Written by: Sanchaly Bhattacharya
Image Source: War on the Rocks, Texas National Security Review
Introduction
“The supreme art of war is to subdue the enemy without fighting”- Sun Tzu. The current phase of warfare is not just about the conventional military arsenal and physical battlefield, but the war often becomes a common norm in virtual space. Thousands of years ago the legend of politics and warfare correctly stated that those wars can be considered successful, where you do not need to fight with your enemy. This seems to be impossible in conventional warfare, but in virtual space, the strategy is to play with the perception to weaken the enemy states. Social media has become a primary means to reach out to people easily. The trend of the younger generation, targeting them, and the virality of the disseminated content can be sometimes very dangerous to plan a cognitive warfare in the targeted nations. In the recent wars, while the West backed Israel and Ukraine against the arbitrary invasion and non-state actors, simultaneously the Kremlin has been continuously working through news outlets to influence the mass opinion, especially in the global south. Both the geopolitical rages have shown a stark reality of cognitive warfare. The cyberspace and information mediums have become an essential component of the modern warfare strategy. Discussion, disputes, and divisiveness across social media platforms such as Facebook, X, Instagram, YouTube, WhatsApp, Telegram, and others have enormous playing roles in influencing the perspective of Gen Z globally. The conflicts between broadly accepted narratives and the counter-narratives are key in times of conflict and contribute to the youths’ calls for their perception of the truth and activism.
Cognitive warfare
In the information age, warfare has become complicated. While conventional warfare demands strategy with courage and leadership, warfare in the virtual space to influence the cognitive space of the human mind needs expert strategy, and perseverance to establish the grand narrative. The word ‘cognitive warfare’ simply means the art of war which will eventually help to shape the popular perception with regards to a certain set of events. Though the word is new, the concept was formulated in ancient times. Strategists like Kautilya, Sun Tzu, and in the present-day George Kennan have stated in their legendary works that victory is achieved by successfully shaping the popular perception of a set of events through the smart combination of overt and covert messaging. Two things are very crucial in cognitive warfare- one is identity, and the other is interpretation. The identity of the person and interpretation of the circulated message in the virtual space is the key to shaping further actions. The interpretation of digital content varies across generations, regions, religions, and ethnic identities, further complicating cognitive warfare. Digital news sources have been increasingly becoming the first mode of source of news. Just one click of the massive reach of the news is not giving enough time for fact-checking the content. Many countries like the EU nations, the US, and Canada have already come up with the legal boundary to curb arbitrarily posted content on social media platforms. However, this is also being used by governments sometimes to remove undesirable content from the online space.
Russia-Ukraine war
In Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, social media platforms have been in center stage as the main communication tools for cognitive warfare in the first major conflict in the post-Second World War era. Ukraine has used the mastered art in utilizing the mix of emotion, political interests, and even rumor to counterstrike Moscow online. The virality of Zelensky’s speeches has helped to showcase the Russia-Ukraine war as a global struggle against the aggressors. On the contrary, the Kremlin adopted the techniques of mixing the old and new, tailoring the messages supporting Russia’s grand narrative about the war about the US’s provoking role in the invasion. Russia mainly targeted far-right and far-left groups in South America and Africa to gain support in the anti-colonized struggle against the US. In Africa, the Kremlin’s operations used the Wagner Group to take the narratives further to shape popular sentiments. Along with that, the state-owned media Russia Today (RT) continued the operative measures via traditional reach and pushed the narratives of Russia’s necessary engagement to end the interference of the West. As an outcome, overall, there is a decline in supporting the Ukrainian’s suffering, and is increasingly vocal against Western support to survive the war for a longer period.
Israel-Hamas war
The contentious relations between Israel and Palestine are deeply rooted in religious and ethnic disputes. Since the start of the Israel-Hamas conflict, the advocacy for the cause of the Palestinian people and calls for an immediate ceasefire have remained the dominant narratives on social media platforms. Israel, in contradiction, uses propaganda about broader geopolitical issues and continues to remove the anti-Israeli content from the virtual places. Israel has framed itself as a vulnerable democracy between some hostile and different religious dominant nations. On one hand, Hamas’s strategic use of the internet to portray the long-standing violence against the Palestinians and justify the October 7 attacks as a necessary action for self-defense. The flow of real-time images and videos on social media platforms has been playing a pivotal role in the changing perception worldwide. With the increasing flow of consumption of online visual content, propaganda has proliferated on prominent platforms like Instagram, TikTok, and X. Interestingly, the allies also continuously helped to forward the message of the parties. In the case of Hamas, Iran is constantly involved in spreading Hamas’s message through multiple accounts, amplifying a dominant trend of social media as a place for proxy warfare.
Conclusion
Information warfare has increasingly become a strategy, where the military also needs to incorporate their communication plans during conflicts. The recent Washington protest against the US backing of Israel and supporting gestures towards the Palestinian cause. This protest can be seen as successful propaganda by Hamas's group. The interplay among technology, social media, generational differences, different ethnic perceptions, historical courses, and geopolitical landscape has created a complex environment where virtual space is the battleground and planting information is the weapon. The recent conflicts show the significance of mobilizing the capacity of counter-narratives on the internet along with the military capabilities. There is a crucial role in information in this digital age and the unfolding challenges in cognitive warfare need to be addressed to safeguard the integrity and authenticity of the information ecosystems and overall to protect the truth.
References
Sullivan, G. R., Dubik, J. M., & Tilford, E. H. (1994). War in the information age (Vol. 94, No. 4). Strategic Studies Institute, US Army War College. War in the Information Age (globalsecurity.org)
Webster, F. (2003). Information warfare in an age of globalization. War and the media: Reporting conflict, 24(7), 57-69. War-and-the-Media1-libre.pdf (d1wqtxts1xzle7.cloudfront.net)
Alberts, D. S., Garstka, J. J., Hayes, R. E., & Signori, D. A. (2001). Understanding information age warfare (Vol. 8). Washington, DC: CCRP Publication Series. apps.dtic.mil/sti/pdfs/ADA395859.pdf
War in the Information Age | Hoover Institution War in the Information Age
War and Military Power in the Information Age | SpringerLink
Information Warfare in an Information Age > National Defense University Press > News (ndu.edu)
The opinions expressed and suggestions made in the article belong solely to the author themselves. Diplomania and O.P. Jindal Global University do not endorse the same.
Comments