The "threat" of foreign intervention in elections is increasingly becoming a concern in the Japanese media. As a basis for these concerns, the media often refer to the Russian government's alleged interference in past elections around the world asdeliver (a child). And the explanation for the interference was that the purpose was to help certain candidates get elected or to create "division" in society.claimto do so. Such claims were seen in such cases as the 2016 British referendum on leaving the European Union, the 2016 U.S. presidential election, and the 2024 Romanian presidential election. Many articles have described Russian influence operations as "what actually took place" in thelegendIn some cases, the threat of Russian interference in the election is made an open and shut fact.We're dealing with.The following is a list of the most common problems with the

The problem here, as we will discuss below, is that there is no evidence that there has been any serious attempt to influence the outcome of these elections, much less that there was any actual influence. This does not mean, of course, that many countries, including Russia, have not attempted to interfere in some way in other countries' elections. Such things happen all over the world. But why do so many Japanese media outlets continue to treat Russian intervention in these particular elections as a "done deal" despite the lack of clear evidence? And what is the problem with this over-awareness of the threat itself?

This article will first examine the three cases listed above individually. It will then delve into the broader issues surrounding the allegations of foreign intervention in the elections.

Russia's "Information Warfare"", NHK (broadcast July 22, 2024)

United Kingdom's Exit from the European Union (2016)

In June 2016, the United Kingdom voted in a referendum to leave the European Union, an event that became known as "Brexit." It was a few months after this referendum that voices began to emerge that Russia may have intervened in some way using social media,End of 2016It was only after the The suspicion was spread in a way that took advantage of similar concerns surrounding the U.S. presidential election that same year.

However, evidence of Russian influence operations ultimately did not emerge, as the Oxford Internet Institute in 2017surveyanalyzed 22.6 million tweets from Twitter accounts believed to have been created by the Internet Research Agency (IRA), which was believed to be close to the Russian government, of which only 416 tweets mentioned Brexit between March and July 2016. Another 2017.surveyreported that there were 3,468 tweets about Brexit from such accounts, most of which were posted after the referendum. With such a small number of posts, it is difficult to read even an intent to influence, as indicated by the UK Parliament's Intelligence and Security Committee in 2020evaluationBut it was revealed that the government has not confirmed any evidence of Russian influence operations. However, it was also noted that the government had not investigated the issue, and the possibility of an intervention attempt itself was not ruled out.

Despite the lack of evidence of attempts to influence, the Japanese media continues to address these allegations of intervention, sometimes even presenting them as if they were confirmed fact. Sometimes these claims are seen through the comments of the performers.

July 22, 2024.broadcastNHK's "Catch! Top News in the World," featured the issue of "information warfare" by Russia, and discussed several cases of alleged Russian interference in foreign elections. Regarding the referendum on the UK's decision to leave the EU, the anchor asked Takahiro Sasaki, "an expert on information warfare," if it was safe to assume that there was some influence there. Mr. Sasaki answered in the affirmative, claiming that "some think tanks" (*1) were of that opinion. (*1) However, he did not specify which think tanks or which studies he was basing this claim on. It is also unclear whether Mr. Sasaki is a company that profits from defense-related contracts, such asFujitsu Defense & National Security Security Research Institutethat there may be a motive at work to exaggerate the threat, given their affiliation with thequestionalso arise.

Brexit-related demonstration in front of the British Parliament (2018) (Photo: David Holt / Wikimedia Commons[.CC BY 2.0])

Similar content was distributed on July 17, 2025 on Abema Prime.program (e.g. TV)It was also seen in Tomoko Nagasako, a researcher at the Graduate Institute of Information Security, listed a number of elections and events in which Russia allegedly intervened. When asked by the anchor if Russia intervened in Brexit and the 2016 U.S. presidential election, Nagasako replied that "it became clear" that "Russian bot networks were active," which "in a way confirmed the effectiveness of the election intervention.

