Lithuania’s legal (in)action in the face of Russian propaganda

Abstract

As the world enters a fifth year of Russia’s murderous war in Ukraine, which, according to the aggressor, was supposed to be a “3 day long special military operation”, the Kremlin’s tireless propaganda machine is flooding the information space with various false narratives in hopes of reducing the help of Ukraine’s allies, discrediting its fight for survival and disseminating uncertainty in Western societies. While the conventional warfare is taking place on the lands, seas and skies of Ukraine, Russia’s information warfare front is much farther reaching. The warmongering state dedicates tremendous amounts of money to disinformation campaigns targeted towards the democratic countries, because it is the only battleground in which Russia might be able to overpower the West. Since the very first days of restoration of its independence, Lithuania has been on the receiving end of such campaigns, even more so, regarding the fact that it managed to achieve membership in the European Union and NATO. Kremlin’s propaganda is particularly concentrated on the neighbouring democratic states that share and nurture Western values. Considering that any war, conventional or information, cannot be won by only defensive action, this article’s purpose is to uncover, what legal means does Lithuania possess in order to counter Russia’s propagandistic activities, are the legal measures sufficient and most importantly – what new legal instruments have been implemented during the recent years that are empowering Lithuania not only to counter Kremlin’s lies, but to fight back? Methodologically, the research involves a legal analysis of existing laws and legal norms of Lithuania, dedicated to fighting propaganda and ensuring legal liability for it, as well as proposals for the amendments of legal acts, put forward by lawmakers at the Parliament of Lithuania. Findings indicate inaction in providing new and innovative legal means of combating propaganda by the legislators. To conclude, the article highlights the few noteworthy examples of proposals, put forward by legislators in the field of information warfare against Russia and emphasizes the fact that more progressive, proactive, and original legal initiatives are necessary.