Social media is increasingly viewed as a tool of influence in an increasingly polarized world. Government-controlled platforms like TikTok are not just for entertainment—they are part of an agenda to control and influence public opinion. While Europe is still debating regulations, China and the US are fully integrating social media platforms and digital strategies into their national security interests and strategies. Whoever wins this techno-digital race will have a decisive impact on the world.

Dr. Jean-Marc Rickli, security strategy expert and Head of Global and Emerging Risks at the Geneva Center for Security Policy (GCSP) in Geneva, explains the mechanisms of this new form of warfare.

Is Europe underestimating digital influence in today's world?

Yes and no. No, because Europeans are increasingly aware of how subversive operations endanger democratic processes. The European External Action Service recently published its third report on Foreign Information Manipulation and Interference (FIMI), which highlights Russia's key role and, to a lesser extent, China's influence.

Yes, because there are few European countries with specialized agencies to combat FIMI and disinformation. France's Viginum could serve as a model here, having successfully debunked Russian disinformation campaigns such as Operation Doppelgänger. This campaign attempted to imitate legitimate European media and government websites in order to undermine support for Ukraine.

Disinformation and subversive operations conducted through digital platforms enable targeted influence on public opinion, with both short- and long-term effects. In the short term, for example, they can influence an election; in the long term, they can undermine citizens' trust in institutions and traditional media.

Are there concrete examples of the militarization of digital platforms?

Meta, for example, was used to amplify hate speech during the mass killings of the Rohingya in Myanmar in 2017. In the area of competition between major powers, the case of TikTok is the most obvious example. The US government (at least under the Biden administration, while the Trump administration continues to enforce the ban on TikTok) considers TikTok a threat to national security. The platform is used not only to collect data but also to disseminate certain content. It determines which content is amplified, which can indirectly influence opinion formation and be reflected in political attitudes.

The US government believes that TikTok has the potential to influence an entire generation because it captures the attention of an entire age group and has therefore decided to ban TikTok. Social media and LLMs are not neutral when it comes to values and worldviews. You can conduct your own experiment by asking the US ChatGPT or the Chinese Deepseek LLMs the same question, and you will see that you will get very different answers when it comes to Tiananmen or the status of Taiwan.

What role do the tech giants play? Are they part of the solution or another risk?

The algorithms of large tech companies are extremely powerful because they not only determine what content a person sees, but also learn from their browsing behavior.

The use of these companies by governments differs greatly between China and the USA. Chinese tech giants are under state control and promote national interests, particularly through the concept of civil-military fusion, which combines military and civilian technologies to make the People's Liberation Army a world-leading military by 2049.

US tech giants, in contrast, are more independent and prioritize their business models based on data monetization. After the Snowden revelations, they were reluctant to cooperate with the US government, but that changed under President Trump. Today, many are more willing to cooperate with the government. In addition, new actors such as Palantir and Enduril have emerged, which are specifically developing technologies for the US military and are intended to contribute to US global dominance.

Is the West underestimating the danger of social media?

I don't think so. The turning point came in the mid-2010s when the Islamic State (ISIS) deliberately used social media such as Twitter (now X) to spread its narratives and advance the establishment of its caliphate. ISIS was the first organization to effectively use social media as a weapon – primarily through the shocking virality of beheading videos.

The West has learned its lesson since then. But democracies are inherently more difficult to protect than countries that deliberately shape and control the internet and digital platforms from the top down. This asymmetry of access – combined with regulatory gaps – makes open societies particularly vulnerable to manipulation and disinformation – especially via social media. Ironically, the absence of state censorship and control is the root cause of this increased vulnerability. How can Europe protect itself? There is no single solution to effectively combat disinformation and subversion – especially in the digital age, where AI, big data, and social media are amplifying these challenges. Governments need a multifaceted approach that combines several tools: promoting critical thinking in education, supporting independent journalism, clear regulations for the digital space, and encouraging responsible innovation. In addition, monitoring mechanisms and targeted measures to combat disinformation and subversion are crucial.

The overarching goal remains to protect citizens' trust in their democratic institutions, as this is the foundation of any open society. Furthermore, the development of a European tech giant could help counteract the influence of global players such as the US and China.

Is there evidence that countries are using psychological warfare to change the political behavior of Western citizens in the long term?

Disinformation and subversion are not new, but cognitive warfare is gaining importance worldwide. It involves influencing how people think and act. Digital technologies, AI, and immersive technologies such as metaverses are increasingly enabling precise personal profiling on a global scale.

Some countries—such as China with its triple warfare (media, psychological, and legal warfare) or Russia with its tradition of political manipulation—are deliberately pursuing subversion. NATO has also been engaging in cognitive warfare since the late 2010s.

With the increasing democratization of subversive technologies such as spyware, not only states but also non-state actors and individuals are able to conduct disinformation campaigns. As access costs for these technologies are rapidly falling, they are spreading rapidly.

Given the rapid technological developments and the increasing proliferation of subversive strategies, Europe faces a crucial challenge. It is not just about defending itself, but about taking active measures to preserve democratic values, digital sovereignty, and social stability.The question is no longer whether Europe should react—but how quickly, before it is too late.

Dr. Jean-Marc Rickli

Security strategy expert and Head of the Global and Emerging Risks Unit at the Geneva Center for Security Policy (GCSP) in Geneva