Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-p9bg8 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-28T07:39:19.544Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Disinformation in international politics

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  22 April 2019

Alexander Lanoszka Open the ORCID record for Alexander Lanoszka [Opens in a new window]
Alexander Lanoszka*
Affiliation:
Department of Political Science, University of Waterloo and Department of International Politics at City, University of London
*
*Corresponding author. Email: [email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Concerns over disinformation have intensified in recent years. Policymakers, pundits, and observers worry that countries like Russia are spreading false narratives and disseminating rumours in order to shape international opinion and, by extension, government policies to their liking. Despite the importance of this topic, mainstream theories in International Relations offer contradictory guidance on how to think about disinformation. I argue that disinformation is ineffective in terms of changing the policies of a target as regards to its foreign policy alignments and armaments – that is, the balance of power. To be strategically effective, disinformation must somehow overcome three powerful obstacles: first, the fundamental uncertainty that international anarchy generates over any information broadcasted by adversaries; second, the pre-existing prejudices of foreign policy elites and ordinary citizens; and third, the countermeasures that are available even amid political polarisation. I examine the most likely case of there seemingly being a conscious and effective strategy that emphasises disinformation: the Russian campaign that has targeted the Baltic states, especially since the 2014 annexation of Crimea. The available evidence strongly suggests that the strategic effects of disinformation are exaggerated.

Keywords

DisinformationFake NewsPolitical PolarisationHybrid WarBaltic SecurityRussia
Type
Research Article
Information
European Journal of International Security , Volume 4 , Issue 2 , June 2019 , pp. 227 - 248
Copyright
Copyright © British International Studies Association 2019 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1 Bunce, Valerie and Hozić, Aida, ‘Diffusion-proofing and the Russian invasion of Ukraine’, Demokratizatsiya, 24:4 (2016), p. 440Google Scholar.

2 Kragh, Martin and Åsberg, Sebastian, ‘Russia's strategy for influence through diplomacy and active measures’, Journal of Strategic Studies, 40:6 (2017), p. 2CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

3 Thornton, Rod, ‘The Russian Military's new “main emphasis”: Asymmetric warfare’, The RUSI Journal, 162:4 (2017), pp. 18–28CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

4 Teri Schultz, ‘Why the “fake rape” story against German NATO forces fell flat in Lithuania’, Deutsche Welle (23 February 2017), available at: {http://www.dw.com/en/why-the-fake-rapestory-against-german-nato-forces-fell-flat-in-lithuania/a-37694870}.

5 Chris Brown, ‘Anti-Canada propaganda greets troops in Latvia’, Canadian Broadcasting Corporation (16 June 2017), available at: {http://www.cbc.ca/news/world/latvia-propaganda-1.4162612}.

6 Philip N. Howard, Bharath Ganesh, and Dimitra Liotsiou, ‘The IRA, Social Media and Political Polarization in the United States, 2012–2018’, Computational Propaganda Research Project (17 December 2018), available at: {https://comprop.oii.ox.ac.uk/wp-content/uploads/sites/93/2018/12/IRA-Report-2018.pdf}.

7 I do not examine domestic disinformation campaigns waged by state institutions, political parties, or other local political actors to shape public opinion. Such examples could be Viktor Orbán's anti-Soros rhetoric and social media manipulation by the Mexican government of Enrique Peña Nieto. Still, I hypothesise below that domestic audiences may be the true target of an international disinformation campaign.

8 Buckland, M. K., ‘Information as thing’, Journal of the American Society for Information Science, 42:5 (1991), p. 359Google Scholar.

9 Fallis, Don, ‘What is disinformation?’, Library Trends, 63:3 (2016), p. 422Google Scholar, emphasis added.

10 Esenwein, George R., ‘Ghosts of the past: Confronting myths and misconceptions about the Spanish Civil War’, Politics, Religion, and Ideology, 12:2 (2011), p. 219CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

11 Lewandowsky, Stephan, Strizke, Werner G. K., Freund, Alexandra M., Oberauer, Klaus, and Krueger, Joachim I., ‘Misinformation, disinformation, and violent conflict: From Iraq and the “war on terror” to future threats’, American Psychologist, 68:7 (2013), p. 487CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

12 Fallis, ‘What is disinformation?’, p. 413.

13 Cull, Nicholas J., Culbert, David, and Welch, David, Propaganda and Mass Persuasion: A Historical Encyclopedia, 1500 to the Present (Santa Barbara, CA: ABC-CLIO, 2003), pp. 318–19Google Scholar.

14 Similarly, strategic narratives are not necessarily disinformation since the former tend to articulate internationally the norms, values, and identities that a state leadership holds dear. See Miskimmon, Alister, O'Loughlin, Ben, and Roselle, Laura, Strategic Narratives: Communication Power and the New World Order (London: Routledge, 2013)Google Scholar.

15 Marquis, Alice Goldfarb, ‘Words as weapons: Propaganda in Britain and Germany during the First World War’, Journal of Contemporary History, 13:3 (1978), pp. 486–7CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

16 Ettinger, David and Jeheil, Philippe, ‘A theory of deception’, American Economic Journal: Microeconomics, 2:1 (2010), p. 1Google Scholar.

17 Mearsheimer, John J., Why Leaders Lie: The Truth about Lying in International Politics (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2011), p. 15Google Scholar.

18 Baldwin, David, Economic Statecraft (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1986), p. 38Google Scholar.

19 An example is Operation Bodyguard, in which the allies deceived Nazi Germany as to when and where an invasion force would land in northwestern Europe.

20 For an exception, see Gartzke, Erik and Lindsay, Jon R., ‘Leaving tangled webs: Offense, defense, and deception in cyberspace’, Security Studies, 24:2 (2014), pp. 316–48CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

21 Schuessler, John M., Deceit on the Road to War: Presidents, Politics, and American Democracy (Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press, 2015)CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

22 Rovner, Joshua, Fixing the Facts: National Security and the Politics of Intelligence (Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press, 2012)Google Scholar.

23 See, for example, Darczewska, Jolanta, ‘The anatomy of Russian information warfare: the Crimean Operation, a case study’, OSW Point of View, 42 (22 May 2014)Google Scholar.

24 Waltz, Kenneth N., Theory of International Politics (Long Grove, IL: Waveland, 1979)Google Scholar.

25 Mearsheimer, John J., ‘The false promise of international institutions’, International Security, 19:3 (1994), pp. 10–11CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

26 Lasswell, Harold D., ‘The strategy of Soviet propaganda’, Proceedings of the Academy of Political Science, 24:2 (1951), p. 68CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

27 Rathbun, Brian C., ‘Uncertain about uncertainty: Understanding the multiple meanings of a crucial concept in International Relations’, International Studies Quarterly, 51:3 (2007), pp. 541–5CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

28 Glaser, Charles L., ‘Realists as optimists: Cooperation as self-help’, International Security, 19:3 (1994), pp. 50–90CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Kydd, Andrew, ‘Sheep in sheep's clothing: Why security seekers do not fight each other’, Security Studies, 7:1 (1997), pp. 114–55CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

29 Fearon, James D., ‘Signaling foreign policy interests: Tying hands versus sinking costs’, Journal of Conflict Resolution, 41:1 (1997), pp. 68–90CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

30 See Miskimmon, O'Loughlin, and Laura Roselle, Strategic Narratives.

31 Hanreider, Tine, ‘The false promise of the better argument’, International Theory, 3:3 (2011), p. 402Google Scholar; Krebs, Ronald R. and Jackson, Patrick Thaddeus, ‘Twisting tongues and twisting arms: the power of political rhetoric’, European Journal of International Relations, 13:1 (2007), p. 39CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

32 Risse, Thomas, ‘“Let's argue!”: Communicative action in world politics’, International Organization, 54:1 (2000), pp. 14–16CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

33 Hanreider, ‘The false promise’, pp. 402–03.

34 Schimmelfennig, Frank, The EU, NATO and the Integration of Europe: Rules and Rhetoric (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

35 Krebs and Jackson, ‘Twisting tongues’, p. 45.

36 Ibid., p. 47

37 Ibid., p. 56.

38 Rathbun, Brian C., Trust in International Cooperation: International Security Institutions, Domestic Politics, and American Multilateralism (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

39 Seymour, Lee J. M., ‘Let's bullshit! Arguing, bargaining and dissembling over Darfur’, European Journal of International Relations, 20:3 (2014), p. 577CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

40 Ibid., p. 575.

41 Lasswell, ‘The strategy’, p. 214.

42 Taliaferro, Jeffrey W., ‘Security seeking under anarchy: Defensive realism revisited’, International Security, 25:3 (2000–01), pp. 144–5Google Scholar.

