An umbrella does not shield against flooding. For the European Democracy Shield to do what it says, it must encompass the full spectrum of hybrid threats, not only foreign disinformation. Like any shield, it is only as strong as its bearer. If it is to be more than a fig leaf, our work to defend democracy must start at home.
How do we better defend our democracy when our adversaries’ weapons are not only tanks and missiles but our own addictive digital platforms? How do we strengthen and protect our democratic culture when those adversaries not only deploy their own soldiers but also sow division and distrust among our own addicted 1 citizens, turning us against one another?
How do we ensure that our democratic processes and government services continue to function when – from cyber attacks to economic coercion, from psychological warfare to strategic corruption and the sabotage of critical infrastructure – anything can and will be used against us? When everything is weaponised to subvert our democracies, including from the inside?
We need to work fast. Our democracies must design a clear and coherent response to malign foreign interference by ‘sharp power’, also known as hybrid threats 2. We need to expose how authoritarian regimes sow and exploit tensions and conflicts across our societies, undermining our democracies from within and constraining our political choices. We must learn, organise and collaborate to deter, defend and disarm them.
When the threats to our democracy are hybrid, our defences must see, identify, and understand every facet of the attack – and ensure that our deterrence and response are united. This is not a political strategy but a call for action. Clarity, speed, and force are vital.
The time to invest in democracy is now. If there is one lesson that EU leaders should learn from Ukraine, it is that democracy and security serve one another. If we support democracy abroad and defend it at home, we strengthen our collective security.
By investing in more robust democratic institutions, civil preparedness and societal resilience, we strengthen the defences that can deter and repel Russia’s hybrid warfare, which, as we have seen in Ukraine, can develop over time into conventional warfare.
Therefore, we cannot allow Europe’s Democracy Shield, as proposed by Commission President Ursula von der Leyen, to limit itself to disinformation. Even if we broaden its scope to ‘Foreign Information Manipulation and Interference’, as the European External Action Service suggests, we miss the target and waste a vital opportunity. Why?
First, after a decade of institutional whack-a-mole that focused on fact-checking and post-fact content moderation, we should know these are not enough. Instead of chasing symptoms, we should address causes. Stronger and swifter enforcement of the EU’s Data Privacy Law and Digital Services Act may be a good start, but we also need a Digital Fairness Act that tackles the addictive design and polarising algorithms of social media. We must make it harder to weaponise our digital infrastructure against us.
At the same time, we should urgently build a European digital public infrastructure. This means a European technological ecosystem that prioritises the public interest, upholds democratic values, and supports sustainable development, all while advancing the digital and green transitions. Platforms that function without targeted advertising are, by design, less addictive. Federated, open source digital platforms will also make us less dependent on tech oligarchs who may be co-opted by our adversaries.
Second, we need a comprehensive defence policy against hybrid threats – a Democracy Shield that prevents flooding, not only the rain; a Shield that is turned towards the outside while at the same time it strengthens our internal defences; a democratic immune system against the foreign and domestic illiberal viruses attacking our democratic structures.
Comprehensive security demands that our government and democratic institutions continue to function, especially in times of crisis. This means we must not only re-commit to the rule of law and our values, but strengthen the separation of powers, nurture healthy systems of checks and balances, and support media that are independent – from governments and from media moguls.
Defending democracy — be it from foreign, domestic or technological threats — always starts at home, by strengthening our democratic institutions and processes. We must be not only resilient but also vigilant and pro-actively prepared. This means boosting our democratic immune system: building deterrence by denial of hybrid attacks.
Therefore, the European Democracy Shield must stand within the forthcoming European Preparedness Union Strategy 3, so that we connect the dots between foreign, domestic and technological threats to democracy, and deploy all the tools of democratic preparedness and resilience that were adopted during the last mandate.4
By broadening its Democracy Shield to encompass hybrid threats and linking it with the Preparedness Union Strategy, the EU can establish a framework for comprehensive security where public, private and civic actors work closely together. It can rally society around a new democratic project: to ensure our civil preparedness and societal resilience against hybrid attacks to our democracy, economy and security.
Our window of opportunity is closing fast. Defence Ministers and intelligence services are warning for rising (attempts of) sabotage across Europe and assess that Russia may escalate their imperial war to one or more NATO countries within a few years. If the future of our democracies depends on our preparedness and resilience, we must start work today. An effective shield demands a steady arm.
This article was first published by Defend Democracy and republished with their permission. The views and opinions in this article do not necessarily reflect those of the Heinrich-Böll-Stiftung European Union.
Footnotes
- 1
Hooked on and under the influence of social media and other digital platforms, with their addictive design, polarising algorithms, targeted advertising, click bait, culture wars and doom scrolling.
- 2
Hybrid attacks target and exploit vulnerabilities inherent in democratic systems of government and in the fabric of democratic societies, such as political rights and individual liberties. By using hybrid threat activities, malign actors seek to exacerbate wedges in society, to undermine social cohesion and trust among citizens and towards their democratic institutions.
- 3
At the request of EU Commission President Von der Leyen and EU’s High Representative for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy, former Finish President Niinistö has written a Preparedness Report, which will serve as input for a European Preparedness Union strategy.
- 4
Such as: Hybrid Toolbox, FIMI Toolbox, DSA, AI Act, Media Freedom Act, anti-SLAPP package, EU Security Union Strategy, Annual Rule of Law Report, INGE Committee Report on foreign interference in all democratic processes in the European Union, including disinformation.