Some major newspapers have also referred to Russia's alleged intervention in the Brexit referendum, although they avoid making definitive statements. For example, the Mainichi Shimbun's May 19, 2018 article (*2) states, "Allegations of intervention in the British referendum (June 2004), which decided to leave the European Union, and other events have emerged. Also, a June 2, 2025 Yomiuri Shimbun article (*3) stated that "Russian and Iranian intervention was suspected" in the same referendum.

U.S. Presidential Election (2016)

Allegations of Russian meddling in the 2016 U.S. presidential election have been the subject of numerous investigations, with three main cases being discussed: first, an attempt to influence voters through social media; second, the Democratic National Committee's (DNC) server was hacked and emails were sent through the whistleblower website, WikiLeaks.effluenceThe first is the suspicion that it was done. And third, possible collusion between Russian officials and the Donald Trump campaign.

As for attempts to influence voters, there is some evidence of this, more so than in the case of Brexit, but never enough to call it a full-scale influence operation. Facebook's spending on paid advertising by IRAs isApproximately US$100,000Only minutes were identified. Google.surveyin the same period, only about half of the advertising dollars purchased from Russian territory were spent during that same period. In addition, social media coverage of accounts seen as Russian government-related associated with the elections at the timeposting (e.g. to a newsgroup or mailing list)were relatively few, and most of them were not even election-specific.

Journalists who analyzed Russia-related social media activity surrounding these elections found that it was "largely irrelevant to the 2016 elections, with very minimal reach, engagement, and spending, and the content was childish and ridiculous."pointing outThe analysis also shows that the content of social media outlets can be seen as intended as a marketing campaign to generate revenue rather than for political purposes. Other analyses have shown that social media outlets can be seen as intended as marketing campaigns to generate revenue rather than for political purposes.pointing outThere are also

The former headquarters of the IRA in Russia, which became a social networking site (Photo: Charles Maynes / Wikimedia Commons [Public domain])

Regarding the DNC emails leaked to WikiLeaks, Russia hacked the DNC's servers.evidencehas not emerged. The Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) was not allowed access to the server, and the cybersecurity firm that had access admitted that it could not confirm whether the server had been hacked or whether staff with access had copied the files. At the time, both the FBI and the National Security Agency (NSA) also expressed "low confidence" that Russia had hacked the serverconfirmingThe company is doing so.

Finally, regarding the allegations of collusion between Russian government officials and the Trump campaign, while there were reportedly some limited contacts between representatives of both sides, the investigation did not indicate that there was any collusion to influence the 2016 election.Not approved.The following is a list of the most common problems with the

Japanese media have actively reported on the possibility of Russian intervention in the 2016 U.S. presidential election. The term "Russia suspicion" has been used 481 times in the Yomiuri Shimbun, 371 times in the Asahi Shimbun, and 305 times in the Mainichi Shimbun since 2016 (*4).

There are many instances where the media has accepted the allegations of Russian interference without questioning or verifying them. For example, in 2022, an editorial writer for the Asahi Shimbun (*5) wrote, "In the 2016 U.S. presidential election, Russian companies supported Trump by pretending to be U.S. companies and citizens on social networking sites, and the Russian military exposed information stolen through hacking from the opposing candidate's side--. The U.S. government indicated as much in 19." (Feb. 21, 2022), no doubt describing it. Yet another columnist went further, stating, "It is clear that there was Russian manipulation in favor of Trump." (July 19, 2025) and asserts (*6).

The Daily Yomiuri dated March 14, 2024.Research Articlesstates the following about the possibility of Russian influence based on the U.S. government's investigation. While we have no doubt that there was interference from Russia in the online space, we have not determined that it was sufficient to influence the election of a particular candidate. However, from the perspective of an authoritarian state attempting to intervene, even if it could not influence a candidate's election, if it could leave distrust and confusion in the election results, it would have accomplished a considerable amount." However, since no full-scale influence operations have been confirmed, it can be argued that if "distrust" or "confusion" was caused, it was largely due to the media, which exaggerated and unquestioningly reported the allegations of intervention, and that the intervention itself had a rather small impact.

