In the article Trump’s Unrealistic Expectations for NATO from earlier this week, The Fulda Gap critiqued Trump’s suggestion that NATO “wasn’t taking care of terror.” This article and the next installment serve to substantiate the argument against the President’s perceptions on the role of NATO.
Pt. 2: A Brief Introduction to Russian Information Warfare
In modern diplomatic terms, Lord Ismay’s quote “to keep the Russians out [and the] Americans in” seems aggressive, but with Russian involvement in multiple conflicts, this has once again become a priority. A NATO research paper (provided below) on Russian Information Warfare gives us a look at their tactics. As the report goes on, describing Putin’s view of intelligence is an application of soft power, that is to say: political, economic, and information-based power. The following is an excerpt from Russian description of the various tactics:
“The primary methods of manipulating information used by the mass media in the interests of information-psychological confrontation objectives are:
- Direct lies for the purpose of disinformation both of the domestic population and foreign societies;
- Concealing critically important information;
- Burying valuable information in a mass of information dross;
- Simplification, confirmation and repetition (inculcation);
- Terminological substitution: use of concepts and terms whose meaning is unclear or has undergone qualitative change, which makes it harder to form a true picture of events;
- Introducing taboos on specific forms of information or categories of news;
- Image recognition: known politicians or celebrities can take part in political actions to order, thus exerting influence on the world view of their followers;
- Providing negative information, which is more readily accepted by the audience than positive.”
“Certain overt and covert techniques for influencing events and behaviour in, and the actions of, foreign countries. [They] may entail the following objectives:
- influencing the policies of another government
- undermining confidence in its leaders and institutions
- disrupting the relations between other nations
- discrediting and weakening governmental and nongovernmental opponents.”
(Yu. Kuleshov et al., “Информационно-психологическое противоборство в современных условиях: теория и практика” (Information-Psychological Warfare In Modern Conditions))
This constitutes Russia’s brand of imperialism in one example of their use of information warfare tactics to subdue a foreign government. This can happen through manipulation of public perception, thus affecting how much people trust authority, vote, and consume. Direct pressure can also be applied to a government through social, political and/or economic blackmail. In seeking to uphold a mixture of deniability and defendability of its actions, it creates uncertain and/or hostile environments for its adversary.
In 2014, many Ukrainians in Crimea had to trade in the their Ukrainian passports for Russian passports.
Russia makes its moves during these periods of uncertainty, then either denies involvement, or provides services to those affected in an effort to make those who oppose Russia’s actions question sources that condemn them. Another prominent example directly connected to NATO’s concerns are Russia’s post-Soviet relations with its former satellite states, particularly Ukraine.
Details of these soft-power tactics carried out in Ukraine are provided in the third PDF-link below: When Hybrid Warfare Supports Ideology. To read about the effects of these tactics, read the Part III of this series.
Most references to Russian information warfare tactics within this article came from the following NATO Defense College research papers provided here for further reading (some have already been linked to above:
