Meta-Warfare

[OUTLAW 09]

If one noticed yesterday the large number of links went to hacked Russian emails of main/key political players actually practicing political warfare you would have been able to "see and understand" the mindset of those using political warfare...now one can see the "political system" in action employing political warfare...AND or one of the first solid articles on the use of Russian transnational gangs a true key element in Russian political warfare...

We have never really had that opportunity until years later when someone dies and we get access to their achieves.....

Recently we are being flooded with countless articles on this topic and other topics...deeply researched...well mostly researched...talking and writing but absolutely no research on the how to stop it.

Heck we cannot even get the current US WH to honestly admit they profited by active Russian influence operations and now we are going to stand up and stop it....

Until we can get away from nothing, but research articles and not to more ...this is way forward or this is one way of doing it...it is a waste of time..effort..and paper...

[OUTLAW 09]

If I go back to the list of RFI subsets....money is missing....why do I include that...the core Russian soft power lays within their use of money both legal and illegal in obtaining their political warfare goals....

While it is not such a major issue in the West...other than trying to figure out how to launder it....it is not used really as a "weaponized system" used in political warfare.

The West tends to use money in the form of financial based organizations...IMF...WorldBank....WTO etc.....to achieve it's goals...

The Russian Laundromat Exposed

https://www.occrp.org/en/laundromat/

Three years ago, OCCRP exposed the “Russian Laundromat” - an immense financial fraud scheme that enabled vast sums to be pumped out of Russia. The money was laundered and moved into Europe and beyond through bribery and a clever exploitation of the Moldovan legal system.
Recently, OCCRP and Novaya Gazeta obtained detailed banking records for more than 120 accounts that made up the Laundromat. We shared the data with dozens of reporters from around the world who tracked down the money locally. The results are "The Russian Laundromat Exposed" - a new project which reveals far more about how the scheme worked and where the money went. The stories below explain how more than $20.8 billion was taken out of Russia and laundered, who got the money, and why some of the world’s largest banks failed to shut the scheme down.

We have seen that Russian money flow being used to finance their info and cyber warfare globally...as it cannot be traced back to Russia and or a single Russian bank.....

[OUTLAW 09]

This is exactly why the US cannot and is not capable of responding to Russian political warfare and countering Russian cyber and information warfare....

"The world is moving too fast for the institutions we created in the 20th century." - General Jones

That is why social media and IT security companies are in fact leading the pushback...not the US government or it's agencies...and that includes DoD/DoS...as they are not tied to the 20th century structures....

[TheCurmudgeon]

Outlaw, when I get to a real computer and can type I want to respond to some comments you made earlier on Kirkullen.

Right now I want to go back to a point I believe Bill C made, that using the term "Political Warfare" is imprecise and confusing. The obvious alternative is "Political Conflict" but that seems too weak. Does anyone have another suggestion.

[Bill Moore]

I wouldn't worry about the confusion, don't define it, but describe it. The description will morph over time as its character changes. Army SF did more harm than good when it narrowly "defined" UW along organizational lines (underground, auxiliary, guerrilla force), which is basically nothing more than another weapon system to coerce. Political warfare is complex and many facets, that is just the way it is. If you do define it you'll have to limit your discussion to the narrow definition you applied to it. I know that is the army way, but then again the army is still trying to figure out how to use military force to achieve political objectives (different than political warfare) in the 21st Century.

[OUTLAW 09]

I wouldn't worry about the confusion, don't define it, but describe it. The description will morph over time as its character changes. Army SF did more harm than good when it narrowly "defined" UW along organizational lines (underground, auxiliary, guerrilla force), which is basically nothing more than another weapon system to coerce. Political warfare is complex and many facets, that is just the way it is. If you do define it you'll have to limit your discussion to the narrow definition you applied to it. I know that is the army way, but then again the army is still trying to figure out how to use military force to achieve political objectives (different than political warfare) in the 21st Century.

Actually a very good thought as it then allows the description to morph as does the environment....

IMHO I am far more concerned about "how that political warfare looks....feels....thinks....acts"....as they are the elements that a country being "attacked" will see and need to counter......

I know I am on a soap box but we are in fact "losing" the "war" and in my daily world it is a "grind it out war" against cyber and information warfare which both drives and supports "political warfare"....

This confirms a lot of what I have been saying when I say the US is losing...on both fronts...cyber and info warfare...

The US Takes On the World in NATO’s Cyber War Games in Tallinn
https://www.wired.com/2017/04/us-tak...eshare#… via @WIRED

In this cyber war game, the Czechs won. The US came in 12th—a step up from last year's dead last.

Many readers here wonder why I keep repeating over and over..we are in fact losing to the Russian cyber and information war directed straight at the US..the above article answers that question in a very clear and concise way.

While we might have the greatest movers and shakers in Silicon Valley we have lost our tech edge and advantages in the cyber era long ago...as we do not focus on the younger generation and drive their tech learning/training/education opportunities as do a lot of other countries...who clearly recognize that value...

[davidbfpo]

Citing Outlaw09's last post in part:

While we (USA) might have the greatest movers and shakers in Silicon Valley we have lost our tech edge and advantages in the cyber era long ago...as we do not focus on the younger generation and drive their tech learning/training/education opportunities as do a lot of other countries...who clearly recognize that value...

In the UK there has been an attempt to recruit young "techies" into government-run cyber roles in the last six years, which is reportedly hard to achieve. One explanation is the private sector pays better, shocking. Then there is the cultural aspect, are government, let alone military institutions in peacetime (as seen by them) places they would fit happily into.

A few years ago I attended a mainly British Army attendee conference on information operations; the vast majority of army attendees were either over-fifty or retirees on contracts. Hardly encouraging IMHO.

GCHQ and the Cabinet Office both have schemes, or are they plots underway to attract and educate talent. We shall see if they work.

[TheCurmudgeon]

Many readers here wonder why I keep repeating over and over..we are in fact losing to the Russian cyber and information war directed straight at the US..the above article answers that question in a very clear and concise way.

While we might have the greatest movers and shakers in Silicon Valley we have lost our tech edge and advantages in the cyber era long ago...as we do not focus on the younger generation and drive their tech learning/training/education opportunities as do a lot of other countries...who clearly recognize that value...

I would argue that we will never win an information war with Russia because any attack on Russian information is futile. The government power is not based in popular support, so information given to the general population will be of no effect. As long as we think that information will beat a dictator, we will be on the losing end of the war.