Clinton addressing the Democratic National Committee (DNC), USA (2016) (Photo: Maggie Hallahan / Wikimedia Commons[.CC BY-SA 4.0])

Romanian presidential election (2024)

In Romania's November 2024 presidential election, low-profile candidate Karin Djordjescu came out on top in the first round of voting. His political rise was due to social media activities such as tic-tocactivationtied to the election. Just two weeks after the election and before the runoff was held, Romania's Constitutional Court invalidated the entire election process, stating that there were irregularities. The government then claimed that Russia had interfered in the election, and relateddocumentdeclassified.

But the document itself indicates Russian interference.evidenceand analytical explanations were not included. Certainly, the campaign was identified as being secretly funded by influencers through a public relations firm, but that firm was not hired by Russia. In fact, the National Liberal Party (PNL), Romania's main political party, was funding the campaign, and theclearbecame the first to do so. It is unclear why they did so, but some suspect that the PNL calculated that by passing a lesser-known candidate on the first ballot, they would create an easier opponent to fight in the runoff.

The Japanese media appears to have had little hesitation in reporting this alleged Russian involvement, regardless of the evidence. The incident seems to fit nicely into the established reporting patterns of so-called malicious Russian activities and is being treated as if the "allegations" alone are sufficient grounds to support the possibility of election intervention.

May 22, 2025.editorialIn a report on the election redone in 2025, the Nikkei assessed that "the Romanian government took a number of steps toward this decisive vote in reflection of the election interference it allowed, which appeared to be Russian. It said that this was due to "alleged Russian intervention in the election" to direct an "unnamed Russian-leaning candidate" in an election that was nullified the previous year. He also noted that the March 10, 2025program (e.g. TV)NHK summarizes the situation in the following way. Djordjescu was "a pro-Russian candidate who made great strides in the election through the use of social networking services," and the Romanian government "invalidated the election, pointing out the possibility of Russian intervention in the election and the involvement of forces and others who sought to spread pro-Russian sentiment in Djordjescu's election campaign.

Djordjescu (pictured), the leading candidate in Romania's presidential election (2024): AUR Alianța pentru Unirea Românilor / Wikimedia Commons[.CC0 1.0])

Not just Russia.

As noted at the outset, the absence of evidence of intervention does not necessarily mean that there was no intervention. Russia has certainly attempted to spread information that it believes is favorable to it in the course of foreign elections, particularly in Eastern Europe, becauseif I remember correctlyBut it is also problematic to assert that a full-scale influence operation was conducted based on mere allegations without evidence, or to imply that it actually worked. However, it is problematic to assert that a full-scale influence operation was conducted based on mere suspicion without evidence, or to imply that it was actually effective.

It is also noteworthy that when the Japanese media focus on foreign election intervention, they focus almost exclusively on Russian influence operations. to influence operations regarding China, and Taiwan in particular.interestOn the other hand, the government's influence operations in countries that are viewed favorably in Japan remain largely unmentioned.

During the Cold War, the United States and the Soviet Union engaged in widespread electoral intervention around the world. And even after the end of the Cold War, the U.S. and Russia'sExamples of Interventionsare numerous. Interestingly, in July 1996, the American weekly Time magazine proudly announced in its cover story that the United States had intervened in the Russian presidential election, which was won by Boris Yeltsinreportand "The Secret Story of How American Advisors Helped Yeltsin Win.

U.S. interventions are wide-ranging, though,Afghanistanand ... andSerbiaThis includes funding and advising opposition groups in such areas as Also, U.S. officials have bribed media organizations in other countries to disseminate information and narratives that serve U.S. interestsAdmittedly.... Outside of elections, the U.S. government has also conducted influence operations targeting citizens of multiple countries using fake social media accounts and disinformation.confirmationThe company has been

Influence operations targeting foreign elections by other countries have also been reported: while media attention focused on Russia in the 2016 U.S. presidential election, the Israeli government also secretly intended to help Trump wininfluence peddlingThe company was developing a In addition, a powerful lobby group, the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPACand through other NGOs.influence peddlingWe cannot ignore Israel's extensive attempts to influence U.S. politics, including the

Former U.S. Secretary of Defense (2023) addressing the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC) (Photo: U.S. Secretary of Defense / Wikimedia Commons[.CC BY 2.0])

The Israeli government has a large onlineinfluence peddlingHowever, many private Israeli companies have also been involved in influence operations, and this has led to the development of the "Israeligrowth industryIn 2023, several media outlets reportedsurveyrevealed that a group in Israel has the ability to use more than 30,000 social media accounts to manipulate to influence foreign elections and hack the accounts of certain politicians.

