Assessing and Mitigating Conflict-Related Online Risks

The document analyzes the spillover of conflict-related online risks—such as disinformation, hate speech, and technology-facilitated gender-based violence—into domestic environments. It argues that while the EU's Digital Services Act (DSA) and UK's Online Safety Act (OSA) were not primarily designed for conflict settings, their systemic risk assessments and crisis protocols can be leveraged to hold platforms accountable. The brief highlights critical gaps, including the erasure of war crime evidence due to over-moderation and the role of engagement-driven algorithms in amplifying harmful content. It recommends structured cross-border cooperation, the development of evidence-preservation protocols, and a shift toward outcome-based metrics in platform risk reporting.

• Conflict-related online risks frequently transcend borders, impacting diaspora and minority communities in countries far from the actual fighting and fueling domestic polarization and offline tensions.
• Generative AI is increasingly used in wartime information operations to distort public perception, as seen during the June 2025 Iran-Israel war and the 2025 India-Pakistan confrontation.
• Over-moderation by platforms creates a significant accountability gap by erasing digital evidence of war crimes and human rights abuses, which is often the same content that triggers automated takedowns.
• Platform design and business models, specifically engagement-based recommender systems and advertising, can financially reward and amplify divisive or misleading conflict narratives.
• The EU's Digital Services Act (DSA) provides tools such as the Article 36 Crisis Response Mechanism, which allows the Commission to require Very Large Online Platforms and Search Engines (VLOPSEs) to take proportionate measures during extraordinary circumstances like armed conflict.
• The UK's Online Safety Act (OSA) lacks a formal crisis response mechanism similar to the DSA, leaving platforms unprepared to respond swiftly to rapidly evolving threats, such as the 2024 Southport riots.
• An analysis of VLOPSE risk assessment reports under the DSA reveals a transparency gap; most platforms provide vague process descriptions and output metrics (e.g., number of removals) rather than outcome-based indicators of effectiveness.
• Platforms often fail to provide adequate local-language moderation in conflict zones, relying on poorly trained AI tools, as evidenced by Meta's delayed response to ethnic violence in Ethiopia.

APA

Schwertheim, H., Scheuble, S., & von Bredow, C. (2025). Assessing and Mitigating Conflict-Related Online Risks. Institute for Strategic Dialogue. https://www.isdglobal.org/wp-content/uploads/2026/03/DPL-Assessing-Mitigating-Conflict-Related-Online-Risks.pdf

Chicago

Schwertheim, Helena, Sophie Scheuble, and Carolin von Bredow. Assessing and Mitigating Conflict-Related Online Risks. Institute for Strategic Dialogue, 2025. https://www.isdglobal.org/wp-content/uploads/2026/03/DPL-Assessing-Mitigating-Conflict-Related-Online-Risks.pdf.

Wikipedia

{{cite report |last1=Schwertheim |first1=Helena |last2=Scheuble |first2=Sophie |last3=von Bredow |first3=Carolin |title=Assessing and Mitigating Conflict-Related Online Risks |publisher=Institute for Strategic Dialogue |date=2025 |url=https://www.isdglobal.org/wp-content/uploads/2026/03/DPL-Assessing-Mitigating-Conflict-Related-Online-Risks.pdf |access-date=23 October 2026 |via=Climate Insights Directory}}

BibTeX

@techreport{schwertheim2025assessing, author = {Schwertheim, Helena and Scheuble, Sophie and von Bredow, Carolin}, title = {{Assessing and Mitigating Conflict-Related Online Risks}}, institution = {Institute for Strategic Dialogue}, year = {2025}, url = {https://www.isdglobal.org/wp-content/uploads/2026/03/DPL-Assessing-Mitigating-Conflict-Related-Online-Risks.pdf}, urldate = {2026-10-23}, note = {Indexed by Climate Insights Directory} }