43 Mearsheimer, John J., The Tragedy of Great Power Politics (New York: W. W. Norton, 2001), p. 30Google Scholar.

44 Jervis, Robert, ‘Cooperation under the security dilemma’, World Politics, 30:2 (1976), pp. 167–214CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

45 Moravcsik, Andrew, ‘Taking preferences seriously: a liberal theory of international politics’, International Organization, 51:4 (1997), pp. 513–53CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

46 Ripsman, Norrin M., Taliaferro, Jeffrey W., and Lobell, Steven E., Neoclassical Realist Theory of International Politics (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2016), p. 19CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

47 Note that this feature of anarchy is most pronounced in adversarial (or Hobbesian) relations. Other types of relationships are possible under anarchy. See Wendt, Alexander, Social Theory of International Politics (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1999), pp. 279–308CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

48 Kirshner, Jonathan, ‘The economic sins of modern IR theory and the Classical Realist alternative’, World Politics, 67:1 (2015), pp. 172–3CrossRefGoogle Scholar; and Yarhi-Milo, Keren, Knowing the Adversary: Leaders, Intelligence, and Assessment of Intentions in International Relations (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 2014)Google Scholar.

49 Parent, Joseph M. and Baron, Joshua M., ‘Elder abuse: How the moderns mistreat Classical Realism’, International Studies Review, 13:2 (2011), p. 207CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

50 Williams, Michael C., The Realist Tradition and the Limits of International Politics (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2005), pp. 5–8CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

51 Wolfers, Arnold, Discord and Collaboration: Essays on International Politics (Baltimore, MD: The Johns Hopkins Press, 1962), p. 31Google Scholar; Barkin, J. Samuel, ‘Realist constructivism’, International Studies Review, 5:3 (2003), p. 337CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

52 Yarhi-Milo, Knowing the Adversary; Marrin, Stephen, ‘Why strategic intelligence analysis has limited influence on American foreign policy’, Intelligence and National Security, 32:6 (2017), pp. 725–42CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

53 Ripsman, Taliaferro, and Lobell, Neoclassical Realist Theory, p. 20.

54 Taliaferro, Jeffrey W., ‘State building for future wars: Neoclassical Realism and the resource-extractive state’, Security Studies, 15:3 (2006), p. 490CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

55 Rathbun, Brian C., Kertzer, Joshua D., Reifler, Jason, Goren, Paul, and Scotto, Thomas J., ‘Taking foreign policy personally: Personal values and foreign policy attitudes’, International Studies Quarterly, 60:1 (2016), pp. 124–37CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

56 Christensen, Thomas J., Useful Adversaries: Grand Strategy, Domestic Mobilization, and Sino-American Conflict, 1947–1958 (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1996), p. 17Google Scholar.

57 Fearon, James D., ‘Domestic political audiences and the escalation of international disputes’, American Political Science Review, 88:3 (1994), pp. 577–92CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

58 Bartels, Larry M., ‘Uninformed votes: Information effects in presidential elections’, American Journal of Political Science, 40:1 (1996), p. 195CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

59 See Barber, Michael and Pope, Jeremy C., ‘Does party trump ideology? Disentangling party and ideology in America’, American Political Science Review, 113:1 (2018), pp. 1–17Google Scholar, available at: {doi:10.1017/S0003055418000795}.

60 Evans, Geoffrey and Pickup, Mark, ‘Reversing the causal arrow: the political condition of economic perceptions in the 2000–2004 U.S. presidential election cycle’, Journal of Politics, 72:4 (2010), pp. 1236–51CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Berinsky, Adam, In Time of War: Understanding American Public Opinion from World War II to Iraq (Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press, 2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar; and Guber, Deborah Lynn, ‘A cooling climate for change? Party polarization and the politics of global warming’, American Behavioral Scientist, 57:1 (2013), pp. 93–115CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

61 Lewendusky, Matthew, ‘Rethinking the role of political information’, Public Opinion Quarterly, 75:1 (2011), pp. 42–64CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Pierce, Douglas R., ‘Uninformed votes? Reappraising information effects and presidential preferences’, Political Behavior, 37:3 (2015), pp. 537–65CrossRefGoogle Scholar. Institutions mediate the influence of partisanship on voting behaviour. See Schmitt, Hermann, ‘Partisanship in nine Western democracies: Causes and consequences’, in Bartle, John and Bellucci, Paolo (eds), Political Parties and Partisanship: Social Identity and Individual Attitudes (London: Routledge, 2014)Google Scholar.

62 Taliaferro, ‘State building’, p. 490.

63 Gadarian, Shana Kushner, ‘Foreign policy at the ballot box: How citizens use foreign policy to judge and choose candidates’, Journal of Politics, 82:4 (2010), pp. 1046–62CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

64 Herrmann, Richard K., ‘How attachments to the nation shape beliefs about the world: a theory of motivated reasoning’, International Organization, 71:S (2017), p. S62CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

65 Kirshner, ‘The economic sins’, p. 169.

66 For a review of the debate and the methodological problems affecting this area of research, see Michael Tomz, Jessica Weeks, and Keren Yarhi-Milo, ‘How Does Public Opinion Affect Foreign Policy in Democracies’, Working Paper (August 2017), pp. 1–3.

67 Allcot, Hunt and Gentzkow, Matthew, ‘Social media and fake news in the 2016 election’, Journal of Economic Perspectives, 31:2 (2017), pp. 211–36CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Olivia Solon, ‘Facebook's failure: Did fake news and polarized politics get Trump elected?’, The Guardian (10 November 2016), available at: {https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2016/nov/10/facebook-fake-news-electionconspiracy-theories}.

68 Brendan Nyhan and Jason Reifler, Misinformation and Fact-Checking: Research Findings from Social Science, New America Foundation Media Policy Initiative Research Paper (2012), p. 1.

69 Lasswell, Harold D., ‘The person: Subject and object of propaganda’, Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, 179 (1935), p. 187CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

70 Shulman, Stephen and Bloom, Stephen, ‘The legitimacy of foreign intervention in elections: the Ukrainian response’, Review of International Studies, 38:2 (2012), pp. 445–71Google Scholar.

71 Pop-Eleches, Grigore and Robertson, Graeme B., ‘Identity and political preferences in Ukraine – Before and after the Euromaidan’, Post-Soviet Affairs, 34:2–3 (2018), pp. 107–18CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

72 Levin, Dov H., ‘When the great power gets a vote: the effects of great power electoral interventions on election results’, International Studies Quarterly, 60:2 (2016), pp. 191–2CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

73 Ibid., p. 193.

74 Corstange, Daniel and Marinov, Nikolay, ‘Taking sides in other people's elections: the polarizing effect of foreign intervention’, American Journal of Political Science, 56:3 (2012), pp. 655–70CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

75 Downes, Alexander B. and O'Rourke, Lindsey A., ‘You can't always get what you want: Why foreign-imposed regime change seldom improves interstate relations’, International Security, 41:2 (2016), pp. 43–89CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

76 Andrew Guess, Brendan Nyhan, and Jason Reifler, ‘Selective Exposure to Misinformation: Evidence from the Consumption of Fake News during the 2016 U.S. Presidential Campaign’, Working Paper (2018), available at:{https://www.dartmouth.edu/~nyhan/fake-news-2016.pdf} p. 12.

77 Layman, Geoffrey C., Carsey, Thomas M., and Horowitz, Juliana Menasce, ‘Party polarization in American politics: Characteristics, causes, and consequences’, Annual Review of Political Science, 9 (2006), pp. 83–110 (pp. 100–01)CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

78 Ibid., pp. 101–03.

79 Dombrowski, Peter and Reich, Simon, ‘Does Donald Trump have a grand strategy?’, International Affairs, 93:5 (2017), pp. 1013–37CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

80 Cormac, Rory and Aldrich, Richard J., ‘Grey is the new black: Covert action and implausible deniability’, International Affairs, 94:3 (2018), pp. 478, 490–1CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

81 Bruegel, J. W., ‘German diplomacy and the Sudeten question before 1938’, International Affairs, 37:3 (1961), pp. 323–5CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

82 Cornwall, Mark, ‘“National reparation”?: The Czech land reform and the Sudeten Germans 1918–1938’, The Slavonic and Eastern European Review, 75:2 (1997), p. 265Google Scholar.

