See related story,

NATO TOLD RUSSIAN ELECTION MEDDLING EVOLVING THREAT THAT MUST BE MET

ANATO draft report says the problem of Russian meddling in democratic elections continues to evolve and alliance members must be ready to meet the threat.

U.S. Democratic congresswoman Susan Davis told a NATO science and technology committee meeting in Halifax Sunday that Russian cyber interference comes largely in the form of disinformation that has specific goals in mind.

“Disinformation campaigns spread false information about our institutions and about our politics and they seek to diminish public faith in liberal democratic institutions and undermine the very fabric of our societies,” said Davis.

She said Russian interference was detected in the early stages of the recent mid-term elections in her country, although not on the scale seen during the 2016 presidential election.

Davis said technology companies shut down hundreds of fake accounts that aimed to disrupt the elections.

“I want to emphasize that the accounts identified and deleted were not only Russian, but also Iranian. And moreover, the U.S. government now also believes that other states are emulating Russia’s tactics including China.”

In a report updated since first presented at a meeting in Warsaw last May, Davis urges NATO member governments and parliaments to adopt measures such as regular risk assessments of election infrastructure and to consider mandating post-election security audits among other initiatives. She said allied countries should strive to establish “common best practices.”

Discussions during the weekend parliamentary assembly meeting have also focused on other measures including the application of sanctions and the use of NATO Article 4, said Davis. Seldom used, a member state under Article 4 can convene a meeting of the alliance to “consult” when it feels its independence or security are threatened.

Davis said last year’s election in the Netherlands can serve as a “great example” of what successful adaptation can achieve.

“The Netherlands were able to secure public trust in their last elections by actively working to make them secure,” she said. “Our Dutch friends held elections without significant disruption and I think their thorough preparation is really a key factor.”

Davis noted that prior to the election the Dutch government reached out to the U.S. government in an attempt to learn lessons from the 2016 elections in the United States. She said it also moved to ban the electronic counting of ballots and put in place a fact-checking function for newspapers that citizens could refer to.