James Lawless (Kildare North, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I thank the three witnesses for the really comprehensive overview of the issues. We are lucky and privileged to have such expertise and experience available to us. I apologise in advance as I have to leave the meeting shortly after I ask my questions because I have another committee meeting. I will try to catch the answers before I leave. I have a couple of points. All the witnesses touched on this in different ways and Professor Laffan mentioned Ireland was late joining the European Centre for Excellence for Countering Hybrid Threats. We have probably been late to the table in a few fields. My own view is that there has been a certain degree of complacency, naivety, ignorance, or lack of awareness in this country to date. I think that has shifted since Ukraine but it should have shifted a long time before that but for whatever reason it did not. We are getting there. The Tánaiste is doing an exemplary job in leading us on the path we need to go down at the moment in terms of the consultations etc. that are under way.

Sometimes those of us who thought to raise awareness, alerts or concerns about these issues were met with the sort of response of, "Why would anyone be interested in Ireland. Are we not this little old country on the edge of Europe and sure who would be bothered with our affairs?" To counter that, I ask the witnesses if it is true that many such attacks or interests that might be taken are opportunistic in nature and do not necessarily require a high degree of collaboration, resources or effort. In actual fact it is minmax - minimal effort for maximum return - and I assume it would be in the interest of many hostile member states and other organisations to destabilise an EU member state. Ireland is a lot more strategic than some might think in terms of the data that is housed here, the multinationals based here, the economic activity that goes on here and the fact we are on the edge of Europe and the telecoms cables that flow from it. That is my first question in terms of the riposte we sometimes get that, "Oh sure look, we are little old Ireland. We are neutral and innocent and why would anybody be interested?". There are lots of reasons but I am interested in the expert view on that.

My next point is about online disinformation. Ms Heinl spoke about online disinformation and campaigns and all of the witnesses touched on it in different ways. It is so true that it is such a vast canvas to be painted by those who engage in disinformation. To what extent can we learn from pre-online? There has always been disinformation of sorts. I am thinking about aircraft dropping leaflets into enemy territory or onto occupied lands during wartime, and guerilla radio stations. It is a sport somebody might be reluctant to engage in but that has been the case historically, broadcasting into occupied areas or broadcasting out, trying to sow confusion. Even in our own country we have seen a flyer drop, I think around the time of the Lisbon treaty, to every household in the country with a predecessor of the UK Independence Party, UKIP, probably largely behind it. It was possibly sponsored by other interests elsewhere but there was activity to undermine a democratic process here.

That is not a new thing; it happened 20 years ago or more. To what extent have the age-old techniques adjusted to the online age? To what extent can defences learned in the past be deployed?

While we probably will not have time to get into it all today even though it would be of great interest, Professor Laffan made some very interesting points about the new world order, the rules-based order being under threat and the unipolar system being replaced by a multipolar system. The thought that struck me as she was speaking is whether the EU is a great power. I would like to think that it aspires to be, but I am not sure if it is quite there yet. She spoke about the US hegemony and it is usually phrased in the US as being China, Russia, of course, maybe BRIC. That is an interesting question and we might not get to the answer for that one today. She also encompassed the hybrid threat to power, utilities and telecoms. There is much more than disinformation. The hybrid is a very vast space and it is overdue that we got on board with that.

My last question is topical. What lessons, if any, are to be learned? We saw a vulnerability in our 1.13 state last week with The Irish Timesfake tan article. To what extent does that show vulnerabilities in the system as a whole and in terms of how actors for whatever purpose or motivation can actually get in under the hood masquerading as something else to great effect? What lessons can be learned from that experience?