COMMITTEE: Civil Dimension of Security SUBJECT: Counteracting Russian Hybrid Warfare - How should NATO support member states’ civilian agencies in combating Russian disinformation campaigns causing social unrest and destabilization? AUTHOR MEMBER: Efekan Körpez RANK: Co-chairman Committee on the Civil Dimension of Security The Committee on the Civil Dimension of Security focuses on the aspects of Euro-Atlantic security which, directly or indirectly, relate to the responsibilities, protection and welfare of civilians. Introduction Hybrid warfare constitutes an important threat to modern society. Hybrid warfare involves different means of warfare that are often perceived as unconventional. One of these means is disinformation. Disinformation is deliberately disseminating false and deceptive information, often done by governments. In turn, public perception gets manipulated in a way that favours the government deploying disinformation and worsens the image of the government that is the target of the disinformation campaign. The incumbent government of the Russian Federation led by Russian president Vladimir Putin is a prominent user of disinformation as has been revealed by numerous scandals that have arisen in various countries over the course of the last 10 years. While the disinformation campaign initially targeted countries in the vicinity of the Russian Federation, (notorious examples being the campaigns run in Georgia and Ukraine where military campaigns were led alongside disinformation ones) the Russian government has gradually expanded the list of targeted countries by engaging in illicit disinformation activities in countries such as the United States of America, the United Kingdom and so forth. Definitions of key words Disinformation Disinformation is false and deceptive information that is deliberately spread to deceive and to alter the public opinion. Hybrid warfare Hybrid warfare is done through blending conventional means of warfare such as military confrontation with other means that are deemed “unconventional” such as cyberattacks, disinformation campaigns, diplomatic hostility and economic sanctions. Fake news A form of disinformation, fake news comprises false information and hoaxes that reach the masses via different means of communication including newspapers, television and social media. Cyberattack A cyberattack is a malicious and illicit virtual attack targeting someone else’s computer system and aimed at seizing data stored in the targeted system. A brief insight into Russian disinformation Tracing the origins of Russian disinformation Russia and its predecessor, the Soviet Union, have a long history of engagement in disinformation activities. Their engagement is so deeply rooted that the English term “disinformation” is in fact a translation of its Russ ian counterpart, дезинформация (dezinformatsiya). The term “dezinformatsiya” was allegedly coined by the infamous Soviet leader Joseph Stalin and its use can be traced back to the 1920s. Russian use began following the formation of a “special disinformation office” within the Soviet government back in 1923 and the term was defined in the 1952 edition of the Great Soviet Encyclopedia as "false information with the intention to deceive public opinion". The main target of the Soviet disinformation campaigns abroad was, like today, the West, a vague geopolitical term encompassing the United States and its allies located mainly in Europe. The global political landscape in the latter half of the 20 th century was dominated by the Cold War, an ideological war between the United States and its allies, united under the umbrella military organization NATO (North Atlantic Treaty Organization), and the Soviet Union and its sphere of influence, jointly known under the name “the Second World”. Direct military confrontation was not attested over the course of the Cold War, however, indirect military confrontations commonly known as “proxy wars” took place during the war and other means of hybrid warfare including disinformation campaigns were employed. A notable incident of Soviet disinformation The 20 th century was marked by numerous incidents of Soviet disinformation. A notable one is the infamous “Operation INFEKTION” in which it was alleged that the United States had invented the immune disease commonly known as AIDS as a part of its biological weapons programme. This news circulated in over 80 countries, and only in 1992, after the dissolution of the Soviet Union, it was admitted that “Operation INFEKTION” was in fact a disinformation campaign launched by the Soviets. The motivations behind the Operation INFEKTION that can also be observed in other Soviet and the current Russian disinformation campaigns include: -Undermining the United States' credibility, -Sparking anti-American sentiments abroad, -Prompting the political isolation of the United States in an international scale, -Escalating tensions between countries with American military bases and the US government and so forth. The image of a deceptive newspaper article published as a part of Operation INFEKTION. Source: sutori.com Nearly two decades of hibernation and the subsequent awakening In 1991, the Soviet Union disintegrated, and 15 new countries emerged from the collapse of the union. The Russian Federation was deemed the successor of the Soviet Union. During the 1990s, Russia was ravaged by a plethora of internal problems. Russia-West relations in the first half of the last decade were relatively tension-free and thus there were no major instances of Russian disinformation during these years. However, after some turning points that were key in shaping these relations (one of them