How to win in information war

How to win in information war

With the development of advanced technologies and the internet, a victory in the information space is just as important or sometimes more important than success on the real battlefields of modern conflicts. Technologies of information wars have achieved a great level, modernizing on the platforms of real wars in the Middle East, North Africa and Europe. Surprisingly, winning an information war does not require an evidential basis, true or semi-true facts. The most important thing is to provoke emotions from the public. As soon as a society wakes up and starts thinking logically, generals of information battles throw in a new jaw-dropping story to prevent people from coming to their senses and to make them forget about the last sensation.

Sergey Grinyayev, the director general of the Center for Strategic Evaluations and Forecasts, is confident that such an approach is overt in the strategy of the information wars against Russia in the context of events in Ukraine: “At the start of the year there was shooting at the Maidan. There have been much talk that Moscow was behind the events. Many believed that an open international investigation of the events is needed, and that the involvement of Russia in the events would doubtlessly be exposed. Not only are we unable to see the results of the investigation, the topic of the Maidan shootings has been successfully removed from the mass media space.”

Grinyayev compared the escalation of information pressure of Russia to an avalanche: “The tragedy of the Malaysian Boeing shot down over the territory of Ukraine was a certain peak, when it was declared without any evidence that the plane was shot down by at least anti-air defenses of the resistance with Russian officers behind them who pressed the ill-fated button, if not Russian anti-air defenses directly. As soon as the Russian Defense Ministry presented convincing evidence about the instance, as soon as the harsh, principled position of Russia in the need to investigate the tragedy within the framework of international law and within the framework of the international committee of the ICAO was voiced, information activity over the issue started dropping. According to the latest information, Ukraine and some Western countries signed an agreement on non-disclosure of the results of the Malaysian Boeing catastrophe until a common agreement is reached.”

According to Grinyayev, this has not been the first year of the information war against Russia: “It is associated with the foreign political course our country has been maintaining on a set of problematic issues on the international agenda: Syria, Afghanistan, relations with Iran, formation of bilateral partner relations with countries of Western Europe, mainly Germany, which some financial and industrial groups, financial circles of the West dislike.”

Vladimir Yevseyev, the director of the Center for Socio-Political Studies, the head of a section at the Institute of CIS Countries, insists that the first time Russia had serious problems with an information war happened in August 2008. The current situation differs “by the absolutely different scale, the absolutely different lack of principles and absolutely different resources used.” Yevseyev believes that Russia survived the information war of 2008 relatively peacefully but “has not fully realized the situation seen then. When a very harsh information war started this year, Russia turned out to be unprepared.” The political analyst is steadfast that Russia needs to take the Syrian experience into account. “How were the Syrian events covered in Europe? The only topic in all newspapers, all magazines, was how hard the life of Syrian refugees was. There was absolutely nothing about the life of Syrians in Syria itself, about things really happening on Syrian territory. Just then, it became clear that the picture was twisted. When in August of the previous year, when chemical weapons were used in Eastern Ghouta, there were no facts to prove that the army of Bashar Assad used the weapons,” said Yevseyev.

In his opinion, those who are waging an information war against Russia have a wide range of opportunities to give information they want on the territory of Russia. “For example, some respectable information agency gets information from Kiev, you can at least change the terms! There is no need to write in the Russia mass media that they are separatists and terrorists. The mass media often lack simple professionalism because they take the information of the West without evaluating it impartially, what is happening, sometimes even not understanding what is happening, trying to create something, as they think, very necessary. In reality, it is not just a substitution of the picture, it is a very serious distortion of information in our country. A very big archive of information used by the West holds no water at all. But why broadcast such information?” wonders Vladimir Yevseyev, urging Russian journalists to be honest and fair.

Russia needs to study own and foreign experienceWith the development of advanced technologies and the internet, a victory in the information space is just as important or sometimes more important than success on the real battlefields of modern conflicts. Technologies of information wars have achieved a great level, modernizing on the platforms of real wars in the Middle East, North Africa and Europe. Surprisingly, winning an information war does not require an evidential basis, true or semi-true facts. The most important thing is to provoke emotions from the public. As soon as a society wakes up and starts thinking logically, generals of information battles throw in a new jaw-dropping story to prevent people from coming to their senses and to make them forget about the last sensation.Sergey Grinyayev, the director general of the Center for Strategic Evaluations and Forecasts, is confident that such an approach is overt in the strategy of the information wars against Russia in the context of events in Ukraine: “At the start of the year there was shooting at the Maidan. There have been much talk that Moscow was behind the events. Many believed that an open international investigation of the events is needed, and that the involvement of Russia in the events would doubtlessly be exposed. Not only are we unable to see the results of the investigation, the topic of the Maidan shootings has been successfully removed from the mass media space.”Grinyayev compared the escalation of information pressure of Russia to an avalanche: “The tragedy of the Malaysian Boeing shot down over the territory of Ukraine was a certain peak, when it was declared without any evidence that the plane was shot down by at least anti-air defenses of the resistance with Russian officers behind them who pressed the ill-fated button, if not Russian anti-air defenses directly. As soon as the Russian Defense Ministry presented convincing evidence about the instance, as soon as the harsh, principled position of Russia in the need to investigate the tragedy within the framework of international law and within the framework of the international committee of the ICAO was voiced, information activity over the issue started dropping. According to the latest information, Ukraine and some Western countries signed an agreement on non-disclosure of the results of the Malaysian Boeing catastrophe until a common agreement is reached.”According to Grinyayev, this has not been the first year of the information war against Russia: “It is associated with the foreign political course our country has been maintaining on a set of problematic issues on the international agenda: Syria, Afghanistan, relations with Iran, formation of bilateral partner relations with countries of Western Europe, mainly Germany, which some financial and industrial groups, financial circles of the West dislike.”Vladimir Yevseyev, the director of the Center for Socio-Political Studies, the head of a section at the Institute of CIS Countries, insists that the first time Russia had serious problems with an information war happened in August 2008. The current situation differs “by the absolutely different scale, the absolutely different lack of principles and absolutely different resources used.” Yevseyev believes that Russia survived the information war of 2008 relatively peacefully but “has not fully realized the situation seen then. When a very harsh information war started this year, Russia turned out to be unprepared.” The political analyst is steadfast that Russia needs to take the Syrian experience into account. “How were the Syrian events covered in Europe? The only topic in all newspapers, all magazines, was how hard the life of Syrian refugees was. There was absolutely nothing about the life of Syrians in Syria itself, about things really happening on Syrian territory. Just then, it became clear that the picture was twisted. When in August of the previous year, when chemical weapons were used in Eastern Ghouta, there were no facts to prove that the army of Bashar Assad used the weapons,” said Yevseyev.In his opinion, those who are waging an information war against Russia have a wide range of opportunities to give information they want on the territory of Russia. “For example, some respectable information agency gets information from Kiev, you can at least change the terms! There is no need to write in the Russia mass media that they are separatists and terrorists. The mass media often lack simple professionalism because they take the information of the West without evaluating it impartially, what is happening, sometimes even not understanding what is happening, trying to create something, as they think, very necessary. In reality, it is not just a substitution of the picture, it is a very serious distortion of information in our country. A very big archive of information used by the West holds no water at all. But why broadcast such information?” wonders Vladimir Yevseyev, urging Russian journalists to be honest and fa
8570 views
Поделиться:
Print: