The traditional view of Foreign Information Manipulation and Interference (FIMI) as an external threat orchestrated by adversarial states like Russia and China is increasingly being challenged by modern political analysis. While the “foreign” label is accurate regarding the origins of many disinformation campaigns, viewing FIMI solely through this lens limits the effectiveness of democratic defenses. By focusing primarily on remedial measures—such as post-hoc fact-checking or platform content moderation—governments often fail to address the domestic enablers that allow foreign narratives to take root. This narrow perspective overlooks the reality that once disinformation enters a national ecosystem, it is often amplified by domestic actors who find the narratives useful for their own political agendas.
Domestic proxies play a fundamental role in the success of foreign interference. Rather than acting as mere puppets, local political figures, media outlets, and grassroots movements often repurpose foreign messaging to advance internal goals, such as deepening social divisions or undermining political opponents. Once a foreign narrative is organicized by domestic voices, traditional forensic investigations and content-moderation tools become significantly less effective because they target the symptoms rather than the root causes. As research from International IDEA highlights, these interventions are insufficient if the underlying domestic vulnerabilities—such as unregulated media environments or deep-seated political polarization—remain unaddressed.
A primary example of these dynamics is found in Georgia, where the ruling Georgian Dream party has consistently mirrored Kremlin-aligned disinformation to consolidate power and push back against Euro-Atlantic integration. In Georgia, FIMI is not just an external intrusion but a constant pressure that reinforces a cycle of democratic backsliding. The government has enacted restrictive laws modeled after Russian policies, systematically curtailing civil liberties. By weaponizing identity and gender politics, both foreign actors and domestic elites create a symbiotic relationship where disinformation thrives, framing Western-style democratic principles as threats to traditional indigenous values.
This case trajectory demonstrates that FIMI’s power lies not in its novelty, but in its ability to serve as an accelerator for pre-existing democratic decay. It acts as a catalyst in environments where institutional safeguards are already weakening and the social fabric is polarized. Because the Georgian government directly benefits from the suppression of dissent and the proliferation of anti-Western rhetoric, the responsibility of countering this interference falls disproportionately on a strained civil society. While civil society initiatives like fact-checking and media literacy are vital, they operate under immense constraint against a government that refuses to implement the structural media reforms necessary to starve the disinformation cycle of its oxygen.
To move beyond the cycle of reactive defense, democracies must undertake a comprehensive, “whole-of-society” approach that addresses these internal enabling conditions. Relying on digital governance measures alone risks overstepping into the censorship of legitimate political expression, which is why defensive strategies must be balanced with the protection of human rights. International IDEA’s research suggests that true resilience is built not by blocking individual posts, but by investing in the long-term foundations of democracy. This includes strengthening independent journalism, promoting civic education, and providing robust protections for the marginalized groups who are most frequently targeted by manipulative content.
Ultimately, preventing democratic decline requires acknowledging that foreign adversaries cannot succeed without domestic fuel. By identifying and addressing the specific structural weaknesses—such as political polarization, financial opaque media, and legal environments that allow for the suppression of dissent—nations can fortify themselves against manipulation. Despite the scale of the threat, democratic openness remains the greatest tool for resilience. By honestly assessing internal vulnerabilities, states can adapt their institutions and empower their populaces to resist the influence of bad-faith actors, proving that democratic decline is not an inevitable byproduct of the digital age.