being the Russo-Georgian war that is thoroughly examined on the following pages), the relations started deteriorating. A map showing all 15 states that formed as results of the dissolution of the Soviet Union. Source: The Guardian. This deterioration in relations brought Russian aggression with it, thus awakening the hibernating Russian disinformation giant. Since the start of the Ukrainian political crisis in 2013, we have been facing an intense disinformation campaign led against NATO and its members by the Russian government. Tensions have never been more escalated as we are currently at the height of a political crisis between Russia and the West. Recent incidents of Russian disinformation have mostly targeted NATO, its members on the both shores of the Atlantic Ocean and some nations that are on the path to join NATO, notably Ukraine and Georgia. These incidents are thoroughly examined on the following pages of our study guide. The simultaneous rise of social media and Russian disinformation: more than just a coincidence? Disinformation used to disseminate through traditional means of communication such as newspapers, television and radio broadcasts. That is a largely different case compared to the influx of disinformation that we are facing today. Nowadays disinformation, mostly in the form of “fake news”, is reaching us via social media networks that saw a steep rise in users with the simultaneous increase in the global internet penetration. These platforms are notoriously devoid of regulations on the content circulating in them, and this lack of regulation attracts large numbers of false and deceptive news articles, often known as fake news. After major fake news incidents that broke out in various countries, some governments have started negotiations with social media giants including Facebook and Twitter as an attempt to hinder the large-scale disinformation of the public via these networks. It is undeniable that social media networks have become an inseparable part of our contemporary lives as many researches have pointed out. Researches have also found out that many of us get their news from these websites, so it is crucial that the news circulating on these websites be reliable and legitimate. Countries and organizations affected Georgia Russia-Georgia relations have been strained ever since the dissolution of the Soviet Union. Escalating tensions between the two countries ultimately culminated in a war where Russian troops invaded Georgia in 2008, known as the Russo-Georgian war. The reason behind the military intervention was cited as “protecting the interests of the oppressed Russian citizens and minority groups inhabiting South Ossetia and Abkhazia”. However, the international community viewed the intervention as motivated by the Russian desire to halt the Westernization attempts predominating the Georgian political landscape such as Georgia’s interest in becoming a member of NATO. The widespread consensus is that both Russia and Georgia are to blame for the war. Numerous incidents of Russian disinformation were reported during the war. Ukraine Ukraine has been amidst a large-scale political turmoil for the last couple of years. The ever- growing political polarization between Westernization supporters and Russophiles has created a massive societal split in the country which has evolved into a full-fledged destructive war devastating the Eastern parts of the country. Ex-president Viktor Yanukovych’s government suspended an agreement that would have resulted in closer bonds between the European Union and Ukraine, opting for closer ties with Russia. This sparked massive protests all around the country by supporters of Westernization that are infamously known under the name “Euromaidan”. The protests ultimately came to an end with the ousting of ex-president Yanukovych, who later fled the country for Russia. Furthermore, in March 2014, the Russian Federation illegally annexed the Crimean Peninsula, internationally recognized as Ukrainian territory. All these developments resulted in Russia launching a disinformation offensive against Ukraine. An image of the 2013 pro-EU Euromaidan protests in Ukraine. Source: iwm.at NATO and its members NATO and its member states, notably the United States, France, Germany and the Netherlands, have been subject to mass-scale Russian disinformation campaigns. Russia has infamously interfered and attempted to influence the outcome by altering the public perception through disinformation campaigns, mostly in the form of fake news, in the United States presidential election of 2016 and also in the French presidential election of 2017. Many more cases of Russian disinformation have been reported in other NATO members over the course of the last few years and these cases are thoroughly examined on the following part of our study guide. Recent developments by country Georgia The Russo-Georgian information war of 2008 There were countless misinformation campaigns led by the Russian government during the Russo-Georgian war. The Russians claimed that the Georgian forces had carried out a genocide against Ossetians living in South Ossetia. Russian officials claimed a South Ossetian death toll of 2000 out of a total population of 70000 people. These were cited by the Russian government as justifications of its military occupation. However, figures obtained from workers at Tskhinvali Regional Hospital located in the regional capital Tskhinvali point out a different reality, where the number of casualties does not add up to more than a few dozens. These figures are backed by human rights organizations stationed there at the time. A photograph of war-torn Tskhinvali taken during the war. Source: Reuters Another notable Russian disinformation campaign was when Russia claimed that its troops deployed in Georgia were there as “peacekeepers” on a humanitarian mission to protect civilians. This has been widely disproved by various journalists, human rights observers and many others who had said that the Russian troops advanced to Georgian cities with strategic importance such as Gori and the port city of Poti, both located outside the breakaway regions of Abkhazia and South Ossetia. It has been also documented that the Russian forces raided and destroyed Georgian military bases and civilian residences and went as far as carrying out an ethnic cleansing of Georgians living in South Ossetia with the help of the Russian-backed puppet government that had assumed de facto control over the region. The South Ossetian puppet government has partially acknowledged the allegations of ethnic cleansing against Georgians. There was extensive media coverage of the war in the Russian media as Russian journalists were brought into South Ossetia along with the Russian troops occupying the territory. There was footage of the advancing Russian troops in wide circulation, with journalists claiming that they were there to protect Russian citizens and Ossetians from the atrocities committed by Georgians. The Russian media was highly focused on these atrocities as they were used as justifications of the military occupation. There were indeed some atrocities committed by the Georgian side, but these have been highly exaggerated and some of them even fabricated by the Russian media. The media coverage had significant psychological effects on the local populations of the breakaway regions as the footage of advancing Russian troops prompted Ossetians to believe that Russians were the winning side. There wasn’t much coverage of the Georgian military in the Georgian media due to the lack of footage. Georgia later responded by blacking out Russian TV stations and severely restricting access to Russian media. International television channels that have Russian government backing such as RT aired several news reports on the war, one of these reported being titled “Genocide”. Russian officials accused Western governments and media of having anti-Russian biases. The Russian deputy foreign minister was quoted as saying “We want television screens in the West to be showing not only Russian tanks, and texts saying Russia is at war in South Ossetia and with Georgia, but also to be showing the suffering of the Ossetian people, the murdered elderly people and children, the destroyed towns of South Ossetia, and [regional capital] Tskhinvali. This would be an objective way of presenting the material.” Ukraine The aftermath of the ouster of ex-President Yanukovych The democratic ousting of Yanukovych was described as a coup by Russian president Vladimir Putin. A Russian disinformation campaign targeting the new pro-Western stance of the Ukrainian government and the Euromaidan protests was launched quickly afterwards. The elaborately developed strategy for this campaign by the GRU -the Russian military spy agency- included creating fake accounts on social media disguised under personas that were posed as ordinary Ukrainians coming from different parts of the country who were feeling discontent with the Euromaidan protests and posting ideologically motivated comments on various websites both in and outside Ukraine, including the renowned social media network Facebook and its Russian counterpart, VK. There is an instance of one impostor that went by the name Ivan Galitsin commenting on an online article of a British newspaper about a Ukrainian opposition politician saying “There was a coup in Ukraine. I live in Kiev. I was on the Maidan, but peaceful protest ended two months ago, when we were displaced by armed nationalists. It's a nightmare. Fascists came to us again 70 years after the Second World War. I do not want this future for Ukraine." Many other ideologically motivated comments were posted through these accounts. One provocative comment targeted at Russophiles, read "Brigades of zapadentsy (pro-Western protesters) are now on their way to rob and kill us. It is very clear that these people hold nothing sacred.'' Numerous other comments were posted to spur hostility towards the new central government in Kiev that was labelled as “fascists” and “Nazis”. This disinformation campaign has succeeded for the most part and one of its most resounding capabilities was to garner support for the secession of the Crimean Peninsula from Ukraine. GRU formed a number of social media groups advocating secession and these groups attracted hundreds of thousands of users in just one day. Subsequently, a controversial referendum on secession -that was widely considered illegitimate by the international community- was held in Crimea and the results were - unsurprisingly- overwhelmingly in favour of secession. A covert military occupation had already started before the referendum and the Russian military established absolute control over Crimea after the secession, which was swiftly followed by the annexation of Crimea by Russia. Only a handful of countries considers the Russian annexation to be legitimate while the widespread stance in the international community views the annexation as an illicit occupation. Neither the secession nor the annexation was met with domestic opposition in Crimea, arguably an effect of the successful Russian disinformation campaign and the suppression of any such opposition. Crimea is under Russian control to date. Armed men believed to be Russian soldiers patrolling outside the naval headquarters in the Crimean