One year ago in Berlin, Lisa F, a 13-year-old German-Russian girl, disappeared for 30 hours. When she returned to her parents, she claimed she had been kidnapped and raped by “Arab” men. This was a lie – as she later admitted. She had fallen out with her parents and invented the whole story. But that did little to stop the episode from becoming the centrepiece of a whirlwind Russian disinformation campaign aimed at destabilising Angela Merkel and German institutions.

Russian state media and pro-Russian websites in Germany immediately swirled with reports. Merkel was already under pressure for her open-door policy on refugees. Now German far-right groups and representatives of Germany’s ethnic Russian community held demonstrations. The Russian foreign minister, Sergey Lavrov, described Lisa (a dual German-Russian citizen) as “our girl” and accused German authorities of a cover-up and “whitewashing reality to make it politically correct”.

A diplomatic spat ensued, with the German foreign minister accusing Russia of “political propaganda”. Berlin officials struggled to counter the Russian campaign. But Moscow’s overt meddling in Germany’s domestic politics seeped into the public consciousness – for a while, at least.

Fast-forward to January 2017. The fallout from the Trump-Russia dossier has now placed Vladimir Putin and his power structure at the centre of American politics. For Europeans, a question arises: what could this all mean for the old continent, as it approaches key elections? This year, voting will take place in France, the Netherlands and in Germany. Remembering the Lisa scandal is important, for it says something about what may lie ahead.

Now that Russia’s covert activities are being so intensely discussed in the US, it is high time Europe placed as much attention on what it might, in turn, be confronted with – and to prepare itself.

This was one of the key messages of the US intelligence agencies’ report on Russian hacking and other activities, which contained a warning that Europe is the next target. “We assess [that] Moscow will apply lessons learned from its Putin-ordered campaign aimed at the US presidential election to future influence efforts worldwide, including against US allies and their election process,” it says. Russian cyber-attacks and disinformation have happened in Europe before. But what the US briefing suggests is that what matters are the reactions to these – or lack of them.

Russia “applies lessons”, write the US intelligence agencies. Russia sends up trial balloons, and then takes the next step – or not. “Plausible deniability” is a priority. If its actions are exposed, that is a setback. If it registers a success, it is emboldened to go further. Russian intelligence services measure their success depending on their “perceived ability to impact public discussion”.

It is anyone’s guess whether Putin is currently enjoying, or wincing at, the fact that so much is now being publicly attributed to the sway of his secret services. The Kremlin has chosen blanket denial as a response.

Some western diplomats and Russia- watchers say Putin hates finding himself publicly accused on the international stage. Others say the narrative that Russia can manipulate western politics helps him domestically. Questions are being asked in the US as to why Barack Obama waited so long before his administration publicly called out (on October 7) Russia’s responsibility in the hacking. Did Obama deliberately choose to let Putin off the hook for a period of time? Could that have been a miscalculation?

It is worth remembering that, months earlier, high-ranking German officials had named Russia as a culprit in similar operations. On 13 May the head of a German intelligence agency, Hans-Georg Maassen, took the unusual step of publicly accusing Russia’s secret services of cyber-spying and sabotage activities, adding that this had become a “permanent threat”. The backdrop to the statement was that Germany’s domestic intelligence agency had established Russia’s role in the 2015 hack of the Bundestag, the lower house of the German parliament.

For all the noise understandably surrounding the US hacking, Germany was the first large western country to see one of its key political institutions targeted by Russian cyber-attacks. It took a while for this to be officially acknowledged, but it was a turning point. By the end of 2016, other German officials, including Merkel herself, had named Russia as a threat to the country’s democratic process. On 8 November she commented that dealing with this had become “a daily task”.

With this in mind, there is an obvious parallel to be drawn between what has unfolded in the US and what is now deemed extremely worrying in Germany – a country that has, as a result of Donald Trump’s election, been described as the standard-bearer of the west. Germany is expected to be the focal point this year of Russia’s efforts to sow confusion, hack, exploit data, spread fake news and discredit or blackmail politicians. Germany is Europe’s most powerful country, and Russia is intent on building a sphere of influence on the continent.

Just as Hillary Clinton was targeted by Russian activities designed to disrupt her electoral chances, Merkel, seeking re-election this year, will be in the Kremlin’s line of fire. Both women have strong records of opposing Putin.

Merkel well knows that Putin will try to boost her opponents’ chances. Nothing that happened in the US will have entirely surprised her. German officials are bracing themselves for more episodes like the “Lisa” operation and the Bundestag hacking. And Moscow will be closely following the reactions these produce, or fail to produce, among German politicians, media and public opinion. Just as it has done in the US.