data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/76a89/76a890e8cbd5384562a3ded876e66706154c89cc" alt=""
Disinformation began in World War I and has continued to gain tactical popularity. Over 6 decades ago, disinformation was used to break apart the weaker seams of foreign policy by a more capable country. Nowadays, headlines regarding disinformation campaigns are often tied to Russia. The Baltic States, specifically, find themselves tackling online “fake news” while Russian military activity has increased alongside the borders of their nations. Moscow’s success in hacking and spreading false military endeavors has proved to be of utmost concern when they are also making decisions that counter the hopes United Nations (UN) member states. Tying the two together may be the future to border security for the Baltic States, in addition to joint military operations. Cyber diplomacy, in coordination with the United States (US) and the North American Treaty Organization (NATO), may prove to be a fundamental key to keeping the Baltic nations safe from fears of Russian military invasion.
The Association for European Journalists (AEJ) met in Kilkenny, Ireland last year to discuss the critical topic of the time: US presidential candidate Donald Trump and his potential affect on European affairs. This year the AEJ convened in Lithuania’s capital to discuss Russian disinformation campaign efforts to generate and spread “fake news.” The Baltic States have expressed concern over possible invasion, while NATO and the US have tried to alleviate their concerns. The region indeed has a foundation of evidence to blame this fear upon; the Russian invasion of Georgia, the uprising in eastern Ukraine, and the annexation of Crimea all showcase these countries’ fears. The location of the AEJ’s annual meeting also held innate meaning. In Vilnius, the former KGB headquarters (now a museum of horror), are the torture chambers and the execution cells; those that were not killed in this building were often shipped to Siberia — an incredible 300,000 Lithuanians out of a population of just under 3 million.
NATO and the US have militarily supported the Baltic States, especially in regard to the anxiety that builds around the time of the Belorussian Zapad games. In 2009, Zapad maneuvers ended with a simulated nuclear attack on Warsaw, while four years later they were preceded by a dummy bombing raid on Stockholm. NATO has critiqued Moscow for its lack of transparency, as these war games concern NATO’s military efforts in Europe’s eastern flank. Jüri Luik, Estonia’s Defense Minister, has said, “European Union (EU) countries should prioritize a so- called ‘military Schengen’ deal to allow freer movement of troops across frontiers to respond to crises in a region unnerved by Russia’s 2014 invasion of Crimea."
Lithuania’s Defense Minister Raimundas Karoblis had stated, “We cannot be totally calm. There is a large foreign army massed next to Lithuanian territory."
The opinions of the Baltic governments do not always mirror those of the NATO, as previously mentioned. NATO members stated that as many as 100,000 troops may have been involved in the “friendly” Zapad games this year, while area experts believe that Russia is not planning to launch an invasion. Not everyone is so confident. Lithuania’s Defense Minister Raimundas Karoblis had stated, “We cannot be totally calm. There is a large foreign army massed next to Lithuanian territory;” additionally, the head of the US Army in Europe, General Ben Hodges, has raised concerns that Russia might use the Zapad drills as a “Trojan horse” to make incursions into Russian-speaking regions in the Baltic region.
Other countries have begun to invest in their own counter-measures. Lars Findsen, chief of Denmark’s Defense Intelligence Service, said on November 18 of this year that the country was planning to build a nearly 280-foot-tall listening tower new Ostermarie, on the Danish island of Bornholm, in order to intercept radio signals across the Baltic Sea and in parts of Russia. Denmark hopes to target the military buildup in these regions — in relation to the area dominated by NATO. The US has also continued its military support by keeping Special Operations Forces in the Baltic States. Unfortunately, the region feels as though they are playing a waiting game.
With Russian-speaking minority populations in all three Baltic states, it is of no surprise that these nations may fear a similar excuse Moscow used for the invasion of Crimea: their minorities are being mistreated. Russian forces needed no insignia when it proved itself a master of “hybrid warfare” in Crimea. Cyber attacks and fake news were utilized to gain minority support and establish the first steps toward invasion. With US and NATO military forces supporting the Baltic States, perhaps there is more that the region can request from its fellow EU states. Cyber diplomacy may also be key to mitigating the fears they place upon the vulnerability of their borders. The research used for this paper would examine various ways the Baltic nations can improve their NATO, US, and EU alliances in order to counter aggressive military actions from Moscow, as well as the disinformation campaigns that could be used to undermine their authority amongst Russian-speaking minority regions.
Comments