The Invisible War: Protecting America's Cognitive Security
Information Warfare and You - A Series
"The supreme art of war is to subdue the enemy without fighting."
-Sun Tzu, Art of War Chapter 3.
Norwich University stands at the forefront of Information Warfare education, offering comprehensive programs that delve into the strategic use of information in modern conflicts. Through its online Graduate Certificate in Information Warfare, students explore the principles of psychological operations, propaganda, disinformation, and cyber operations, gaining insights into how various nations conceptualize and implement information warfare strategies. The curriculum emphasizes the analysis of current threats and the development of influence campaigns, preparing graduates for roles in defense, intelligence, and cybersecurity sectors.
By Colonel (Ret) Scott Nelson, Senior Advisor to the DoD CIO.
We lock our doors, secure our networks, and patrol our borders. But what about protecting our minds? In the 21st century, the battlefield has expanded to include the cognitive realm, and the stakes are higher than ever. This is the domain of cognitive security, and its protection is crucial for US national security.
What is Cognitive Security?
Cognitive security refers to the protection of the individual and collective minds of a population from manipulation, deception, and other forms of harmful influence. The Cognitive Domain is a critical component of the Information environment and is impacted by actions and effects in the information and physical domains. Cognitive security is a critical aspect of information warfare. Securing the collective minds of decision makers and the population is now a national imperative to maintain US democracy and our national interests. Manipulation targeting decision-making, behavior, perceptions and beliefs, undermining our ability to think critically, make informed choices, and act in our own best interests. This can be achieved through various means, including disinformation, propaganda, and psychological operations. As you research cognitive security consider the Russian and Chinese significant investments and doctrinal writing about psychological warfare and how it impacts all aspects of a national power; Diplomacy, Informational, Economic and Military (DIME).
Why is Cognitive Security Vital for US National Security?
A nation's security rests not just on its military might or economic strength, but also on the shared values, trust, and social cohesion of its people. Cognitive security is the bedrock of these essential elements. When a nation's cognitive space is compromised, its ability to function effectively is severely hampered. This can manifest in:
Erosion of Public Trust: Disinformation campaigns can erode public trust in institutions, government, and even science, leading to political instability and social fragmentation.
Weakened National Resilience: By manipulating public opinion and sowing discord, adversaries can weaken a nation's resolve and ability to respond to crises, both internal and external.
Undermined Democratic Processes: Interference in elections through disinformation and manipulation can undermine the legitimacy of democratic processes and institutions.
Damaged National Identity: Attacks on a nation's history, culture, and values can fracture national identity and create internal divisions.
Cognitive Security through the Lense of Social Movement Theory:
The intersection between social movement theory and cognitive security lies in understanding how shared beliefs, narratives, and collective identities are mobilized and manipulated, either to strengthen a society's resilience or to undermine it. Social movements, by their nature, aim to shape collective perceptions and motivate collective action, while cognitive security focuses on protecting the integrity of these shared cognitive spaces.
Here's a breakdown of the intersection:
1. Framing and Narrative Control:
Social Movement Theory: Framing theory, a key component of social movement theory, explains how social movements construct narratives to define problems, identify causes, and propose solutions. Successful framing resonates with the target audience's values and beliefs, mobilizing support and action.
Cognitive Security: Adversaries can exploit framing techniques to spread disinformation and manipulate public opinion. They create narratives that exploit existing grievances, sow discord, and undermine trust in institutions. Protecting cognitive security involves identifying and countering these manipulative narratives.
2. Collective Identity and Social Cohesion:
Social Movement Theory: Social movements often rely on constructing a shared identity among their members, fostering a sense of belonging and solidarity. This collective identity strengthens the movement's ability to mobilize and sustain collective action.
Cognitive Security: A strong sense of national or community identity can enhance cognitive security by fostering resilience to manipulative narratives and external influence. Conversely, adversaries can exploit existing social divisions and weaken social cohesion by promoting divisive narratives and targeting specific groups.
3. Mobilization and Collective Action:
Social Movement Theory: Social movement theory examines the factors that facilitate or hinder the mobilization of collective action. This includes resource mobilization, political opportunity structures, and the role of social networks.
Cognitive Security: Understanding how adversaries mobilize support for their narratives and actions is crucial for protecting cognitive security. This involves analyzing their online strategies, identifying key influencers, and understanding how disinformation spreads through social networks. Conversely, understanding mobilization principles can also help build societal resilience and counter-mobilize against harmful narratives.
4. Emotion and Affect:
Social Movement Theory: Emotions play a powerful role in social movements, motivating participation and shaping collective action. Movements often tap into emotions like anger, fear, and hope to mobilize support.
Cognitive Security: Adversaries can exploit emotions to manipulate public opinion and incite action. Disinformation campaigns often rely on evoking fear, anger, or resentment to polarize society and undermine trust. Building cognitive security involves understanding how emotions are manipulated and promoting emotional resilience.
5. Information Cascades and Echo Chambers:
Social Movement Theory: Information cascades and echo chambers can amplify the spread of ideas and narratives within social networks. This can contribute to the rapid growth of social movements but also to the spread of misinformation.
Cognitive Security: Adversaries can exploit information cascades and echo chambers to amplify their disinformation campaigns. Protecting cognitive security requires understanding how these dynamics work and developing strategies to counter the spread of false or misleading information.
By understanding the principles of social movement theory, we can gain valuable insights into how adversaries manipulate public opinion and undermine cognitive security. This knowledge can inform the development of effective strategies to counter disinformation, build societal resilience, and protect the integrity of our shared cognitive spaces.
Examples of US Cognitive Security at Risk:
Foreign Interference in Elections: The 2016 and 2020 US presidential elections highlighted the vulnerability of democratic processes to foreign interference, particularly through disinformation campaigns on social media.
Spread of Conspiracy Theories: The proliferation of conspiracy theories, often amplified by social media algorithms, has eroded public trust in institutions and fueled social division. Examples include Soviet Union “Operation INFEKTION” manufactured story for CIA creation of AIDs and false narratives surrounding COVID-19.
Polarization of Public Discourse: Adversarial actors can exploit existing social and political divisions through targeted disinformation campaigns, exacerbating polarization and hindering constructive dialogue.
Adversary Capabilities and Tactics:
Several actors possess and actively utilize capabilities to attack US cognitive security. These include:
State-sponsored actors: Nations like Russia and China have invested heavily in information warfare capabilities, including sophisticated disinformation campaigns and cyber operations targeting social media platforms. These campaigns often aim to sow discord, undermine democratic institutions, and promote narratives favorable to their interests.
Non-state actors: Extremist groups and terrorist organizations utilize online platforms to spread propaganda, recruit members, and incite violence. They exploit social media algorithms to amplify their messages and target vulnerable individuals.
Domestic actors: Individuals and groups within the US can also contribute to the erosion of cognitive security by spreading disinformation, promoting conspiracy theories, and engaging in online harassment and intimidation.
How They Attack:
Sophisticated Disinformation Campaigns: These campaigns often involve coordinated efforts across multiple platforms, utilizing bots, fake accounts, and manipulated media to spread false or misleading information.
Microtargeting: Adversaries can leverage data analytics and social media algorithms to target specific demographics with tailored disinformation campaigns, maximizing their impact. Artificial Intelligence provides a key tool to execute microtargeting at scale.
Exploitation of Social Media Algorithms: Social media algorithms, designed to maximize engagement, can inadvertently amplify disinformation and extremist content, creating echo chambers and reinforcing existing biases.
Cyberattacks and Data Breaches: Cyberattacks can be used to steal sensitive information, which can then be used to blackmail individuals or spread disinformation.
Protecting cognitive security requires a multi-faceted approach involving government, social media platforms, educational institutions, and individuals. We need to develop critical thinking skills, promote media literacy, strengthen our democratic institutions, and hold social media platforms accountable for the content they host. The battle for our minds is already underway. We must be prepared to defend ourselves.
Case Study: Cognitive Security in the Russia-Ukraine Conflict
The ongoing conflict between Russia and Ukraine provides a stark illustration of the importance of cognitive security and the devastating consequences of its erosion. Russia's strategy has heavily emphasized information warfare and psychological operations, aiming to manipulate perceptions, sow discord, and undermine Ukrainian resistance. This case study examines some key aspects of this cognitive dimension:
Pre-Invasion Information Operations:
Historical Narratives: For years leading up to the invasion, Russia propagated disinformation narratives denying Ukraine's distinct national identity and portraying it as an artificial construct controlled by Nazis. This narrative aimed to justify the invasion and undermine Ukrainian patriotism.
Denial and Deception: Russia consistently denied plans for an invasion, even as it amassed troops on the border. This created confusion and hampered Ukraine's ability to prepare effectively.
Cyberattacks: Russia launched cyberattacks against Ukrainian government websites and critical infrastructure, aiming to disrupt services and sow panic.
During the Invasion:
Control of Information Space: Russia attempted to control the narrative by restricting access to independent media within occupied territories and promoting its own propaganda channels.
Targeting Civilians: The bombing of civilian targets, hospitals, and schools, combined with disinformation campaigns blaming Ukraine for these atrocities, aimed to demoralize the population and erode international support for Ukraine.
Exploitation of Social Media: Both sides utilized social media to disseminate information and influence public opinion. However, Russia's efforts involved sophisticated disinformation campaigns, utilizing bots, fake accounts, and manipulated media.
Targeting Refugees: Disinformation campaigns targeting Ukrainian refugees aimed to create tensions between refugees and host countries, further destabilizing the region.
Ukrainian Response:
Resilient Communication: President Zelenskyy and the Ukrainian government effectively utilized social media and traditional media to communicate directly with the Ukrainian people and the international community, countering Russian narratives and rallying support.
Fact-Checking and Debunking: Ukrainian and international organizations actively worked to debunk Russian disinformation and expose war crimes.
Cyber Defense: Ukraine received significant international assistance in strengthening its cyber defenses and countering Russian cyberattacks.
Appeal to Shared Values: Ukraine effectively framed the conflict as a defense of democracy and freedom against authoritarian aggression, resonating with Western audiences and garnering international support.
Key Takeaways for Cognitive Security:
Proactive Defense is Crucial: Ukraine's pre-invasion efforts to build resilience and counter disinformation were limited. This highlights the importance of proactive measures to strengthen cognitive security before a crisis occurs.
Resilient Communication is Essential: Zelenskyy's effective communication played a vital role in maintaining morale, rallying international support, and countering Russian disinformation.
International Cooperation is Key: Combating disinformation and protecting cognitive security requires international cooperation in areas such as information sharing, cyber defense, and media literacy.
The Importance of Media Literacy: The conflict underscores the importance of media literacy and critical thinking skills in navigating the complex information environment.
The Russia-Ukraine conflict serves as a stark reminder that the battles of the 21st century are fought not only on physical battlefields but also in the cognitive domain. Protecting cognitive security is no longer a luxury but a necessity for national survival.
For more information:
While "cognitive security" as a distinct field within national security is still developing, information relating to its various aspects can be found across a range of sources. It's often interwoven with discussions of information warfare, psychological operations, disinformation, and national resilience. Here are some key areas and potential sources:
Government and Think Tank Reports/Publications:
The Future of Indo-Pacific Information Warfare: Challenges and Prospects from the Rise of AI | RAND
Defending American Interests Abroad: Early Detection of Foreign Malign Information Operations | RAND
Cognitive Security – Army Cyber Institute
Scott A Nelson, Principal Deputy, DoD Cyber Academic Engagement Office
Scott Nelson is a senior defense leader with over 25 years of experience in cyber operations, information warfare, and academic engagement. He currently serves as the Principal Deputy of the Department of Defense Cyber Academic Engagement Office, where he leads national partnerships to build and sustain the cyber workforce. He previously served as Senior Advisor to the Strategist at Cyber National Mission Force and Deputy G3 at Army Cyber Command, where he led strategic transformation efforts for Army IO forces. A retired US Army Colonel and a trusted voice in national security, known for integrating strategy, education, and innovation across the cyber and information domains, he has also commanded multiple Reserve and Guard elements at U.S. Special Operations Command, NORAD, and NORTHCOM. He holds a Master of Strategic Studies from the Army War College and a cybersecurity certification from the University of Washington.
 | A guest post by
|
 | A guest post by
|
A solid primer—cognitive security is the backbone of strategic resilience today. But is the U.S. building doctrine to disrupt adversary cognition, or just defend our own? And what exactly is our own? What doctrine are we defending?
Without that shift, we’re stuck in a reactive loop while China and Russia run the offense.