Information operations: Difference between revisions
imported>Alexander Wiebel (→Electronic warfare: .) |
John Leach (talk | contribs) m (Text replacement - "]]" to "") |
||
(7 intermediate revisions by 3 users not shown) | |||
Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
{{subpages}} | {{PropDel}}<br><br>{{subpages}} | ||
In United States and | In United States and NATO doctrine, '''information operations (IO)''' are "The integrated employment of the core capabilities of electronic | ||
warfare, computer network operations, psychological operations, military deception, and | warfare, computer network operations, psychological operations, military deception, and | ||
operations security, in concert with specified supporting and related capabilities, to influence, | operations security, in concert with specified supporting and related capabilities, to influence, | ||
Line 10: | Line 10: | ||
==Primary Activities in Information Operations== | ==Primary Activities in Information Operations== | ||
===Electronic warfare=== | ===Electronic warfare=== | ||
{{main|Electronic warfare}} | |||
Broadly speaking, electronic warfare involves:<ref name=JP1-02 /> | Broadly speaking, electronic warfare involves:<ref name=JP1-02 /> | ||
:*Learning about an opponent's electronic capabilities, resources and their deployment. At the national/strategic level, this is usually called ''' | :*Learning about an opponent's electronic capabilities, resources and their deployment. At the national/strategic level, this is usually called '''electronic intelligence''', and '''electronic support''' at the tactical level. | ||
:*Interfering with the opponent's systems, called either ''' | :*Interfering with the opponent's systems, called either '''electronic attack''' or. more traditionally, '''electronic countermeasures''' (ECM). Purely electronic or #computer network operations|software/computer network actions are called '''soft kill''', while physical destruction of enemy electronic resources is '''hard kill'''. | ||
:*Minimizing the effects of enemy counteractions on one's own electronics, called ''' | :*Minimizing the effects of enemy counteractions on one's own electronics, called '''electronic counter-countermeasures (ECCM)''' or '''electronic protection'''. The latter is a newer and less frequently recognized term. | ||
===Computer network operations=== | ===Computer network operations=== | ||
Line 31: | Line 32: | ||
| url =http://www.online-literature.com/view.php/artofwar/7?term=deception }}</ref> | | url =http://www.online-literature.com/view.php/artofwar/7?term=deception }}</ref> | ||
Over the centuries, deception has become much more extensive. | Over the centuries, deception has become much more extensive. During the First World War, the activity was less formally managed than in later years, but there were notable activities, such as by the controversial British colonel, Richard Meinertzhagen.<ref name=>{{citation | ||
| author = Meiners, Mary | |||
| title = Lawrence of Arabia and Richard of Israel, Conflict and Deception in the Middle East | |||
| journal = ISPP 31st Annual Scientific Meeting, Sciences Po, Paris, France, | |||
| date = Jul 09, 2008 | |||
| url = http://www.allacademic.com/meta/p245944_index.html}}</ref> | |||
In the Second World War, strategic deception was managed at the highest command levels by the Western Allies and the Soviet Union. The London Controlling Staff (LCS) was the chief British organization, which guided its U.S. counterpart, Joint Security Control (JSC). <ref name=BoL>{{citation | In the Second World War, strategic deception was managed at the highest command levels by the Western Allies and the Soviet Union. The London Controlling Staff (LCS) was the chief British organization, which guided its U.S. counterpart, Joint Security Control (JSC). <ref name=BoL>{{citation | ||
Line 38: | Line 44: | ||
| publisher = Bantam Books | | publisher = Bantam Books | ||
| year = 1976 | | year = 1976 | ||
| ISBN = 0-553-01311-4}}</ref> | | ISBN = 0-553-01311-4}}</ref> Deception, by the broader Russian term ''maskirovka'', is probably more embedded in Russian military thought than in any other nation. <ref>{{cite journal | ||
| journal = Airpower Journal | |||
| date = Spring 1988 | |||
| title = Soviet Maskirovko | |||
| author = Smith, Charles L. | |||
}}</ref> | |||
Advanced technologies, such as | Advanced technologies, such as measurement and signature intelligence (MASINT), have been valued when they bring special capabilities for detecting deception. | ||
===Operations security=== | ===Operations security=== | ||
This is more of a measure to support covert action, rather than an action in and of itself. It prevents the opponent from identifying what the covert actor intends to do, or has done. | This is more of a measure to support covert action, rather than an action in and of itself. It prevents the opponent from identifying what the covert actor intends to do, or has done. | ||
===Psychological operations=== | ===Psychological operations=== | ||
Historically, many of the military and civilian covert action organizations of the United States came from psychological warfare, rather than existing intelligence operations | The core of psychological operations is propaganda, which was once a neutral term referring to any information issued by governments. | ||
====United States==== | |||
Historically, many of the military and civilian covert action organizations of the United States came from psychological warfare, rather than existing intelligence operations. | |||
