[iwar] [fc:US.media.battle.takes.on.added.importance]

From: Fred Cohen (fc@all.net)
Date: 2001-10-21 09:02:43


Return-Path: <sentto-279987-3183-1003680153-fc=all.net@returns.onelist.com>
Delivered-To: fc@all.net
Received: from 204.181.12.215 [204.181.12.215] by localhost with POP3 (fetchmail-5.7.4) for fc@localhost (single-drop); Sun, 21 Oct 2001 09:04:07 -0700 (PDT)
Received: (qmail 11986 invoked by uid 510); 21 Oct 2001 16:02:06 -0000
Received: from n20.groups.yahoo.com (216.115.96.70) by 204.181.12.215 with SMTP; 21 Oct 2001 16:02:06 -0000
X-eGroups-Return: sentto-279987-3183-1003680153-fc=all.net@returns.onelist.com
Received: from [10.1.1.220] by n20.groups.yahoo.com with NNFMP; 21 Oct 2001 16:02:29 -0000
X-Sender: fc@red.all.net
X-Apparently-To: iwar@onelist.com
Received: (EGP: mail-8_0_0_1); 21 Oct 2001 16:02:33 -0000
Received: (qmail 33394 invoked from network); 21 Oct 2001 16:02:31 -0000
Received: from unknown (10.1.10.142) by 10.1.1.220 with QMQP; 21 Oct 2001 16:02:31 -0000
Received: from unknown (HELO red.all.net) (65.0.156.78) by mta3 with SMTP; 21 Oct 2001 16:02:31 -0000
Received: (from fc@localhost) by red.all.net (8.11.2/8.11.2) id f9LG2hN16350 for iwar@onelist.com; Sun, 21 Oct 2001 09:02:43 -0700
Message-Id: <200110211602.f9LG2hN16350@red.all.net>
To: iwar@onelist.com (Information Warfare Mailing List)
Organization: I'm not allowed to say
X-Mailer: don't even ask
X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.5 PL3]
From: Fred Cohen <fc@all.net>
X-Yahoo-Profile: fcallnet
Mailing-List: list iwar@yahoogroups.com; contact iwar-owner@yahoogroups.com
Delivered-To: mailing list iwar@yahoogroups.com
Precedence: bulk
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:iwar-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com>
Date: Sun, 21 Oct 2001 09:02:43 -0700 (PDT)
Reply-To: iwar@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [iwar] [fc:US.media.battle.takes.on.added.importance]
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit

                            19 October 2001
              US media battle takes on added importance

      By Andrew Koch; JDW Washington Bureau Chief; Washington DC

As the US military campaign in Afghanistan proceeds without significant
resistance, the propaganda battle between the USA and Al-Qaeda and the
Taliban is heating up. 

On the tactical front inside Afghanistan, the US armed forces’
psychological operations (psyops) units are taking the lead,
transmitting a variety of messages through radio broadcasts and airdrops
of leaflets designed to affect the behaviour of both Taliban and
Al-Qaeda forces as well as the general Afghan population. 

The primary format being used is Dari and Pashto language radio
programmes being broadcast from US Special Operations Command EC-130E
Commando Solo aircraft operating from Oman.  While the tactical,
short-term military purposes of the messages can be effective — such as
those that warn ordinary Afghans to "stay away from military
installations, government buildings, terrorist camps, roads, factories,
or bridges" — their ability to affect the Taliban or significantly alter
public opinion in Afghanistan is questionable. 

The problem, Metzl notes, is that while the DoD controls the
dissemination of all US government radio products other than the Voice
of America, the sophistication and quality of its product is "not as
good as it should be, particularly in culturally sensitive areas". 

Although the broadcasts have provided little new information to Afghans,
they did mark the first official acknowledgement of the introduction of
US ground troops.  "United States forces may be moving into or through
your area in the future," one broadcast said, while another warned the
Taliban "our helicopters will rain fire down upon your camps".  To avoid
certain death, the message said, Taliban forces should "approach United
States forces with your hands in the air". 

At the strategic level, the USA is facing a stiff challenge from Osama
bin Laden, who has successfully tapped into feelings of Arab and Muslim
alienation and anger at US policies in the Middle East. 

The Bush doctrine, which calls on national governments to be "either
with us or against us" in the global anti-terrorism campaign, is feeding
fears that the future use of force may not be justified and properly
constrained.  Confusing signals out of Washington, including the
possibility that the USA could later widen the military portion of the
anti-terrorism campaign to include other Arab or Muslim states, is
undercutting the US message that the conflict in Afghanistan "is not a
war on Islam". 

As part of a public diplomacy offensive to head-off some of these
concerns, senior US national security officials have begun appearing on
media outlets with greater appeal to Arab and Muslim audiences,
including the Qatar-based Al-Jazeera network.  National Security Advisor
Condoleezza Rice said during a 15 October interview with Al-Jazeera that
"the president does imagine a Palestinian state as a part of his vision
for the future" and re-iterated the US position that "the war on
terrorism is not a war against Islam".  US Secretary of Defense Donald
Rumsfeld touched on similar themes during an Al-Jazeera interview the
following day, adding that US forces have helped Muslims in places like
Kuwait, Bosnia and Kosovo. 


------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor ---------------------~-->
Get your FREE VeriSign guide to security solutions for your web site: encrypting transactions, securing intranets, and more!
http://us.click.yahoo.com/UnN2wB/m5_CAA/yigFAA/kgFolB/TM
---------------------------------------------------------------------~->

------------------
http://all.net/ 

Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/ 



This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.2 : 2001-12-31 20:59:56 PST