On a crisp October morning in Vilnius, Lithuania’s capital, the otherwise quiet streets of the old town gave way to a gathering of more than 650 professionals, researchers, and journalists from across the world. They had come for the European edition of Disinfo2026, a conference organized by EU DisinfoLab, a Brussels-based nonprofit dedicated to studying and combating disinformation. Among them, carrying the weight of years of work on truth and accountability in Syria, was Bassam al-Ahmad, co-founder and executive director of Syrians for Truth and Justice (STJ). His presence was not ceremonial. For STJ, a Syrian human rights organization that has long documented abuses and fought against the erasure of facts, the fight against disinformation is not an abstract academic exercise. It is a daily struggle, closely tied to justice, memory, and the possibility of holding power to account. The conference, held on 7 and 8 October 2026, was designed to strengthen collective responses to this global challenge, and al-Ahmad was there to contribute, to learn, and to build bridges with others engaged in the same battle.
The setting itself felt symbolic. Vilnius, a city that has lived through shifting borders, foreign domination, and information warfare, was an apt host for a conversation about the manipulation of facts. The conference halls buzzed with intense discussion about the latest mechanisms for verifying information, holding malicious actors accountable, and understanding how artificial intelligence is reshaping the landscape of deception. Digital legislation, its enforcement, and its limits, were also high on the agenda. For many participants, these are not merely technical matters. They are about protecting the very foundations of democratic society: trust, informed choice, and public debate. The presence of so many experts in one room underlined the scale of the challenge. Disinformation has become more sophisticated, more automated, and more embedded in political conflict than ever before. The sessions were designed to move beyond diagnosis and toward action, exploring how governments, civil society, and independent researchers can work together to detect, document, and respond to false narratives before they harden into accepted reality. For STJ, this emphasis on accountability and verification resonated deeply. In Syria, false information has not only accompanied violence but has often been a weapon of it, used to justify atrocities, obscure responsibilities, and sow confusion about who did what, when, and to whom. Being in Vilnius was therefore not a departure from STJ’s work, but an extension of it.
Yet the conference was not free of controversy. In the days leading up to the event, according to The Guardian, some organizations and governments withdrew their official sponsorship. The reason was not logistical or financial. It was political. The U.S. State Department had reportedly contacted several governments about their support for the conference, and this pressure, combined with the conference’s framing of certain discussions, led some sponsors to pull out. The sessions in question were those examining the United States as a disinformation actor. The entities that withdrew their sponsorship said they did so because the framing of certain discussions differed from their official positions. It was a stark reminder that even efforts to expose manipulation can themselves become targets of manipulation, or at least of diplomatic pressure. The withdrawals did not cancel the conference, but they hung over it like a shadow, prompting uncomfortable conversations about the freedom of civil society to name threats wherever they exist. The fact that such pressure was applied in advance of the event, rather than in response to a specific finding, was particularly striking. It suggested that the very topic of U.S. influence operations was considered sensitive enough to warrant intervention, and that some governments preferred to distance themselves rather than risk association with an event that challenged a powerful ally. In the end, other entities continued to support or participate, and the conference proceeded, but the episode illustrated the difficult terrain that organizations like STJ must navigate when they seek to speak truth to power.
One of the most talked-about sessions was titled “The US as an FIMI Threat.” FIMI stands for Foreign Information Manipulation and Interference, a term the European Union defines as “a mostly non-illegal pattern of behaviour that threatens or has the potential to negatively impact values, procedures and political processes. Such activity is manipulative in character, conducted in an intentional and coordinated manner. Actors of such activity can be state or non-state actors, including their proxies inside and outside of their own territory.” The definition is deliberately broad, allowing for a range of activities that may not break formal laws but nonetheless undermine democratic debate and institutional trust. The session did not argue that the United States is the only actor engaging in such activity, nor that it is necessarily the worst. Rather, it sought to open a space for honest examination of a reality that many would prefer to ignore: that democracies, even established ones, are not immune to using information as a tool of foreign policy. This is a sensitive subject, especially in Europe, where the United States has long been seen as a partner and ally. But the conference’s willingness to include such a session was precisely why many participants found it valuable. Disinformation research, they argued, must be fearless. It cannot exempt friendly governments from scrutiny if it hopes to maintain credibility. The response from the U.S. State Department, as cited by The Guardian, was quick and pointed. The Department said the term generally describes influence operations conducted by adversarial actors, and added that countries’ withdrawal from the conference should come as no surprise after the event characterized the United States as an “FIMI threat.” This exchange, tense as it was, highlighted the stakes of the work being discussed in Vilnius, and the very real consequences that can follow when researchers name powerful actors as sources of manipulation.
For STJ, participation in Disinfo2026 was about more than attending sessions and absorbing new research. It was part of a deliberate strategy to strengthen networking and exchange expertise with international stakeholders, both within and beyond the European Union, who are working on accountability, countering disinformation, and digital rights. Bassam al-Ahmad met with fellow practitioners, shared experiences from the Syrian context, and listened to lessons from other regions. The value of such exchanges cannot be overstated. Disinformation is not contained by borders. A narrative that begins in one country can quickly spread across continents, adapted and weaponized by local actors. Networks of trust and communication among researchers and civil society organizations are therefore essential. When a new coordinated campaign emerges, when a manipulated video goes viral, when an algorithm amplifies falsehoods into mainstream discourse, it is often these informal networks that first sound the alarm. STJ’s work in Syria has long involved documenting human rights violations and preserving evidence for future accountability. But without an understanding of how disinformation operates, that evidence can be drowned out, dismissed, or distorted. By participating in conferences like Disinfo2026, STJ deepens its ability to protect the truth in a hostile information environment, and to contribute to a stronger collective response to these challenges. The conference also offered an opportunity to discuss digital rights, a field that is still emerging in many parts of the world, but which is increasingly central to any struggle for justice and dignity.
Looking back on those two days in Vilnius, the lasting impression is not one of unified solutions or triumphant progress. It is one of sober persistence. The controversy over sponsorships and the debate over the United States as a disinformation actor made clear that the topic remains politically explosive, and that those who study it will continue to face pressure from many sides. But the conference also showed that a diverse community of researchers, journalists, and human rights defenders is willing to grapple with these difficulties, to ask uncomfortable questions, and to build the tools and alliances needed to answer them. For STJ, the gathering was a reminder that the fight for truth is both local and global. In Syria, the consequences of disinformation can be measured in lives lost, in families displaced, in justice denied. But the same forces that operate in Syria are at work elsewhere, adapting their methods to different contexts and exploiting different vulnerabilities. No single organization can counter them alone. The European edition of Disinfo2026, despite its tensions and unresolved questions, represented an important effort to build the collective capacity to resist. For Bassam al-Ahmad and STJ, participation was not just an obligation or a learning opportunity. It was a commitment to the idea that even in a world saturated with lies, the human impulse to seek truth and demand accountability remains a force that can be organized, strengthened, and sustained. The road ahead is long, and the obstacles are formidable, but gatherings like this one offer a reason to continue.