Peninsula following its take-over by pro-Russian sources. Source: Reuters The current Russian disinformation campaign led by Russophile hackers A full-scale Russian disinformation campaign is still in place in Ukraine. It should be noted that the main target of this campaign is Ukrainians themselves rather than the international community. Deceptive news articles aimed at demoralizing and concerning the Ukrainian people, prompting a public backlash against the Ukrainian government and creating distrust in it are still in wide circulation in Ukraine. Russia is waging an information war on Ukraine as a part of the indirect conflict between the two states in which it clearly emerges as the stronger belligerent. The objectives of this disinformation campaign seem to have succeeded to this day. A hacktivist group named “CyberBerkut” is in the front line of the disinformation campaign. The organization has threatened the Ukrainian government numerous times with leaking secret, classified information and documents in case its desires are not met and documents labelled classified that have been alleged by the organization to pertain to the Ukrainian government are routinely made public on their website. The credibility of these “leaked documents” is highly questionable. In one of these documents leaked in 2015, it was alleged that the Ukrainian Deputy Defence Secretary of the time had covertly diverted the arms shipments supplied by the USA to be used by the frontline forces fighting separatist rebels in eastern Ukraine and sold the arms to the Assad regime for illicit financial gains. The content of the document was made public on both CyberBerkut’s own website and on a Russian news portal. The legitimacy of the allegations made are disputable as it is almost impossible to prove them accurate or false. It is however, highly possible that CyberBerkut, as an organization that has disseminated false, fabricated information on numerous occasions, may have fabricated this document in order to demoralize the Ukrainian troops stationed in the Eastern regions of the country and get them thinking that they are actively being betrayed and sacrificed for nothing by a corrupt central government. The same case is valid for the general Ukrainian public. The overall aim in this disinformation campaign is to build deep public distrust in the Ukrainian government. Since its first emergence in March 2014, CyberBerkut has been deeply engaged in illicit activities including cyber espionage. It has carried out cyberattacks against NATO and the governments of Germany and Ukraine. The membership of the organization is largely anonymous; however, it has been often claimed that the group has links to the Crimean Berkut, a former unit that was a part of the Ukrainian Interior Ministry until the annexation of Crimea. After the annexation the unit was incorporated into Russian Interior Ministry. The Ukrainian identity of CyberBerkut complies with the Russian tactic of creating internal opposition. CyberBerkut published sets of documents in which the Ukrainian military has allegedly committed deliberate atrocities against the civilian population in Eastern Ukraine. These include so- called “false-flag” attacks (an attack committed by the armed force of a country that is blamed on terrorists) carried out by the Ukrainian army. In one document, a field commander purportedly ordered some army units to carry out such an attack, but it has been deemed highly unlikely that a high-ranking military official would order a war crime to be committed. In another document that CyberBerkut claims to be leaked from the Ukrainian Security Service, it is alleged that the Ukrainian military carried out a rocket attack targeting the small city of Volnovakha and a civilian bus was shelled during the rocket strike, resulting in civilian casualties. The fact that the “evidence” put forward by the group largely contradicts its allegations and the separatist rebels initially taking responsibility prior to the surfacing of the news on the attack largely cast doubt on CyberBerkut’s allegations. It is now widely believed that the separatist rebels were indeed the perpetrators of the attack and this points out the possibility that the document published by CyberBerkut might have been a forged one as a part of a wider disinformation campaign waged by Russia on Ukraine. Another important fact not to overlook is the Russian government’s statement on the Volnovakha attack denouncing “the violations of human rights committed by Kiev”. A photograph of the civilian bus shelled during the Volnovakha attack. Source: VK A document concerning a prominent right-wing politician, Dmytro Yarosh -deemed a neo-Nazi by the group- and his political party proved the most scandalous. In one of these documents it was alleged that a high-ranking military official ordered the formation of “protective detachments” consisting of “the volunteer corps” that are in turn a paramilitary organization created by Yarosh’s party that helps the Ukrainian army combat separatists in the East. The reason for the formation of these detachments were attributed to the prevention of the mass defection of Ukrainian soldiers near the town of Debeltseve where rebels had actively tried to trap Ukrainian soldiers. In response, Yarosh threatened to split the army in two and create a parallel armed force that would have, according to him, received the support of both regular Ukrainian soldiers and the volunteers. This event may be interpreted as a disinformation campaign aimed at widening the divide in the Ukrainian coalition government while benefitting from the cracks in it. Should the campaign have succeeded, the