Information Warfare and the Idea of The State - Russia-US Case

    Photo Courtesy of Television Series: The Last Ship

  Background

The choice of the topic for the study was informed by the controversies surrounding the US elections in 2016 to 2017. There was founded allegations on technology-guided information warfare which was attributed to the Russian Internet Agency. This attribution is one in a sequence of complaints across Europe targeted at Russia. Information warfare, manifests itself in many ways and has existed before the period under study, however the researcher chose to narrow down to the dynamic of information warfare that uses technology. According to several scholars, information warfare is targeted on manipulations of the information systems, which they define as a combination of “knowledge, beliefs and decision-making processes.” Manipulation or rather distortion of information systems is carried through disinformation and misinformation campaigns. Russia in this case ran online platforms that misinformed the American public in order to stir violence.

On the other hand, what information warfare seeks to manipulate are attributes of one of the key pillars of a state; The idea of the state. Barry Buzan, argues that there is the physical attribute of the state which is a summation of the population and the territory, secondly institutions of the state and the main attribute which gives foundation to the other two which he calls the idea of the state. This idea, brings together identities, traditions, beliefs and ideologies.

To the United States which fell victim to the information warfare, its beliefs, ideologies like diversity and civil liberties and the identities of its people like religious and racial identities were polarised in order to cause instability. This study was therefore presented as The Role of Information warfare in challenging the idea of the state: Russia-US Case Study (2017)

 Study Objectives

The study therefore, was seeking to assess how information warfare challenges the idea of the state in this case the United States; examine the tools and operations of the Russians and determine the vulnerability of the US public to this warfare. 

 Theoretical Underpinnings

Constructivism is one of the new theories in the field of international relations which emerged due to the inefficiencies of the realist and liberal schools of thought. It contests the material arguments of realism by asserting that the social relations constructs are what make states[1]. The constructivist theory emphasizes on identities, traditions, practices which can be widely recognised by the people and some that can be institutionalized. In the context of this study, the concept of threats gets to be understood not on the material or idealistic approaches but rather as social constructions. The theory further, gives a very relevant constitution and causation between the agents (actors) and the societal structures. The structures which will configure the environment shape the actors and mainly informs their preferences as well as interests.

The structures are normative and ideational and in particular some mechanisms within the structures contribute to the actors’ influence. Scholars have argued for three such mechanisms: Imagination, Communication and constraint. The main mechanism this study will consider is the communication mechanism which Wendt argues that it “Provides a linguistic or moral court of appeal”[2] . This means that through communication embedded in the structures of society, actors are able to influence and justify some of their actions which would serve their interests. The study is based on manipulation of the idea of the state and constructivist scholars have given two identities of the state which in this context would greatly inform its idea; that of a social identity which is based on the international status the state assumes and the most critical one which is the corporate identity that sums together ideological and cultural factors that sum up a state.

The concentration of Wendt under this identity was on the structural contexts, systemic processes and strategic practices[3]. This study will therefore, further abstract the whole theory of constructivism to work with the concepts of: agents, normative and ideational structures, the communication mechanism within the structures and the corporate identity given to the state. It is possible therefore to conceptualize the abstract idea of a state, which will then inform how its internal security environment operates. Having embedded the theoretical provisions of constructivism, the operations of information warfare are also put into place, especially as targets; the knowledge system, beliefs and traditions. A congruence is immediately established between the idea of the state and information warfare. This congruence is very important in the analytical process.

Racial and religious identities exist in the United States, however there had been better co-existence before the period under study. Diverse races like the African-American, Mexican, Spanish and many more have occupied the United States. These races, are expected, as the idea of the state suggests, to exist cohesively due to the convergence of diversities under the American nationhood. There can arise conflicts however, along the differences in identity. The misunderstanding can be dampened in the event that some of the issues are addressed inclusively. Information warfare comes in to use the racial differences so as to stoke tensions. To an external enemy that is an added advantage, since exacerbating the tensions covertly compromises the national security of the United States.

The socially constructed environment characterised by traditions and to a large extent identities is very vulnerable to information warfare. The successful disinformation of the American public dislodged the ideals and institutionalized practices. Black Lives Matter, an organization in the United States that advocates for the rights of the African-Americans was for example impersonated on social media and the information it spread were radical and inciting its followers against what it labelled as “White supremacy.” For example, data put forward by a reputable news agency indicates that there was formed, the BlackMatterUS online platform, by the Russian Internet Research Agency which secretly appealed to African-American activists to plan protests against police brutality. The facebook, twitter and instagram accounts had been suspended by relevant institutions and so it only relied on its website[4] Attached still to this website is another calling itself Blackfist which offered self-defence materials to its followers online. It publicized very threatening information like “Let them know that black power matters”[5].

These online platforms as earlier pointed out had their accounts and pages suspended except for the websites which still exist to date. The ability of such information to challenge cohesiveness, resolution of differences and tolerance of differences in ideologies and racial identities is very high. There was a record high number of violence in the United States.

 It pegged this identity factor to immigration and gun violence. Moving towards the electioneering period, the United States experienced a lot of violence incidences that were based to a great extent on fabricated information.

It is therefore possible to figure out the security challenges, threats and risks based on socially constructed practices. The belief system of the communities or rather nations within the United States, configures the basis for their interests. This then details how conflicts are structured, to the advantage of the information warfare-aggressor. One can conclude that because of the congruence between the idea of the state and information warfare; which are the beliefs, traditions, knowledge and identities, the former can be compromised by the latter. This nexus has also been fronted by constructivism as the most important objects of analysis in the security context internationally and locally.

 Study Findings

On the first objective, the study found out that through falsified information the US public was more divided, especially along racial and religious lines. The African-Americans demonstrated, engaged in street fights and even shot the Native Americans. Activists that advocated for African-American rights were duped into supporting an anonymous group calling itself Blackfist which ran a website that trained them on self-defence tactics and shared edited videos showing black people being shot by white police officers. Some of those videos could not be authenticated. The religious identity was also attacked, with Muslim-Americans bearing the brunt of profiling. Information warfare that manifested in disinformation strategies was able to cause division, intolerance and instability in some states within the United States. The study finds that the idea of the state in its most stable case would result in a better national security position, it however like in the US case be influenced by information warfare.

Beliefs, ideas, knowledge, practices and identities are the societal structures which inform the idea of the state while to information warfare they are its targets. The idea of the state will then result as a dependent variable to the independent information warfare. In conclusion, the study finds out that the occurrence of violence and identity-based divisions justifies the effect information warfare had on the idea of the state. The philosophical foundation behind the United States was successfully distorted.

On the second objective, the researcher identified a sequence which outlined the operations of the Russians. The first instance was identification of the target. The target’s characteristics for example the public and its diverse differentiation is outlined then the institutions which are to be hacked for information are also identified. The Democratic Party for example was hacked and several information released later. After identification of the target, hacking is done. The tools which were in the form of spam mails, mimicked profiles and redirecting of institution platforms were used. Some of the hackers identified by the FBI and many other European agencies were like APT 29, COZY BEAR, APT 28 and Operation Pawn Storm. The hackers establish remote access on the computer databases through which they phish for information. The third face after the hacking is alteration of that information to fit the objective of the information warfare agents. The final phase is dissemination of the altered information.

Statistics show that 65% of US Citizens access social media platforms. The bots and trolls as they have come to be mentioned are fake profiles of individuals used to spread the information. They suffice on social media, having identities and details which resemble those of normal US Citizens. According to a research by the RAND Corporation, “the trolls are on standby 24 hours a day, in 12-hour shifts and each a daily quota of 135 posted comments of at least 200 characters.” That is a lot of information when the number of trolls and bots is factored in. The bots are most prevalent on twitter and facebook. A NATO study also found that these bots and trolls behaviour was characterized by “sharing information not supported by sources, pasting links without commenting, posting off-topic comments and engaging in fabricated conspiracy theories”. The repetitive nature and high volume of information these tools convey, especially at a digital age have a very big impact on the state’s security. The other further risk is on the target these tools are used against; elections. This is a very volatile activity especially when it is mobilized along identity lines.

Facebook also received a share of its use. From paid adverts to fake facebook pages, as its Vice President of Policy and Communications, shared with the US Congress intelligence committee. He averred that they found out most of the adverts shared socially and politically divisive information touching mostly on issues of immigration and race. Statistically, he indicates that up to 10 million people in the US saw the divisive information and on trolls he linked to the Internet Research Agency; a total of 120 trolls existed that would generate 80,000 posts resulting in an outreach of 49 million Americans. Upon sharing these posts the total reach nearly 150 million viewers. He points out that they were aimed at exploiting America’s cultural rivalries. The figure below outlines the key main phases of the Russian operations.

The final objective determined the vulnerability of the American public to information warfare. The main cause for vulnerability has also been identified to be a result of the large volumes of information that is disseminated. Experimental psychologists argue that greater volumes of messages from multiple sources can persuade.[6] Bearing in mind the fragility of knowledge itself, the public in the United States, heavily relied on information churned out on social media platforms without taking the initiative to clarify on authenticity. As earlier indicated, the bots were operated around the clock and each had a wide reach to the audience. The belief system was the compromised, which stoked tensions across the United States. The logic behind vulnerability is then pegged on less knowledge on the part of the victim and the psychological advantage that the disinformation agent holds from multiple platforms of dissemination to the staged leaks from hackings. As the research institutions also established, the key targeted events are the volatile ones like elections which within it has dynamics of identity, traditions and grievances. The need for information during the electioneering period is very high and especially at this digital age. Technology itself is also very elusive since, it is hard to determine authenticity of pictures, videos and even voice messages because of the internet’s decentralization of information control. This amorphous nature of the internet frameworks and technology easily manipulates the public’s perceptions.

This study finds that the public being the least informed, is the softest target for information warfare. Theoretically, how the security threats are constructed is also very different between the experts and the public. To the experts it is easy for them to understand the algorithm with which information warfare is waged, right from the hacking to the dissemination of information that have been altered.

                                                                 
 Conclusion

This study concludes that information warfare in its contemporary form, which is advanced by technology can amount to a lot of threats to state security. This is because, by targeting the objective value of the state-idea, it can propagate internal strife and disharmony. It is also evident from the findings that the United States which was the case study felt victim to this type of warfare during its 2017 electioneering period.

The nature in which its public and further institutions were targeted and successfully hacked and misinformed respectfully should be a learning point to other states. The labelling of disinformation wars as simply ‘fake news’ is not enough to conceptualize the threats it has to national security. Such a labelling fails to project the need to understand motives of the warfare agents.

The Russian agencies owing to trails of the hackings are responsible for the disinformation wars across Europe and the United States. The replication of this could be possible and information warfare rather than nuclear wars is the next phase of the security sector evolution.

Theoretically, the realm of social constructions is key in the conceptualization of internal security concerns compared to material concepts in realism. The social attributes influence or rather inform the material interests.

Technology has stood out to be a driving agent of information warfare due to its ability to assume anonymity and confine itself to the covert sphere of action. The two phases in such technology guided operations; hacking and dissemination of information are greatly covert and yet they act as the interface between the aggressor and the victim. It is important for governments, private sector institutions, the public and even civil society to conform to the contemporary security-threat field since its effect keeps growing each day. The hypotheses was tested through the data that was gathered and it is  true from the events that happened in the United States that Russian operations were efficient and effective in mounting information warfare and this affected its institutions as well.

                                                                
 Recommendation

Several recommendations were made by the study but this one below particularly, stirred much debate with those that have accessed the recommendations of the study.

1.      Establishment of a vulnerability index which will help rank publicly discussed issues in a way that those that require greatest attention receive it. This will be more of preventive measure on the security agencies. The vulnerability index will have values of 1 to 5 with the least value being the least vulnerable (normal disagreements) to the highest value being most vulnerable or rather volatile. Policymakers upon using this tool will also be able to come up with short-term policies or legislations and even long-term plans to address the concerns, debates or grievances among the public. This will also act as a confidence-building mechanism to the state institutions among the public. The index is illustrated below

Index 1	Index 2	Index 3	Index 4	Index 5
Normal national disagreements	Less Vulnerable	Controversial	Vulnerable	Highly Vulnerable
E.g. in policy, laws or programs but they remain driven by knowledge, ideologies and approach differences. Trade and tariff in the US appear on this index	At this index, the concerns gather momentum and conspicuous all over the media, trends on social media but the knowledge and ideational conversations still persist. On social media disinformation is minimal.	The public begins to increase their response to the issues being discussed. The debates however start shaping both the political and social dimensions of a state. The conflicts suffice but are minimal. Disinformation also suffices e.g. the LGBT issue	At this level the public is very engaging, identity lines suffice and on social media and physically these groupings are founded. At this level fabricated information increase. Likely, conflict begins to take shape along such identities.	Recorded violence, retaliatory attacks, large volumes of information that is unauthenticated and probabilities of ungoverned spaces within the state. Immigration, gun laws and racial relations in the US could be placed here

Table 1 of 5.2 outlining the vulnerability index for security agencies and policymakers

                                                       REFERENCES

Alina.P & Spencer.B (2018); The future of political warfare; Russia, The West and the coming age of digital competition; Brookings Institution-Robert Fobsch Foundation, Washington D.C

Bluntschli, J.K (2000); The Theory of The State; Batoche Books

Buzan.B, (1983) PEOPLE, STATES and FEAR: The National Security Problem in International Relations; WHEATSHEAF LTD, Sussex

Hamilton, Samuel N., Wendy L. Miller, Allen Ott, and O. Sami Saydjari. "Challenges in applying game theory to the domain of information warfare." In Information Survivability Workshop (ISW). 2002.

Helmus, Todd C., Elizabeth Bodine-Baron, Andrew Radin, Madeline Magnuson, Joshua Mendelsohn, William Marcellino, Andriy Bega, and Zev Winkelman, Russian Social Media Influence: Understanding Russian Propaganda in Eastern Europe. Santa Monica, CA: RAND Corporation, 2018. https://www.rand.org/pubs/research_reports/RR2237.html

https://www.businessinsider.com/russian-trolls-blackmattersus-reddit-2017-10?IR=T  Accessed on 31^st August 2018 – 16:34 pm

https://newsroom.fb.com/news/2017/10/hard-questions-russian-ads-delivered-to-congress/ Accessed on 30^th August 2018 – 22:37 pm

https://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2017/10/russia-facebook-race/542796/

Accessed on 31^st August 2018 – 11:00 am

http://www.smawins.com/Content/Files/SMA%20Elections%20171106.pdf accessed 30^th April 2018 – 22:34 pm

http://www.worldometers.info/world-population/us-population/

HURD, IAN. “Constructivism Theory.” January 2008: 298-316

Kux. D; SOVIET ACTIVE MEASURES AND DISINFORMATION; OVERVIEW AND ASSESSMENT; Parameters, Journal of the US War College

Libicki, Martin C. What is information warfare? NATIONAL DEFENSE UNIV WASHINGTON DC INST FOR NATIONAL STRATEGIC STUDIES, 1995.

Molander, Roger C., Andrew Riddile, Peter A. Wilson, and Stephanie Williamson. Strategic information warfare: A new face of war. Rand Corporation, 1996.

NUMBERS, FACTS AND TRENDS SHAPING THE WORLD Pew Research Center, October, 2016, “The Political Environment on Social Media”

Paul, Christopher and Miriam Matthews, The Russian "Firehose of Falsehood" Propaganda Model: Why It Might Work and Options to Counter It. Santa Monica, CA: RAND Corporation, 2016. https://www.rand.org/pubs/perspectives/PE198.html

Reus-Smit. C. “Constructivism”. In Theories of International Relations, edited by Burchill. S et al (3^rd eds) Palgrave Macmillan, 2005

Szafranski. R (Col); A Theory of Information Warfare; Preparing for 2020; Department of Defence, Air University

Wolfers.A; “National Security as an ambiguous symbol” Political Science Quarterly, Vol. 67, 4 (1952)

---

[1] HURD, IAN. “Constructivism Theory.” January 2008, pg. 299

[2] Reus-Smit. C. “Constructivism”. In Theories of International Relations, edited by Burchill. S et al (3^rd eds) Palgrave Macmillan, 2005

[3] Ibid

[4] https://www.businessinsider.com/russian-trolls-blackmattersus-reddit-2017-10?IR=T  Accessed on 31^st August 2018 - 16:34 pm

[5] Ibid

[6] Paul, Christopher and Miriam Matthews, The Russian "Firehose of Falsehood" Propaganda Model: Why It Might Work and Options to Counter It. Santa Monica, CA: RAND Corporation, 2016. https://www.rand.org/pubs/perspectives/PE198.html  

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.