Anti-Corruption and Integrity Outlook 2024

10. Foreign interference

Introduction

With rising geopolitical tensions, foreign powers are increasingly seeking ways to interfere in OECD countries’ and partners’ public decision-making processes and the broader public debates in democracies. Foreign interference is fundamentally linked to integrity, as it commonly involves attempts to exploit loopholes in target states’ integrity and anti-corruption frameworks to capture the integrity of democratic processes and institutions and to directly and indirectly influence the decision-making process in the target country. As recent high-profile examples across OECD countries have shown, these attempts can be made through providing funding to public officials and political movements, cultivating relationships with prominent political figures, and covertly influencing public office holders and public debate, notably through foreign information manipulation and interference (Conley et al., 2016[89]; Charon and Jeangène Vilmer, 2021[33]; OECD, 2021[19]; Zelikow et al., 2020[11]). As globalisation and growing geopolitical tension makes the risk of foreign interference more prominent, affecting the fabric of public decision making, the anticorruption and public integrity toolbox can offer solutions to build resilience in the face of this rising threat.

This chapter explores what foreign interference is and why it presents a relevant and critical threat to integrity in OECD countries. It finds that:

• Tackling foreign interference will require more attention from national governments.

• There is a need to better link foreign interference and corruption.

Tackling foreign interference will require more attention from national governments

OECD countries started to recognise this specific threat in the Luxembourg Declaration, which stated that ‘in the current socioeconomic, climate, digital and geopolitical environment, the democratic model of government needs to be both deepened and protected’, and recognised that “democracies face global challenges of increasing magnitude and complexity including […] foreign interference by non-democratic actors.” (OECD, 2022[90]).

Broadly defined, foreign interference is the attempt to unduly and negatively influence the political system, the economy, the society, the environment or the information space of target states by foreign actors (Box ‎10.1). It is increasingly used to further a range of strategic objectives in geopolitics, security, and the economy, including supporting military objectives (such as the decade of Russian foreign interference before it launched its full-scale war in Ukraine), advancing foreign policy interests, achieving economic strategic advantage, or more broadly undermining the democratic model of governance. Foreign interference involves a range of covert and deceptive activities, including elite capture, political finance, election interference, foreign information manipulation and interference, economic coercion, instrumentalisation of migration, misuse of CSOs, think-tanks, academic and cultural co-operation and exchanges, as well as abuse of diaspora (NATO, n.d.[91]; EEAS, 2023[92]). Democracies are especially and structurally vulnerable to foreign interference due to their social and economic openness (Bressanelli et al., 2020[10]; Zelikow et al., 2020[11]). In terms of impacts, foreign interference can not only undermine trust in public institutions, but can also weaken national security, economic security and growth, as well as democratic sovereignty. Furthermore, foreign interference can impact the rule of law and the rendering of justice across borders, thereby preventing the prosecution and sanctioning of corrupt individuals and companies.

Box ‎10.1. Existing definitions of foreign interference

There is no universally accepted definition of foreign interference, but existing definitions include:

• The European Commission has stated that “the term ‘foreign interference’ is used to differentiate influencing activities that are integral to diplomatic relations from foreign interference, that is, activities that are carried out by, or on behalf of, a foreign state-level actor, which are coercive, covert, deceptive, or corrupting and are contrary to the sovereignty, values, and interests of the Union.”

• The United States Department of Homeland Security (DHS) defines foreign interference as “malign actions taken by foreign governments or foreign actors designed to sow discord, manipulate public discourse, discredit the electoral system, bias the development of policy, or disrupt markets for the purpose of undermining the interests of the United States and its allies” (_]), while the United States Code uses the term “foreign malign influence”, which is defined in 50 USC § 3059(e)(2) as “any hostile effort undertaken by, at the direction of, or on behalf of or with the substantial support of, the government of a covered foreign country with the objective of influencing, through overt or covert means— (A) the political, military, economic, or other policies or activities of the United States Government or State or local governments, including any election within the United States; or (B) the public opinion within the United States.”

• The Australian Department of Home Affairs understands the concept of foreign interference as “activity carried out by, or on behalf of, a foreign power, is coercive, corrupting, deceptive or clandestine, and contrary to Australia’s sovereignty, values and national interests. It involves foreign powers trying to secretly and improperly interfere in Australian society to advance their strategic, political, military, social or economic goals, at our expense.”

A common understanding and definition of foreign interference could be useful to distinguish it from legitimate foreign influence and reduce the risk of foreign interference through international co-operation. Based on existing national definitions in OECD countries, common elements of foreign interference activities generally include the lack of transparency of the activities conducted; that the activities are conditioned, tasked or instructed, directly or indirectly, by a foreign state; and that they are intended to be harmful to the target country.

Source: (European Commission, 2023[93]; US Department of Homeland Security, 2018[94]; Australian Department of Home Affairs, 2023[95]).