Ukrainian public would have got trapped in the notion that their government is corrupt and betraying on them. This aim was exemplified in another document where Yarosh was alleged to have illegally seized properties and businesses belonging to Ukrainian citizens and to deposit the stolen monetary gains in a foreign bank account. Other notable Russian disinformation incidents A news report by the Russian state television aired an interview with a “refugee” who claimed that the crucifixion of the three-year-old son of a pro-Russian militant took place in front of the locals who had been forcibly gathered in Lenin Square in the city of Sloviansk. It was later revealed that there was no place named Lenin Square in the city of Sloviansk and the husband of the interviewee was a pro- Russian rebel. This is a typical example of the methods used in the blatant disinformation war waged against Ukraine by the Russian government. A relatively new case of disinformation arose in 2017 when the spokesperson for the Ministry of Defence of the Donetsk People’s Republic -the rebel government controlling a sizeable portion of the Donetsk Oblast that is in war with the Ukrainian forces, widely believed to have Russian government backing- ludicrously claimed that an “Islamic brigade” with as many as 500 members was deployed to the port city of Mariupol by the Ukrainian army and the brigade established control over the port of Mariupol where they were engaged in illegal trafficking of chemical weapons to “unidentified” Middle Eastern countries. The claim was met with ridicule by both locals and outsiders and was proven false and deceptive after fact-checking. The common tactic of inserting a slight amount of truth into the story that is commonly seen in similar disinformation campaigns was observed in this case, as the “Islamic brigade” that the spokesman referred to did exist in reality, as a controversial battalion made up of mostly Muslim, Crimean Tatar volunteers whose aim was to help the Ukrainian army on the battlefield, led by a renown Crimean Tatar leader who fled Crimea after its annexation by Russia. A photograph of the port of Mariupol that was claimed to have been taken over by an “Islamic brigade” by an official from the separatist government based in Donetsk. Source: bizbilla.com It is almost impossible to disprove allegations sourcing from groups like CyberBerkut or persons with ties to the Russian government right away but taking those allegations with a grain of salt will always be helpful while looking at them as there is always a high risk that they are fabricated information that is there to deceive people. NATO and its members Unlike the two cases examined above, the Russian Federation has not launched any military invasions in what can vaguely be defined as “the West”, consisting mostly of NATO members. Nonetheless, a major disinformation campaign led by Russia aimed at swaying the public opinion and also the election results in favour of itself and politicians it backs has plagued the West for the last couple of years. Russian interference in the US presidential election of 2016 Perhaps the most overt and the most blatant of these disinformation campaigns was waged on the United States by Russia as a way to interfere in its presidential election back in 2016. The Russian government has repeatedly denied all allegations about election meddling, but the findings of the American intelligence suggests the other way around, many have said that there is concrete evidence concerning Russian interference. Russia employed several strategies to influence the US election. It has financially supported politicians with ties to it in order to gain leverage over the next US government. Vladimir Putin made it clear with his own words that he was supporting Donald Trump’s election bid. Much was done to decrease popular support for Hillary Clinton, Donald Trump’s main opponent during the elections. Two main ways contributed to the deterioration of the public image of Hillary Clinton. One was leaking classified information by launching cyber-attacks on the Democratic Party’s institutions (the political party of Hillary Clinton) and the other was launching a nationwide disinformation campaign. “Fake news” inarguably played the biggest role in this disinformation campaign. Fake news proved highly efficient to Russia in creating a polarized political landscape in the USA during the run-up to the presidential election. The Russian government founded “troll factories” by recruiting hundreds of employees who were assigned with the task of sharing racially and politically divisive fake comments on American websites and creating numerous fake news articles while as Americans coming from a wide array of racial and political backgrounds. All this led to escalating tensions between the opposite ends of the American political spectrum. The employees mostly comprised of young Russians in their 20s who were paid up to $2,100 a month for engaging in these activities. An ex-employee of one of these troll factories was quoted as saying “The way you chose to stir up the situation, whether it was commenting [on] the news section or on political forums, it didn’t really matter....First, you gotta be a redneck from Kentucky, then you need to be a white guy from Minnesota, you’ve slaved away all your life and paid your taxes, and then 15 minutes later you are from New York posting in some Black slang.” In 2015, well before the 2016 election, the troll-factory network had more than 800 people doing this kind of work, producing propaganda videos, infographics, memes, reports, news, interviews and various analytical materials to persuade the public. The