Efforts from abroad to influence the presidential election are happening once more.
As foreign interference in elections evolves, so too does the strategy for addressing it. Officials are faced with challenges regarding how to ensure accountability for wrongdoers while maintaining the public's trust in the electoral process.
TroibNews 
The season of foreign election interference is in full swing.
This week, the Department of Justice announced the seizure of websites linked to a disinformation campaign originating from Russia. Additionally, federal officials accused two employees of RT, a media organization controlled by Moscow, of participating in efforts to disseminate pro-Russian propaganda, fueled by substantial financial backing.
However, the interference isn't limited to Russia. On Friday, a think tank with a hardline stance revealed that pro-Iranian websites have been spreading disinformation about the election. This announcement follows intelligence reports linking Iran to a hacking attempt on the Trump campaign. U.S. officials indicated in a Friday briefing that Russia, Iran, and China are working to influence the upcoming elections.
Just a few years back, the political landscape was shaken by revelations of Russian attempts to meddle in the 2016 election. Now, as we head into another presidential election cycle, foreign government meddling has become a significant concern that is impossible to ignore. Presidential elections especially have become prime targets for foreign interference, often characterized by alarming tales of deceptive social media campaigns and illicit foreign activities. Chris Krebs, former director of the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency, noted, "2024 is lining up to be a busy election interference season."
The U.S. response is continuously evolving.
Experts in national security have pointed out that the Biden administration is taking a much firmer stance than previous administrations. Nonetheless, officials still face challenges in determining how to hold wrongdoers accountable, deter future interference, and maintain public trust amid ongoing efforts by both foreign and domestic actors to instill doubt.
Even the strategy regarding the public disclosure of attempts at interference is a contentious issue. Transparency about potential threats is necessary, but excessive attention might inadvertently contribute to the chaos that malicious actors aim to create. Emily Harding, former deputy staff director for the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence, highlighted that “that is the core of the debate: whether you are in fact carrying water for the adversaries by highlighting this activity.”
The threats themselves have also become a battleground for political discourse. Following the hack of the Trump campaign, the former president quickly asserted that he was targeted for being “strong on Iran.” Meanwhile, a Democratic PAC is leveraging the crackdown on Russian influence to attack Republican candidates. Additionally, the son of a former Trump advisor charged with violating Russian sanctions criticized the proceedings against his father in a political light.
Concerns about foreign threats to U.S. election integrity have increased, especially after reports of Russian attempts to gain favor for Trump in 2016. During a press conference on Wednesday, Attorney General Merrick Garland affirmed that the Justice Department is committed to countering foreign interference in the 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 declared at a meeting of the Election Threats Task Force.
This year has already seen several reported attempts at interference.
Federal authorities suggested that Iran was behind the hacking of both the Trump campaign and an attempted breach of the Biden-Harris campaign. In addition, Meta disclosed that the Iranian hacking group targeted the WhatsApp accounts of President Biden and Trump’s staff. Russia has also attempted to influence U.S. politics through state media and seemingly independent websites to disseminate pro-Russian narratives. As a countermeasure, the federal government announced plans that include visa restrictions on Russian state-controlled media and financial incentives for reports on foreign election interference. The Treasury Department has also sanctioned various individuals linked to Russia's interference efforts.
In a recent report, the analytics company Graphika outlined a Chinese influence operation named Spamouflage that seeks to manipulate U.S. political discussions using social media accounts.
As the threat of foreign interference continues to intertwine with American elections, experts and officials are in a constant dialogue about the proper response.
Criminal charges related to foreign election interference are often seen as “name and shame” indictments, indicating that those accused are unlikely to be arrested or face trial, primarily because they are beyond U.S. jurisdiction. Usually, prosecutors hold off on announcing cases until they believe they can secure an arrest.
Even though the probability of a trial or plea agreement is minimal, U.S. prosecutors maintain that these cases can still deter future actors. They can limit the accused's travel and serve as a public notice to the implicated governments regarding U.S. concerns. Moreover, such actions might prompt the American public to remain vigilant against possible propaganda.
However, “name and shame” cases are met with controversy within the government for potentially risking exposure of intelligence sources for cases that are unlikely to be pursued in court. Critics have also raised ethical concerns regarding the use of the criminal justice system to make accusations that may not be substantiated in a legal setting.
The nature of interference often seeks to inflame American divisions, and allegations of foreign meddling can themselves be met with skepticism. Although intelligence agencies have cited Russia's attempts to amplify pro-Trump narratives, Trump and his supporters have downplayed Russia's involvement, attributing motivations to U.S. agencies instead—a narrative that the former president and his allies revived recently following new charges.
Even when foreign threats do not directly affect the outcomes of elections, they influence politics and public sentiment. Some national security experts caution that bringing attention to these threats could exacerbate public distrust in the political system and unwittingly amplify divisive narratives advanced by foreign states. The normalization of foreign disinformation campaigns has led to a more significant rhetoric surrounding "fake news."
Gavin Wilde, a former National Security Council director for Russia, expressed concern about the erosion of confidence in the electoral process. “That's been problematic, because our reaction to it can cause as much stress and a sense of precarity among the public as whatever you know the Russians or Chinese are doing,” he noted, having contributed to assessments of Russian interference in the 2016 and 2020 elections.
Nevertheless, analysts have commended the Biden administration for sending a strong message. John E. Herbst, a former ambassador to Ukraine, praised the “comprehensive use of American power” that has caught “the Russians off kilter by putting this out publicly.” He declared, “It’s the old notion that transparency is the best disinfectant and the best defense — a very good defense in any case.”
He also pointed out the reactions from the Russian state-controlled media organization RT, which dismissed U.S. government actions with quips like, “Three things are certain in life: death, taxes and RT’s interference in the US elections,” and added, “Somewhere Secretary Clinton is sad that it’s not because of her.” Herbst emphasized that these patterns are troubling as, “sadly, Russian propaganda themes have made it into part of our political discourse, especially on the right.”
Allegations against the RT employees also involved a previously unnamed company financed by the Russian state media organization, which is believed to be Tenet Media, linked to several prominent far-right influencers.
Accusations of foreign interference have also been politicized by various campaigns. Trump was quick to assert that he was a target of Iranian actions since “I was protecting people in the Middle East that maybe they aren’t so happy about that,” attempting to bolster his foreign policy credentials. On the other side, Republicans have dismissed Russia's alleged schemes, aiming to deflect attention. Stephen Miller claimed on X that the DOJ itself posed a greater threat to election integrity. Trump, in a post on X, accused Kamala Harris and the DOJ of attempting to undermine the election in favor of the Democrats by reviving the “Russia, Russia, Russia Hoax.” Soon after the indictment of a former Trump advisor for working with a sanctioned Russian television station, his son, Dimitri Simes Jr., lashed out on X, asserting that “Joe Biden and his stooges are impotent cowards.”
Contributors to this report include John Sakellariadis, Maggie Miller, and Kyle Cheney.
Jessica Kline contributed to this report for TROIB News
This week, the Department of Justice announced the seizure of websites linked to a disinformation campaign originating from Russia. Additionally, federal officials accused two employees of RT, a media organization controlled by Moscow, of participating in efforts to disseminate pro-Russian propaganda, fueled by substantial financial backing.
However, the interference isn't limited to Russia. On Friday, a think tank with a hardline stance revealed that pro-Iranian websites have been spreading disinformation about the election. This announcement follows intelligence reports linking Iran to a hacking attempt on the Trump campaign. U.S. officials indicated in a Friday briefing that Russia, Iran, and China are working to influence the upcoming elections.
Just a few years back, the political landscape was shaken by revelations of Russian attempts to meddle in the 2016 election. Now, as we head into another presidential election cycle, foreign government meddling has become a significant concern that is impossible to ignore. Presidential elections especially have become prime targets for foreign interference, often characterized by alarming tales of deceptive social media campaigns and illicit foreign activities. Chris Krebs, former director of the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency, noted, "2024 is lining up to be a busy election interference season."
The U.S. response is continuously evolving.
Experts in national security have pointed out that the Biden administration is taking a much firmer stance than previous administrations. Nonetheless, officials still face challenges in determining how to hold wrongdoers accountable, deter future interference, and maintain public trust amid ongoing efforts by both foreign and domestic actors to instill doubt.
Even the strategy regarding the public disclosure of attempts at interference is a contentious issue. Transparency about potential threats is necessary, but excessive attention might inadvertently contribute to the chaos that malicious actors aim to create. Emily Harding, former deputy staff director for the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence, highlighted that “that is the core of the debate: whether you are in fact carrying water for the adversaries by highlighting this activity.”
The threats themselves have also become a battleground for political discourse. Following the hack of the Trump campaign, the former president quickly asserted that he was targeted for being “strong on Iran.” Meanwhile, a Democratic PAC is leveraging the crackdown on Russian influence to attack Republican candidates. Additionally, the son of a former Trump advisor charged with violating Russian sanctions criticized the proceedings against his father in a political light.
