Facebook hearings can spark real debate in Congress about Russia

This week, executives from some of the biggest technology and social media companies in the world will appear before the House Intelligence Committee and Senate Intelligence Committee to share what they know about Russia’s use of their platforms to intervene in the 2016 U.S. election. It’s an important and overdue hearing, but one that must not lose sight of the ultimate target of the investigation: Russia.

Russia’s objectives are ambitious. Russian President Vladimir Putin resents the collapse of the Soviet Union and seeks to restore Russia’s lost empire in order to give the Russian government a freer hand at home and abroad. Russia’s intervention in the American election was part of a broader effort to undermine confidence in Western democracies and the credibility of Western institutions, weaken trans-Atlantic relationships such as NATO, diminish the international appeal of Western liberalism and the United States, as well as reduce American power abroad, reassert Russian power, and ultimately protect Putin’s regime from the threat of people power.

{mosads}Russia’s use of information did not begin with the 2016 U.S. election. In fact, there is a long history of Soviet and Russian information operations. During the Cold War, Russia favored exploiting divisions already present in American society, especially around race, as a means of undermining U.S. political cohesion. In more recent years, Russia has deployed information as a weapon in neighboring countries like Macedonia and Ukraine, and it has used information operations against multiple Western targets.

Russia has hacked email systems at the U.S. Department of State and the Joint Chiefs of Staff. It has intercepted and released the audio of a U.S. diplomat’s phone conversation to divide the United States from its European partners. It used social media against Angela Merkel in Germany and fake news in Italy against Matteo Renzi. Russia relies on groups like WikiLeaks. It exploits social media to spread propaganda and disinformation. There is even evidence of Russian ties to secessionist movements in the United States and Europe.

There are things that technology companies should do differently. We see evidence in Congress and in the companies themselves that change is coming. Twitter has announced an initiative to provide users with more transparency by giving political advertisements a uniform look and disclosing who paid for them. Similarly, Facebook took down a site claiming to represent veterans that had posted politically divisive posts and created an enormous following. These are good first steps, but more will need to be done to combat sites that promote deliberate disinformation. Still, these are tactical considerations, and the bigger debate that Congress can initiate this week is about a Russia strategy for the United States that is worthy of the challenge.

After the 9/11 attacks, the U.S. intelligence community changed the way it shares information with law enforcement in the hopes of preventing another attack on American soil. Resources were devoted to the threat as never before because we, as a nation, understood the enormity of the attack and the urgency of our response. Russia’s actions in the 2016 U.S. election should have the same galvanizing effect. In this new era, the U.S. intelligence community and private tech companies may need to share more information to warn each other, and the public, about attacks against Western democracies.

Congress and the public must think broadly about this threat and think beyond the technical and social media issues likely to be raised at the hearings. Specifically, we need to prepare the executive branch for a new cold war. The U.S. intelligence community and the U.S. Department of State must be staffed and resourced for it. If legal authorities need revision, then Congress should act accordingly. The White House must request sufficient appropriations for these activities and prosecute these programs vigorously, while providing the diplomatic leadership required for an international response to this Russian challenge to democracy.

Furthermore, we need to invest in the American people. Education is the cornerstone for an effective defense of democracy. Russia exploited America’s media illiteracy, our civic illiteracy, and our historical illiteracy. At home, we need to increase the public’s resistance to influence by foreign powers. Finally, Congress must lead. In the absence of clear executive branch willingness to do so, Congress must take the initiative. It can begin by using the hearings with America’s technology giants to start educating the public about the threat posed by Russia.

The Russian effort is grander than the use of social media or the election of an individual president. Russia seeks to sow division within the United States and within the broader community of Western democracies. The public needs to be sensitized and their attention reoriented to combat the broader Russian effort to weaken our faith in free institutions, and undermine the political cohesion of the United States. In an era of heightened cynicism and diminished confidence in our free institutions, Congress has the opportunity this week to begin an important strategic discussion that looks beyond media platforms and understands the potentially existential threat to Western liberal democracy. The stakes couldn’t be higher.

James M. Ludes, Ph.D., is vice president for public research and initiatives and executive director of the Pell Center for International Relations and Public Policy at Salve Regina University. Mark R. Jacobson, Ph.D., is an associate professor at the Edmund Walsh School of Foreign Service at Georgetown University. They are co-authors of the “Shatter the House of Mirrors” report on Russian influence operations in the United States.