Disinformation poses a growing challenge, not only threatening the credibility and effectiveness of peacekeeping missions but also undermining global democratic structures. While the United Nations is actively working to combat this issue, the effectiveness of its efforts and the implications for its broader mission remain in question. Examining how disinformation weakens the UN’s goals could highlight the need for new approaches, including adapting effective methods used by the European Union.

Disinformation – What’s that?

Disinformation is intended to deliberately deceive and mislead the recipient. In most cases, it aims to achieve economic or political goals and interests. Increasingly, disinformation is being used during times of war or crisis, such as the ongoing Russian invasion of Ukraine or during the COVID-19 pandemic. The potential for disinformation to be particularly powerful stems from its use as a weapon in information warfare and its capacity to destabilize structures and societies. 

What has the UN done against disinformation so far? 

The UN has been concerned with disinformation for some time. A look at its historical timeline shows that this concern dates back to the early days of the organisation. In 1947, for example, the General Assembly condemned the dissemination of propaganda that could endanger (world) peace. The subject of a convention on freedom of information was also widely debated within the UN. However, it was never adopted because of the unclear relationship with the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights and the tensions that existed. Despite the failure of certain initiatives, the UN Secretariat has continued to emphasise the importance of preventing the dissemination of misleading content by member states.

The impacts of disinformation on the UN

Disinformation during the COVID-19 pandemic and informational attacks on peacekeepers have affected the UN’s goals of peace and security. According to the Secretary-General’s Roadmap from June 2023, 70 percent of peacekeepers reported that disinformation had a severe, moderate, or critical impact on their daily work. Additionally, 75 percent indicated that disinformation posed a threat to their own safety. Of the current 12 active peacekeeping missions, most, numbering six, are located on the African continent. In four of these missions, handling information, especially disinformation, is already included in the mandates. The four missions — MONUSCO, MINUSCA, MINUSMA, and UNMISS — are required to train peacekeepers to recognize disinformation more quickly and easily, and to integrate strategic communication and partnerships with local actors more effectively into their daily work.

Regarding local partnerships, there was an awareness day in the Congo this year with one hundred students to raise awareness about the issue. Additionally, the mission in the Congo operates a radio station to reach the population and inform them about the mission and the role of the peacekeepers.

The implementation of measures against disinformation is not surprising when looking at case studies from Mali or the Central African Republic. MINUSMA faced false information suggesting that peacekeepers were cooperating with other armed groups on the ground and thus not acting in accordance with the mission’s mandate. In the Central African Republic, the intentions of the peacekeeping forces were questioned, which significantly hindered the work of the soldiers and contributed to conspiracy theories against the UN and the mission.

The African Center for Strategic Studies has also noted that many of these disinformation campaigns originate from Russia. Given the number of campaigns and their intended purpose, particularly for the mission in Mali, it raises the question of whether there is a direct correlation.

If this is the case and the primarily Russian campaigns negatively impact the peacekeepers and thus directly influence the work of the United Nations, the role of Russia as a P5 state would be called into question, depending on the originator of the campaign. Russia, along with the other P5 and E10 states, mandates peacekeeping missions in the Security Council and helps determine their mandates and composition, among other things.

Russia’s prominent role

If Russia is one of the actors actively spreading disinformation against the goals of the UN and its peacekeeping missions, it is possible that the objectives of these missions, as well as those of the organization, cannot be achieved, and that the working processes within the Security Council may be actively manipulated. The Security Council, which is responsible for global security and international peace, could fail to meet these goals due to targeted subversion. This raises the initial question of what the UN can truly accomplish in the fight against disinformation, especially concerning peacekeeping missions.

The Secretariat can, of course, independently implement measures such as the Verified campaign during the pandemic. Additionally, the General Assembly can also take action and mandate disinformation as a topic through a Uniting for Peace resolution. Within the framework of the General Assembly, EU member states could attempt to build on the already adopted Resolution 227 to develop solutions for dealing with disinformation. Member states of the Union, in collaboration with like-minded states, could increase pressure on the Secretary-General to initiate further negotiation processes for an international legal document on disinformation.

Even if an actor like Russia undermines the work of the UN with misleading content, the organization is not entirely incapacitated. However, Russia’s behavior leaves a bitter taste, especially when looking at the mandate renewals of MINUSCA, MINUSMA, and UNMISS. All three mandates had two abstentions, from China and Russia. Each of these resolutions also deals with handling disinformation in peacekeeping missions. It is notable that, in 2022, 60 percent of disinformation campaigns on the African continent originated from Russia and China.

Whether Russia isolates itself within the United Nations with its behavior or continues this double game remains to be seen. Either scenario would be undesirable for the future of the organization and peacekeeping missions. An isolated player with veto power could obstruct future votes in the Security Council out of a sense of defiance, thereby jeopardizing the future of the organization. Although we do not have a Security Council in Europe, Russia is trying to undermine European support for Ukraine through targeted campaigns, among other things. Much more serious, however, is the influence on national and European elections, which can actively contribute to the rise of populist forces and undermine democratic institutions and structures in the future. This can have a negative impact on goals such as (global or european) peace and security.

What the UN can learn from others like the EU

The United Nations has been looking for solutions to digital problems for a long time. The European Union is also regularly confronted with disinformation campaigns from abroad. Although the two organizations cannot be directly compared, as they are different in nature, the UN can still learn from the European community. Cooperation could take place at the level of knowledge transfer in particular.

For example, the European External Action Service (EEAS) has launched the EUvsDisinfo project. The project identifies and analyses disinformation in a targeted manner, which can help to contain potential negative implications for organizations, individuals or countries. Since the project was established in 2015, it has uncovered and refuted over 18,000 cases of disinformation content. All cases of disinformation campaigns are recorded on the website and made accessible to the public. This approach demonstrates the EU’s commitment to research and data analysis as a cornerstone of its fight against disinformation. By systematically documenting and analyzing cases of disinformation, the EUvsDisinfo project not only uncovers patterns but also provides transparency and accountability. The United Nations could use a similar tool in the respective national languages or dialects to take some of the power away from the impact that disinformation can have.

In addition, the EU works closely with the member states, as can be seen from the cooperation with the EUROPE DIRECT centers, among others. These centers monitor the daily press on a daily basis, which means that false information is detected directly. This cooperative model could inspire the UN to strengthen partnerships with regional and national actors to create a decentralized but interconnected network for identifying and combating disinformation.

Furthermore, the EU’s success in developing coherent strategies and frameworks, such as the Action Plan against Disinformation and the Digital Services Act (DSA), illustrates the importance of clear guidelines and accountability measures for both public and private actors. These frameworks establish standards for governments, social media platforms, and civil society to address disinformation systematically. The United Nations could adopt a similar approach by creating a global framework or “Code of Conduct on Disinformation” that encourages member states to adhere to common principles and minimum standards in combating this challenge.

Through these initiatives, the EU showcases the importance of combining research, collaboration, and regulatory strategies in the fight against disinformation—an approach that the United Nations could adapt to its global mandate.

In conclusion, the UN should consider adopting a multi-pronged approach inspired by the EU. This includes developing a centralized platform for identifying and documenting disinformation, fostering stronger regional and national cooperation, and implementing clear global guidelines to address the challenge comprehensively. By leveraging the EU’s experience, the UN can strengthen its ability to mitigate the harmful impacts of disinformation, protect vulnerable communities, and promote trustworthy information in an increasingly digital world.