Suggestions for Small Wars Essay Contest?

[William F. Owen]

One characteristic of many small wars is that they are asymmetric: one actor possesses considerably more “hard” or military power than the other. Yet many ostensibly weaker powers seem able to negate this advantage through the use of information. Manipulation of existing news outlets (e.g., newspapers and magazines), and creation of new media outlets (e.g., blogs and websites), may permit weaker actors to achieve end states otherwise unattainable. Under what conditions are such information operations most likely to succeed (e.g, during more traditional military operations, such as the November 2004 assault on Fallujah, or during less traditional military operations, such as the pacification of Anbar)? What are the most efficient ways for weaker actors to use information operations to negate their opponents’ military advantages? Conversely, what are the most efficient ways for stronger actors to deny weaker actors such capabilities (e.g., embedding, foreign-language websites, etc.))? Which branch or branches of the US Government are best able to conduct such operations, and in what ways?

I have fundamental problems with the language and logic in use here. "Asymmetric" is meaningless in terms of military thought. It does not usefully describe the phenomena that it claims to.

IMO, the use of the description "Small Wars" is also largely useless, in that it is not a useful description. How do you measure Small versus Large?

What all these bumper stickers manage to avoid is the admission that there are opponents against whom the use of conventional military force is not useful because they shelter and subsist within civilian populations. That's it! It's nothing to do with information or the media. Information and media are not and never can be military ends in themselves. They are activities that create a friction which may negatively impact on military action, because of the political/humanitarian dimension. EG: If military action remains unknown or unreported, (or no one cares) there can be no information dimension.

There are populations who are completely inoculated against information operations, EG - The militant and ultra-orthodox Jewish communities in Israel and the wider world or militant Islam and the Pro/Pan-Arabists anywhere, and people of any extreme position. They only accept information that supports their beliefs. Check out "cognitive dissonance" as a phenomena. These people are not swayed by information. - However a gun in the mouth does get them to take their fingers off the keyboard or stop the interview for the BBC.

To my mind the entire challenge is to make and retain the utility of military force, so that it achieves the decisions we need. You have guerillas and bad people because they believe that power comes from the barrel of a gun. The best and most effective solution is to make such men, fear for all they believe, should they wish to attempt gaining influence by such means.