The former headquarters of the Internet Research Agency (IRA), a Russian troll factory. Image Credit: Wikimedia Commons.
Mitigating Foreign Influence in U.S. Elections
On September 4th, 2024, the Biden administration announced that it would take major actions against Russian influence in the upcoming presidential election. According to the U.S. intelligence community, Russia has been interfering with the election in order to manipulate voters. Despite the issue’s complexity, the U.S. government must continue mitigating foreign influence in elections to ensure that the process is fair and not used to the advantage of adversaries overseas.
Russia is notorious for interfering in U.S. elections, having done so several times since the Cold War. The most notable instance occurred in 2016, after which twelve Russian military intelligence officers were indicted for stealing and releasing documents by hacking the computers of U.S. entities and individuals involved in the election. In 2020, Russia used strategies such as spreading propaganda around certain candidates to U.S. media and officials, and using fake social media accounts to undermine Americans’ confidence in the electoral system and increase political polarization. As a result, the U.S. government has taken steps such as the recent decision by the Biden administration to mitigate foreign influence in elections. For instance, in December of 2016, President Obama issued Executive Order 13694, which helps mitigate dangerous cybercrimes such as those committed during that year’s election. On September 12th, 2018, President Trump issued Executive Order 13848, which calls for cooperation across intelligence agencies to identify any foreign interference in elections and allows for the direct application of Department of Treasury-led sanctions on the perpetrators.
However, there is no directive that focuses explicitly on social media-based attacks that have impacted elections. Therefore, one major step that the government can take is to create a new directive that specifically targets those who use social media to carry out such attacks. Troll factories, including Russia’s now-defunct Internet Research Agency (IRA), are companies that create fake social media accounts in order to achieve political goals, and are responsible for several accounts that have interfered with elections. Though social media platforms themselves have been taking steps to manage the issue, such as how Facebook has been dismantling Russian troll accounts, the issue remains prominent. The government must therefore act as well, and an effective way to start is by issuing a mandatory directive that focuses on any foreign influence via social media. Though the current directives generally target any method of foreign influence, they are too ambiguous to manage such a complex issue alone.
Additionally, the intelligence community must continue countering potential sources of Russian influence. In February of 2024, the FBI eliminated a router network controlled by Russia’s General Staff Main Intelligence Directorate (GRU) that used malware to install data files for cyber espionage. Shortly after, the FBI and several international organizations issued a cybersecurity advisory on Russia’s use of certain routers for cybercrime, and recommended strategies such as implementing strategic firewall rules and changing usernames and passwords. This is especially important because Russia can potentially use routers to access election-related information and use the data to interfere. It is thus crucial that the intelligence community continue to issue advisories and monitor possible methods of interference accordingly, especially during election years.
To further defend against attempts to directly change election results and to reinforce trust that the voting process itself is secure, the government could also require a form of alternative voting record for electronic voting machines. If paper ballots are not used, a machine could be required to produce a type of receipt or other physical voting record that can be compared against the electronic record. Paper ballots, meanwhile, are not digital, so hackers would be unable to easily alter them. However, paper ballots are harder to tally than digital ballots, can be subject to damage or incorrectly filled out, such as in the case of the 2000 election, and they are not always accessible by people with disabilities. In those cases, the government should use extensively monitored digital methods to ensure that hackers did not manipulate votes. Still, both paper and digital voting methods can be effective in preventing foreign actors from altering election outcomes.
It is important that the U.S. government take these actions in order to ensure a more honest election process. If America does not enforce regulations on social media, continue thwarting possible security issues, or encourage the use of paper ballots and physical voting records, Russia will continue to easily influence elections in a way that decreases trust in America’s government system. However, if the appropriate steps are taken, America can easily mitigate most foreign influence in its elections, reinforcing the government’s credibility and relieving political polarity.