Definitions below come from the Operations Coordinating Board (OCB), which, in 1954, was the White House organization that approved or disapproved covert and clandestine activities.<ref name=PgndColor>{{citation | Definitions below come from the Operations Coordinating Board (OCB), which, in 1954, was the White House organization that approved or disapproved covert and clandestine activities.<ref name=PgndColor>{{citation | ||
Line 52: | Line 65: | ||
| title = Paper Prepared by the Operations Coordinating Board: Principles to Assure Coordination of Gray Activities | | title = Paper Prepared by the Operations Coordinating Board: Principles to Assure Coordination of Gray Activities | ||
| url = http://www.state.gov/documents/organization/96785.pdf | | url = http://www.state.gov/documents/organization/96785.pdf | ||
}}</ref> Policy-level control has always been under the | }}</ref> Policy-level control has always been under the Department of State. | ||
In U.S. doctrine, the term "propaganda", without further qualification, is intended to be descriptive and emotionally neutral: | In U.S. doctrine, the term "propaganda", without further qualification, is intended to be descriptive and emotionally neutral: | ||
Line 59: | Line 72: | ||
sponsor, either directly or indirectly.<ref name=JP1-02 /></blockquote> | sponsor, either directly or indirectly.<ref name=JP1-02 /></blockquote> | ||
Of the three general types of propaganda, | In the Second World War, the Office of Strategic Services was spawned from the interim Coordinator of Information, William J. Donovan. OSS held the responsibility for "gray" and "black" propaganda, while the Office of War Information produced "white propaganda". United States Army Special Forces were created by the Psychological Operations Division of the Army Staff. | ||
Of the three general types of propaganda, #White propaganda|white, #Gray propaganda|gray and #Black propaganda| black, white is overt while gray and black are covert.<ref name=FM3-05-30>{{citation | |||
| url = http://www.fas.org/irp/doddir/army/fm3-05-30.pdf | | url = http://www.fas.org/irp/doddir/army/fm3-05-30.pdf | ||
| title = FM 3-05.30/MCRP 3-40.6 Psychological Operations | | title = FM 3-05.30/MCRP 3-40.6 Psychological Operations | ||
| date = April 2005}}</ref> | | date = April 2005}}</ref> | ||
====White propaganda==== | =====White propaganda===== | ||
White is acknowledged as a statement of U.S. Government policy, or emanates from a source associated closely enough with the U.S. Government to reflect an official viewpoint. The information is true and factual. It also includes all output identified as coming from U.S. official sources. | White is acknowledged as a statement of U.S. Government policy, or emanates from a source associated closely enough with the U.S. Government to reflect an official viewpoint. The information is true and factual. It also includes all output identified as coming from U.S. official sources. | ||
====Gray propaganda==== | =====Gray propaganda===== | ||
The source of gray propaganda is deliberately ambiguous. | The source of gray propaganda is deliberately ambiguous. | ||
<blockquote>The true source (U.S. Government) is not revealed to the target audience. The activity engaged in plausibly appears to emanate from a non-official American source, or an indigenous, non-hostile source, or there may be no attribution.</blockquote> | <blockquote>The true source (U.S. Government) is not revealed to the target audience. The activity engaged in plausibly appears to emanate from a non-official American source, or an indigenous, non-hostile source, or there may be no attribution.</blockquote> | ||
Line 85: | Line 100: | ||
known that the activity is subsidized or otherwise assisted by the | known that the activity is subsidized or otherwise assisted by the | ||
U.S. Government?</blockquote> | U.S. Government?</blockquote> | ||
====Black propaganda==== | =====Black propaganda===== | ||
The activity engaged in appears to emanate from a source (government, party, group, organization, person) | The activity engaged in appears to emanate from a source (government, party, group, organization, person) | ||
usually hostile in nature. The interest of the U.S. Government is concealed and the U.S. Government would deny | usually hostile in nature. The interest of the U.S. Government is concealed and the U.S. Government would deny | ||
Line 93: | Line 108: | ||
<blockquote>Responsibility for engaging in black propaganda and other related activities is assigned solely to the designee of the [(CO)]. Likewise it should be kept in mind that activities, either gray or black, conducted into denied areas from their peripheries, other than radio, are the sole responsibility of the [(CO)] designee.</blockquote> | <blockquote>Responsibility for engaging in black propaganda and other related activities is assigned solely to the designee of the [(CO)]. Likewise it should be kept in mind that activities, either gray or black, conducted into denied areas from their peripheries, other than radio, are the sole responsibility of the [(CO)] designee.</blockquote> | ||
In US doctrine, black propaganda rarely is employed below the strategic level, due to the stringent coordination and security requirements needed to protect its actual source. Further, black propaganda, to be credible, may need to disclose sensitive material, with the damage caused by information disclosure considered to be outweighed by the impact of successful deception. <ref name=FM3-05-30 /> | In US doctrine, black propaganda rarely is employed below the strategic level, due to the stringent coordination and security requirements needed to protect its actual source. Further, black propaganda, to be credible, may need to disclose sensitive material, with the damage caused by information disclosure considered to be outweighed by the impact of successful deception. <ref name=FM3-05-30 /> It is primarily the responsibility of the Central Intelligence Agency. | ||
