There's a near consensus that Russia is trying to destabilize the West - a long-term goal. Yet people fixate on Russia's (inflated) short-term accomplishments, and propose solutions that miss the forest for the trees.
Consider Russia's 3 main tools: cyberattacks, using Western politicians & businessmen, and spreading fake, divisive information. Do the proposed solutions negate those tools' long-term effectiveness?
Instead of obsessing over which Western officials held secret talks with Russians, how about pushing for global financial transparency? Go after offshore banking. Guess how Russia recruits Westerners? It's not with its ideology.
It wouldn't hurt if political parties expelled politicians clearly advancing Russia's agenda (rather than joking about them) and refused access to former politicians working a second career as lobbyists for autocrats and their business associates.
As for Russian fake news and social media efforts, the long-term solution is to limit demand for such material, not undermine democracy to restrict its supply. Political parties need to stop spreading their own conspiracies and contributing to anti-intellectualism.
They should refuse to use information obtained from cyberattacks or other unsavory sources (see the recent French election). Voters must punish politicians that put party before country. It might sound utopian, but why bother with democracy otherwise?
Meanwhile, an assortment of commentators, (ex)lobbyists, information warriors, and futurists are busy proposing policies that give themselves a leading role in implementation but (unintentionally) serve Russia's goal of destabilizing Western societies.
The only way Russian destabilizing efforts can succeed is if Westerners distrust one another, distrust their own media, and adopt a conspiratorial mindset. Those are precisely the outcomes of the aforementioned individuals' actions.
They regularly call experts (and each other) Russian spies or useful idiots; some even create a list, reminiscent of McCarthyist tactics. Their followers are known for questioning the loyalty of anyone not approved by their disinformation guru.
They copy Russia's (and Trump's) tactic of calling any inconvenient news "fake news". They make things up. They cite each other in support of their lies. They block journalists who call them out on their deceit. They seek to discredit media sources that publish the truth.
They push ever more elaborate conspiracies. Their followers are rarely given the raw info that serves as the basis for the conspiracies. The followers are told to have faith. Eventually, they come to expect impeachment, etc., forcing the info warriors into a conspiracy arms race.
What better serves the Kremlin's long-term goals than to have Western publics trust conmen, bypass credible news sources, and abandon reason? Perhaps those tactics can help win the info battle, but they will enable a feeble Russia to nevertheless win the war.