83 Robbins, Keith G., ‘Konrad Henlein, the Sudeten question and British foreign policy’, The Historical Journal, 12:4 (1969), pp. 680–1CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

84 Developing strong civil societies can inoculate against such irredentism. See Lanoszka, Alexander, ‘Russian hybrid warfare and extended deterrence in Eastern Europe’, International Affairs, 92:1 (2016), pp. 175–95CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

85 Whether pro-Sudeten German propaganda was intentionally misleading is thus debatable.

86 Owen, John M. IV, The Clash of Ideas in World Politics: Transnational Networks, States, and Regime Change, 1510–2010 (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

87 Kahneman, Daniel and Tversky, Amos, ‘Prospect theory: an analysis of decisions under risk’, Econometrica, 47 (1979), pp. 263–91CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

88 Consider the proposition that Voice of America and Radio Free Europe were responsible for ending the Cold War and undermining the Warsaw Pact. Notwithstanding how these outlets almost certainly were less deceptive than official communist sources, the fall of communism and the ensuing geopolitical realignments are far more attributable to economic circumstances, military failures, technological laggardness, and nationalism.

89 Pomerantsev, Peter, ‘The Kremlin's information war’, Journal of Democracy, 26:4 (2015), p. 41CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

90 Schweller, Randall L. and Pu, Xiaoyu, ‘After unipolarity: China's visions of international order in an era of U.S. decline’, International Security, 36:1 (2011), pp. 47–8CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

91 See Krekó, Péter and Enyedi, Zsolt, ‘Orbán's laboratory of illiberalism’, Journal of Democracy, 29:3 (2018), pp. 39–51CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

92 Van Herpen, Marcel, Putin's Propaganda Machine: Soft Power and Russian Foreign Policy (Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield, 2016)Google Scholar.

93 Keir Giles, ‘Russia's Hybrid Warfare: A Success in Propaganda’, Working Papers on Security Policy 1/2015 (Berlin: Federal Academy for Security Policy). See also Lupion, Miranda, ‘The gray war of our time: Information warfare and the Kremlin's weaponization of Russian-language digital news’, Journal of Slavic Military Studies, 31:3 (2018), pp. 329–53CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

94 Bērziņš, Jānis, ‘Russian new generation warfare is not hybrid warfare’, in Pabriks, Artis and Kudors, Andis (eds), The War in Ukraine: Lessons for Europe (Riga: University of Latvia Press, 2015), p. 45Google Scholar.

95 Thornton, ‘The Russian military's new “main emphasis”’.

96 Bunce and Hozić, ‘Diffusion-proofing’, p. 440.

97 Christian Caryl, ‘If you want to see Russian information warfare at its worst, visit these countries’, Washington Post (5 April 2017), available at: {https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/democracy-post/wp/2017/04/05/if-you-want-to-see-russian-information-warfare-at-its-worst-visit-these-countries/}.

98 Benas Gerdziunas, ‘Baltics battle Russia in online disinformation war’, Deutsche Welle (8 October 2017), available at: {http://www.dw.com/en/baltics-battle-russia-in-online-disinformation-war/a-40828834}; Brüggemannand, Karsten and Kasekamp, Andres, ‘The politics of history and the “war of monuments” in Estonia’, Nationalities Papers, 36:3 (2008), pp. 425–48CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

99 Thornton, Rod, ‘The changing nature of warfare’, The RUSI Journal, 160:4 (2015), p. 44Google Scholar.

100 Quoted in Shaun Walker, ‘Latvians fear elections could let Kremlin in by back door’, The Guardian (4 October 2014), available at: {https://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/oct/04/latvia-russia-putin-crimea-riga-ukraine-voting}.