trolls were most active on social networking websites such as Facebook and Instagram. This doesn’t come out very surprising as two-thirds of the American populations reportedly get at least some news on social media websites and the content on these websites is relatively unregulated, turning them into a safe haven for this kind of activity. Many fake news incidents can be traced back to these organizations operated by the Russian intelligence and it has been reported that these “fake news articles” may have reached at least 126 million Americans on Facebook alone. A photograph of various Russian newspapers’ front pages reporting on Donald Trump’s election victory. Source: AFP The “Lisa case” in Germany Similar cases also arose in European countries. A major incident took place in Germany back in 2016 when the story of a thirteen-year-old girl of mixed Russian and German background named “Lisa” who was claimed to have been kidnapped and raped by migrants after spending the night with her boyfriend circulated around the country. Russian media outlets were key in disseminating the story and Russian officials accused Germany of endeavouring to cover up the story. The news spurred protests across Germany until Lisa eventually confessed the truth, which ultimately resulted in the story turning out to be nothing more than an elaborately planned disinformation campaign. Germany, as a leading member of NATO, was key in imposing sanctions on Russia after its occupation of Ukrainian territory. This consequently led to Germany becoming a main target of Russian disinformation aimed at weakening German chancellor Angela Merkel’s authority and destabilizing the political landscape. RT and Sputnik are the main Russian media outlets operating outside Russian borders and are widely known to act as mouthpieces of the Russian government abroad. These media outlets played a big role in the circulation of the “Lisa case” and they constitute a platform for radical political organizations and political parties that are supportive of the Russian government, propose lifting sanctions put on Russia and promote the anti-Ukrainian rhetoric mainly used by the Russian government about the crisis in Ukraine. A photograph of the German protests sparked by the “Lisa case”. Source: BBC The anti-Ukrainian disinformation offensive during the Dutch referendum of 2016 A referendum was held in the Netherlands in 2016 on whether the Dutch public approved of the EU-Ukraine Association Agreement, of which the Russian government was a staunch opponent. To sway the public opinion of the Dutch people, a group consisting of local pro-Russian, anti-Ukraine expatriates led by a left-wing Dutch MP, vocally opposed the agreement, denounced the new, pro- Western government of Ukraine as a “bloodthirsty kleptocracy” and disseminated their stance through in-person meetings, television broadcasts and social media networks. Furthermore, pro-Russian agents disguised as Ukrainians actively endeavoured to infiltrate town hall meetings and a pro-Russian conservative political party reiterated the Russian government’s talking points and spread Moscow’s propaganda videos. The outcome of the referendum was against the agreement, but it should be acknowledged that the outcome cannot be fully attributed to the Russian attempts to sway the public perception of Ukraine. Other influencing factors such as the growing Euroscepticism amongst the Dutch public were decisive in shaping the outcome. The Russian disinformation campaign during the French presidential election of 2017 Russia’s endeavours to interfere in the French presidential election of 2017 were arguably the most blatant election interference carried out by Russia in Europe. Pernicious cyber attacks and disinformation campaigns almost solely targeted the current French president Emmanuel Macron and his party, En Marche. Just one and a half days before the second round of the French presidential election between Emmanuel Macron and his right-wing opponent Marine Le Pen, 9 gigabytes of stolen files accompanied by 21 thousand emails were leaked by a team of hackers. It is not known for sure if these hackers had Russian government backing but it is widely suspected that the Russian intelligence might be behind the plot. Macron’s campaign staff have maintained that there were “hundreds, if not thousands of attacks” against their systems originating from Russia and its vicinity. Out of all the candidates that ran for office in the last French presidential election, Macron was the only candidate that was a vocal opponent of Putin’s government. Putin has spoken fondly of the other candidates, including Marine Le Pen, who met with Putin in Moscow and received direct financial assistance from a bank that is affiliated with the Russian government. The French branches of the Russian media outlets Sputnik and RT were highly active during the run-up to the election and their coverage of the election was blatantly biased against Macron, as shown by an analysis. Among the conspiracy theories and narratives spread by the Russian media outlets by Macron are allegations that he is an agent for American financial interests and secretly gay. A network of hyperactive automated accounts (bots) expressing pro-Russian, anti-EU views helped to promote these stories, although it is not known whether these accounts originated in Russia. Pro-Russian candidates benefitted greatly from both overt and covert Russian government support. For instance, a questionable study published by a Moscow-based consultancy declared François Fillon, a candidate whom Putin had spoken fondly of, the leading candidate. The study was promoted as being based on