Britain is also involved in influence operations, revealed in 2025.caseappears that the British government contracted with a media agency to pay local online influencers to produce content targeting voters in 22 countries in Central and Eastern Europe and Southern Europe.

However, the influence operations being conducted by the U.S., Israel, and the U.K. are rarely mentioned in the Japanese media, much less considered an issue.

Do influence operations actually have an effect?

Even assuming that many foreign countries are conducting full-scale influence operations, the question remains as to their effectiveness. That is, to what extent can these efforts influence the targeted countries?

A dispassionate analysis of the facts shows that the possibility of actually exerting influence is extremelylow (position)It can be said that. First of all, the modern online environment is awash in information and propaganda from a wide variety of opinions and countless sources. In such a context, even if foreign powers were able to secretly mobilize large numbers of fake accounts and bots, there are major questions about the practicality of influencing the outcome of national elections or causing "social divisions" in any meaningful way.

People looking at their smartphones on the train (2p2play / Shutterstock.com)

Convincing the public is not an easy task.Never.People are exposed to a large amount of advertising and public relations campaigns on a daily basis. People are daily exposed to massive amounts of advertising and public relations campaigns, which are supported by vast amounts of money and research. Especially when it comes to elections, foreign influence operations must compete with local political organizations, corporations, and other forces. Local forces have the ability to persuade voters with far more resources in terms of money, time, political representation, and local knowledge than foreign forces. Even if foreign forces have the means to persuade many people about election candidates and issues, in most cases local forces have the incentive and ability to do so on a larger scale and more effectively than foreign forces.

Study finds voters in the 2016 U.S. presidential election were influenced by what is believed to be a Russian intelligence operation.evidencehas not been found. In fact, other studies have found that localpolitical campaignand ... andpolitical advertisementitself has also been shown to have little effect on changing people's political behavior. Furthermore, the impact of social media onresearchfound little evidence that exposure to different content changes people's attitudes toward or participation in politics. In reality, people tend to have relatively fixed views on political issues. Thus, if someone shares a news story or reposts an assertion from Russia, it is more likely that they were persuaded by the information to agree with the assertion than that they originally agreed with it.

It is not necessarily true that Russia or other countries will not attempt large-scale political influence operations in the future. Given the limited effects that can be obtained, however, the likelihood of such a development may not necessarily be high.

Origins of Attention to Russia

So where did the concern about Russian "influence operations" come from and why has it become such a major concern for the Japanese media?

Allegations of Russian meddling first surfaced during the 2016 U.S. presidential election campaign over the email leaks between candidate Hillary Clinton and the Democratic Party. The Clinton campaign increasingly made allegations suggesting a connection between Russia and Trump.useThe Clinton campaign was the first to use the Russian intervention in the election as a source to attack the Trump campaign. After losing the election, Clinton attributed her defeat to Russian intervention in theblaming to a large extentThis was followed by a nearly two-year investigation into alleged collusion between Russia and Trump, and the allegations continued to receive daily coverage. At the same time, the British government was also concerned about the Russian threat.emphasisWith the Russian invasion of Ukraine in 2022, the threat of Russian influence operations entered a new phase.

Election monitoring in Romania (2025) (Photo:OSCE Parliamentary Assembly / Wikimedia Commons[.CC BY-SA 2.0])

Japanese media interest in the allegations of Russian intervention followed this longstanding interest of Western governments and Western media. In 2025, however, suspicions of Russian involvement in the 2025 House of Councillors election emerged in some quarters, particularlyattentionbegan to gather.

