What Is So Foreign About Foreign Influence Operations?

Ördén and Pamment ask the question that most policy frameworks assume away: what precisely makes a foreign influence operation foreign, and why does the distinction matter legally and politically? The paper — the first in Carnegie's Lines in the Sand series — argues that the 'foreign' designation is doing significant normative and legal work that is rarely made explicit. Distinguishing foreign from domestic influence requires definitional precision that most existing frameworks lack, and the boundary between foreign interference and legitimate political communication is more contested than policy discussions acknowledge.

For practitioners and policymakers working on FIMI definitions and legal frameworks, this paper is essential reading. The question of what counts as foreign interference — as opposed to public diplomacy, diaspora communication, or ordinary political speech — has major implications for regulation, attribution, and response. Getting the definition wrong creates both under-inclusion (missing real interference) and over-inclusion (criminalising legitimate activity). Pamment's work on the EU counter-disinformation framework gives this paper particular authority.