101 Thornton, Rod and Karagiannis, Manos, ‘The Russian threat to the Baltic states: the problems of shaping local defense mechanisms’, Journal of Slavic Military Studies, 29:3 (2016), p. 340CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

102 Lindqvist, Erik and Östling, Robert, ‘Political polarization and the size of government’, American Political Science Review, 104:3 (2010), p. 560CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

103 NewsBalt, ‘Из граждан Литвы готовят врагов народа? [Are Lithuanian citizens prepared as enemies of the nation?]’, NewsBalt (1 January 2017), available at: {http://newsbalt.ru/reviews/2017/01/iz-grazhdan-litvy-gotovyat-vragov-naroda/}.

104 NewsBalt, ‘Theme: Soft occupation of the USA by Poland and the Baltic states’, NewsBalt (2018), available at: {http://newsbalt.ru/subject/soft-occupation-usa/}.

105 Ben Nimmo, Donara Barojan, and Nika Aleksejeva, ‘Russian narratives on NATO's deployment’, Digital Forensic Research Lab (1 April 2017), available at: {https://medium.com/dfrlab/russian-narratives-on-natos-deployment-616e19c3d194}.

106 ‘Apklausa: lietuviai – už NATO ir stiprią kariuomenę Skaitykite daugiau’, DELFI (1 February 2016), available at: {https://www.delfi.lt/news/daily/lithuania/apklausa-lietuviai-uznato-ir-stipria-kariuomene.d?id=70275978}.

107 ‘Lietuvos gyventojai ypač palankiai vertina narystę NATO’, LRT (27 January 2017), available at: {http://www.lrt.lt/naujienos/lietuvoje/2/161652/lietuvos-gyventojai-ypacpalankiai-vertina-naryste-nato}.

108 Juhan Kivirähk, Public Opinion and National Defence (Tallinn, Estonia: Turuuuringute AS, 2017), p. 4.

109 Ministry of Defence of the Republic of Latvia, ‘Residents Poll on State Defence Issues’ (21 February 2017), available at: {http://www.mod.gov.lv/en/Aktualitates/Preses_pazinojumi/2017/02/21-01.aspx}.

110 Latvijas Sabiedriskais medijs, ‘Support for EU and NATO membership high among Latvian speakers’, LSM.lv (27 June 2016), available at: {https://eng.lsm.lv/article/society/defense/support-for-eu-and-nato-membership-highamong-latvian-speakers.a189527/}.

111 Michael Smith, ‘Most NATO members in Eastern Europe see it as protection’, Gallup (10 February 2017), available at: {http://news.gallup.com/poll/203819/nato-members-easterneurope- protection.aspx}.

112 Andžāns, Māris and Veebel, Viljar, ‘Deterrence dilemma in Latvia and Estonia: Finding the balance between external military solidarity and territorial defence’, Journal on Baltic Security, 3:2 (2017), pp. 29–42CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Šlekys, Deividas, ‘Lithuania's balancing act’, Journal on Baltic Security, 3:2 (2017), pp. 43–54CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

113 Jen Weedon, William Nuland, and Alex Stamos, Information Operations and Facebook (Facebook, 2017), p. 11. See also Guess, Andrew, Nagler, Jonathan, and Tucker, Joshua, ‘Less than you think: Prevalence and predictors of fake news dissemination on Facebook’, Sciences Advances, 5:1 (2019), eaau4586Google ScholarPubMed.

114 Gerber, Thomas P. and Zavisca, Jane, ‘Does Russian propaganda work?’, The Washington Quarterly, 39:2 (2016), pp. 79–98CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

115 Guess, Nyhan, and Reifler, ‘Selective exposure’.

116 Dombrowski and Reich, ‘Does Donald Trump have a grand strategy?’.

117 See Isabella Hansen and Darren J. Lim, ‘Doxing democracy: Influencing elections via cyber voter influence’, Contemporary Politics (2018), available at: {doi: 10.1080/13569775.2018.1493629}.

118 Goddard, Stacie E., ‘Uncommon ground: Indivisible territory and the politics of legitimacy’, International Organization, 60:1 (2006), pp. 42–4CrossRefGoogle Scholar.