When a proposal to establish a European Resilience Council (ERC) for addressing disinformation, FIMI, and hybrid threats was recently presented in Brussels, representatives from multiple Member States responded. Broad support was voiced for democratizing decision-making processes in this domain, expanding the legitimacy of existing mechanisms, adopting an all-of-society approach, and simplifying current toolboxes and implementations. At the same time, concerns were raised about potential duplication of efforts by existing entities, the added value of the ERC, the need to create a new organization as such, the need for additional funding, and possible interference with Member States’ sovereignty. In addition, delegations requested further details on the proposal's legal, financial, and technical dimensions and guidance on the next steps.
The text below describes how an ERC could be structured when taking the Member States' responses into consideration.
Introduction
In response to the increasing threats posed by disinformation, foreign information manipulation and interference (FIMI), and hybrid threats, the European Union has developed a range of initiatives to address these challenges. To ensure the long-term effectiveness and inclusivity of these efforts and to fundamentally enhance societal resilience, it is essential to incorporate civil society perspectives and foster an all-society approach to dealing with disinformation, FIMI, and hybrid threats. The proposed European Resilience Council (ERC) will serve as a vital advisory body to EU institutions, strengthening the democratization of policy-making, bolstering legitimacy, transparency and accountability, and ensuring that EU responses to disinformation, FIMI, and hybrid threats are more relevant, citizen-focused, and coordinated. The ERC will add value to existing EU structures by providing civil society expertise while avoiding duplication and ensuring respect for Member States' competencies. The Council will also diminish distrust and affective polarization among certain segments of citizens and reinforce the protection of the fundamental right to freedom of speech.
Objectives of the European Resilience Council
The ERC will:
• Advise EU institutions, particularly the HWP ERCHT and the European Board for Digital Services and through these the European Council and the European Commission, on policies and interventions dealing with disinformation, FIMI, and hybrid threats, ensuring the development of more inclusive, transparent, and democratic strategies.
• Enhance the legitimacy of European policies and interventions dealing with disinformation, FIMI, and hybrid threats by incorporating citizen-focused insights into the EU's response to these challenges, ensuring policies are perceived as more relevant and grounded in the lived experiences of European citizens.
• Compliment the functioning of existing EU entities dealing with disinformation, FIMI, and hybrid threats while avoiding duplication.
• Enhance the coherence of existing toolboxes dealing with disinformation, FIMI, and hybrid threats while simplifying them by providing holistic and experience-informed recommendations.
• Respect Member States' national sovereignty.
Key responsibilities
(1) Advising on the democratization of interventions dealing with disinformation, FIMI, and hybrid threats.
-
The ERC will offer insights into the ethical and societal implications of EU policies aimed at addressing disinformation, FIMI, and hybrid threats, ensuring that these policies adhere to democratic principles, transparency, accountability, and human rights.
-
Added value: Civil society contributes grassroots expertise, including expertise by marginalized and underrepresented groups, ensuring that EU policies address experienced concerns, tap into collective learning outcomes, and provide multi-perspectivity to promote inclusivity and decrease marginalization. This approach will enhance equitable policies serving a multitude of needs, social legitimacy, and democratic resilience, enabling EU interventions to be seen as reflective of citizens' values and concerns, while avoiding the perception of prioritizing the defense of processes and institutions over citizens.
(2) Promoting an all-society approach to dealing with disinformation, FIMI, and hybrid threats.
-
The ERC will advocate for the involvement of civil society organizations, the private sector, academia, media professionals, and individual citizens in efforts to deal with disinformation, FIMI, and hybrid threats fostering multi-stakeholder collaboration.
-
Added value: The ERC’s ability to integrate diverse societal actors ensures that no sector is excluded from addressing disinformation, FIMI, and hybrid threats. By bringing all relevant stakeholders together, the ERC will enhance the collective effectiveness of the EU's efforts and foster broader societal acceptance of interventions while enhancing societal resilience through participation.
