OSCE observer reveals concerns in US midterms

DW: As many people may not be familiar with your mission, can you briefly explain your mandate and how the Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe's Office for Democratic Institutions and Human Rights has come to monitor the US midterm elections?

Tana de Zulueta: This is actually the eighth OSCE/ODIHR election observation mission to the United States. So this is a long-standing engagement with the United States and a part of the United States' commitment, like all other participating states, including Germany, where I observed the election last year.

In each situation we send a mission according to the needs which a needs assessment establishes [first]. And in the case of the United States this time around, it was recommended to send what we call a limited election observation mission, which means we do not have short-term observers that systematically monitor polling on Election Day. We have just got long-term observers, and we have 36 of these traveling across the United States. We have been here since October 3.    

Just to clarify: You were invited by the Trump administration to observe the US midterm elections?

Yes, we were invited by the State Department — as usual.

Read more: Is Donald Trump the Democratic Party's 'unwitting unifier'?

In your interim report after traveling through the country ahead of the midterms, you state that there are disputes about voter registration and identification, which is a highly charged issue that is the subject of ongoing litigation. Are you concerned that this could have an impact on the election?

It is important to note that voting has already begun and so this is an ongoing election. A very large portion of voting is already happening. Yesterday, I visited a polling station in Atlanta, Georgia, and yes indeed it is true that there are outstanding issues and ongoing litigation concerning a very sensitive issue in a country in which fears of discrimination run deep because of its history.

So this is a long-standing issue and, yes, one that is coloring the debate throughout this election. But possibly fears as to what is referred to here as voter suppression appear to have actually mobilized voters. In Georgia we were informed that even though this is a midterm election, which is an election only for Congress and for local offices at the state level, this has a presidential level of voter turnout and early voting already.  

Read more: What Germany and EU are watching in US midterm elections    

Cyberattacks and the integrity of the election is another key issue. In your report you write that most observers expressed confidence in the integrity of the election infrastructure and efforts to mitigate cybersecurity risks, but "some shared concerns about the possibility of real and alleged cyberattacks and their potential impact on public confidence." How confident are you about the safety and integrity of the election system? 

Our report, which was published on October 26, is a halfway report which was looking at the issue. The issue of cybersecurity was flagged to us by our interlocutors prior to our arriving in the country and it is one which we have attempted to lock at closely, speaking to those involved and to stakeholders, voters, parties, candidates.

There are new rules and new levels of coordination. And, indeed, there has been considerable spending on improving the security of election infrastructure since it was declared a strategic asset last year — with federal intervention, if I may say, on reinforcing the security, which did not exist in the past because elections in the United States are run on a state level and in most cases at the county level.

So you have tremendous fragmentation and terms and rules and processes, and this was perceived as vulnerability. But with the declaration of the election infrastructure as a national asset, the levels of coordination and the assistance given to local authorities appears to have reinforced confidence. So, if concerns were high about this aspect, people feel that they have quite a good handle on this particular issue. But we'll see, because this election is far from complete.

You also mention in your report the increasingly polarized political environment in the US and concerns about possible online disinformation campaigns. That report was written before the events of last week that included the mailing of package bombs and the attack on a synagogue in Pittsburgh. How do you assess the political climate right now and how do you view — also mentioned in your report — the increasing verbal attacks on journalists and the media?

This is an issue which we are watching. It is an issue which is persistent and one we will watch and report on because it is one which is affecting the climate of this election. The legitimacy of media workers, who should be important actors in guaranteeing that voters get good and comprehensive information, is being challenged and in some cases their personal safety [is] at risk with these attempted bomb attacks. We have even had cases of politicians attacking journalists, or coming to blows as it were. So, this is an issue which we have to watch because the ability of journalists to do their work correctly and safely is one of the things we have to report on. 

At 1830 UTC, DW's editors send out a selection of news and features. Sign up to receive it here.