send-fake-market-moving-ap-tweeton-white-house-explosions-idUSBRE93M12Y20130423
Shang, W., Liu, M., Lin, W., & Jia, M. (2018). Tracing the source of news based on blockchain. 2018 IEEE/ACIS
17th
International
Conference
on
Computer
and
Information
Science
(ICIS),.
https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/abstract/document/8466516
Shiraz, C. (2015, April 27). Will Pakistan-Saudi relations survive Yemen
https://www.mo.be/en/analysis/will-pakistan-saudi-relations-survive-yemen-crisis
crisis?
MO*.
Siddiqui, N. (2019, December 21). Saudi Arabia denies pressurising Pakistan to withdraw from Malaysia summit.
Dawn - World. https://www.dawn.com/news/1523518
Silvela, E. (2017). La comunicación estratégica (No. 72; Documentos de Seguridad y Defensa). Instituto
Español
de
Estudios
Estratégicos.
http://www.ieee.es/Galerias/fichero/cuadernos/DocSeguridadyDefensa_72.pdf
Skinner, M. (2019, December). The Financial Risk of Overreliance on Chinese Student Enrollment. World
Education News + Reviews. https://wenr.wes.org/2019/12/the-financial-risk-of-overreliance-on-chine se student-enrollment
Smith, H. (2017). In the era of hybrid threats: Power of the powerful or power of the “weak”? Hybrid CoE.
https://www.hybridcoe.fi/wp-content/uploads/2017/12/Strategic-Analysis-October-2017.pdf
Snegovaya, M. (2015). Putin's information warfare in Ukraine. Soviet origins of Russia's hybrid warfare. Institute
for
the
Study
of
War.
http://www.understandingwar.org/sites/default/files/Russian%20Report%201%20Putin%27s%20Informat
ion%20Warfare%20in%20Ukraine-%20Soviet%20Origins%20of%20Russias%20Hybrid%20Warfare.pdf
Sommerbauer, J. (2016). Die Ukraine im Krieg: Hinter den Frontlinien eines europäischen Konflikts
(Kremayr&Scheriau).
154
Strategic communications as a key factor in countering hybrid threats
Spanish
Government.
(2019,
February).
Referencia
del
Consejo
de
Ministros.
https://www.lamoncloa.gob.es/consejodeministros/referencias/Paginas/2019/refc20190215.aspx#CIBERSE
GURIDAD
Spanish
National
Security
Department.
(2019). National Cybersecurity
https://www.dsn.gob.es/en/documento/estrategia-nacional-ciberseguridad-2019
Strategy
2019.
Starr, D. (2009). Chinese Language Education in Europe: The Confucius Institutes. European Journal of
Education, 44, 65–82. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1465-3435.2008.01371.x
State Security Department of the Republic of Lithuania. (2019). National Threat Assessment 2019. State
Security Department of the Republic of Lithuania - Ministry of National Defence. https://www.vsd.lt/wpcontent/uploads/2019/02/2019-Gresmes-internetui-EN.pdf
Stella, M., Ferrara, E., & De Domenico, M. (2018). Bots increase exposure to negative and inflammatory
content in online social systems. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of
America. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1803470115
Stern, D. (2017, June). Lithuanians 'sleep peacefully' thanks to German troops. Politico.
https://www.politico.eu/article/lithuania-nato-russia-baltics-germany-sleep-peacefully-thanks-to-germantroops/
Stewart, S. (2009). Democracy promotion before and after the 'colour revolutions'. Democratization, 16, 645–
660. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/13510340903082978
StopFake.org. (2020). About us | Struggle against fake information about events in Ukraine.
https://www.stopfake.org/en/about-us/
Stratpol. (2016). Panorama of global security environment 2015-2016.
content/uploads/2016/05/panorama-2015-2016-FINAL.pdf
https://stratpol.sk/w p-
Sukhankin, S. (2017, September 8). Russia Tests EW Capabilities Ahead of Zapad 2017. Eurasia Daily Monitor,
14. https://jamestown.org/program/russia-tests-ew-capabilities-ahead-of-zapad-2017/
Supreme
Court
Prosecutor.
(2018). Causa
especial
3/20907/2017.
Supreme
Court.
https://cronicaglobal.elespanol.com/uploads/s1/39/18/31/0 /392195369-conclusiones-provisionales-deltribunal-supremo.pdf
Supreme Headquarters Allied Powers Europe. (2018). NATO's Enhanced Forward Presence Battlegroup
Lithuania Marks Its 4th Rotation. SHAPE - Supreme Headquarters Allied Powers Europe.
https://shape.nato.int/efp/latest-news/natos-enhanced-forward-presence-battlegroup-lithuania-marksits-4th-rotation
Swedish Civil Contingencies Agency. (2018a). Countering information influence activities—A handbook for
communicators. https://rib.msb.se/filer/pdf/28698.pdf
Swedish
Civil
Contingencies
Agency.
(2018b).
