Use of disinformation as a weapon in contemporary international relations: accountability for Russian actions against states and international organizations

被引:2
作者
Espaliu-Berdud, Carlos [1 ]
机构
[1] Univ Antonio de Nebrija, Santa Cruz de Marcenado 27, Madrid 28027, Spain
来源
PROFESIONAL DE LA INFORMACION | 2023年 / 32卷 / 04期
关键词
International accountability; Disinformation; Cyberattacks; Fake news; Use of force; Countermeasures; International wrongful acts; Sanctions; International relations; European Union; NATO; Rusia; Ukraine;
D O I
10.3145/epi.2023.jul.02
中图分类号
G25 [图书馆学、图书馆事业]; G35 [情报学、情报工作];
学科分类号
1205 ; 120501 ;
摘要
We have chosen to study international responsibility for carrying out disinformation campaigns, aiming to assess the importance and progress that the use of disinformation campaigns has obtained in contemporary international society as a geopolitical weapon, much like other well-established means such as the use of force. We focus on the situation with Russia because it has become apparent not only to specialized researchers but also to all citizens through the mainstream media that Russia has used disinformation campaigns to cloak its invasion of Ukraine in a smoke cloud of lies and half-truths. Thus, we found that, in the case of the Russian disinformation campaigns, the full circle of the accountability relationship has been completed. The Russian state has been accused of or blamed for carrying out these disinformation campaigns. The violation of certain international obligations has been reported, and it has been held accountable or even sanctioned for this. In light of these findings, it can be concluded that disinformation campaigns are becoming increasingly important as a tool of geopolitics or international relations, either on their own or in conjunction with other, more classic weapons in international society, such as the age-old use of force.
引用
收藏
页数:19
相关论文
共 67 条
[51]  
STELZENMULLER C., 2017, Testimony before the U.S. Senate Select Committee on Intelligence
[52]  
Surez-Serrano Chema., 2020, SYbIL, V24, P129, DOI [10.17103/sybil.24.6, DOI 10.17103/SYBIL.24.6]
[53]  
TEDH, 2005, Judgment of 6 September, Salov v. Ukraine
[54]  
TEDH, 1992, Sentencia de 23 de abril, Caste//s c. Espana.
[55]  
TEDH, 1976, Sentencia de 7 de diciembre, Handyside c. Reino Unido
[56]  
TJUE, 2001, Sentencia del Tribunal de Justicia de 6 de marzo
[57]  
Union Internacional de Telecomunicaciones (UIT) y Organizacion de las Naciones Unidas para la Educacian la Ciencia y la Cultura, 2020, Broadband Commission research report on 'Freedom of Expression and Addressing Disinformation on the Internet'
[58]  
United Kingdom Government, 2021, National Cyber Strategy 2022
[59]  
United Nations Special Rapporteur on Freedom of Opinion and Expression the Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe Representative on Freedom of the Media the Organization of American States Special Rapporteur on Freedom of Expression and the African Commission on Human and Peoples' Rights Special Rapporteur on Freedom of Expression and Access to Information, 2017, Joint declaration on freedom of expression and fake news, disinformation and propaganda
[60]  
United States of America, 2022, National Security Strategy