Last week, I had the distinct honor on the invitation of the African Centre for Media Excellence (ACME) to offer perspectives on the subject of foreign malign influence, and how I see it from the perspectives of contemporary diplomacy. This was based on a research study undertaken by the media agency to understand the perceptions of the media and journalists in Uganda on foreign malign influence that often are propagated by sovereign states. This is because today, nations often employ various strategies to exert influence and further their interests on the international stage.
According to the draft findings of the report, 46% of the journalists had never come across any form of propaganda from foreign actors, whereas 54% said yes and that they have encountered foreign malign influence. The draft report noted that the main source of foreign malign actors is governments through its state institutions and bureaucracies.
While the concept of soft power offers a legitimate and effective means of building relationships and fostering cooperation, there is a growing concern surrounding foreign malign influence where countries employ deceptive tactics to manipulate and undermine the sovereignty of other nations. This includes spreading disinformation, conducting cyberattacks, interfering in elections, and engaging in economic coercion. Such actions pose a threat to the stability and integrity of democratic systems and international relations
In the panel discussion, I was asked about my perspectives on the draft findings including the actions and strategies deployed according to the draft findings. I pointed out that whereas use of fake accounts, blocking of websites, online trolls etc. were illegitimate means of spreading misinformation and disinformation be state actors, there were greater need to delineate these actions alongside legitimate use of soft power by other nation states. The use of soft power includes communicating foreign policy, spreading cultural values, offering education exchanges and extending interests of sovereign actors in foreign countries. For instance, many governments legitimately use publications to air out their views and shape foreign public opinions, and they may cooperate and collaborate with local NGOs, Think-Tanks, and may equally advertise and roll out advocacy campaigns through its embassies and missions as a form of public diplomacy. This should not be concluded as malign influence.
Public diplomacy is key for sovereign states because it helps in forming and shaping public opinions as well as foreign policy execution. This means, state actors will strive towards shaping how others think of them in foreign countries through many forms – including interactions with private interest groups, NGOs, raising public awareness of international affairs, enabling them to impact domestic policy agenda as well.
As we discussed foreign malign influence, the role of China and Russia dominated the discussions. However, I argued that from the perspectives of new public diplomacy which is more than broadened today – the aim is to develop and advance diplomacy policies and practices for non-state actors including sub national actors, supra national organizations, NGOs and sometimes private companies. The goals of such strategies are basically for improving a country’s reputation including advancing its political advantages in a global geopolitical contestation in which states sees each other as competitors or perhaps enemies that are unable to trust each other – at least from a realist point of view.
Foreign malign influence whether it manifests in subtle or more complicated forms, it’s critical that independent journalists, investigators and the general public create a clear delineation between legitimate use of soft power and foreign malign influence. For instance, what is seen as Russian and Chinese malign influence, Russia and China sees it as legitimate use of soft power. Soft power involves the ability to shape the preference of others through appeals and attractions rather than coercion (Nye 1990).
I do think that foreign malign influence is pervasive and intersects at a point where power, control of resources, money and influence is at stake. Its more dominant in kleptocratic societies where sophisticated networks of kleptocratic financial structures, security services and professional propagandist intersect, and where the interests of these actors are in jeopardy, foreign malign influence is at its best. It’s our collective roles as journalists, investigators and citizens to look at the nuances beyond the news, and media propaganda to examine questionable and dubious agreements and trade deals and cooperations, including contractual deals, arms exchanges and security arrangements because often, it’s at this point, where these actors are quite daring in deploying their tools and strategies to avoid mechanisms of accountability.
To ensure the responsible use of soft power, countries should prioritize transparency and accountability. This includes clearly communicating the objectives and intentions behind soft power initiatives, as well as establishing mechanisms for oversight and evaluation. By doing so, countries can maintain credibility and prevent the misuse of soft power for nefarious purposes.
Therefore, government sponsored efforts to communicate to foreign publics to promote its strategic objectives should not be seen by others as foreign malign influence. This is not to deny this problem exists. It’s just a call to be more critical in analyzing the problem. In fact, at the end of the conversation – which was fairly charged and passionately discussed by members in the room, there seems to be a general consensus that foreign malign influence can manifest in very subtle forms and sometimes through a more sophisticated, complex and interconnected networks of structures within and outside state bureaucracies – including financial, insurance, banking, legal and political elites and institutions. it is equally important to recognize and promote the legitimate use of soft power as a means of fostering cooperation and understanding among nations. By adopting a comprehensive approach that combines countering malign influence with transparency and accountability, countries can strike a balance that protects their interests while upholding the principles of international cooperation.
Moses Owiny – is Founder at Centre for Multilateral Affairs