If
crisis
or
war
comes.
https://www.dinsakerhet.se/siteassets/dinsakerhet.se/broschyren-om-krisen-eller-kriget-kommer/omkrisen-eller-kriget-kommer---engelska-2.pdf
Sytas, A., Siebold, S., Martin, M., & Chopra, T. (2017, February 17). Lithuania looking for source of false
accusation of rape by German troops. Reuters. https://www.reuters.com/article/us-lithuania-nato/lithua nialooking-for-source-of-false-accusation-of-rape-by-german-troops-idUSKBN15W1JO
Tajani, A. (2017, September). Letter to Ms. Beatriz Basterrechea, MEP. https://beatrizbecerra.eu/w pcontent/uploads/2017/09/Respuesta-Tajani-Catalu%C3%B1a.pdf
Tasiu, A. (2018). Hostile gatekeeping: The strategy of engaging with journalists in extremism reporting.
Defence Strategic Communications - Officional Journal of the NATO Strategic Communications Centre of
Excellence, 5, 51–85. https://www.stratcomcoe.org/download/file/fid/79989
155
STOA | Panel for the Future of Science and Technology
Tatham, S. (2008). Strategic Communications: A Primer. ARAG Special Series, Defence Academy of the United
Kingdom, 8(28).
The economist. (2017, August). Putin the boots in Belarus—Russia's biggest war game in Europe since the cold
war alarms NATO. The Economist. https://www.economist.com/europe/2017/08/10/russias-biggest-w argame-in-europe-since-the-cold-war-alarms-nato
The Guardian. (2013, November 21). Ukraine suspends talks on EU trade pact as Putin wins tug of war.
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/nov/21/ukraine-suspends-preparations-eu-trade-pact
The Lithuania Tribune. (2017, September). Two Russian military aircraft violated Lithuanian airspace. The
Lithuania Tribune. https://lithuaniatribune.com/two-russian-military-aircraft-violated-lithuanian-airspace foreign-ministry/
The
White
House.
(1987).
National
Security
Strategy
of
the
United
https://history.defense.gov/Portals/70/Documents/nss/nss1987.pdf?ver=2014-06-25-121104-753
States.
The
White
House.
(2010).
National
Security
Strategy.
https://obamawhitehouse.archives.gov/sites/default/files/rss_viewer/national_security_strategy.pdf
The White House. (2017). National Security Strategy of the United States of
https://www.whitehouse.gov/wp-content/uploads/2017/12/NSS-Final-12-18-2017-0905.pdf
America.
The
White
House.
(2020).
Executive
order
on
preventing
online
censorship.
https://www.whitehouse.gov/presidential-actions/executive-order-preventing-online-censorship/
Tomkiw, L. (2018). For Ukraine's wartime fact-checkers. The battle rages on. Wilson Quarterly.
https://www.wilsonquarterly.com/quarterly/the-disinformation-age/for-ukraines-wartime-fact-checkersthe-battle-rages-on/
Trembo, S. (2017, February 14). Seimas ratified Defence Cooperation Agreement with the USA. Lietuvos
Respublikos Seimas. https://www.lrs.lt/sip/portal.show?p_r=119&p_k=2&p_t=169440
Treverton, G., Thvedt, A., Chen, A., Lee, K., & McCue, M. (2018). Addressing Hybrid Threats. Hybrid COE.
https://www.hybridcoe.fi/wp-content/uploads/2018/05/Treverton-AddressingHybridThreats.pdf
UK
Government.
(2011).
Prevent
strategy
(Cm
8092).
https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/9797
6/prevent-strategy-review.pdf
UK Government. (2017). The government response to the eight report from the Home Affairs Select Committee
session 2016-17, HC 135: Radicalisation : the counter-narrative and identifying the tipping point (Cm 9555).
https://www.parliament.uk/documents/commons-committees/home-affairs/Correspondence-1719/Radicalisation-the-counter-narrative-and-identifying-the-tipping-point-government-response-EighthReport-26-17-Cm-9555.pdf
UK
Government.
(2020,
January
28).
Foreign
Secretary's
statement
https://www.gov.uk/government/speeches/foreign-secretary-statement-on-huawei
on
Huawei.
UK Ministry of Defence. (2019). Defence Strategic Communication: An approach to formulating and executing
strategy (Joint Doctrine Note No. 2/19). Development, Concepts and Doctrine Centre.
https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/8043
19/20190523-dcdc_doctrine_uk_Defence_Stratrategic_Communication_jdn_2_19.pdf
United Nations Security Council. (2014). REVIVAL OF ISLAMIC HERITAGE SOCIETY. United Nations Security
Council. https://www.un.org/securitycouncil/sanctions/1267/aq_sanctions_list/summaries/entity/revi valof-islamic-heritage-society
University Foreign Interference Taskforce. (2019). Guidelines to counter foreign influence in the Australian
university
sector.
https://docs.education.gov.au/system/files/doc/other/ed19-0222_-_int_ _ufit_guidelines_acc.pdf
156
Strategic communications as a key factor in countering hybrid threats
US
Department
of
Defence.
https://www.hsdl.org/?view&did=716398
(2008).
Principles
of
Strategic
Communication.