The threat of Russian influence operations in both Western countries and Japan is often referred to as "information warfareand "cognitive warfareand so on, and it has also come to be spoken of in overly anxious military terms. The issue is also often used as a vague, all-encompassing concept. Concerns are expressed not only about disinformation spread surreptitiously online, but also about regular news broadcasts originating in Russia. The subject of this concern is becoming increasingly ambiguous, and the media are not only concerned with allegations of foreign meddling in elections, but also with "pro-Russiaand "pro-RussianIt extends to information and ideas that are interpreted as

It is, of course, the practice of all governments to spread messages that they consider favorable to their countries. Thus, it is very difficult to distinguish propaganda from information about the world that can be considered objective. Each nation will always use the means available to it to criticize and expose the weaknesses of those it considers its enemies and to win allies.

International reporting by the Japanese media has largely focused on "pro-U.S." and "pro-U.S.-leaning" perspectives.affectThe US government has been a major player in the Japanese economy for many years. As a result, the news carried by the Japanese media includes news that the U.S. government disseminates to promote its own interests.propagandaand ... anddisinformationalso included in the list. This is due to the inevitably greater acceptance of the viewpoints of more influential countries in the information environment and the central position of the US in Japan's foreign policy and media. It is assumed that this bias in reporting is treated as normal and not a concern because the U.S. is seen as an ally.

X (formerly Twitter) Headquarters, USA (Photo:9yz / Wikimedia Commons[.CC BY-SA 4.0])

summary

As we have seen, the Japanese media's discussion of Russia's alleged influence operations is undeniably overly concerned and exaggerated. One article published by the online media outlet President even states in its headline, "Russian Information Operations Dominate Japan's SNS....claimThe company is doing so.

For governments, exaggerated fears of foreign interference in the online environment can help them enforce measures that restrict people's legitimate right to access information and free speech, especially information and speech that criticizes power. In addition, the media can be cozying up to the government's movestrendThere is a In addition, one can suspect that fear of covert and malicious actions by foreign adversaries will help increase media readership and viewership. In addition, a group of tech companies and research institutionsAnti-Disinformation Industryis expanding, but the companies and organizations involved here stand to benefit from the government's implementation of questionable foreign intervention measures.

It is common to blame foreign adversaries (and foreigners in general) for domestic problems. A columnist for the UK's Guardian newspaperpointing outAs I did, "It is easier to lay the blame for political events we dislike, from Brexit to Donald Trump, in Putin's malicious hands than to ask hard questions about our own dysfunctional democracy.

In Japan, rather than being overly alarmed about the interference of unproven foreign powers, it may be necessary to first focus on improving digital literacy among citizens, while once again questioning the state of domestic democracy.

1 Mr. Sasaki's reply: "Some think tanks and others have issued analyses. They want the U.K. to become more domestic oriented. They want to take the focus off the EU sanctions against Russia, and they are spreading more and more information about the UK's exit from the EU that will benefit the UK. This is what caused the Brexit event.

2 Mainichi Shimbun, "Verification: Fake News Measures EU 'False' Declaration Spills Over: 'It's Interference with the Press' vs. 'Information Manipulation Measures'" (May 19, 2018).

3 Yomiuri Shimbun, "[SNS and Elections] Politics Today (Part 2): Intervention from Abroad, a Looming Crisis" (June 2, 2025).

4 Results of searches using the Asahi Shimbun's online database "Asahi Shimbun Cross Search", the Mainichi Shimbun's online database "My Search", and the Yomiuri Shimbun's online database "Yomidas".

5 Asahi Shimbun, "(Reporter's Commentary) Countermeasures against information manipulation: National regulations, education, and social maturity are also key" (February 21, 2022).

6 Asahi Shimbun, "(Naoya Fujita no Netto Katao Mihonroku) Information that stirs up exclusivism, resonating feelings" (July 19, 2025).

Writer: Virgil Hawkins

Follow @GNV_tweets