Concerns about foreign threats to U.S. election integrity have increased, especially after reports of Russian attempts to gain favor for Trump in 2016. During a press conference on Wednesday, Attorney General Merrick Garland affirmed that the Justice Department is committed to countering foreign interference in the 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 declared at a meeting of the Election Threats Task Force.
This year has already seen several reported attempts at interference.
Federal authorities suggested that Iran was behind the hacking of both the Trump campaign and an attempted breach of the Biden-Harris campaign. In addition, Meta disclosed that the Iranian hacking group targeted the WhatsApp accounts of President Biden and Trump’s staff. Russia has also attempted to influence U.S. politics through state media and seemingly independent websites to disseminate pro-Russian narratives. As a countermeasure, the federal government announced plans that include visa restrictions on Russian state-controlled media and financial incentives for reports on foreign election interference. The Treasury Department has also sanctioned various individuals linked to Russia's interference efforts.
In a recent report, the analytics company Graphika outlined a Chinese influence operation named Spamouflage that seeks to manipulate U.S. political discussions using social media accounts.
As the threat of foreign interference continues to intertwine with American elections, experts and officials are in a constant dialogue about the proper response.
Criminal charges related to foreign election interference are often seen as “name and shame” indictments, indicating that those accused are unlikely to be arrested or face trial, primarily because they are beyond U.S. jurisdiction. Usually, prosecutors hold off on announcing cases until they believe they can secure an arrest.
Even though the probability of a trial or plea agreement is minimal, U.S. prosecutors maintain that these cases can still deter future actors. They can limit the accused's travel and serve as a public notice to the implicated governments regarding U.S. concerns. Moreover, such actions might prompt the American public to remain vigilant against possible propaganda.
However, “name and shame” cases are met with controversy within the government for potentially risking exposure of intelligence sources for cases that are unlikely to be pursued in court. Critics have also raised ethical concerns regarding the use of the criminal justice system to make accusations that may not be substantiated in a legal setting.
The nature of interference often seeks to inflame American divisions, and allegations of foreign meddling can themselves be met with skepticism. Although intelligence agencies have cited Russia's attempts to amplify pro-Trump narratives, Trump and his supporters have downplayed Russia's involvement, attributing motivations to U.S. agencies instead—a narrative that the former president and his allies revived recently following new charges.
Even when foreign threats do not directly affect the outcomes of elections, they influence politics and public sentiment. Some national security experts caution that bringing attention to these threats could exacerbate public distrust in the political system and unwittingly amplify divisive narratives advanced by foreign states. The normalization of foreign disinformation campaigns has led to a more significant rhetoric surrounding "fake news."
Gavin Wilde, a former National Security Council director for Russia, expressed concern about the erosion of confidence in the electoral process. “That's been problematic, because our reaction to it can cause as much stress and a sense of precarity among the public as whatever you know the Russians or Chinese are doing,” he noted, having contributed to assessments of Russian interference in the 2016 and 2020 elections.
Nevertheless, analysts have commended the Biden administration for sending a strong message. John E. Herbst, a former ambassador to Ukraine, praised the “comprehensive use of American power” that has caught “the Russians off kilter by putting this out publicly.” He declared, “It’s the old notion that transparency is the best disinfectant and the best defense — a very good defense in any case.”
He also pointed out the reactions from the Russian state-controlled media organization RT, which dismissed U.S. government actions with quips like, “Three things are certain in life: death, taxes and RT’s interference in the US elections,” and added, “Somewhere Secretary Clinton is sad that it’s not because of her.” Herbst emphasized that these patterns are troubling as, “sadly, Russian propaganda themes have made it into part of our political discourse, especially on the right.”
Allegations against the RT employees also involved a previously unnamed company financed by the Russian state media organization, which is believed to be Tenet Media, linked to several prominent far-right influencers.
Accusations of foreign interference have also been politicized by various campaigns. Trump was quick to assert that he was a target of Iranian actions since “I was protecting people in the Middle East that maybe they aren’t so happy about that,” attempting to bolster his foreign policy credentials. On the other side, Republicans have dismissed Russia's alleged schemes, aiming to deflect attention. Stephen Miller claimed on X that the DOJ itself posed a greater threat to election integrity. Trump, in a post on X, accused Kamala Harris and the DOJ of attempting to undermine the election in favor of the Democrats by reviving the “Russia, Russia, Russia Hoax.” Soon after the indictment of a former Trump advisor for working with a sanctioned Russian television station, his son, Dimitri Simes Jr., lashed out on X, asserting that “Joe Biden and his stooges are impotent cowards.”
Contributors to this report include John Sakellariadis, Maggie Miller, and Kyle Cheney.
Jessica Kline contributed to this report for TROIB News