==Activities supporting information operations== | ==Activities supporting information operations== | ||
===Civil-military operations=== | ===Civil-military operations=== | ||
See | See civil affairs. | ||
===Defense support to public diplomacy=== | ===Defense support to public diplomacy=== | ||
===Public affairs=== | ===Public affairs=== |
Latest revision as of 07:30, 18 March 2024
This article may be deleted soon. | ||
---|---|---|
In United States and NATO doctrine, information operations (IO) are "The integrated employment of the core capabilities of electronic warfare, computer network operations, psychological operations, military deception, and operations security, in concert with specified supporting and related capabilities, to influence, disrupt, corrupt or usurp adversarial human and automated decision making while protecting our own. Also called IO."[1] Primary Activities in Information OperationsElectronic warfareBroadly speaking, electronic warfare involves:[1]
Computer network operationsMuch like electronic warfare, this discipline, primarily involving software, has three parts:[1]
DeceptionWhile the first warfare may have involved hitting one's opponent over the head with a rock, having a fellow warrior distract the enemy such that he appears the threat, while you get even closer, happened very early in prehistory. In circa 400 BC, Sun Tzu said "All warfare is deception." [2] Over the centuries, deception has become much more extensive. During the First World War, the activity was less formally managed than in later years, but there were notable activities, such as by the controversial British colonel, Richard Meinertzhagen.[3] In the Second World War, strategic deception was managed at the highest command levels by the Western Allies and the Soviet Union. The London Controlling Staff (LCS) was the chief British organization, which guided its U.S. counterpart, Joint Security Control (JSC). [4] Deception, by the broader Russian term maskirovka, is probably more embedded in Russian military thought than in any other nation. [5] Advanced technologies, such as measurement and signature intelligence (MASINT), have been valued when they bring special capabilities for detecting deception. Operations securityThis is more of a measure to support covert action, rather than an action in and of itself. It prevents the opponent from identifying what the covert actor intends to do, or has done. Psychological operationsThe core of psychological operations is propaganda, which was once a neutral term referring to any information issued by governments. United StatesHistorically, many of the military and civilian covert action organizations of the United States came from psychological warfare, rather than existing intelligence operations. Definitions below come from the Operations Coordinating Board (OCB), which, in 1954, was the White House organization that approved or disapproved covert and clandestine activities.[6] Policy-level control has always been under the Department of State. In U.S. doctrine, the term "propaganda", without further qualification, is intended to be descriptive and emotionally neutral:
In the Second World War, the Office of Strategic Services was spawned from the interim Coordinator of Information, William J. Donovan. OSS held the responsibility for "gray" and "black" propaganda, while the Office of War Information produced "white propaganda". United States Army Special Forces were created by the Psychological Operations Division of the Army Staff. Of the three general types of propaganda, #White propaganda|white, #Gray propaganda|gray and #Black propaganda| black, white is overt while gray and black are covert.[7] White propagandaWhite is acknowledged as a statement of U.S. Government policy, or emanates from a source associated closely enough with the U.S. Government to reflect an official viewpoint. The information is true and factual. It also includes all output identified as coming from U.S. official sources. Gray propagandaThe source of gray propaganda is deliberately ambiguous.
Black propagandaThe activity engaged in appears to emanate from a source (government, party, group, organization, person) usually hostile in nature. The interest of the U.S. Government is concealed and the U.S. Government would deny responsibility. The content may be partially or completely fabricated, but that which is fabricated is made to appear credible to the target audience. Black activity is also usually designed to cause embarrassment to the ostensible source or to force the ostensible source to take action against its will.[6] Black propaganda can be considered clandestine, as the source is unknown.
In US doctrine, black propaganda rarely is employed below the strategic level, due to the stringent coordination and security requirements needed to protect its actual source. Further, black propaganda, to be credible, may need to disclose sensitive material, with the damage caused by information disclosure considered to be outweighed by the impact of successful deception. [7] It is primarily the responsibility of the Central Intelligence Agency. Activities supporting information operationsCivil-military operationsSee civil affairs. Defense support to public diplomacyPublic affairsA form of "white propaganda", this is an officially recognized activities to keep all local and international stakeholders informed of the situation. References
|