PNAS 123/36 pp. e2534920123-e2534920123 2026-09-04 Original State-sponsored agenda setting: Measuring the impact of narrative laundering
Patrick L. Warren, Darren L. Linvill, Camille J. Saucier
Abstract
Foreign information manipulation and interference (FIMI) is an important part of the digital information ecosystem, yet its effects are poorly understood. Most research analyzing FIMI to date is descriptive, exposing efforts to erode trust, promote favorable narratives, and target specific communities. Existing work evaluating the impacts of FIMI contrasts those directly exposed to FIMI messaging (by viewing the original messages) with those who were not, finding little evidence of changes in beliefs or behavior. Rather than persuading individuals directly, we argue FIMI often operates through agenda-setting processes that shape which issues and narratives dominate public discourse. A key component of this process is narrative laundering, whereby misleading content is scrubbed of its origins and circulated into mainstream channels. This study examines the Russian-aligned Storm-1516 campaign, which uses state media, fabricated sites, and paid influencers to elevate false narratives, especially those that implicate Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy in corrupt acts. By analyzing the dissemination of these narratives, we assess how Storm-1516 shifts the public agenda, illustrating how foreign influence can exert substantial effects on information environments even when individual-level persuasive effects may be limited.
JCC — pp. 1-15 2026-08-26 Original The Virtue of Bias? China’s Stakeholder Mediation in the Iran and North Korea Nuclear Crises
JCC — pp. 1-14 2026-08-25 Original China’s Soft Power Projection in the Middle East—North Africa
Jonathan Fulton, Shaojin Chai
JCC — pp. 1-15 2026-08-07 Original Patriotic Criminals: China’s Covert Netherworld in Southeast Asia and the Pacific
Gregory Raymond, Graeme Smith
PSJ 54/3 2026-07-23
Original Corporate Quasi‐Sovereignty: Big Tech and the Politics of Sovereign Authority in the Digital Age
PNAS 123/30 pp. e2608203123-e2608203123 2026-07-20 Original Public responses to atrocities depend on partisanship and context, not legal labels
Yphtach Lelkes, E.M. Mitchell, Erin Walk, Sean Westwood
JCC — pp. 1-17 2026-07-20 Original Memory in Motion: The Configuration of Korean War Memory in Chinese Popular Representations
Xiaowen Cheng, Jinhong Li
Abstract
China’s Korean War memory moves in and out of view, but rarely returns unchanged. This article asks how Chinese popular representations of the Korean War vary as the foreign relationships embedded in the war shift. It develops a configurational account of wartime memory, emphasizing activation, selection, and mediation across state priorities, nationalist repertoires, and media institutions. Drawing on a near-comprehensive corpus of theatrically released Chinese Korean War films, alongside close readings of influential print and screen texts, it traces three periods: canonization, latency, and security revival. Chinese sacrifice and victory endure; the United States remains central, but negative portrayals of US soldiers become less common; solidarity with North Korea recedes; Soviet participation remains largely unmentioned; and China’s intervention is increasingly framed as national defense.
JCC — pp. 1-16 2026-07-17 Original China’s UN Diplomacy on the Russo-Ukrainian War
Vita Golod, Nataliia Mudrenko
Abstract
This article examines how China conducts its diplomacy on Ukraine within the United Nations framework and assesses whether its stated principles align with its actual behavior. Using corpus linguistics, discourse analysis, and UN voting data from 2014 to 2025 across the United Nation Security Council (UNSC), General Assembly (UNGA), and selected UN technical bodies, it analyzes the relationship between China’s words and its deeds. A comparison with the Palestine/Gaza corpus shows that China applies more attribution and selective framing, challenging the notion of a uniform ‘principled neutrality’. The findings show that China’s abstention doctrine is conditional, and that its UN behavior reflects strategic differentiation across political and technical arenas of global governance.
WP 78/3 pp. 419-458 2026-07-01 Original Who Sets the Agenda? Diplomatic Experience and Small Power Influence in the United Nations
Sabrina B. Arias
Abstract
abstract: Why are some small powers effective in setting the UN agenda, even in the face of large power opposition? The author argues that small states are more likely to be represented by experienced diplomats, who, over time, accumulate influence that can be deployed to shape the international organization’s agenda. To test these claims, the author assembled a data set of proposed agenda items and the tenure of all states’ ambassadors from 1946 to 2018 and conducted interviews with diplomats from forty-nine states. The author finds that smaller powers have more diplomatic experience than larger powers; that individuals with more diplomatic experience are more successful at agenda setting even when accounting for material power; and that random shocks to ambassadorial tenure, such as the death of an ambassador, have negative effects on diplomatic experience and effectiveness. These insights contribute to understanding the role of individuals and diplomacy in international relations and the ways in which small powers influence international politics.
JOP 88/3 pp. 1231-1244 2026-07-01 Original Understanding Resourcing Trade-Offs in International Organizations: Evidence from an Elite Survey Experiment
Mirko Heinzel, Bernhard Reinsberg, Christian Siauwijaya
Abstract
International organizations (IOs) are mandated to address some of the most important global challenges under intense budget scarcity. In recent years, they expanded their funding base through a greater reliance on earmarked voluntary contributions by member states and nonstate actors. Critics warn that earmarked funding creates an important trade-off: IOs can do more with earmarked funding but have less control over what they do and do it less well. In this registered report, we probe how staff evaluate different types of earmarking through a novel elite survey experiment with staff from six United Nations organizations. We show that staff prefer earmarking for their own area of work over other types of earmarking. However, these preferences do not affect the funding amount they deem as appropriate or the overheads they expect their organization to charge. Our study provides important insights for debates on the resourcing of IOs and the motivations of international bureaucrats.