Ukraine & War Time Communications
Inspiring speeches, Biden's brilliant strategic communications, and propaganda
I’ve been lazy with this blog, partly because I’ve been doomscrolling Twitter for weeks. First, it was about crypto, and now it’s about Ukraine. I feel this is an unusual time that I may wish to remember in the future, so I’m documenting some of my very scattered thoughts here. Today’s post is on war time communications.
Exhibit A: Inspiring speeches
Setting aside Zelenskyy, only because there is no shortage of that coverage. At a UN meeting, Kenyan ambassador Martin Kimani delivered a brilliant speech, available here:
Highlights below (emphasis mine):
"Kenya and almost every African country was birthed by the ending of empire. Our borders were not of our own drawing. They were drawn in the distant colonial metropoles of London, Paris, and Lisbon with no regard for the ancient nations that they cleaved apart. Today, across the border of every single African country live our countrymen, with whom we share deep historical, cultural, and linguistic bonds.
At independence, had we chosen to pursue states on the basis of ethnic, racial, or religious homogeneity, we would still be waging bloody wars these many decades later. Instead, we agreed that we would settle for the borders that we inherited, but we would still pursue continental political, economic, and legal integration. Rather than form nations that looked ever backwards into history with a dangerous nostalgia, we chose to look forward to a greatness none of our many nations and peoples had ever known.
We chose to follow the rules of the Organization of African Unity and the United Nations Charter, not because our borders satisfied us, but because we wanted something greater, forged in peace.
We believe that all states formed from empires that have collapsed or retreated have many peoples in them yearning for integration with peoples in neighboring states. This is normal and understandable. After all, who does not want to be joined to their brethren and to make common purpose with them?
However, Kenya rejects such a yearning from being pursued by force. We must complete our recovery from the embers of dead empires in a way that does not plunge us back into new forms of domination and oppression. We rejected irredentism and expansionism on any basis, including racial, ethnic, religious, or cultural factors. We reject it again today."
Exhibit B: on the Biden Administration’s stellar communications strategy
I admit I did not understand why the US was announcing every step along the way. It felt a bit like a veiled threat and probable escalation, without explicit provocation. Turns out the strategy was right and pre-emptive on two fronts. Biden was two steps ahead of both military moves and the probable disinformation campaign and false flags, which could be countered real-time with action/video/facts.
It suggests an awareness of and sensitivity to his extremely wide-ranging audience:
Russia (playing 4D chess),
Ukraine (seeking tangible support),
NATO/UN (seeking direction),
and the American people (always ready to judge harshly without full context)
Particularly in hindsight, I don’t know how it could have been handled better. The respective strategy teams deserve major accolades for their execution so far
Per NYT, Biden made several critical choices: Early on, he shared intelligence far more broadly with allies than was typical. "The idea was to avoid disagreements about tough economic sanctions."
The strategy was risky, given worry about Russian moles in various governments. However, the bigger risk was that NATO/allies would not be convinced of the stakes and fail to impose unified opposition.
Biden's wooing of allies was challenging, as he came up against:
NATO's recent memories of Trump's raging against the org
Biden's failure to consult Europe in his rapid exit from Afghanistan
Tthe US snubbing of France over a nuclear sub deal
Biden also greenlit "an unprecedented public information campaign...aimed at preventing Mr. Putin from employing his usual denials to divide his adversaries."
“Our theory has been that putting true information into the public domain, which was bearing out in real time because everybody can see what they’re actually doing…[This was] the best way to prevent the Russians and what they always do, which is to try to control the narrative with disinformation,” a senior administration official
Highly risky because all of these moves could be perceived as a threat. Moreover, when Biden suggested allies may not respond to a "minor incursion" recently, it felt a bit like a green light for Russia to do just that and face no consequences.
From Bloomberg:
"When US officials discuss their knowledge about Putin’s intentions & the capabilities he has mobilized, they are also hinting that America’s vast intelligence apparatus can monitor the moves of the Russian military and perhaps even peer into the decision-making of the regime. The message seems to be this: 'Vladimir, we’re reading your mail.'”
Notes from the Bloomberg piece:
Hurts Putin's strategy of using surprise and ambiguity to his advantage
Prepares the rest of the world for the West's potentially devastating response, by painting a proper picture of the problem
Most importantly, this is an unambiguous, amplified attack vs disinformation. Biden is illuminating lies before they can spread
"The old saw that a lie can travel around the world while the truth is lacing up its boots is particularly relevant in today’s information wars."
"The U.S has often seemed slow in confronting propaganda and disinformation propagated by its rivals — whether Islamic State, Russia or China* — in part because bureaucratic obstacles and concerns about disclosing valuable intelligence keep getting in the way."
The approach has worked so far, but it is highly risky.
What if they share intelligence that turns out to be false?
Oversharing may lead to crisis fatigue or a sense of provocation, rather than de-escalation
Who knows what Russia could share about the US/allies in response -- I'm sure we have covert ops that we don't even want to know about
Sharing too many specifics may reveal how we're getting our intelligence
My sincere hope is that these homegrown efforts can be tackled next, given the success the administration is seeing now.
Anyway, in hindsight, it's incredible how risky, thoughtful, and fruitful each communication/de-classification was. The global narrative of war seems to matter more than ever, and it is absolutely incredible to see all of this happening real-time.
We are both lucky and unlucky that things have turned out as they have.
Biden (and Kamala) deserve all the accolades for pulling off the most wide-reaching anti-Russia alliance, maybe of all time. We have the world vs. Russia right now — governments, the private sector, and the people. Germany explained Biden simply came to them with facts, did not pressure, and made a convincing case. It sounds simple, but geopolitics is hard, and every country had a great reason to say no. Every single one. Yet Biden got them all on board, and fast. Presumably, the intelligence shares must’ve made a great case itself, but a good idea dies if not pitched right.
*I'd personally add domestic disinformation campaigns to that list as well -- antivax/Stop the Steal/etc.
Exhibit C: Examples of bad war time communications
Russia’s ambassador to Ireland holds the party line in the face of ample evidence against in an interview with an Irish journalist.
It is akin to US politicians on WMDs. But the stakes are very different. In Russia, this man dies if he doesn’t say this. In the US, politicians merely lose a campaign endorsement. They are primed by greed/power.
And hence we have a faction of the GOP, “Putin apologists,” who are really just assholes bent on building a brand while the world burns.
Separately, I wish all journalists were as sharp and relentless as the Irish guy.
And of course, Putin’s endless gaslighting of his own people.
Ukrainian propaganda. There are plenty of articles on Zelenskyy, the hero of the people, all over the world. I’m in the admiration camp, and nearly everything he says is inspiring. So instead, my one ongoing source of frustration of War in the Age of Social Media: the lies. The propaganda from both sides. Just a few days ago, we wept with the story of the boys defending Snake Island. We heard them stand up to Russian attackers and were told they all died in their heroism.
Now we know they’re all alive. Did we really need to be so misled? We were already on Ukraine’s side, and their being captured by Russian soldiers is just as tragic.
How do we contend with war propaganda in the age of social media?
We are all equally vulnerable. It’s not an IQ thing—it’s an emotional, tribal hope thing.
Exhibit D: Freedom of speech
This is a sad, but good example of what the freedom of speech in the US actually means and why it is valuable.
Oligarchs and normal citizens alike are silenced because they might get Navalny’ed if they say anything contrary. Everyone protesting in Russia right now is a goddamn hero. It puts the inane “Freedom” Convoy to absolute shame.
And true to form, Elon Musk still sucks: