Results 1 to 7 of 7

Thread: The compression of time and space in non-traditional warfare

  1. #1
    Council Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Posts
    3,169

    Default The compression of time and space in non-traditional warfare

    This will be short, and if there is a better forum to put this in feel free to move it.

    The recent terrorist attacks has really hit home the obvious to me. Terrorism by its nature seeks to propagate the effects of terror well beyond its point of origin by leveraging the media. To deny that is an attempt to separate terror from its true nature, if it doesn't do this then it is something else.

    Reminds me of the Zen Koan like riddle, "If a tree falls in the forest and there no one to hear it, does it make a noise?"

    The tree certainly made a noise, if one associates it with the recent terrorist attacks in Paris. Much of the Western world is clued to the news of the attack. In America, CNN, Fox, and other 24 hour news programs cover it as the expense of almost all other news, even when there are no actual updates. When there are no updates they bring in talking heads to speculate and promote theories on what the attack means. Can it happen here? What should we do? 24 hours a day, and it will continue until another news worthy item appears. These media outlets are witting or unwitting proxies for the terrorists. They are doing exactly what the terrorists want. We live in market states, where the market drives decisions over reason tied to national security, so their oohing and aahing over the attacks is understandable from that perspective.

    Within minutes of the attack, a localized terrorist attack on a media office became globalized. It continues to make front page news (an ancient phrase now) globally promoting fear and grossly exaggerating the scale of the event. What would be considered a relatively minor tactical action during war, or a tragic criminal action if it was a mass murder based on criminal motivations, has become a globally strategic event because it was terrorism conducted in the West.

    This gives terrorists a considerable amount of relative power to create a disproportionate level of fear. If I watch the news four days a day, I relieve the attack four times. Equally important, and tied to the sins of the media is the grossly disproportionate expenditure of funds on security measures by many countries in response to this event. I suspect most airports around the world have increased security, and many cities in Europe have increased security presence in heavily populated areas, etc. Of course increased security in subway stations and airports doesn't stop another attack like the one that just happened.

    From a limited portion of the land domain it transfers to the information domain and effects the world. The terrorists are more effective at globalizing perception than the state actors opposing them, and this needs to change.

  2. #2
    Registered User raptor10's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    D.C.
    Posts
    9

    Default

    What were the true effects of the attack? Did they accomplish their desired behavioral change? Or did the international community react in the opposite way that they intended?

    Just because you have an audience doesn't mean they are affected in the way that you want.
    Who shall I send? ME

  3. #3
    Council Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Posts
    3,169

    Default

    Sadly they furthered their strategy. Operation Hemmrage is focused on slowly weakening the West through attacks that cause the West to spend more on security. The social contract between the state and it's people requires the state to protect its citizens or lose legitimacy. It is impossible to protect everything which is why we need a proactive strategy.

    The second impact is more significant, which is deepening the tension between traditional Europeans and Muslims. Already there have been several attacks on Muslims throughout Europe that are not widely reported on. This will push more recruits into extremist groups. This has been going on for years. We just don't appreciate a death by a thousand cuts strategy.
    Last edited by Bill Moore; 01-11-2015 at 02:23 PM.

  4. #4
    Council Member davidbfpo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    13,366

    Default As I watched Paris marching

    Excellent, thought provoking post Bill and I will try to respond:
    Quote Originally Posted by Bill Moore View Post
    This will be short, and if there is a better forum to put this in feel free to move it.

    The recent terrorist attacks has really hit home the obvious to me. Terrorism by its nature seeks to propagate the effects of terror well beyond its point of origin by leveraging the media. To deny that is an attempt to separate terror from its true nature, if it doesn't do this then it is something else.
    We all too often forget terrorism is armed propaganda. Terrorism rarely attacks 'hard' targets, such US embassies - though it can happen; it prefers 'soft' often unguarded targets and always where the public are.

    Reminds me of the Zen Koan like riddle, "If a tree falls in the forest and there no one to hear it, does it make a noise?"

    The tree certainly made a noise, if one associates it with the recent terrorist attacks in Paris. Much of the Western world is clued to the news of the attack. In America, CNN, Fox, and other 24 hour news programs cover it as the expense of almost all other news, even when there are no actual updates. When there are no updates they bring in talking heads to speculate and promote theories on what the attack means. Can it happen here? What should we do? 24 hours a day, and it will continue until another news worthy item appears. These media outlets are witting or unwitting proxies for the terrorists. They are doing exactly what the terrorists want. We live in market states, where the market drives decisions over reason tied to national security, so their oohing and aahing over the attacks is understandable from that perspective.
    There is no better contrast to the 24/7 coverage of events in Paris, than the reported deaths of two thousand in Baga, a small town in the north-east of Nigeria, at the hands of Boko Haram - where there is no external access, nor to my knowledge social media reporting.

    The main media are competitive, so none can leave the subject alone, especially if the newer broadcasters (CNN & Sky) are reporting.

    Within minutes of the attack, a localized terrorist attack on a media office became globalized. It continues to make front page news (an ancient phrase now) globally promoting fear and grossly exaggerating the scale of the event. What would be considered a relatively minor tactical action during war, or a tragic criminal action if it was a mass murder based on criminal motivations, has become a globally strategic event because it was terrorism conducted in the West.
    It is a cliche that we live in an open, transparent world with 24/7/365 news reporting - as large parts of the world to my knowledge - do not have the same news coverage. China, most of Africa and the Arab world come to mind.

    The liberal democracies or the 'Free World' have often claimed to be open and transparent, with a free press for example. So what has changed recently?

    There are two countervailing factors. Technology has enabled news reporting, in scope, more imortantly in speed or pace. Corporate and national news media are now competing with transnational media and citizen reporting - primarily of imagery, as the assault on the Parisian supermarket showed.

    In liberal democracies there remains a strong national capital focus, where the media are concentrated. Excluding high profile events, good & bad news and VIP activity provincial cities and below rarely get extensive coverage. Airports are an exception, partly as AQ and others still appear to chose them as targets.

    This gives terrorists a considerable amount of relative power to create a disproportionate level of fear. If I watch the news four days a day, I relieve the attack four times. Equally important, and tied to the sins of the media is the grossly disproportionate expenditure of funds on security measures by many countries in response to this event. I suspect most airports around the world have increased security, and many cities in Europe have increased security presence in heavily populated areas, etc. Of course increased security in subway stations and airports doesn't stop another attack like the one that just happened.
    In Paris the French managed when it came to the assaults to get the broadcasters to have a very slight delay in broadcasting - the BBC has acknowledged this IIRC. Some journalists had to be located and ejected.

    During 'The Troubles' the UK government tried for a time to ban the official spokesmen for the PIRA, instead their voices were dumbed away and an actor spoke their words - which was laughable and ineffective.

    As to the security response, invariably at airports and London train stations in the UK, is little more than security theatre. Are extra, armed police deployed based on a threat assessment or the need for suitable imagery on our TV screens, ostensibly to reassure us?

    There is widening gap between the traditional 'national security' assessment and response compared to the more pressing, not new need for 'public security' - the safety of the people, not the state.

    From a limited portion of the land domain it transfers to the information domain and effects the world. The terrorists are more effective at globalizing perception than the state actors opposing them, and this needs to change.
    I typed this as the mass march slowly walks through the centre of Paris. The BBC coverage is rather euphoric, a million people marching in solidarity; it is almost as if the mass marches against national terrorism in Italy and Spain had never happened.
    davidbfpo

  5. #5
    Council Member davidbfpo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    13,366

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by raptor10 View Post
    What were the true effects of the attack? Did they accomplish their desired behavioral change? Or did the international community react in the opposite way that they intended?