US Senate. (2019). Report of the selected committee on intelligence on Russian active measures campaigns and
interference in the 2016 U.S. election. Volume 1: Russian efforts against election infrastructure with additional
views. https://www.intelligence.senate.gov/sites/default/files/documents/Report_Volume1.pdf
Vendil, C., & Oxenstierna, S. (2017). Russian Think Tanks and Soft Power (FOI-R-4451-SE). FOI - Swedish
Defence Research Agency. https://www.foi.se/rest-api/report/FOI-R--4451--SE
Vidalon, D. (2019, November). France will not exclude China's Huawei from 5G rollout: Minister. Reuters.
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-france-huawei-minister/france-will-not-exclude-chinas-huawei-from5g-rollout-minister-idUSKBN1XZ1U9
Vikmanis, V. (2017, October 28). Electronic War—Are We Ready? Zapad-2017 training. Latvijas Avīze.
https://www.la.lv/elektroniskais-kars-vai-esam-gatavi
Vojtískova, V., Novotný, V., Schmid-Schmidsfelden, H., & Potapova, K. (2016). The Bear in Sheep's Clothing—
Russia's Government-Funded Organisations in the EU. Wilfried Martens Centre for European Studies.
https://www.martenscentre.eu/sites/default/files/publication-files/russia-gongos_0.pdf
von der Leyen, U. (2019). A Union that strives for more. My agenda for Europe.
https://ec.europa.eu/commission/sites/beta-political/files/political-guidelines-next-commission_en.pdf
Vrije Universiteit Brussel. (2019, December). The VUB will not continue its cooperation with the Confucius
Institute. https://press.vub.ac.be/the-vub-will-not-continue-its-cooperation-with-the-confucius-institute#
Warrell, H. (2019). Britain to review Prevent anti-radicalisation programme | Financial Times.
https://www.ft.com/content/b4cc0fde-1e5f-11e9-b2f7-97e4dbd3580d
Warsaw Institute. (2017). ZAPAD - 2017. Lessons Learned. The Warsaw Institute Foundation.
https://warsawinstitute.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/10/ZAPAD-2017-russia-belarus-militarymanuovers-drills-summary-eng.pdf
Wilson, A. (2014). Ukraine Crisis: What it means for the West. Yale University Press.
Wilson, P., & Kennedy, A. (1999). Trustworthiness as an Economic Asset. International Food and Agribusiness
Management Review, 2(2), 179–193. https://www.ifama.org/resources/Documents/v2i2/Wil sonKennedy.pdf
Yousaf, F. (2016). The plight of Religious Minorities in Pakistan. South Asia Democratic Forum.
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/324245465_SADF_Focus_The_plight_of_Religious_Minorities_
in_Pakistan
Zhukov, Y. (2015). The economics of rebellion in Eastern Ukraine. Vox Ukraine. https://voxukraine.org/en/t he economics-of-rebellion-in-eastern-ukraine/
157
STOA | Panel for the Future of Science and Technology
ANNEXES
Methodology and resources used
Two main methodological resources have been used to perform the analysis of hybrid threats and
strategic communications. The first one has been a detailed desk research, taking into account an
extensive collection of documents that can be consulted in the References section.
The second resource has been interviews with key experts in the topic. The following experts were
interviewed during the project. We want to thank them for their valuable ideas and contributions:
•
Georgios Chatzichristos, Member of the Operational Security Unit at ENISA.
•
CN Enrique Cubeiro, Chief of Staff at the Spanish Joint Cyber-Defence Command.
•
Gustav Gressel, Senior Policy Fellow within the Wider Europe Programme at the European
Council on Foreign Relations.
•
Lutz Guellner, Head of Division of Strategic Communications at the European External Action
Service.
•
Irene Lozano, former Secretary of State of España Global. Spanish Government.
•
Jānis Sārts, Director of the NATO Strategic Communications Centre of Excellence.
•
Elvira Tejada de la Fuente, Chief Prosecutor of the Computer Criminal Unit. State Attorney
General of Spain.
•
Dr. Teija Tiillikainen, Director of the Hybrid CoE, the European Centre of Excellence for
Countering Hybrid Threats.
•
Veronika Víchová, Head of the Kremlin Watch Program at the European Values Think-tank.
158
A theoretical description of hybrid threats is
complemented by an analysis of diverse case studies,
describing the geopolitical context in which the hybrid
threat took place, its main features, the mechanisms
related to strategic communications used by the victim
to counter the hybrid threat and its impact and
consequences.
This is a publication of the Scientific Foresight Unit (STOA)
EPRS | European Parliamentary Research Service
This document is prepared for, and addressed to, the Members and staff of the European
Parliament as background material to assist them in their parliamentary work. The content of
the document is the sole responsibility of its author(s) and any opinions expressed herein should
not be taken to represent an official position of the Parliament.
ISBN 978-92-846-7812-9 | doi: 10.2861/14410 | QA-02-21-202-EN-N
QA-02-21-202-EN-N
This study describes the key features, technologies and
processes involved in strategic communications to
counter hybrid threats and their components.