Maskirovka… Or Not?

918 words, 5 minutes read time.

Originally, I wanted to write about maskirovka and informational regurgitation. The art of military strategic and tactical deception, and the perils of confirmation biases. Inflatable tanks/missile launchers/aircraft. Clausewitz… Jomini… Mahan… Arthashastra…Sun Tzu… Lippmann… Bernays… Dewey. Fascinating stuff.

An outline was drafted.

In the process, however, these topics have been covered in depth by others much more academically grounded than I in terms of historic, contemporary, and possible examples. Or not… I don’t know – I haven’t had the time to sit and dwell over conversations this past weekend to flesh out something a bit more substantial.

So let me, instead, tell you what I am not and why these topics are so compelling on an amateur level.

I am not an Intelligence expert – Geospatial intelligence (GEOINT) – Meanwhile, in the South China Sea, Maritime Rant, and Regret, Not Vengeance, Human intelligence (HUMINT) – Mirrors and Patterns, Weaponized Opinion?, and The Viability of Tanks and the (Forced) Evolution of Doctrine… though that sort of falls into Technical intelligence (TECHINT), Signals intelligence (SIGINT) ) – no posts yet – for a reason, Open-source intelligence (OSINT) – The Perils of OSINT, Measurement and signature intelligence (MASINT) – no posts yet, or Financial intelligence (FININT) – The Cost of a Tweet?  On Experts, Property Values, and Solipsism, and The Yamato-Class Battleships and ROI. I am sure that this may be an announcement of some dismay to the readers from China (57 views to date – yes, I see your views from
Shanghai, Beijing, Putian, and 9 others), but I can only shrug – I hope you have found this interesting. I know I have.

Some posts on this blog may dabble into these unique disciplines, and it is my standing conviction that to properly relate a concern on some contemporary topic, one has to be able to effectively describe what a trend in satellite imagery might mean, break down the costs of warfare (traditional and informational), or analyze trends in news reporting to show what it all might mean in the near future.

I am not a History expert. The version of history which becomes the accepted and widely understood version is quite often not the most accurate collection of data points or… even worse… a poorly diluted version in which the nuances of true cost or cause adds a level of bias which chafes like wearing corduroy pants in the summer… in Orlando.  

I am not a Sociology expert. People are both different and similar throughout cultures, socio-economic backgrounds, parental legacy, and faith. We love to think we can spot and critique the perceived differences, but – for the most part – all have parallel hopes, dreams, fears, and aversions. Sure, pattern recognition exists, but that – to me – is more individual-focused and based upon basic needs of security, acceptance, and all that is Maslow.

I am not an Expert of any kind. If you have been paying attention since 2016 (and if you have been reading this blog for that long, I humbly and most sincerely thank you), you will know that I have quoted Edward Ellsberg ad nauseum on this issue:

“Experts” are people who know so much about how things have been done in the past that they are usually blind to how things can be done in the future.

Information has – and always will – hold strategic and tactical purposes – whether it be military operations, economical affairs, industrial efforts, political campaigns, or even the influence operations of public opinion. For some, it is a profession – to be paid to speculate (correctly and incorrectly), to have actions taken (effective or ineffective), and to be lost to the void of classification until… whenever someone remembers or is insatiably curious to delve into archives somewhere.

Yet we exist within the information battlefield every day. We don’t realize it (blissful ignorance), we try to understand it (casual inquiry), we comprehend layers 1 through 101 of the Informational Onion (debating a better hobby), we see some patterns (break out the tinfoil tricone), or we understand that the rabbit hole becomes one with the Multiverse, Nirvana, Dante’s Levels of Hell (“Housewares… sporting goods… fitted sheets”), and Pierre Teilhard de Chardin’s “Noosphere” (“And I was like ‘Yeahwhatever.’”)

I will always find intelligence – as a discipline and as a human facet of awareness – a topic of interest. More than that, though, it is what we do with that intelligence is what is even more enticing. Do we carelessly repeat a key piece of a puzzle which builds a more comprehensive picture of importance for an adversary? Do we follow an algorithmic bread crumb trail to arrive at a predetermined conclusion? Do we saturate with false positives or plausible negatives? Do we increase doubt or decrease tolerance of the questionable?

Do we ramble on incoherently or is there something else going on – a lead-in to more carefully phrased observations?

Maskirovka is always going to be a thing – the deliberate injection of doubt to increase the effort and cost of knowing the truth.

Informational regurgitation, likewise, will also continue to be a thing – the accurate/inaccurate processing and communication of what is thought to be known at a particular moment in time for selfless or selfish reasons.

What I want you to consider, dear reader, is your source… your expectations… your ethics…and your actions today and tomorrow. You may not want to think you are on the game board of Information Warfare, but you don’t have a choice in the matter. What you do have a choice in is what role you play – or allow yourself to be played – on that board.

V.O.

[399,695]