Center for Security Research Articles Psychological aspects of modern warfare

Psychological aspects of modern warfare

Aleksandar Nacev

While war has long been viewed as a competition between adversaries, peace has been defined by absence of such conflict. But what happens when the line between war and peace is blurred and hardly visible? Countries today face a number of actors who use a wide range of political, informational, military, and economic measures to influence, coerce, intimidate, or undermine its interests or those of its friends and allies. To accomplish military goals without putting one’s nation, civilians, or even opposition troops at mortal risk is certainly the ideal manner in which to win a war.

This is one of the reasons why psychological warfare is the preferred form of warfare by both state and non-state actors today. Psychological warfare is the planned tactical use of propaganda, threats, and other non-combat techniques during wars, threats of war, or periods of geopolitical unrest to mislead, intimidate, demoralize, or otherwise influence the thinking or behavior of an enemy. All the global and regional powers have their unique brand of psychological warfare, but also terrorist groups like the Islamic State—employ political warfare to varying degrees. Modern psychological warfare, however, extends beyond proxy and covert uses of force. The US employs it’s multifaceted soft-power approach globally, Russia employs insignia-less “little green men,” China uses “civilian” fishing vessels to assert its claims in the South China Sea. Iran employs its shadowy Quds Force, the covert arm, to control a network of proxies throughout Iraq, Syria and the Middle East.

In warfare, each dimension of psychological warfare and every strategy are to be used together in an integrated and comprehensive manner. Just as a traditional military will not rely exclusively on fighter jets to accomplish their mission, psychological operations must rely on more than a single strategy to accomplish their goals. Every strategy has strengths and weaknesses, and proper planning must account for these weaknesses by utilizing combinations of functions simultaneously or consecutively. Psychological operations are intended to accomplish certain goals by managing the ideas, emotions, and behaviors of the opponent, as a less harmful and less risky alternative to traditional forms of warfare. The ability to program the opponent for the purposes of controlling his actions to accomplish military goals without necessarily putting oneself in harmful situations is the heart of psychological warfare. Like any programming language, the language of the mind is complicated, based on human instinct, environmental conditioning, complex and conflicting incentives, exposure to information, and so much more. Although psychological operations have seen a formal presence in many world militaries since the early twentieth century, the military potential for the application of psychology has not reached its limit, because a great number of ethical issues began to arise. It is generally seen as immoral to intentionally harm another person using psychological methods. Generally speaking, it is considered unethical to shoot another person, yet the shooting of other people tends to be a defining trait of warfare. But, it is important to consider that it is a far simpler matter to treat emotional or behavioral distortions in the brain than it is to treat a bullet in the brain. In pursuing the military applications for psychology, a nation not only greatly strengthens its military through highly effective means of accomplishing its goals, while reducing the amount of risk to which it exposes its soldiers, but it also reduces the amount of actual violence that must be used in accomplishing those goals.

The information arena is also an increasingly important battleground. Thanks to relatively low barriers to entry to social media, even non-state actors can wage sophisticated information campaigns to recruit and propagandize. Varying forms of economic pressure—bribes, blockades, or highly conditioned aid packages—are long-standing tools of statecraft that are now used for psychological warfare. Both state and non-state actors continually innovate in search of means of wreaking havoc far from their home bases, without firing a shot. Using such mechanisms of psychological warfare, these actors can advance their territorial interests without provoking a full-fledged military response by their opponents, and always shield themselves with the cloak of deniability.                

It is safe to say that security leaders and strategists must consider that psychological effects will matter as much as the kinetic ones in the hybrid dimensions of modern warfare.  Today every nation must build methods to develop the skill sets needed for the new dimensions of conflict, not only in their militaries and other government agencies, but across their societies and within the community of their security partners.

Related Post

How do terrorist groups exploit the corona pandemic?How do terrorist groups exploit the corona pandemic?

Rabie W. Sedrak

The spread of the Corona pandemic has changed the dynamics of most political processes at the local, regional, and international levels. However, it is remarkable that actors of current terrorist groups from various ideologies have demonstrated significant abilities to adapt rapidly to those changes caused by the spread of Corona virus. Indeed, some terrorist groups have tended to use the virus as a tool to achieve their goals, such as the attempt of some terrorists in Tunisia to spread the virus among security personnel earlier this month. Through monitoring the behavior of violent extremist groups worldwide during the past weeks, it was possible to identify a number of paths through which Corona virus have influenced the movement of such extremist groups, or rather the paths that these groups are employing, to serve their purposes.

Fake news is a threat to electoral securityFake news is a threat to electoral security

Aleksandar Nacev

By participating in free and fair elections, citizens cast their votes expecting the officials they elect to represent their interests in the best possible way. The voters’ choice grants legitimacy to the elected representatives and the parties they are part of. This legitimacy allows politicians to enact and amend legislation in the way they find most appropriate and suitable – usually along the lines of a published policy platform or manifesto. While the competition for political power is an essential element in ensuring the democratic diversity of interests, the election process can become exposed to malicious attempts to influence the result, including attempts from foreign powers to try and manipulate voters with false messaging as well as outright interference in the electoral count.

 This reason alone should be enough to understand that protecting the integrity of elections is therefore a clear priority; both for individual states, but also for international organisations, such as the European Union. The threat has clearly been growing in the past couple of years, with a series of fairly blatant attempts to manipulate electoral processes in at least 18 countries, including the USA, Netherlands and the Ukraine.


Cyber Espionage and its ImpactsCyber Espionage and its Impacts

Blagoja Janakievski

In the newest operational warfare domain, cyberspace, there are armies of nefarious hackers from around the globe who use cyber warfare for economic, political, or military gain. One aspect of cyber warfare that needs to be looked upon more closely is cyber espionage. Cyber spying is the act of engaging in an attack or series of attacks that let an unauthorized user or users view classified of sensitive material. These attacks are often subtle, amounting to nothing more than an unnoticed bit of code or process running in the background of a mainframe or personal workstation, and the target is usually a corporate or government entity. The goal is typically to acquire intellectual property or government secrets. Attacks can be motivated by greed or profit, and can be used in conjunction with a military operation or as an act of terrorism. Consequences can range from loss of competitive advantage to loss of materials, data, infrastructure, or loss of life. (more…)