Hacking democracy
One reason why Donald Trump kept the US media spellbound throughout his campaign was his fondness for impromptu remarks. Mainstream media treated many of these as gaffes, but more often than not they seemed to galvanize his base. Many voters who had lost confidence in establishment figures felt that Trump’s candour was an asset. When he disparaged Mexicans and Muslims, or cryptically hinted that the Second Amendment had to be protected at any cost, millions of the frustrated sat up and took notice. Finally, here was a candidate who wouldn’t yield to liberal nostrums about minorities and foreigners. Trump also seemed authentic because he called his opponent “crooked” in press releases and he didn’t mind saying: “Russia, if you’re listening, I hope you’re able to find the 30,000 emails that are missing [from Hillary Clinton’s private email server] I think you will probably be rewarded mightily by our press.”
With hindsight this particular ‘joke’ turned out to be prescient. Russia’s state-sponsored hackers didn’t find the desired emails, but they managed – in a year-long campaign that proceeded despite a warning from President Obama in early September – to find information that was equally damaging. Tens of thousands of emails stolen from the servers of the Democratic National Committee not only embarrassed the Clinton campaign during its crucial final weeks but also affected several close congressional races. The describes Russia’s interference as the most “brazen, disruptive and manipulative attack on the American electoral system since Watergate” a verdict that has been confirmed by a formal CIA investigation.
Irrespective of one’s political sympathies, Russia’s hack bodes ill for future elections. The potential disruptions of strategic hacking and leaking go well beyond mere embarrassment. When Wikileaks posted emails that aired internal squabbles within the DNC, the resulting publicity led to the resignation of the party’s chairwoman, and a wave of “fake news” stories which appear to have swayed public opinion in close congressional races in up to a dozen states. Even the most partisan Trump supporter would agree that such consequential intrusions by a foreign power have the capacity to undermine the fundamentals of American democracy. Had similar leaks been used against a Republican campaign the effect would have been no less sinister. Given the current context, however, the Russian business interests of senior members of the Trump campaign are deeply concerning, as is the fact that Trump’s nominee for Secretary of State, the former ExxonMobil chief executive Rex Tillerson, received Russia’s Order of Friendship in 2013.
When the US has tried to detain suspected Russian hackers – as happened last year with the arrest of Dmitry Ukrainsky in Thailand – Moscow has moved quickly to prevent extradition. In most cases, even when there is compelling evidence of criminal wrongdoing, Russia has declined to cooperate with US law enforcement. The difficulties of locating and prosecuting hackers has emboldened cyberarmies in China, Iran, North Korea and Syria, several of which pose equally serious threats to their countries’ political rivals. To date, most of their activity has focused on the theft of personal information from government databases, or intellectual property from corporations and money from banks, but the success of Russia’s interference in the US elections will inevitably inspire copycat campaigns.
Several years ago Edward Snowden showed that cyberspace had been overrun by intelligence agencies from the so-called Five Eyes nations – Australia, Canada, New Zealand, the United Kingdom and the United States. These agencies
were gathering and exploiting information with little or no regard for traditional protections of privacy and freedom of speech. Snowden’s disclosures showed that mature democracies had a dangerously cavalier approach to digital information and willingly used it to gain commercial, political and in some cases personal advantages on their unsuspecting targets. At the time, there was little discussion about what other less restrained intelligence agencies might do with similarly sensitive information. Russia’s hacking of the US election is a striking example of what can be done, and it is almost certainly a sign of the political mischief that lies in store in our increasingly interconnected digital world.