A European conference on disinformation has become a point of contention after the United States expressed concerns over its program, which included a panel discussion questioning whether Washington could be considered a source of foreign information manipulation and interference. As a result, Lithuania, Canada, and the European Union withdrew their official support for the #Disinfo2026 event, held in Vilnius, Lithuania, on October 7 and 8.
Lithuania’s Foreign Ministry, Canada’s Global Affairs department, and the European External Action Service removed their logos from the list of conference supporters following U.S. diplomatic contacts. These withdrawals occurred after internal U.S. documents indicated that officials were pleased with Lithuania’s decision to scale back its participation. Lithuania stated that certain parts of the conference did not align with its government’s official stance, while Canada mentioned that changes to the framing of several panel discussions prompted its decision to revise participation, though Canadian officials still attended the event.
The European Union also withdrew its official support, citing that some of the conference discussions were framed in ways that conflicted with its official positions. However, the EU continues to provide funding for the conference. The primary issue at the heart of the dispute was the panel discussion scrutinizing the United States as a potential threat of foreign information manipulation and interference. This session aimed to explore how European organizations could independently bolster their ability to counter information threats.
France, on the other hand, maintained its support for the conference, emphasizing the importance of engaging with civil society in shaping European policies on disinformation. This situation has underscored growing differences among Western governments on how to define foreign information threats and how to address criticism within international civil society forums.
These developments reflect broader tensions over the fine line between countering disinformation and allowing debate about governmental actions, highlighting the complexities involved in international cooperation on these issues.