Talking Information Operations

Shoulder Strap from an infantry colonel in the Union Army (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

I had a wonderful meeting today with someone who ‘gets it’ when it comes to Information Operations.  Full spectrum, A to Z IO.  Not the old five components.  Not just cyber. Not just EW.  Not just deception or OPSEC or MISO.  IO.  Plain and simple.  IO in all its glory, warts and all.

I once had a conversation with a senior responsible for IO ‘doctrine’, although I am playing fast and easy with the words.  I had traveled to meet with one senior and oh, by the way, since I’m here, let’s talk IO.  He quoted line and verse what the definition was for IO and all the other IO ‘stuff’, but I quickly realized the lights were on but nobody was home.  This was a full bird Colonel and while he could regurgitate what IO is and was he didn’t have an original thought.  He somehow could not take IO in its present form and extrapolate from that, he could not project, could not think outside the very clearly defined box that was IO and he certainly did not understand the shortfalls and wasn’t working to evolve the community as a whole.  He did not ‘get it’.  The good news is this was a few years ago and I honestly can’t remember his name.

Today’s conversation was refreshing. Most times when I talk IO, as I’ve said in this blog, I’m pigeonholed into one niche or another.  This gentleman had just returned from downrange, from having worked a no-crap, hands on, real IO job.  Now me, I don’t care if you’re an E-1 or an O-11 or even *gasp* a contractor, if you “do” IO, you’re golden in my book.

But when someone talks Joint IO, Army IO or even government information activites (because, as we all know, military IO cannot work without all parts of the government involved, without academic and corporate input, cooperating and integrated with the overall strategy), I get a warm and fuzzy all over.

This was especially refreshing because I’ve come to an obvious conclusion: too much time is spent on cyber, whereas it’s only a small percentage of IO.  Cyber is not and cannot be done for cyber’s sake.  Namely, you cannot “do” cyber without it being integrated with the big picture, and that is the job of IO, to do the integration.  One cannot launch a cyber campaign without that being coordinated and integrated into the national military strategy, which, in turn, must be integrated with the national security strategy and so on.

I have more and more people say, lately, that cyber should not be a domain.  But right now cyber is getting all the attention. It’s sexy, it’s well fed and its well funded.

But nothing can and may be done unilaterally.  So please, when you talk cyber, consider the big picture. When you are thinking MISO, think of the big picture.  When you’re thinking EW, think of the big picture.  In my opinion, EW professionals understand they are part of the joint environment, even the combined environment, best.  Most EW folks resent some aspects of IO but they’re resigned to and almost embrace the fact that they must cooperate and be integrated into the overall strategy and integrated into larger campaigns.

It’s nice to meet a fellow IO professional.  It’s even nicer when we both speak the same language.

Related articles

• What is Information Operations (toinformistoinfluence.com)
• Seeking IO Lessons Learned (toinformistoinfluence.com)
• Navy Looking to Use EW as Part of Cyber (blogs.defensenews.com)
• Cyberwar moves up on Pentagon’s priority list (triblive.com)
• OPSEC: National security starts with you (waronterrornews.typepad.com)
• OpSec (thrivelinks.wordpress.com)
• Senior NCO Wisdom (westernrifleshooters.wordpress.com)
• Dishonorable Disclosure: The Silent Professionals Speak Up (waronterrornews.typepad.com)
• The Decade of the CIO is Here – The Beyond CIO Series (forbes.com)