Interesting reading for FA 30s…


MAJ Matt Yandura sent us this one by Rosa Brooks, Professor of Law, Georgetown University Law Center.  The title is “Ten Years On: The Evolution of Strategic Communication and Information
Operations since 9/11”

Brooks Prepared Statement


4 Comments on "Interesting reading for FA 30s…"

  1. majreb March 10, 2014 at 6:40 pm ·

    Imagine a future conflict on the other side of the world. World opinion is split and indecisive because of international and domestic legal disputes with the countries involved. We attempt to project our power but lose contact because our satellites are no longer working, the web is down and all other means to contact the projecting force is down. Meanwhile in the homeland, we face sudden and massive power outages along with communication outages. Ships and aircraft navigating by GPS become lost from no signal or false information. Our seaports are overwhelmed by an inability to move traffic because we can’t track it and organize its flow. Navigation channels and river locks are closed due sunken ships and barge crashes. Aircraft run out of fuel as they wait to land on runways and then attempt to land on runways that have aircraft attempting to takeoff. Pipeline flows are rerouted causing explosions, spills, and ecological hazards. Massive traffic jams shut down major cities. The NYSE and others go crazy with wildly fluctuating prices until they are shut down. Banks do the same when their systems go haywire as well. Our nuclear power plants all decide to have meltdowns or safety issues all on the same day. It’s a catastrophe, US will and its people are defeated.

    Think this can’t come true? This may be just what a future adversary has planned for us. The battle in the future may not be by soldiers but in public opinion, cyberspace, the electromagnetic spectrum, and international and domestic law. Dr Larry Wortzel looks at China’s take on Information Warfare in his paper The People’s Liberation Army and Information Warfare. (

  2. majreb February 28, 2014 at 3:43 pm ·

    U.S. Governmental Information Operations and Strategic Communications: A Discredited Tool or User Failure? Implications for Future Conflict , by Dr Steve Tatham
    In this monograph Dr Steve Tatham, one of the UK’s longest serving Information Operations specialists, examines the US Government’s, DoD’s IO and MISO programs. He uses Afghanistan as his main platform for examination. It looks at whether the current policy of using contractors and a US style media and marketing approach to changing attitudes and perceptions is correct for the operational environments we face in today’s crisis laden world. He believes that strategic communication and “soft” power will be more important in the future and that leaders need to be better prepared to engage in the human domain. If you have deployed as an IO officer much of what he brings to light will make you think back to your own experiences to ask yourself could I have done it better?

  3. MAJ Therese Obidinski October 13, 2012 at 1:05 am ·

    Just read the director’s article “”Breaking the Status Quo: Information and the Future Force.” I would be interested to know what the proponent is doing to promote this article for DoD and USG audiences. This is an interesting concept and it may be advantageous to socialize this article in other venues and gain feedback from the community. —Could be a possible COA for doctrinal development.

    We are working at ARSOUTH to codify our IO processes. Organization matters. At ARSOUTH the G7 directorate is organized as G7 Fires with a FA officer as the G7- not a FA30. The two chiefs consist of an IO LTC and a fires FA LTC. We do not fall under the G3. We are selling ourselves to increase participation and synchronization of effects and IRCs (information related capabilities) in a predominately “nonlethal” environment. We mainly follow Joint doctrine per our new CG’s guidance. The new draft JP 3-13 while it focuses on the synchronization of IRCs working groups with our higher HQ, SOUTHCOM often use emerging Joint doctrinal concepts. One such concept is Information Related Activities (IRAs) which consist of SC, IO, and IRCs….

    Our CG is concerned about perceptions of Partner Nations (ARSOUTH AOR is Latin America minus Mexico)- and the use of terms such as engagement, lethal/nonlethal, targeting and influence are problematic- why? how does this translate/perceived into PN language? Our CG’s guidance resulted in a review of doctrinal terms and an effort to compose viable non-doctrinal substitutes for these terms based on PN perceptions. (We are still working on this…) He likes the idea of the “narrative”- and wants us to explore options to create an ARSOUTH narrative.

    The director’s article is relevant to ARSOUTH especially with his point to focus on “how we deliver communication capabilities and capacity for commanders” rather than focusing solely on the audience and the message. Perhaps adopting similar organizational construct as described in his article could be a viable way forward.

  4. adam12 May 10, 2012 at 3:26 pm ·

    Thanks to fellow FA30s for putting this link out there, was not sure if it was included in this thread.

    The prepared remarks of Rosa Brooks, Professor of Law, Georgetown University Law Center, for her testimony before the House Armed Services Sub-Committee on Evolving Threats and Capabilities. The title is “Ten Years On: The Evolution of Strategic Communication and Information Operations since 9/11. (received by a colleague)

Leave a Comment

You must be logged in to post a comment.