David Shedd and Ivana Stradner’s article “The Covert War for American Minds” describes how Russia, China, and Iran have taken on a long term strategy to weaken the United States through disinformation. These governments are not breaking into voting machines or tampering with ballots. Instead they are using social media platforms and online campaigns to erode trust in the process of democracy itself. Russia has used artificial intelligence to create convincing fake accounts that argue over polarizing topics such as abortion and immigration. China has developed networks of false American personas, spreading posts that criticize both major parties and promote dissatisfaction with the system. Iran has hacked into campaign files, leaked documents, and encouraged Americans to boycott the election altogether. The aim is not to secure a single political outcome but to convince Americans that elections are unreliable and democracy cannot be trusted.

The United States has taken some steps to respond, including exposing disinformation networks, sanctioning bad actors, and using Cyber Command to disrupt foreign trolls. Yet its actions have been uneven, and officials still debate whether counter-messaging or even retaliation should be part of the response. Virtue ethics provides a useful way to think and reveal the kind of community they help to build. Using virtue ethics, the actions of Russia, China and Iran clearly

represent information warfare and are unjustifiable because they embody dishonesty, injustice and manipulation. The same would be true if the United States adopted similar tactics abroad, since imitating vice cannot cultivate the virtues necessary for democratic life.

Christopher prier highlights the importance of strategic narratives in modern international competition. For him, stories are not simply a way of describing the world but a tool to shape how people understand reality and how they see themselves in relation to others. Narratives provide meaning , frame enemies and allies, and influence how communities decide what is legitimate or illegitimate. In the era of social media, these narratives spread more quickly and more directly than ever before. Instead of governments having to work through traditional media, they can reach ordinary people at scale, bypassing filters and spreading their message in real time.

Shedd and Stradner’s account shows how Russia has mastered this approach. Russian operations did not seek to persuade Americans of a single political position. Instead, their fake accounts and manipulated videos spread contradictory messages across the political spectrum. The purpose was to divide Americans and convince them that the system itself could not be trusted. For example, Russia released false videos that appeared to show ballots being destroyed. It also used AI driven accounts to comment on divisive issues such as gun rights and immigration. Through virtue ethics, these actions reflect dishonesty and cowardice. The actors hide behind false identities and undermine truth for the sake of destabilization. This is the opposite of the courage and honesty expected of virtuous actors.

China’s “spamouflage” network is another example of narrative warfare. Chinese linked accounts posed as American citizens and spread posts critical of both candidates, while also attacking down ballot Republicans.Rather than presenting a vision of justice of fair competition, these networks tried to persuade Americans that democracy itself was failing. The habit of deceit in these campaigns reflect vice rather than virtue. A virtuous community requires honesty and prudence, but spamouflauge manipulation and confusion.

Iran has used similar tactics particularly by stealing and leaking files from political campaigns. These leaks were meant to create embarrassment, distrust and disengagement. They were paired with online messages encouraging Americans not to vote at all. Again, this conduct shows recklessness and manipulation rather than prudence and justice. A virtuous political actor would try to resolve conflict through fair argument and respect for sovereignty, not by sabotaging the decision making of another country.

Some observers suggest that the United States should respond with its own counter narratives, reviving Cold War style influence operations that spread messages abroad. While tempting, this approach would mean adopting the same vices that Russia, China, and Iran have demonstrated. If America engaged in dishonesty and manipulation, it would lose the virtues of integrity and fairness that defines democracy. Virtue ethics insists that character matters, and a nation cannot build a healthy democracy by copying the vices of its rivals.

For these reasons, Prier’s focus on narratives clarifies why disinformation is a form of information warfare. When evaluated through virtue ethics, the conclusion is clear; these operations are unjustifiable because they reflect dishonesty, injustice, cowardice, and recklessness rather than the virtues required for democratic flourishing.

Audra Morkevicius explores how cyber operations and information warfare occupy the “gray zone” between peace and open conflict. They do not look like traditional warfare, yet they have real consequences for sovereignty and democratic decision-making. She argues that disrupting information systems and spreading propaganda carries moral weight because it prevents citizens from making free and informed choices. When people cannot trust information, their political autonomy is weakened, and the legitimacy of democratic life begins to erode.

The operations by Russia, China, and Iran fit neatly into this framework. These nations are not conducting direct attacks on infrastructure but are instead targeting trust and perception. By spreading disinformation, creating false accounts, and leaking stolen documents, they aim to destabilize the United States without firing a shot. This is what Morkevicius means by gray zone conflict: it blurs the line between peace and war, civilian and combatant, propaganda and truth.

From the standpoint of virtue ethics, the character of these actions is easy to see. Russia’s reliance on deception shows a settled pattern of dishonesty. China’s camouflage demonstrates cowardice and manipulation, hiding behind invented citizens rather than engaging openly. Iran’s decision to leak campaign files shows recklessness, the opposite of the virtue of prudence. All three nations fail to embody justice, since they deny Americans the right to a fair and trustworthy political process.

One of Morkevicius’ key points is that information warfare can easily spread once it is normalized. If adversaries do it, other states may feel pressured to respond in kind. This is where the temptation arises for the United States to respond in kind. However, virtue ethics makes clear that wrongdoing is not excused just because others do it first. If the United States manipulated elections in Russia, China, or Iran, it would also be cultivating vice and abandoning honesty and justice. This would corrode the democratic character it seeks to protect.

Instead, a virtuous response would emphasize transparency, education, and resilience. The United States can openly expose disinformation networks, strengthen citizens’ ability to recognize manipulation, and work with social media companies to limit the reach of false content. At the same time, it must protect the First Amendment, even though adversaries exploit it. Preserving freedom of speech is itself a democratic virtue and prudence requires balancing protection with openness. In addition, civic responsibility should be encouraged at the individual level. Citizens who cultivate the virus of honesty and critical thinking become less vulnerable to manipulation, which strengthens the democratic fabric from the ground up. A government committed to virtue must also model restraint. Even when retaliation might seem effective in the short term, self control and prudence signal a deeper strength that manipulation can never achieve.

When we combine Morkevicius analysis with virtue ethics, the conclusion is straightforward. Election interference is indeed information warfare, and it is not justifiable under any circumstances. These actions corrode the moral character of both the aggressors and their targets, weaken sovereignty, and destroy the virtues needed for democratic societies to thrive.

The election interference carried out by Russia, China, and Iran represents a clear form of information warfare. Rather than using bombs or bullets, these nations have chosen to use disinformation, false identities, and leaked materials to weaken American democracy. Prier’s concept of strategic narratives shows how these operations work to shape perceptions and identities, while Morkevicius’ framework demonstrates how they occupy the dangerous gray zone between peace and war. Looking through virtue ethics it is clear that these actions reveal dishonesty, injustice, and cowardice not the virtues of honesty, prudence, and justice that make political communities flourish.

Some argue that the United States should respond with similar campaigns abroad, giving its adversaries a taste of their own medicine. Virtue ethics warns against this temptation. A democracy cannot preserve its integrity by imitating the very vices it condemns. Responding with dishonesty and manipulation would damage the moral standing of the United States and weaken the character of its own democratic system.
A better path lies in cultivating democratic virtues at home. That means educating citizens to recognize disinformation, exposing foreign networks openly, and working with technology companies to stop malicious activity while protecting free speech. The health of democracy depends not only on defending against outside attacks but also on maintaining the honesty, courage, and prudence that sustain trust within society. For this reason, foreign interference in elections is not only information warfare but also a deeply unethical practice that cannot be justified.