A great, tightly written article over at MWI that looks at information through the “man, train, equip” construct of preparing the Army for war.
While emphasis on operations in the information environment and the cyber domain are certainly increasing, the balance of the military’s attention remains focused on force-on-force engagements during declared conflicts. Much of the time, information and cyber are given supporting roles for kinetic operations but recently, US Army Cyber Command announced a shift in focus from information warfare to “information advantage” for “decision dominance,” and is working to bring the concepts to the forefront of how the Army fights.RETHINKING “MAN, TRAIN, AND EQUIP” FOR INFORMATION ADVANTAGE, Modern War Institute
Co-written by a PSYOP and Cyber officer, no less – folks in the game.
What I love about the article is that it’s not about the shiny stuff or promising some panacea through the right combination of “words and images.” The Army’s mission is to win land wars. Everything supports that. Instead of focusing on how this or that “information” tool can be used to support that, they focus on demonstrating how information already plays a key role in recruiting, training, and equipping the Army for war.
They talk about disinformation campaigns that target the military.
They talk about how lies spread faster than truth, the so-called ‘illusory truth’ effect.
How should the Army deal with this?
Specifically, to become proactive in the information environment, the Army needs to understand and predict how and what our competitors and adversaries are going to say, and be ready to deploy solutions ahead of, and in response to, competing and malicious narratives. One solution is teaching critical-thinking skills and inoculating the force by teaching soldiers to become more thoughtful consumers of media and information, especially regarding social media.
I love this.
Critical thinking is key. This isn’t going to be solved by artificial intelligence – at least not anytime soon. We need humans in the room who are astute across multiple domains and who understand the potential impacts of publishing that “edgy” Tweet or highlighting that training or social event.
This has application at both the individual and organizational levels.
Yes, we’re talking about “optics.” Optics are easy to dismiss, but they are actually important. What isn’t optics after all?
Doing the right thing is also important. We need critical thinkers who understand which way to lean at a given time. Is the juice worth the squeeze? What are the potential second and third-order effects?
That’s hard. That takes time.
On training, the authors write about how just about everything we do is now exploitable. Training is not just training anymore. It’s operations.
Specifically, they write about the Jade Helm exercise in 2015 which was the canary in the coal mine.
The information warfare tactics used against Jade Helm could be applied throughout the world, whenever and wherever the US military trains with partners and allies. In fact, we should assume those tactics will be used in the very locations that US servicemembers may be fighting the next war.
The idea of perfect secrecy is diminishing. If we want to compete, we need to recognize that now and start playing the actual game instead of the one we want to play.
Again, they offer a solution:
To gain and hold information advantage, the Army must assess the information environment before, during, and after domestic exercises—just as it does internationally—to understand the narratives surrounding the training and troop movements and to predict, preempt, and ultimately prevent false narratives from taking hold.
They close with the following:
Ultimately, the Army has taken the first steps toward recognizing the vulnerabilities inherent to the ubiquity of the information environment by pivoting away from information warfare—a term that preserves the peace-war dichotomy that is irrelevant in competition—toward achieving information advantage—a term that appreciates the information environment’s moral and cognitive aspects and its relevance to military readiness.
I’m growing to like the term “information advantage” as I get to understand it better. And couching it as they did – a term that “appreciates the information environment’s moral and cognitive aspects” – helps in understanding.
However, information advantage is such a big tent that it starts to lose some of its meaning. There are terms that we should lump and terms that we should split.
Information warfare is something that can be “done” – it’s an activity.
Information advantage – as I understand it – is a state, a confluence of things that puts a decision-maker in an advantageous position.
Information Advantage: A condition where a force holds the initiative in terms of relevant actor behavior, situational understanding, and decision-making through the use of all military capabilities.
What I’m saying is that I don’t think information advantage replaces information warfare (or psychological warfare). It’s something different, something bigger.
Kudos to the authors for a terrific, thought-provoking article.