Many paragraphs into the article, Entous and Farrow report that after the fall of the USSR, American intelligence officials began to think that previous "information operations" had been overrated in their effectciveness. But:
Russian military and intelligence agencies, on the other hand, didn’t see information warfare as a sideshow. They invested in cyber weapons capable of paralyzing critical infrastructure, from utilities to banks, and refined the use of fake personae and fake news to fuel political and ethnic discord abroad. “We underestimated how significant it was,” Lwin said, of these online influence operations. “We didn’t appreciate it—until it was in our face.”The actual impact of "information operations" are inherently difficult to measure clearly. No one doubts that advertising has its effects. Or that propaganda can be effective at shaping a public narrative or exploting fears at a particular crisis moment. Will Bunch tweets cautiously:
The 2016 election changed the calculus. In the U.S., investigators pieced together how Russian operatives had carried out a scheme to promote their preferred candidate and to stoke divisions within U.S. society. Senior Israeli officials, like their American counterparts, had been dubious about the effectiveness of influence campaigns. Russia’s operation in the U.S. convinced Tamir Pardo, the former Mossad director, and others in Israel that they, too, had misjudged the threat. “It was the biggest Russian win ever. Without shooting one bullet, American society was torn apart,” Pardo said. “This is a weapon. We should find a way to control it, because it’s a ticking bomb. Otherwise, democracy is in trouble.”
Some of Pardo’s former colleagues took a more mercenary approach. Russia had shown the world that information warfare worked, and they saw a business opportunity. In early 2017, as Trump took office, interest in Psy-Group’s services seemed to increase. Law firms, one former employee said, asked Psy-Group to “come back in and tell us again what you are doing, because we see this ability to affect decisions that we weren’t fully aware of.” Another former Psy-Group employee put it more bluntly: “The Trump campaign won this way. If the fucking President is doing it, why not us?” [my emphasis]
People need to be able to walk and talk at the same time. I think it's perfectly sensible to say that the results in Wisconsin, Michigan, and Pennsylvania indicates that the Russian operation may have worked. But in any outcome so overdetermined as a US Presidential election, it's very difficult to tie that down. The result may have been inadequate polling, insufficient media buys, and weaknesses in the Democratic get-out-the-vote operation, too. It may have been Jill Stein's Green Party candidacy.20. That would be a lot worse than some burglars breaking into the Watergate back in the day. It would be a foreign effort to hijack our election. The worse part? Trump only won by 100,000 votes in 3 states. It may have worked. -30-— Will Bunch (@Will_Bunch) February 12, 2019
For me, it's obvious that its the responsibility of the government to counter cyber mischief by foreign governments or private operators. It the responsibility of the government at all levels to enforce campaign laws, including those against illegal campaign donations by non-citizens. And the potential for corruption and various kinds of pressure against US national interests from the Trump Crime Family's various business dealings with Russia should be taken seriously, fully investigated, and prosecuted where appropriate.
Those two considerations are not at all mutually exclusive. I'll also add in the interest of realistically understand the Russian intervention in 2016 that it's by no means clear to me that Putin's government actually wanted to get Trump elected President. From what I've seen and heard from journalists, scholars, and officials who have some legitimate claims to expertise on the topic of such Russian operations, it sounds more likely that the goal was to damage Hillary Clinton politically in order to weaken her Presidency. As much as Putin may like some of Trump's decisions and the effects of his politics in the US, would an old KGB hand like Putin really want and unpredictable and apparently seriously unstable guy like Trump running the US?
Will Bunch himself wrote a story last year whose topic relates to that of the New Yorker story, How the Trump family sold U.S. foreign policy to the highest bidder Philadelphia Inquirer 05/20/2018. In it, he calls attention to this important story: Mark Mazzetti et al, How the Trump family sold U.S. foreign policy to the highest bidder New York Times 05/19/2018.
No comments:
Post a Comment