Winning the Information War in Ukraine

 

As the war in Ukraine enters its 8^th day, it continues to dominate global headlines. The war, the international response and the wider stories surrounding this most brutal of conflicts remains the main global news story, as nations unite in condemnation of Russia’s barbaric acts.

Perhaps the most powerful lesson emerging at the moment is not that of military operations, or use of specific weapons or tactics, but rather the sheer power of the information environment and how it can be exploited to shape perception. Ukraine is the first time that a war has been played out in a western society which has full and immediate access to information, imagery and insight about the war and its impact.

While the 1991 Gulf War remains the ‘CNN War’ in the sense that it was the first time that the world got to see a war occurring far from home in near real time, the 2022 Ukraine war is perhaps the ‘Smart Phone War’.

Image by Ministry of Defence; © Crown copyright

A week in and we can see several key lessons emerging. Firstly, the ability to capture imagery and broadcast it effectively and quickly shapes the media narrative and public understanding of the conflict. This has been a war filled with timely imagery that pulls no punches in hiding the sheer brutality of the conflict, and the horrors being inflicted by the Russian invaders.

The conflict lands so intensely with people because it is not filtered, sanitised or hidden behind press conferences or carefully crafted media reports. People can see the impact of what is going on within seconds, and share it globally. The speed of information advance is incredible, and impossible to control.

This highlights the next lesson – you cannot control the information battlespace, but you can shape it to reflect your interests. The Ukrainian Government has demonstrated a social media masterclass in its use of social media channels to broadcast relentless messages of resistance, determination and to build national cohesion and unity.

The material being produced to help shape public understanding, from imagery of President Zelensky leading his nation to moving short clips trying to unify the nation speak to a media team that understand the importance of showing the world their suffering.

It is debatable if, whether this conflict had occurred 20 years ago, the world would have been so unified and united in its condemnation and response. It is the ability to show so quickly what is happening, and to make it so easy to disseminate that ensures people learn and understand, and in turn are outraged at this appalling act of war by President Putin. By contrast 20 years ago, footage would be slower to emerge, people would learn by the evening news bulletins or the papers the next day, and the intimacy and immediacy of the conflict would be lacking.

In seizing the social media space, and making every effort to exploit it, the Ukrainian Government has galvanised the world and helped build a shared sense of determination and resistance. This is the war that has proven that even in the face of potentially terrible odds, it is possible to build a will to fight.

Social media too has been used to maintain this morale and social cohesion – the imagery of the President on the front line, or of short quotes like ‘Russian Warship Go Fuck Yourself’ have energised the nation and helped quash rumours. An open information environment, enabling people to learn and see what is happening, versus a locked down one has unified Ukraine, and brought the nation together.

In a similar manner, the excellent initiative shown by Ukrainian officials in exploiting their enemies mistakes on social media have helped quash the myth of the invincible Russian war machine.

For example, the film footage of APCs being stolen by tractors, of Russian troops being beaten by a supermarket door, or by the Ukrainian equivalent of Inland Revenue confirming that tax is not payable on seized Russian vehicles has helped build morale and a sense that Ukraine can fight to win.

This footage of spirited resistance, humiliation of the enemies’ basic mistakes, or even teaching Ukrainians how to drive stolen tanks and also an adept use of wider social media or other channels – such as trying to expel Russia from the UN, or setting up a helpline for Russian mothers concerned on their sons, points to a force that is decisively gaining an information advantage.

The goodwill generated by these tales of resistance also help build wider support – the internet has helped propagate huge amounts of imagery showing destroyed Russian vehicles, tales of surrender and of an Army acting as if it is punch-drunk and half beaten. By bringing people on side, and dominating the information space, it has made it harder for Russia to make their case, or to try and undermine the Ukrainian will to fight.

The Internet has become a nakedly partisan chamber, sharing information, trying to showcase where the enemy is and trying to help do small things to shape Ukrainian resistance. By contrast Russian efforts here appear shambolic at best, and utterly divorced from reality.

A key lesson is that 20^th century dictator like propaganda stories may work on an ill-educated populace cut off from the world (e.g. North Korea), but it is hard to hide the truth from a population used to engaging online. Putin’s regime has misjudged how to handle the information space, relying on tired tropes of ‘Nazis’ to try to build popular support, but ignoring that for any Russian under the age of 77, the Great Patriotic War occurred before their lifetime.

It is all well and good trying to unite people under the banner of defeating fascism, but this is a difficult sell to an intelligent educated younger population, who are aware of the outside world and want a Western style way of life. Trying to convince people who have travelled that Ukraine is a hot bed of Nazi style fascists that require eradication is tough to those who can see the Western news, or who will have to fight if conscripted.

The risk Putin runs is that in his desire to recreate the Soviet order, he is reliant on the post-Soviet generation to deliver it, and this generation seem to show relatively little appetite for recreating a world that vanished before they were born.

By lacking an effective information campaign, the Russian Government is struggling to make the case for its war domestically, and unrest is likely to grow in the weeks and months ahead as sanctions bite, jobs are lost, and access to the western lifestyle that the under 30s took for granted ebbs away, possibly for many years to come. Will this be the tipping point for the regime?

If there is to be a revolution, it will in part be spotted on open-source intelligence via social media. This crisis has reminded us again of the value of the internet in providing credible open-source intelligence material, which helps shape the narrative and records the facts.

From sites covering Russian vehicle losses, to assessment of bomb damage to confirm that Russian weapons are being used to strike Ukrainian targets, the internet open-source intelligence community has been invaluable in helping assess and record the war. It is a good reminder to military commanders that in future operations, they cannot take for granted that the enemy will not have access to quality OSINT, or that their movements, losses and operations won’t be reported on social media for all to see and monitor.

Understanding this and how best to engage in the information space is going to be a key lesson for Western governments. For HMG trying to work out how to communicate messaging, particularly on defence matters and getting the right balance of wording on a tweet correct, possibly taking minutes or hours to approve via a ‘chop chain’, and not find the message drowned out amid thousands of other tweets is going to be hard.

There is a risk that in the desire to do the perfect ‘policy compliant on message’ tweet, the initiative has been lost and by the time it is approved, the narrative has already been settled. By contrast, too quick a tweet response in itself raises questions of accuracy and honesty.

A major challenge that government communicators will need to consider moving forward is how to balance off accuracy, timeliness and whether social media is a ‘weapon’ to be use to advance campaign objectives, or an objective statement of fact. Could, for example, social media be used for disinformation or to try to hide or conceal western military activity, or should it always be an objective and balanced reporting of the truth – even if commenting on reports may compromise operational security.

There is no certainty that the next time UK forces enter a conflict situation that the information war will not be targeting their people and units – in those circumstances is the UK well placed to fight and dominate the information space, and if not, how does the media capability need to change to be more effective?

 Understanding this debate is crucial, because we cannot always assume that we will have control of the narrative, support of the local population and an utterly inept opponent unable to not master social media – one day it may be the case that we are on the information backfoot and if so, how do we respond and what will it take to regain the initiative and win the information space back to being aligned with our interest and not our foes?

One final key reminder, not lesson, for it takes conflict to remind us of it, is that this war has shown us the power and importance of the media in broadcasting the truth. To watch journalists, stay in Ukraine, at considerable risk to themselves to tell the story of these desperate hours is laudable and moving.

They could leave and escape, but to stay, to record and to tell the balanced story about what is going on is so important. It is at times like this we should be grateful for the dedication and commitment of the print and broadcast media to stay and tell the stories that so desperately need to be told.

As the horrors of Ukraine continue to unfold, we must consider all these issues, and think about how the information war is being fought. Without doubt we are in the first mainstream global social media war (not a localised conflict), but this will equally not be the last. We must learn the lessons here and be ready for whatever comes next.