    Just because you have an audience doesn't mean they are affected in the way that you want.
    Raptor10,

    I am unsure what the attackers motives were beyond revenge - after the publication of cartoons by Charlie Hebdo. There are those who consider the death of the lady French police officer disrupted an attack on a Jewish school 100m away and so seizing the kosher supermarket may indicate a hatred of the Jewish community (seen before in earlier attacks in 2012, by a lone wolf).

    Time will tell if French policies are affected.

    I have long thought apart from the profound armed propaganda impact the attackers 'desired behavioral change' is not in us, but amongst those who are already angry and who lack the motivation to violently act. A "Yes we can" objective.
    davidbfpo

  6. #6
    Council Member davidbfpo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    13,366

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Bill Moore View Post
    Sadly they furthered their strategy. Operation Hemmrage is focused on slowly weakening the West through attacks that cause the West to spend more on security. The social contract between the state and it's people requires the state to protect its citizens or lose legitimacy. It is impossible to protect everything which is why we need a proactive strategy.
    Bill,

    I think the British public is aware of the "drip, drip" approach taken by the violent Irish Nationalists (PIRA and now the 'dissidents') which aimed (still does for some) to undermine the British role in Northern Ireland. Non-jihadist terrorism in Western Europe has historically sought achievable aims, national self-determination mainly or the rather remote aims for a huge societal change - the 'Red Brigades' for example.

    Jihadist terrorism is different, in part as its aims are not primarily here, rather in Muslim majority countries and its use at times of mass casualty attacks alongside its general use of violence.

    The 'social contract' between the state and the citzenry is a complex matter. Security -v- freedom / liberty is not a zero sum decision. We maybe heading for a time where legitimacy must publicly take into account the likelhood of successful attacks unless we lose freedom for supposed security.

    As many have commented this week France has a very strict legal regime, capable security forces, tight gun control, pervasive surveillance and more this still did not stop this week's attacks.

    We must avoid making all Muslims a 'suspect community' and lessen their loyalty to their home. That a Muslim police officer was murdered in Paris, alongside a black lady police officer (religion unknown) and a Muslim police colonel commanded one of the assaults should make people think.

    Back to Bill:
    The second impact is more significant, which is deepening the tension between traditional Europeans and Muslims. Already there have been several attacks on Muslims throughout Europe that are not widely reported on. This will push more recruits into extremist groups. This has been going on for years. We just don't appreciate a death by a thousand cuts strategy.
    Yes there have been attacks in France, very few, although one could expect personal attacks are not currently been reported to the police let alone the media.

    There can be tension, in part as some will always oppose 'newcomers' and adjestment can be slow - for example speaking the local language.
    davidbfpo

  7. #7
    Council Member AmericanPride's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    "Turn left at Greenland." - Ringo Starr
    Posts
    965

    Default

    While I disagree that the exclusive or primary of terrorism is (always) propaganda, I think unfortunately that democratization (free speech, free press, etc) goes hand in hand with the risk that modern terrorism will occur and will accomplish this propagation effect you describe. Same dilemma with copycat murderers and so on. The counterfactual of course is whether an information blackout would mitigate the goals of the terrorists.
    Last edited by AmericanPride; 01-11-2015 at 08:54 PM.
    When I am weaker than you, I ask you for freedom because that is according to your principles; when I am stronger than you, I take away your freedom because that is according to my principles. - Louis Veuillot

Similar Threads

  1. The Way Of War
    By Taiko in forum Futurists & Theorists
    Replies: 31
    Last Post: 01-08-2013, 06:42 AM
  2. New technologies and war legislation: a progress?
    By M-A Lagrange in forum Law Enforcement
    Replies: 27
    Last Post: 02-11-2012, 08:37 PM
  3. The Army Capstone Concept: the Army wants your comments
    By Westhawk in forum TRADOC Senior Leaders Conference
    Replies: 247
    Last Post: 03-19-2011, 12:00 AM
  4. Time to review the military mindset?
    By RobSentse in forum The Coalition Speaks
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 01-02-2011, 07:07 AM

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •