Propaganda, Disinformation, Strategic Communication — How to Improve Cooperation in CEE Region?

2020;
: 160-164
1
Institute of Central Europe, Lublin, Poland

A paper deals with possibilities and opportunities for cooperation in Central and Eastern European region in the field of information security with particular emphasis on media influenced by Russia. My point of departure is that the information threats to societal security is external and they have relevant impact on the sustainability, conditions for evolution, of traditional patterns of language, culture and religious and ethnic identity, custom and values. An information crisis in the Baltic states results from the process of manipulation and disinformation campaign against the Russian-speaking residents. The V4 states including Poland do not display a numerous Russian-speaking audience, thus Russian propaganda here is facilitated by local pro-Russian media. This paper unveils it is necessary to develop effective offensive procedures to fight propaganda in the media and promote democratic values. States should strive to create an open, pluralistic information environment. Such strategies should be realized by both public and private sectors as well as the civil sector so as to cooperate in information complementation and exchange. Dealing with the contemporary challenges should include prevention, community management, social media management, psychosocial support and legal measures. Restoration of confidence in the media and development of professional journalism are essential. Additionally, the lack of new media literacy skills, together with the combination of populism and anti-liberal narratives, will increase its vulnerabilities to more risks than information security.

  1. Čižik T. (2017). Russian Information Warfare in Central Europe. In Čižik T. (ed.), Information Warfare — New Security Challenge for Europe, Bratislava: Centre for European and North Atlantic Affairs, 8–31.
  2. Hajduk J., Stępniewski T. (2015). Wojna hybrydowa Rosji z Ukrainą: uwarunkowania i instrumenty [Russia’s hybrid war with Ukraine: conditions and instruments]. Studia Europejskie, 4(76), 135–151.
  3. Hornik, R. (2016). A strategy to counter propaganda in the digital era. Yearbook of the Institute of East-Central Europe, 14(2), 61–74.
  4. Jiráček, L. (2016, December). Soft risks and threats to safety and security: the case of the Czech Republic. In. A. Visvizi, T. Stępniewski (Eds.), Poland, the Czech Republic and NATO in Fragile Security Contexts, IESW Reports, 64–67.
  5. LSM (2016, February 11). Глава русскоязычного ТВ Эстонии: доверие зрителя пришло не сразу’ [The head of the Russian-speaking Estonian TV: the viewer trust did not come immediately]. LSM. LV, http://www.lsm.lv/ru/statja/obschestvo/novosti/glava-russkojazichnogotv-... prishlo-ne-srazu.a168679/ (2020-01-30).
  6. Milo D., Klingová K. (2017). The Vulnerability Index: Subversive Russian Influence in Central Europe, GLOBSEC Report. Budapest: Globsec Policy Institute. 
  7. Nimmo B. (2015, May 19). Anatomy of an Info-War: How Russia’s Propaganda Machine Works, and How to Counter It, StopFake.org, https://www.stopfake.org/en/anatomy-of-an-info-war-how-russia-s- propaganda-machine-works-and-how-to-counter-it (2020-02-11).
  8. Reichardt I. (2016). Russian propaganda in the West. Yearbook of the Institute of East-Central Europe, 2016, 14(2), 9–22.
  9. FEPS. (2016). Resisting Foreign State Propaganda in the New Information Environment: the case of the EU, Russia, and the Eastern Partnership countries, Foundation for European Progressive Studies — Brīvības un Solidaritātes Fonds.
  10. Smoleňová I., Chrzová B. (eds., 2017, November). United We Stand, Divided We Fall: The Kremlin’s Leverage in the Visegrad Countries. Prague: Prague Security Studies Institute (PSSI).
  11. Šuplata M. , Nič M. (2016), Russia’s information Was in Central Europe: new trends and counter-measures, GLOBSEC Report, Bratislava: GLOBSEC Policy Institute.
  12. Zaliznyak, Y. (2016). Information security and Russian aggression: Ukraine—EU—NATO hybrid response. Yearbook of the Institute of East-Central Europe, 14(2). 23–42.