EU unveils controversial Democracy Shield with new information monitoring centre

Brussels – Controlling freedom of expression in the name of defending democracy. A delicate project, with controversial aspects, but in times of propaganda and disinformation, the European Commission is trying to take action with an EU monitoring center to verify what is being disseminated. The initiative is called Democracy Shield, and its core is this structure designed to counter narratives deemed harmful to public opinion.

The basic concept is that it is not possible to say everything freely. This may sound dangerous in the context of a democracy, a key pillar of which is freedom of expression, but external interference is to be avoided. “We do not want to narrow the spectrum of democracy,” they explain in Brussels. “Freedom of speech remains for everyone,” one assures. At the same time, however, “citizens must be free from interference.” 

However, the proposal put forward by the European Commission, along with the communication to the Member States is far from reassuring. It proposes the creation of a European monitoring centre with the stated aim of facilitating information sharing, supporting operational cooperation and capacity building to resist evolving common threats, in particular foreign information manipulation and interference (FIMI) and disinformation. The center aims to act proactively, including intercepting and “removing false content,” emphasizes Henna Virkkunen, Executive Vice President for Security and Democracy.

The EU’s High Representative for Foreign and Security Policy, Kaja Kallas, makes no secret of the anti-Russian nature of the initiative. “We are seeing campaigns, including from Russia, specifically designed to polarise our citizens, undermine trust in our institutions and pollute politics in our countries.” The new European Democratic Shield, therefore, “is part of Europe’s response to protect the ingredients of our democracies.”

Fears for the ‘European Ministry of Truth’

Is the European narrative the only truth? There are those in Brussels who are worried. “The President of the Commission has no authority to brand what is fake news and what is not,” say Gaetano Pedullà and Danilo Della Valle, MEPs of the 5 Star Movement, who consider this European Centre for Democratic Resilience, seen as a real European Ministry for Truth, to be “highly dangerous.” Even before the European centre for the control of what is said, from the ranks of the European Liberals (RE) Sandro Gozi suggests dealing with X, the social networking site owned by Elon Musk where, he denounces, there is “algorithmic manipulation disguised as neutrality,” a way of operating that is “transforming X into a chaos machine that alters democratic debate.”

https://www.eunews.it/en/2024/12/30/musk-us-interference-in-the-eu-and-the-limits-of-a-struggling-europe/

Of a different opinion, however, Nathalie Loiseau, also a Liberal, president of the Special Commission on the European Democracy Shield: “I believe that this communication is a good and necessary first step towards a democratically capable Union” against external threats. “Now more than ever, the European Union must confront the growing challenges to democratic processes posed by malicious interference.” 

The situation is indeed a delicate one, as Michael McGrath, Commissioner for Democracy and Justice, acknowledges: “Digital evolution has created new avenues for threats to our stability,” he warns, because the way reality is told affects European political and social “stability.” In this sense, “the European Centre will be vital to preserve the information space,” because “this foreign interference will not disappear.”

Independent information. But how?

 The European Democracy Shield also includes targeted and strengthened funding for independent and local journalism, guaranteed under the new Media Resilience programme, which will link existing media support with the funding programmes proposed in the new multiannual financial framework. Good news, at first sight. Unfortunately, it will be up to the Commission to decide where to allocate the funding. It will finance, in practice, whoever Brussels sees fit. One wants to avoid repeating the experiences of Voice of Europe, an online newspaper active in the EU with pro-Russian content. 

But the aim is not to repeat experiences like those surrounding elections in Romania, which were annulled due to interference, marking a precedent in European political history. Supporting media outlets independent from third countries with anti-EU interests is therefore central to the EU’s strategy.