Amid revelations of spy scandals and disinformation campaigns, foreign interference in U.S. elections is a very real worry. In 2016, Russia seeking to influence the U.S. election was shocking; now it’s practically routine. New proposed federal rules would tighten requirements for disclosing “foreign agents” operating in the U.S. They are needed.
Congress first passed the Foreign Agent Registration Act back in 1938 to expose Nazi activity in the U.S. This summer, the Biden Justice Department released new draft rules to update the law’s enforcement. They require more registration and reporting for lawyers, lobbyists, nonprofits and multinational companies and their executives operating in the U.S. with foreign funding.
Just this month, the Justice Department indicted employees of the Russian-controlled media outlet RT who were directing a $10 million disinformation network in the U.S. The department also indicted former Trump adviser Dimitri Simes for working for a sanctioned Russian state-owned TV network and laundering money to hide it.
It’s not just Russia. Iran hacked the Trump campaign and tried to hack the Harris campaign, as well as the WhatsApp accounts of the Biden and Trump administrations. The Chinese Spamouflage scheme uses social media accounts to manipulate U.S. political discourse.
Proposed updates to Justice Department rules would combat such attacks by increasing the number of organizations subject to registering as foreign agents, as well as imposing some mild administrative burdens on them.
If that sounds insufficient given the quickening pace of foreign interference today, here’s a word of caution: There is a growing global pattern of “foreign agent” laws being used to suppress civil society, silence dissent and imprison dissidents. Starting in Russia and spreading around the world, these laws have become part of the authoritarian playbook for dismantling democracy.
Vladimir Putin’s 2012 “foreign agent” law was passed to suppress protests against his return to power. It targeted independent foreign-funded nongovernmental organizations that engaged in “political activity,” requiring that they register as “foreign agents,” identify themselves as such in all publications, and undergo audits.
By 2017, the law was being used against media organizations. Then its net was progressively widened, first to cover any private individuals or groups receiving any foreign funding which published “printed, audio, audio visual or other reports and materials,” and then Russian citizens who reported or shared information on crime, corruption, the military, space and security services or their employees. As intended, this stifled dissent, shut down civil society and press freedom, and bolstered autocracy.
And it became an export. Some 60 countries followed suit, adopting “foreign agent” laws on Russia’s model. This year, for example, the pro-Russian Georgian Dream party rammed a “foreign agent” law through parliament requiring that nongovernmental organizations with foreign funding register on a public database as “organizations serving the interests of a foreign power.” Tens of thousands of Georgians protested what they called “the Russian law,” recognizing it as a move toward tyranny. Subsequently, Prime Minister Irakli Kobakhidze said that his Georgian Dream party planned to abolish opposition parties.
I live in Bulgaria, a NATO and European Union member state and a U.S. ally, where a similar “foreign agent” law was recently introduced by pro-Russian forces. It was just tabled in committee, but it’s not the first time the bill has been introduced and it won’t be the last. It would require nearly anyone receiving at least roughly $600 from a “foreign source” to register as a “foreign agent.” “Foreign source” is so broadly defined as to include not only foreign governments but companies, foundations, non-profits, civic organizations, international organizations and even your Aunt Ivanka who emigrated years earlier.
If any source abroad sent you any sort of funding — a stipend, a scholarship, payment for a workshop — you could be branded a “foreign agent” and severely restricted. That means no teaching, no providing social services, no disseminating information, no making art.
The law would ensnare virtually anyone involved in international cooperation or exchange, which would threaten the existence of civil society organizations, including (not incidentally) the American University in Bulgaria, where I serve as president.
The university is now 30 years old. Each year it graduates future leaders committed to democracy, a new generation prepared to push back against authoritarianism. It’s an example of how in many countries, international cooperation and exchange is the lifeblood of civil society. Once cut off by onerous “foreign agent” laws, cultural exchange and independent thinking itself wither and die.
In the U.S., we’re right to be vigilant and vigorous in combatting foreign election interference. But we should remember that we’re not the only country targeted by autocratic regimes.
Happily, U.S. democracy is robust. Even while confronting the problem, we can still encourage international dialogue and hear other voices. We are able to maintain international exchanges while keeping our civil society strong and our political discourse open and free.
Other countries aren’t so fortunate. The U.S. needs to help them temper autocratic and xenophobic impulses, and to protect and nurture civil society as a critical resource for building and preserving democracy.
Margee Ensign, Ph.D., is president of the American University in Bulgaria. Previously she served as president of the United States International University-Africa; as president of Dickinson College; and as president of American University of Nigeria.