Strategic corruption as a tool for foreign interference

An important aspect of foreign interference is strategic corruption, or the weaponisation of loopholes in target states’ anti-corruption and integrity frameworks, to achieve the perpetrator’s geostrategic goals. Although not a new phenomenon, recent instances of strategic corruption prompt a reassessment of corruption as a critical threat to OECD states and their democratic institutions, which goes far beyond economic and welfare issues. First, the risks of corruption should be assessed beyond potential monetary losses and the frequency of corruption occurring. Instead, OECD countries should anticipate the damage which elite- and regulatory capture can do to public institutions’ abilities to perform and uphold the public interest. Second, the threat of strategic corruption raises the need for co-ordinated responses within governments. Strategic corruption targets loopholes in policies and processes within the competence of a range of public sector actors, including authorities responsible for, for example, security, open government, public sector standards, or the rule of law. Third, it is clear that strategic corruption is a problem which can affect all countries. The use of strategic corruption highlights the urgency of re-evaluating anti-corruption and integrity efforts in OECD countries to close integrity-related loopholes. In addition, the critical role of corruption enablers operating in transnational networks raises the need for international co-ordination in detection and sanctioning.

There is a need to better link foreign interference and corruption

Mapping foreign interference risks

Foreign states have used political financing to influence the outcome of elections in target nations and undermine the integrity of these critical democratic processes. This funding can be direct in the form of cash payments, in-kind material donations (such as office equipment or the production of campaign materials), or payments to organisations affiliated with political parties. It can also be indirect via, for instance, organisations bringing voters to polls on election day or the mobilisation of donations from diaspora members (Vandewalker and Norden, 2021[36]). This kind of intervention can lead to increased political polarisation in the target country, upswings in support for the intervening nation, skewed and unfair election results, reduced trust and engagement in democratic and electoral processes, and even growth in political violence in the target state (Vandewalker and Norden, 2021[36]; Levin, 2016[96]).

Foreign states have also pursued interference through the exploitation of the revolving door and conflicts of interest in target states. Foreign states are increasingly trying to augment their lobbying power and networks by recruiting current and former ministers and senior officials to support their influence agendas (Jones, 2023[97]; Bressanelli et al., 2020[10]). These engagements seek to draw on the knowledge, networks and profile that these senior public office holders have. Those officials lending their knowledge and skills to foreign entities risk facilitating or shielding foreign interference activity, especially where senior appointments are not transparent or effectively managed through robust integrity safeguards. Such approaches may also lead senior officials to take foreign interests into close consideration, with the perspective of a future recruitment.

Foreign states can also destabilise governments through covert or illicit influencing activities against legitimate decision-making processes and political structures. The use of covert influencing has increased over the past decade, and protecting open societies from foreign covert influence and interference has become a priority for many OECD countries (Bressanelli et al., 2020[10]). Foreign states can exert this influence through foreign information manipulation and interference, covert lobbying practices, hidden agendas pushed by foreign-funded think-tanks and civil society organisations, abuse of academic exchange and scientific co-operation, mobilising and intelligence gathering through diasporas, and influence through state-affiliated corporations. This interference undermines public integrity by increasing the risk that public office holders exercise their powers, consciously or not, in foreign actors’ interests rather than their own country’s public interest. It contributes to weaker internal cohesion of open societies and perceptions that democracies are dysfunctional, corrupt and untrustworthy, and can increase support for non-democratic forms of government.

Foreign interference can also weaken the rule of law in democracies, posing a significant challenge to the integrity of legal processes and the fight against corruption and transnational bribery. Foreign interference in this context can occur through attempts by foreign governments to influence corruption investigations for political reasons, pressuring law enforcement or judicial authorities to either initiate or halt investigations against specific individuals or companies. Disinformation campaigns to manipulate public opinion and perception of corruption cases may spread false information or create fake narratives, which can impact the credibility of investigations and legal proceedings. External actors may also use hacking and cyber-interference to gain access to sensitive information related to corruption cases or to manipulate the course of investigations. Foreign powers may also use economic leverage to influence the handling of corruption cases, leading to compromised investigations or lenient resolutions of cases.

Adjusting anti-corruption and integrity frameworks to foreign interference risks

OECD countries must enhance their understanding of the risks posed by foreign interference, and particularly how the effectiveness of their integrity frameworks can influence these risks. Countries that are not implementing integrity mechanisms related to conflicts of interest, revolving door practices, lobbying, and political financing, or those not gathering data on the implementation of these mechanisms, are more susceptible to the risks of foreign interference and its destabilising effects on democracy. Countries should therefore develop their capacities to detect and identify foreign information manipulation campaigns, and to raise public awareness of these campaigns, and retain proper safeguards to ensure freedom of expression and privacy. They should also introduce clear regulations for the financing of political campaigns and parties, to strengthen transparency and limit opportunities for political financing by foreign powers and their proxies. And they should introduce dedicated policies for managing the employment of current and former office holders in foreign entities, including transparency measures and cooling-off periods, to mitigate the risk of foreign interference.

Countries could also improve transparency requirements on foreign influence activities and those who engage in them, along with their intermediaries, through public registries, supported by proportionate sanctions, especially for malign foreign interference activities. One of the most established policies in this area is the Foreign Agents Registration Act (FARA) in the United States, which establishes a specific legal regime for foreign lobbyists that is distinct from the regime for domestic lobbyists. After Australia adopted a similar type of scheme in 2018 and the United Kingdom in 2023, many OECD countries are currently exploring how to create their own version of FARA, including in the EU in the context of its Defence of Democracy package. In addition, addressing foreign interference in transnational bribery cases requires a comprehensive, co-ordinated effort at the international level.

Finally, by fortifying legal frameworks, promoting transparency, and fostering collaboration, countries can work together to safeguard the integrity of anti-bribery efforts and ensure the independence of justice is preserved.