{"id":47646,"date":"2019-05-17T06:00:19","date_gmt":"2019-05-16T20:00:19","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.aspistrategist.ru\/?p=47646"},"modified":"2019-05-16T17:43:58","modified_gmt":"2019-05-16T07:43:58","slug":"cyber-enabled-election-interference-occurs-in-one-fifth-of-democracies","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.aspistrategist.ru\/cyber-enabled-election-interference-occurs-in-one-fifth-of-democracies\/","title":{"rendered":"Cyber-enabled election interference occurs in one-fifth of democracies"},"content":{"rendered":"
<\/figure>\n

Cyber-enabled election interference has already changed the course of history. Whether or not the Russian interference campaign during the US 2016 federal election was enough to swing the result, the discovery and investigation of the campaign and its negative effects on public trust in the democratic process have irrevocably shaped the path of Donald Trump\u2019s presidency.<\/p>\n

Covert foreign interference presents a clear threat to fundamental democratic values. As nations around the world begin to wake up to this threat, new research by ASPI\u2019s International Cyber Policy Centre<\/a> has identified the key challenges democracies face from cyber-enabled election interference, and makes five core recommendations about how to guard against it.<\/p>\n

ICPC researchers studied 97 national elections which took place between 8 November 2016 and 30 April 2019. The 97 were chosen out of the 194 national-level elections that occurred during the time period because they were held in countries ranked as \u2018free\u2019 or \u2018partly free\u2019 in Freedom House\u2019s Freedom in the world<\/a><\/em> report.<\/p>\n

The study focused on cases of cyber-enabled interference (for example, social media influence campaigns or hacking operations). It didn\u2019t include offline methods of foreign influence, such as large donations. Foreign interference was measured according to the yardstick provided by former prime minister Malcolm Turnbull when he described<\/a> \u2018unacceptable interference\u2019 as \u2018foreign influence activities that are in any way covert, coercive or corrupt\u2019.<\/p>\n

Of the 97 elections and 31 referendums reviewed, foreign interference was identified in 20 countries: Australia, Brazil, Colombia, the Czech Republic, Finland, France, Germany, Indonesia, Israel, Italy, Malta, Montenegro, the Netherlands, North Macedonia, Norway, Singapore, Spain, Taiwan, Ukraine and the US.<\/p>\n

Interference was overwhelmingly attributed to Russia or China. The research found a strong geographical link between attributed sources of foreign interference and target countries. Interference in 15 of the 20 countries was attributed to Russia, primarily in Europe and South America, while Chinese interference campaigns showed a strong focus on the Asia\u2013Pacific.<\/p>\n

The research identified three categories of interference:<\/p>\n