2018 Ranking of Countermeasures by the EU28 to the Kremlin’S Subversion Operations

Total Page:16

File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb

2018 Ranking of Countermeasures by the EU28 to the Kremlin’S Subversion Operations Kremlin Watch Report 13.06.2018 2018 Ranking of countermeasures by the EU28 to the Kremlin’s subversion operations Kremlin Watch Team Kremlin Watch is a strategic program which aims to expose and confront instruments of Russian This report has been consulted with 16 governmental influence and disinformation operations focused and non-governmental experts from 12 European against Western democracies. countries. 2018 Ranking of countermeasures by the EU28 to the Kremlin’s subversion operations 1 2018 Ranking of countermeasures by the EU28 to the Kremlin’s subversion operations 1. Introduction This report is a follow-up to the Overview of countermeasures by the EU28 to the Kremlin's subversion operations conducted by the European Values Think-Tank and published in May 20171. It summarises the attitudes, policies, and strategic responses of the EU28 to Russia's disinformation campaigns and other hostile influence operations. The special focus in this updated issue is on the main developments and changes, positive or negative, which took place during the months after the original report was published. Specifically, the developments have been updated up to June 1st, 2018. The second half of 2017 and first half of 2018 have been far from uneventful. The Kremlin's hostile activities are becoming ever bolder each month. Europeans have witnessed more attempts to meddle in domestic affairs and elections, increased activity of automated bots and trolls on social media, and even a physical attack on their own soil in the case of the attempted murder of Sergei Skripal and his daughter in the United Kingdom. On the other hand, the public and political debate has also progressed. The mentioned events stirred wider discussions about the responsibility of social media platforms and the urgent need for media literacy amongst European citizen. The findings of the Report are based on a qualitative analysis of national strategy documents, reports, and official statements from all 28 member states that reveal the priorities of their individual foreign, security and defence policies. Specifically, this Report aims to summarize how individual EU member states are reacting to the growing threat of Russian subversion in three separate domains: 1) the government and political establishment, 2) the counterintelligence community, and 3) the non- governmental (civic) sector. The Report thus provides a comprehensive comparative overview of the current state of play in Europe, identifying common strengths and weaknesses between countries. Of course, it is important to keep in mind that typological studies are inherently reductive and thus cannot fully account for the particularities and complexity of individual cases (in this instance, the EU28 country profiles). Nonetheless, the identification of regional and group patterns, common challenges and proven best practices is a valuable exercise for gaining a deeper understanding of both the threat in question and the most effective palliative policies. The authors hope the Report fulfils these objectives and, furthermore, that it stimulates political will for decisive and internationally-coordinated action against Russian disinformation and other means of subversive influence. Any errors or omissions are our own. 1 http://www.europeanvalues.net/wp-content/uploads/2017/05/Overview-of-countermeasures-by-the-EU28-to-the- Kremlin%E2%80%99s-subversion-operations-1.pdf 2 2018 Ranking of countermeasures by the EU28 to the Kremlin’s subversion operations 2. Method Country profiles detailing the of state of play in each EU member state were compiled using policy reviews, media analyses, and independent expert data. We reviewed official strategy documents and summary reports of each member state, together with recent statements made by their political representatives and security/intelligence officials. Our analysis centred on content pertaining to the influence of foreign powers, cyber-security, disinformation campaigns, counterintelligence activities, and media literacy programs. We searched for all available data on policy proposals and countermeasures (both planned and implemented), as well as evidence of their effectiveness, using open-source, online, and academic sources. We also utilised the expertise gained through our cooperation with numerous institutions and organisations in the countries under review, in order to identify the most effective national projects and local response initiatives. If we have missed any relevant initiative, we will gladly update the Report as feedback arrives. The chief methodological contribution is the development of a rating system based on three qualitative measures: 1) political acknowledgment of the threat by state representatives, 2) government strategy and applied countermeasures, and 3) counterintelligence responses. The tables below define and operationalise the scale for each of the three measures. Based on each country’s total score (the sum of all three measures), we generated an overall symbolic ranking and grouped the EU28 into six categories based on their recognition of and response to the Russian threat. This categorisation is the basis of the Report’s conclusions and also structures our final recommendations based on individual states’ experience and capabilities. These recommendations follow the experiences and best practices of the EU countries that are most advanced in countering disinformation and hostile influence. 3 2018 Ranking of countermeasures by the EU28 to the Kremlin’s subversion operations Analytical framework: Operationalization of the rating scale Political acknowledgment of the threat RATING DESCRIPTION SYMPTOM CRITERIA 0 COLLABORATION WITH Governing politicians play a Clear signs of cooperation of HOSTILE FOREIGN cooperative role with Kremlin governing politicians with hostile INFLUENCE foreign influence. foreign influence & any attempt for a state response to the Treat is stopped. 1 THREAT DENIAL Critical mass of the governing No relevant state response to the politicians denies or Threat is allowed by the government. systematically underplays existence of the Threat 2 THREAT PARTIALLY Individual politicians in the Ad hoc minor non-coordinated ADMITTED government admit existence of initiatives by individual state experts the Threat. Critical mass of are allowed, but complex policy is not governing politicians is reluctant pro- actively pursued by the to the threat government. 3 GOVERNMENT ADMITS Critical mass of the governing Specific government ministers seek THE THREAT politicians admits existence of to develop a policy response, the Threat and allows individual individual counter-measures are government bodies to start already implemented in practise, under-radar ad-hoc responses others are being planned. Agreement on the political direction. 4 GOVERNMENT ASKS FOR Steps for setting up national The government directly tasks its POLICY COUNTER- defence system to counter security institutions to create a MEASURES hostile foreign influence complex policy to counter the Threat, operations are being developed. not only ad hoc non-coordinated initiatives. 5 ALL-GOVERNMENT An all-government approach Specific initiatives are already put in POLICY adopted, policy is established practise, and no significant political COUNTERMEASURES IN and implemented. setbacks are present while policies PLACE are implemented. 4 2018 Ranking of countermeasures by the EU28 to the Kremlin’s subversion operations Government counter-activities RATING DESCRIPTION SYMPTOM CRITERIA 0 COLLABORATI The government helps The government takes specific measures limiting the ON Russian influence to resilience of the country towards Russian influence or spread, either from enabling the fulfilment of the goals of the Kremlin, i.e. conviction or for limiting the freedom of the press, collaboration with opportunistic reasons. extremist parties, etc. 1 IGNORANCE The government is not There are no signs of any acknowledgement of the concerned with disinformation and influence operations coming from disinformation and Russia or elsewhere. influence operations; it does not consider them a threat and takes no steps to counter them. 2 PARTIAL There are a few single One or only a few departments of the state administration INITIATIVES IN initiatives and steps show concern with disinformation and influence operations SOME AREAS being taken to counter and takes steps to counter them. They are focused on disinformation and specific problems, for example cyber-security or media influence operations. literacy. The lack of resources or support prevents these The effectivity of these initiatives from being fully efficient. The country has a measures is representative in at least one of the international bodies questionable. countering disinformation operations. There is no sophisticated and coordinated policy in place. 