a reliable Sputnik and this led the French polling commission to swiftly denounce the Russian outlet. RT and Sputnik were barred from attending events organized at En Marche’s headquarters. After winning the election, Macron continued to take a hard line on the Russian outlets. Macron, in response to an RT journalist complaining about the tight restrictions imposed on her network, said “Russia Today (RT) and Sputnik were agents of influence and propaganda that spread falsehoods about me and my campaign.” A provocative news headline by Russia Today (RT) targeting Macron. Source: RT via YouTube The Salisbury poisoning On March 4, 2018, Sergei Skripal, a former Russian military officer and a former agent covertly working for the British intelligence agency while ostensibly working for the Russian intelligence agency, and her daughter were poisoned in Salisbury, England with a nerve agent originating from Russia, according to British officials. The perpetrator of the poisoning is widely believed to be the Russian state and the British government also shares this stance. However, the Russian government has dismissed all accusations and launched a disinformation campaign by diverting attention to other countries. Russian media outlets have blamed the poisoning on other governments including the US and the UK itself and claimed that the nerve agent originated from other countries, claims include the Czech Republic, Slovakia and Sweden. The UK-Russia relations hit an all-time low after this diplomatic scandal. Other notable incidents Disinformation campaigns have been reported in countries all across Europe, including the Czech Republic, Slovakia, the Balkan states, the Baltic states, Poland and so forth. It should be noted that the disinformation campaigns carried out in the Baltic states often included provoking the ethnic Russian minority inhabiting those countries, much like what we have seen in Ukraine. Estonia, the northernmost of the Baltic states, made an appreciable move in countering Russian disinformation by launching a television station targeting the sizeable Russian minority of the country in September 2015. The channel was perceived to act as an “anti-Russian propaganda channel”. Russian disinformation campaigns directly targeting NATO NATO, as a military alliance that has been labelled as a threat to Russia by Russian president Vladimir Putin, is also being routinely targeted by disinformation and fake news campaigns. In January 2017, Russia-affiliated news websites alleged that the US was sending 3600 tanks to be deployed in NATO operations near the Russian border. The allegations soon turned to be fake news, as statistics released by the US Army completely contradicted the allegations and thus, disproved them. Another news report emerged in late March 2017 when US president Donald Trump allegedly handed a 374 billion US$ “NATO invoice” to German chancellor Angela Merkel. This news was disproven after a spokesman for the German government denied media reports and stated that there is no “debt account at NATO”. Reports of a teenager being raped by German soldiers in Lithuania, who are leading NATO’s new battle group in the country, emerged in February 2017, but this provocative rumour never really caught on with the public as it was dismissed as false by the Chairman of the NATO Military Committee shortly after its emergence. The rumours are widely believed to originate from Russia. A false and deceptive news article published by a pro-Russian media outlet. NATO Resolutions on the matter As of August 2018, there have been no resolutions adopted by the NATO Parliamentary Assembly explicitly addressing the issue of Russian disinformation campaigns. However, the NATO resolution 437 regarding the stability and security in the Black Sea region, that directly addresses Russian aggression in states neighboring the Black Sea can be interpreted to indirectly address the growing issue of Russian disinformation. Following the increased frequency of Russian disinformation campaigns targeting NATO and its member states, lawmakers from the NATO Parliamentary Assembly have called for strong measures to counter emerging information technology threats that range from Russian election meddling to terrorist activity on the Dark Web and cyberattacks on critical infrastructure during the NATO Parliamentary Assembly Spring Session held in the Polish capital of Warsaw between 25 and 28 May 2018. There have been draft reports concerning the issue and a resolution on the matter will be drafted for discussion at NATO Parliamentary Assembly’s Annual Session that will be held in November 2018 in Halifax, Canada. Possible solutions to the problem Our committee has come up with a handful of feasible solutions to the problem. Detecting and countering fake news online Fact-checking has been deemed highly effective in detecting fake news articles that directly contribute to disinformation and many European governments including the governments of Germany, France and the Netherlands have made deals with leading social networking site, Facebook on fact- checking the news and information in circulation on the website. France has passed so-called “fake news laws” in order to prevent mass-scale public disinformation. The new legislation will allow election candidates to sue for the removal of contested news reports during election periods, as well as forcing platforms such as Facebook and Twitter to disclose the source of funding for sponsored content. The European Union and NATO have already taken steps to reinforce their harsh stance against cyberattacks and disinformation. One of these steps was the establishment of the European Centr