Attempts at Foreign Influence Have Become the New Normal in American Elections
As foreign interference in elections evolves, so too does the approach to combat it. Authorities are facing challenges regarding how to ensure accountability for wrongdoers while maintaining public confidence in the electoral process.
TroibNews 
The period of foreign election meddling is in full swing.
Recently, the Department of Justice disclosed that it had seized websites that were part of a Russian misinformation operation. Additionally, federal authorities charged two RT personnel with involvement in a Russian propaganda distribution network, supported by substantial funding.
Moreover, interference concerns extend beyond Russia. A prominent think tank on Friday exposed a collection of pro-Iranian platforms disseminating misinformation related to the election, following a report from the intelligence community that connected Iran to hacking efforts targeting the Trump campaign. U.S. officials briefed reporters on Friday that Russia, Iran, and China are each attempting to sway the upcoming elections.
Not long ago, revelations of Russia’s interference in the 2016 election shocked the political landscape. Two election cycles later, foreign interference attempts have become a recurring feature of U.S. elections, particularly presidential races, highlighted by shocking revelations of deceptive social media activities and covert foreign operatives. As for the 2024 elections, Chris Krebs, the former director of the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency, noted they are “lining up to be a busy election interference season.”
The response from the United States is evolving.
National security professionals acknowledge that the Biden administration has adopted a tougher stance than past administrations. However, challenges remain regarding how to effectively deter offenders, counter future incursions, and maintain confidence in an electoral system where both foreign and domestic actors attempt to undermine trust.
The decision on how much to publicize about these interference attempts remains unresolved: While transparency is critical, excessive focus may inadvertently play into the hands of the agitators by breeding chaos and uncertainty.
“That is the core of the debate: whether you are in fact carrying water for the adversaries by highlighting this activity,” stated Emily Harding, former deputy staff director for the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence.
The issue of foreign meddling has also become a tool for political campaigns. Following the hack of the Trump campaign, the former president quickly framed the incident as a target on him for being “strong on Iran.” Democratic groups are leveraging recent actions against Russian influence to criticize Republican candidates. Additionally, the son of a charged ex-Trump campaign advisor politicized his father's legal troubles linked to Russian sanction violations.
Heightened anxiety around foreign threats to U.S. electoral integrity has escalated over the years, beginning with reports of Russian support for former President Donald Trump in 2016.
At a press event on Wednesday, Attorney General Merrick Garland affirmed that the Justice Department would actively combat foreign interference in this year's elections.
“We will be relentlessly aggressive in countering and disrupting attempts by Russia and Iran — as well as China or any other foreign malign actor — to interfere in our elections and undermine our democracy,” he announced during a meeting of the Election Threats Task Force, created by the Justice Department.
A range of meddling attempts have surfaced this year.
Federal authorities indicated that Iran was behind a hack targeting the Trump campaign and an attempted breach of the Biden-Harris campaign. Meta disclosed that an Iranian hacking group targeted WhatsApp accounts belonging to staff of President Joe Biden and Trump.
The U.S. government accused Russia of continuing its meddling efforts through state media and seemingly independent websites that disseminate pro-Russian propaganda. Recent government actions to counter these maneuvers included implementing visa restrictions on Russian state media entities and introducing financial rewards for reporting foreign electoral interference. Additionally, the Treasury Department imposed sanctions on individuals associated with Russia's alleged interference efforts.
A recent report by Graphika outlined a Chinese influence operation named Spamouflage, which uses social media to influence U.S. political discourse.
As foreign interference becomes a staple of American elections, debates continue over the best response strategies.
Charges related to foreign election interference are often seen as symbolic since the accused are usually beyond U.S. jurisdiction, and thus unlikely to face trial.
Despite these charges being unlikely to lead to convictions, U.S. prosecutors see them as deterrents. These actions notify the involved governments of U.S. concerns and remind the American public to remain vigilant against potential propaganda.
Still, the so-called "name and shame" strategy remains contentious within the government due to its potential to reveal intelligence sources for cases that may never proceed to court. Plus, there are ethical concerns about using the criminal justice system to make accusations unlikely to ever be adjudicated.
And as these cases of interference often aim to exploit existing U.S. societal divides, they sometimes receive scornful responses.
For instance, during recent accusations of Russian interference designed to support Trump, the former president and his allies denied Russian involvement, accusing U.S. agencies of political bias — an argument they reiterated following the latest charges.
While foreign threats may not directly alter election outcomes, they nonetheless impact politics and public perceptions.
Some experts warn that by bringing attention to these threats, the government could inadvertently deepen public mistrust and amplify the divisive narratives promoted by foreign states.
Gavin Wilde, a former National Security Council official, expressed concerns about the tangible effect of foreign propaganda on voter behavior, emphasizing the potential for such reactions to destabilize public confidence.
