[iwar] [fc:Defense.Dept..Divided.Over.Propaganda.Plan]

From: Fred Cohen (fc@all.net)
Date: 2002-02-23 22:39:02


Return-Path: <sentto-279987-4511-1014532860-fc=all.net@returns.groups.yahoo.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); Sat, 23 Feb 2002 22:40:08 -0800 (PST)
Received: (qmail 18148 invoked by uid 510); 24 Feb 2002 06:40:59 -0000
Received: from n34.groups.yahoo.com (216.115.96.84) by all.net with SMTP; 24 Feb 2002 06:40:59 -0000
X-eGroups-Return: sentto-279987-4511-1014532860-fc=all.net@returns.groups.yahoo.com
Received: from [216.115.97.165] by n34.groups.yahoo.com with NNFMP; 24 Feb 2002 06:41:00 -0000
X-Sender: fc@red.all.net
X-Apparently-To: iwar@onelist.com
Received: (EGP: unknown); 24 Feb 2002 06:40:59 -0000
Received: (qmail 75757 invoked from network); 24 Feb 2002 06:40:59 -0000
Received: from unknown (216.115.97.171) by m11.grp.snv.yahoo.com with QMQP; 24 Feb 2002 06:40:59 -0000
Received: from unknown (HELO red.all.net) (12.232.72.152) by mta3.grp.snv.yahoo.com with SMTP; 24 Feb 2002 06:40:59 -0000
Received: (from fc@localhost) by red.all.net (8.11.2/8.11.2) id g1O6d2f13821 for iwar@onelist.com; Sat, 23 Feb 2002 22:39:02 -0800
Message-Id: <200202240639.g1O6d2f13821@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: Sat, 23 Feb 2002 22:39:02 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [iwar] [fc:Defense.Dept..Divided.Over.Propaganda.Plan]
Reply-To: iwar@yahoogroups.com
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Washington Post
February 20, 2002
Defense Dept. Divided Over Propaganda Plan 
Critics Fear 'Information Operations' Could Backfire, Hurt Pentagon's
Credibility 
By Thomas E. Ricks, Washington Post Staff Writer
A Pentagon plan that would involve the U.S. military in overseas propaganda
efforts has divided the Defense Department, officials said yesterday.
At the center of the controversy is a new Office of Strategic Influence,
created in recent months to more directly influence foreign public opinion
about U.S. military operations. Just what the new office will do remains
unclear, and its tentative plans have not been approved by Defense Secretary
Donald H. Rumsfeld, said one Pentagon official. "There are some proposals,
suggestions and ideas being talked about," he said.
But the official said that even those initial discussions have sparked
widespread concern inside the Defense Department among officials who feel
that the new office, by seeking to manipulate information and even knowingly
dispense false information, could backfire and discredit official Pentagon
statements.
Military public affairs officials have expressed concern to top officials
that the new office, if it continues on its proposed course, will blur the
distinction between intelligence operations and public relations operations,
one defense official said. "You could get guys from the black world dealing
with issues like what to tell kids in Pakistan," said another official.
But there also is concern in the military that the field of "information
operations" is one of the few areas in which the armed forces have had major
problems during the Afghan war.
Air Force Gen. Richard B. Myers, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff,
singled out that area for unusual public criticism. "One area in particular
I think we've been slow to get going has been our information operations
campaign," he said in November. "Despite our best efforts, we took too much
time to put together the team, if you will." The result, he said, was that,
"occasionally, we missed the opportunity to send the right message."
Myers did not elaborate on those missed opportunities, but others in the Air
Force were surprised that the media placed so much emphasis on civilian
casualties caused by bombing mistakes. The military was especially surprised
by that emphasis because Air Force planners believed that they were
operating under unprecedented constraints designed to minimize civilian
injuries. They complained to top commanders that, because of those limits,
they frequently missed hitting al Qaeda leaders, especially in the first
three weeks of the Afghan campaign, which began on Oct. 7.
The dissension at the Pentagon over the new information effort, which was
first reported in yesterday's New York Times, focuses on the intention of
some officials to operate in peacetime as well as wartime. The military has
long tried to influence public opinion in countries at war under the title
of "psychological operations." But the new office apparently plans to extend
such operations into nations in which the United States is not a combatant.
The division at the Pentagon over the plan is only the latest manifestation
of a long-running battle inside the military between public affairs
officials and the new community of "information warriors," said retired Col.
Virginia Pribyla, a former head of the Air Force's press desk. "Information
war" has been a major growth area in the military over the past decade, said
Pribyla. "The problem is they don't see anything wrong with not telling the
truth," she said.
An additional concern of public affairs officials is that those involved in
the new effort do not have backgrounds that give them expertise in shaping
public opinion. Air Force Brig. Gen. Simon P. Worden, the head of the Office
of Strategic Influence, is an astrophysicist who has worked extensively in
space operations and missile defense.
Worden in turn reports to Douglas Feith, the undersecretary of defense for
policy, a lawyer whose background is in Middle Eastern affairs and strategic
arms control. Through a spokesmen, Feith declined to be interviewed for this
article.
Worden's office also coordinates its work with retired Army Gen. Wayne
Downing, who has been overseeing the U.S. counteroffensive against terrorism
on the National Security Council. Downing is a former head of the U.S.
Special Operations Command.
But others said that the public affairs officers are overreacting. "I don't
see the great, nefarious plot in this office [of Strategic Influence] that
some people do," said Dan Kuehl, a specialist in information warfare at the
National Defense University. "It just makes common sense" to use the power
of information, he said.

------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor ---------------------~-->
Sponsored by VeriSign - The Value of Trust
Do you need to encrypt all your online transactions? Find
the perfect solution in this FREE Guide from VeriSign.
http://us.click.yahoo.com/vCuuSA/UdiDAA/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 : 2002-12-31 02:15:03 PST