Thursday, March 23, 2017

A Strategic Perspective on "Information Warfare" & "Counter-Propaganda"

Prepared remarks by Matthew Armstrong given before the Emerging Threats & Capabilities Subcommittee of the House Armed Services Committee on Wednesday, March 15, 2017; from linkedin

image (not from entry) from

There are several challenges hindering our credibility and the ability to be effective in today’s environment.
The first is that our messages and actions are generally dis-unified [sic]. We have a competitive advantage in terms of resources, people, skills, and scale, yet our various government departments and agencies are organized in such a way that makes coordination nearly impossible.
Beyond the obvious, this includes failing to understand, coordinate, or support programs that may develop and strengthen local defenses, even inoculation, against adversarial influence. Lesser known examples include Fish & Wildlife Services helping game wardens in Africa, exchange programs [JB emphasis], and U.S. Navy tenders helping local harbor masters and mechanics. ...
The lack of coordination and bureaucratic cultural divides contribute to our second challenge, which is that our response to adversarial propaganda is almost invariably reactionary [sic -- JB note: Does the author mean "reactive"?]. When our adversaries explain their actions to the world or make claims about us, we find ourselves scrambling to prove them wrong. This keeps us on our heels and requires us to overcome the narrative set by others. It also means limited consideration of the psychological effect of actions, which the Chinese appear to be overcoming in their recent reorganization of their Cyberspace Operations Forces. ...

No comments: