Information warfare has moved to the centre of the UK’s security agenda, says Yuliia Turchenko. Media monitoring reveals how digital manipulation and foreign interference now shape public understanding of risk. Here, the author weighs up the threat, and suggests how the UK should respond
The UK’s security landscape is changing fast. Traditional espionage and terrorism still matter, but information warfare now sits at the heart of national security. It shapes political trust, crisis response and strategic stability. The most significant threats to the UK increasingly operate through information rather than physical force.
Between September and December 2025, I conducted media monitoring for the King’s College London project Information Influence in UK National Security. The data reveal a sharp rise in public discussions on national security and disinformation. These conversations involved more than 16.6 million people, with over 34% expressing negative sentiment. Public anxiety has become part of the threat environment. And when people feel unsafe, manipulation becomes easier.
Information warfare thrives in uncertainty. Hostile actors exploit emotion, confusion and division. They can damage a country without crossing its borders — or even leaving a trace.
Foreign intelligence services remain active, but their methods have evolved. Between September and December, China dominated UK security debates. MI5 Director-General Ken McCallum warned publicly that Chinese state actors pose a 'daily threat' to the UK. His message spread widely and deepened public concern.
The collapse of a high-profile China espionage trial in October only intensified the conversation, raising questions about intelligence procedures and the robustness of the legal framework. Analysts argued that London must balance engagement with vigilance — a difficult task in an era of rising geopolitical tension.
China is increasingly shaping the UK’s security agenda, forcing the country to rethink its approach to international policy
At the same time, Russia maintained pressure through classic espionage and influence operations. UK police arrested three people in Essex under the National Security Act on suspicion of assisting Russian intelligence. They were released on bail while the investigation continues.
But Russia’s strategic aims go further. Moscow seeks to shape narratives, amplify polarisation, and undermine democratic institutions. Its operations increasingly blend hacking, espionage, and psychological manipulation. As Gabriela Borz has noted, foreign actors exploit political polarisation to destabilise democracies.
Information warfare connects these threats. A leaked document, a deepfake video or a targeted rumour can reach millions before officials respond.
Information warfare becomes most effective where institutions reveal internal weaknesses. In October, hundreds of UK government-related passwords surfaced on the dark web, highlighting gaps in public-sector cybersecurity. Officials insisted sensitive information was safe. But the leak raised an obvious question: would the government detect a compromise quickly enough?
In October 2025, British newspaper The Independent reported that more than 700 email addresses and associated passwords from multiple UK government domains have appeared on the dark web, raising concerns about public-sector cybersecurity vulnerabilities.
Institutional restructuring added to the uncertainty. Reports suggested the Foreign, Commonwealth & Development Office might dissolve its conflict and refugee crises unit, prompting criticism from security experts. Experts warned that conflict prevention is essential to long-term national security — especially at a time of expanding global instability.
Leadership dynamics also drew attention. UK National Security Adviser Jonathan Powell received praise for his diplomatic role in the Gaza negotiations, but critics questioned whether political leaders were prioritising national security consistently enough. This polarisation reflects deeper debates about the UK’s role in a multipolar world.
When institutions appear overstretched or divided, adversaries exploit the cracks. They amplify doubt and feed disinformation into the public sphere.
Perhaps the most striking result of the media monitoring is what wasn’t discussed. Despite evidence of disinformation, almost nobody used terms like 'information warfare', 'hybrid warfare' or 'cognitive warfare'.
This absence matters. If people cannot describe a threat, they cannot recognise it. And without recognition, resilience becomes impossible.
Malicious information operations spread quietly, before governments and the public realise something is wrong
Information operations work best below the level of public awareness. They spread quietly, shaping perceptions and emotions long before anyone realises something is wrong. Without a shared vocabulary, even the most advanced government strategy will struggle to mobilise society.
For this reason, public media literacy and open communication must become central pillars of national security. They protect the foundations of democracy: trust, transparency and informed debate.
Information warfare targets the public’s ability to think clearly and make informed decisions. It confuses fact with fiction, undermines political trust and deepens social divides. It also weaponises emotions — especially fear.
Information warfare targets the public’s ability to make informed decisions, weaponising fear to tilt the balance of power in global conflicts
Between September and December, millions engaged with debates on security. But many did so through anxiety rather than confidence. This emotional volatility creates opportunities for foreign actors to manipulate discussion, distort consensus and weaken democratic decision-making.
Democracies depend on shared truths. Information warfare attacks exactly that.
The UK’s response is evolving, but gaps remain. Traditional espionage persists. Cyber vulnerabilities grow. Disinformation accelerates. The challenge is to connect these issues into a coherent strategy.
Three priorities stand out. The government must:
The reshaping of the UK’s security landscape is happening now. But can institutions and society adapt quickly enough to meet digital-era threats?
Information warfare exploits openness, speed and emotion — the same qualities that define democratic societies. To defend itself, the UK must strengthen not only systems but citizens. An informed and resilient public is the strongest defence.
The frontline of national security is no longer at the border. It is in the minds of citizens — and the UK must protect it.
The project ‘Informational Influence on National Security in a Geopolitical Context’ is implemented within the framework of the British Academy / CARA / Leverhulme Researchers at Risk Research Support Grants 2024.