Overall, while the Biden administration has been commended for its proactive stance, challenges remain in managing the complexities of foreign electoral interference and its broader implications.
Anna Muller for TROIB News
Recently, the Department of Justice disclosed that it had seized websites that were part of a Russian misinformation operation. Additionally, federal authorities charged two RT personnel with involvement in a Russian propaganda distribution network, supported by substantial funding.
Moreover, interference concerns extend beyond Russia. A prominent think tank on Friday exposed a collection of pro-Iranian platforms disseminating misinformation related to the election, following a report from the intelligence community that connected Iran to hacking efforts targeting the Trump campaign. U.S. officials briefed reporters on Friday that Russia, Iran, and China are each attempting to sway the upcoming elections.
Not long ago, revelations of Russia’s interference in the 2016 election shocked the political landscape. Two election cycles later, foreign interference attempts have become a recurring feature of U.S. elections, particularly presidential races, highlighted by shocking revelations of deceptive social media activities and covert foreign operatives. As for the 2024 elections, Chris Krebs, the former director of the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency, noted they are “lining up to be a busy election interference season.”
The response from the United States is evolving.
National security professionals acknowledge that the Biden administration has adopted a tougher stance than past administrations. However, challenges remain regarding how to effectively deter offenders, counter future incursions, and maintain confidence in an electoral system where both foreign and domestic actors attempt to undermine trust.
The decision on how much to publicize about these interference attempts remains unresolved: While transparency is critical, excessive focus may inadvertently play into the hands of the agitators by breeding chaos and uncertainty.
“That is the core of the debate: whether you are in fact carrying water for the adversaries by highlighting this activity,” stated Emily Harding, former deputy staff director for the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence.
The issue of foreign meddling has also become a tool for political campaigns. Following the hack of the Trump campaign, the former president quickly framed the incident as a target on him for being “strong on Iran.” Democratic groups are leveraging recent actions against Russian influence to criticize Republican candidates. Additionally, the son of a charged ex-Trump campaign advisor politicized his father's legal troubles linked to Russian sanction violations.
Heightened anxiety around foreign threats to U.S. electoral integrity has escalated over the years, beginning with reports of Russian support for former President Donald Trump in 2016.
At a press event on Wednesday, Attorney General Merrick Garland affirmed that the Justice Department would actively combat foreign interference in this year's elections.
“We will be relentlessly aggressive in countering and disrupting attempts by Russia and Iran — as well as China or any other foreign malign actor — to interfere in our elections and undermine our democracy,” he announced during a meeting of the Election Threats Task Force, created by the Justice Department.
A range of meddling attempts have surfaced this year.
Federal authorities indicated that Iran was behind a hack targeting the Trump campaign and an attempted breach of the Biden-Harris campaign. Meta disclosed that an Iranian hacking group targeted WhatsApp accounts belonging to staff of President Joe Biden and Trump.
The U.S. government accused Russia of continuing its meddling efforts through state media and seemingly independent websites that disseminate pro-Russian propaganda. Recent government actions to counter these maneuvers included implementing visa restrictions on Russian state media entities and introducing financial rewards for reporting foreign electoral interference. Additionally, the Treasury Department imposed sanctions on individuals associated with Russia's alleged interference efforts.
A recent report by Graphika outlined a Chinese influence operation named Spamouflage, which uses social media to influence U.S. political discourse.
As foreign interference becomes a staple of American elections, debates continue over the best response strategies.
Charges related to foreign election interference are often seen as symbolic since the accused are usually beyond U.S. jurisdiction, and thus unlikely to face trial.
Despite these charges being unlikely to lead to convictions, U.S. prosecutors see them as deterrents. These actions notify the involved governments of U.S. concerns and remind the American public to remain vigilant against potential propaganda.
Still, the so-called "name and shame" strategy remains contentious within the government due to its potential to reveal intelligence sources for cases that may never proceed to court. Plus, there are ethical concerns about using the criminal justice system to make accusations unlikely to ever be adjudicated.
And as these cases of interference often aim to exploit existing U.S. societal divides, they sometimes receive scornful responses.
For instance, during recent accusations of Russian interference designed to support Trump, the former president and his allies denied Russian involvement, accusing U.S. agencies of political bias — an argument they reiterated following the latest charges.
While foreign threats may not directly alter election outcomes, they nonetheless impact politics and public perceptions.
Some experts warn that by bringing attention to these threats, the government could inadvertently deepen public mistrust and amplify the divisive narratives promoted by foreign states.
Gavin Wilde, a former National Security Council official, expressed concerns about the tangible effect of foreign propaganda on voter behavior, emphasizing the potential for such reactions to destabilize public confidence.
Overall, while the Biden administration has been commended for its proactive stance, challenges remain in managing the complexities of foreign electoral interference and its broader implications.
Anna Muller for TROIB News
