Foreign interference in U.S. elections is not limited to attempts to influence the ballot box. It can also involve fabricated videos, misleading opinion polls, and messages promoted by social media influencers through mobile phones, all of which can shape voters\u2019 perceptions of candidates and institutions before they cast their ballots. More dangerously, the spread of fake content can lead people to question even accurate news, turning truth itself into a subject of dispute.<\/p>\n
This was the issue raised by journalist specializing in U.S. affairs Mowaffak Harb during a discussion with academic and political researcher Roulan Bejamov, who rejected holding Moscow responsible for political divisions surrounding U.S. elections.<\/p>\n
Between warnings about influence operations and skepticism toward the accusations, a parallel battle is emerging alongside the midterm elections, centering on the nature of the messages reaching voters and their ability to distinguish information from disinformation.<\/p>\n
Harb distinguishes between a country favoring a particular candidate and using misleading content to support that candidate. He argues that the development of the internet, social media platforms, and artificial intelligence has transformed the tools of interference and accelerated their spread.<\/p>\n
He explained that Democratic accusations against Russia focus on influencing the content of messages directed at voters to support Republicans, while U.S. President Donald Trump and Republicans speak of fraud within the electoral process itself.<\/p>\n
He stressed the need to distinguish between ordinary political disagreements ahead of an election and intelligence warnings about attempts to influence public opinion, emphasizing that manipulating content does not necessarily mean compromising voting mechanisms.<\/p>\n
Harb linked the current accusations to the history of competition between countries dating back to the Cold War. However, he noted that the situation has moved beyond political exchanges to involve networks and organizations that have been subjected to U.S. and European sanctions.<\/p>\n
He cited the Storm-1516 network, which he said publishes misleading videos, alongside the Pravda networks, arguing that the proliferation of publishing channels increases the likelihood that such messages will reach the public.<\/p>\n
According to his analysis, Russian-linked accounts focus on issues involving Ukraine, sanctions, and NATO, prompting Moscow to favor continued Republican control of Congress and support for Trump.<\/p>\n
Harb warned against manipulating opinion polls using online data, producing videos with artificial intelligence, and enlisting influencers to promote content. Some influencers may understand the nature of the material they are promoting, while others may share it without knowing whether it is genuine.<\/p>\n
He argued that the rapid pace of technological development makes it increasingly difficult to counter these practices. He also noted that holding the U.S. administration solely responsible for the vulnerabilities amounts to an exaggeration, despite Democratic accusations that it has reduced funding for institutions tasked with protecting networks.<\/p>\n
He said the deeper danger lies in the possibility that the sheer volume of fabricated content could lead the public to question reliable news as well, threatening trust in institutions and information sources.<\/p>\n
At the same time, he rejected the idea that protests in Western countries automatically constitute evidence of Russian interference, distinguishing between domestic disagreements and Moscow\u2019s attempts to exploit them.<\/p>\n
For his part, Bejamov described Russia as a \u201cconvenient scapegoat\u201d for American political parties. He argued that mutual influence is natural in an open world and that a Russian citizen publishing content online does not prove state interference.<\/p>\n
He also rejected reducing the relationship between Trump and Russian President Vladimir Putin to one of friendship, noting that Trump\u2019s policies have included ending strategic security agreements, which harmed Moscow, in his assessment.<\/p>\n
Nevertheless, he argued that Trump\u2019s pragmatic approach makes him better suited to dealing with Russia than his predecessor, Joe Biden. This, however, does not mean that their interests are aligned or that disagreements over Ukraine have come to an end.<\/p>\n
Bejamov disagreed with Harb\u2019s assessment of the impact of foreign interference, stressing that such accusations do not determine the choices of American voters or the outcome of elections.<\/p>\n
Harb believes the elections will reveal how Americans view Trump\u2019s policies, particularly tariffs and the war in Iran and their impact on living conditions. He noted that potential losses could prompt some Republican candidates to distance themselves from him.<\/p>\n
Bejamov, meanwhile, said the Kremlin is studying various possible election scenarios but does not base its strategy on Western electoral cycles, remaining committed to the continuity of its calculations and unwilling to make concessions.<\/p>\n
Between these two positions, debate continues over the extent to which foreign messaging can influence U.S. elections, alongside the role played by economic conditions and domestic policies in shaping voters\u2019 decisions.<\/p>\n
United News Network \u2013 UNN Arabic<\/strong><\/p>\n An independent media platform providing reliable news and objective analysis, seeking to promote peace and cultural dialogue around the world, convey the truth, and build bridges of understanding among peoples.<\/p>\n