(3) Complementing existing institutions while avoiding duplication.
The ERC will compliment responsibilities of existing EU entities.
-
The ERC will not monitor disinformation and FIMI campaigns and hybrid threats since this is the primary responsibility of entities like the EEAS StratCom Task Forces, EDMO, and EUvsDisinfo. Added ERC value: The ERC will leverage insights and reports from existing entities and propose interventions based on the monitoring by the entities.
-
The ERC will not enforce the Digital Services Act (DSA) since this is the primary responsibility of the DSCs, the European Board for Digital Services, and the European Commission. Added ERC value: The ERC will offer its recommendations on how to avoid denial of service responses to legal content and on drafting more citizen-focused, inclusive, and relevant DSA-based interventions and policies.
-
The ERC will not engage in fact-checking since this is the primary responsibility of EDMO and independent fact-checking entities. Added ERC value: The ERC will leverage insights and reports from existing entities and propose interventions based on the fact-checking activities by the entities.
-
The ERC will not take the lead in strategic communication to deal with disinformation, FIMI, and hybrid threats since this is the primary responsibility of entities like the EEAS East StratCom and South StratCom Task Forces. Added ERC value: The ERC will offer its recommendations on drafting more citizen-focused, inclusive, and relevant strategic communication.
-
The ERC will not draft or implement new media literacy or citizenship education initiatives since this is the primary responsibility of EDMO and its hubs. Added ERC value: The ERC will offer its recommendations on drafting more citizen-focused, inclusive, and relevant frames for devising prophylactic and education interventions enhancing societal resilience.
-
The ERC will not address cybersecurity issues and will not draft recommendations and guidelines regarding cybersecurity since this is the primary responsibility of ENISA and national cybersecurity agencies.
-
The ERC will not engage in intelligence and counterintelligence operations and investigations since this is the primary responsibility entities such as the EEAS, EU StratCom Task Forces, and national security agencies. Added ERC value: The ERC will offer its recommendations on drafting more citizen-focused, inclusive, and relevant frames for drafting and implementing intelligence and counterintelligence operations and investigations.
-
The ERC will not create an alternative Rapid Alert System nor add-ons to it. Added ERC value: The ERC will offer its recommendations on drafting more citizen-focused, inclusive, and relevant frames for the further development of the existing Rapid Alert System.
-
The ERC will not conduct its own research on disinformation, FIMI, and hybrid threats since this is the primary responsibility entities such as EDMO and academic institutions. Added ERC value: The ERC will offer its recommendations on drafting more citizen-focused, inclusive, and relevant frames for conducting research.
-
The ERC will not interfere with the sovereignty of Member States.
-
Added value: The ERC’s added value lies in its holistic, multi-perspectivity-based approach to addressing a broad spectrum of issues related to disinformation, FIMI, and hybrid threats. Its independence ensures a perspective less influenced by institutional biases or the defense of institutional interests.
Structure and Membership
• The ERC will consist of representatives of civil society organizations, the private sector, academia, media professionals, and individual citizens.
• Each Member State will delegate one ERC member. Member States are responsible for creating a national structure for selecting their delegate based on the criteria of relevant expertise, track record, and the ability to represent diverse societal perspectives including perspectives by marginalized and underrepresented groups.
• The ERC will be chaired by the member representing the rotating Presidency of the Council.
Conclusion
The establishment of the European Resilience Council will play a critical role in enhancing the EU’s approach to disinformation, FIMI, and hybrid threats by integrating civil society in many aspects of the EU’s decision-making processes. This will increase the legitimacy of EU policies, foster an all-society approach, and complement the functioning of existing EU bodies, thus ultimately strengthening the EU’s ability to deal with disinformation, FIMI, and hybrid threats while respecting the national sovereignty of Member States.
The creation of the European Resilience Council will be an essential element in the EU’s strategy to strengthen societal resilience against disinformation, FIMI, and hybrid threats.