3 SOPHISTICAT There are a few single One or only a few departments of the state administration ED initiatives and steps show concern disinformation and influence operations and INITIATIVES IN being taken to counter takes steps to counter them. They are focused on specific SOME AREAS disinformation and problems, for example cyber-security or media literacy. influence operations. They have enough resources and support and clearly show They are widely positive results. The country has a representative in at least supported and show one of the international bodies countering disinformation efficiency. operations. 4 INITIATIVES There are initiatives All the relevant departments of the
Recommended publications
  • Bekijk Hier De Democraat In
    Democraat februari 2015 het ledenmagazine van de Provinciale Statenverkiezingen politieke vereniging D66 p.8 – interview Thom de Graaf p.38 – maak kennis met… “Ik zet in op @MatthijsvMilt dubbele cijfers” Democraat tekst 02 Democraat 03 vooraf Alexander Pechtold inhoudsopgave Meine-Henk Klijnsma hield daar een boeiend verhaal over de Vrijzinnig-Democratische Bond (vdb), de voorloper van D66. Hij deed dit bij ge- legenheid van de onthulling van een belangrijk stukje partijhistorie dat de partij op een veiling verwierf. Een verkiezingsaffiche van de vdb uit 1922, een van de beroemdste affiches uit de Neder- landse politieke geschiedenis. Verderop in deze Democraat leest u hier meer over (zie pag. 40). Zoals u ook van alles kunt lezen over de campag- ne voor de verkiezingen van 18 maart. Want ook 08. Democraten, 2015 is een verkiezingsjaar. En niet zomaar één. Uw stem telt namelijk dubbel. Wij kunnen op 18 Politiek Den Haag is worstelend het nieuwe jaar maart het verschil maken in zowel de provincie “ Ik zet in op ingegaan. Worstelend met de vraag hoe te reage- als de Eerste Kamer. En dat doen we met een hel- ren op de aanslagen in Parijs op de redactie van dere boodschap: wij willen vooruit met Neder- dubbele cijfers” het satirische weekblad Charlie Hebdo en op een land. Het kabinet hobbelt van incident naar inci- kosjere supermarkt. Gruwelijke aanslagen, waar dent, de agenda van de ministerraad is al maanden alleen de terroristen zelf verantwoordelijkheid angstvallig leeg. Wij branden wél van ambitie om voor dragen. Misdrijven die niet te rechtvaardigen voor mensen aan de slag te gaan.
    [Show full text]
  • D66 Morrelt Aan Vrijheid, Democratie En Burgerrechten
    D66 morrelt aan vrijheid, democratie en burgerrechten Door Coen de Jong - 7 maart 2020 Geplaatst in D66 - Democratie D66 werpt zichzelf graag op als de hoeder van de rechtsstaat, de vrijheid en de democratie tegenover het oprukkende populisme. Vicepremier en minister van Binnenlandse Zaken Kajsa Ollongren sprak in 2018 in een lezing: ‘Het populisme wil sommige Nederlanders anders behandelen dan andere. En daarmee bedreigt het kernwaarden van Nederland’. Woorden gericht aan het adres van oppositiepartij Forum voor Democratie. D66 wilde bij oprichting een alternatief zijn voor het vermolmde Nederlandse partijstelsel. D66 stond voor bestuurlijke vernieuwing, inspraak van de burger in plaats van handjeklap tussen verzuilde elites en voor het kiezen van burgemeesters. Directe democratie, zoals via referenda, stond ook hoog aangeschreven. En D66 zag zichzelf als vanaf het begin in 1966 pragmatisch en later tevens als ‘redelijk alternatief’. Het hoogtepunt van D66 waren de ‘paarse’ coalities in de jaren negentig waarbij D66 het CDA uit de regering wist te houden. Maar in 2006 wist lijsttrekker Alexander Pechtold – geen succes als minister van Bestuurlijke Vernieuwing – met moeite drie Kamerzetels te halen. Maar de redding was nabij. Pechtold positioneerde D66 tegenover de PVV en Geert Wilders, wat hem populair maakte bij journalisten én progressieve kiezers. Deelname in 2017 aan Rutte-3 betekende voor D66 de terugkeer in het centrum van de macht. Alleen: van de oorspronkelijke principes en van bestuurlijke vernieuwing hoorden we niets meer. Integendeel, het raadgevend referendum sneuvelde uitgerekend met Kajsa Ollongren op Binnenlandse Zaken. De website van D66 beschrijft de uitgangspunten van de partij in vijf vage ‘richtingwijzers’ over Wynia's week: D66 morrelt aan vrijheid, democratie en burgerrechten | 1 D66 morrelt aan vrijheid, democratie en burgerrechten duurzaamheid, harmonie en vertrouwen.
    [Show full text]
  • Inside the Temple of Covert Propaganda: the Integrity Initiative and the UK’S Scandalous Information War
    Inside the Temple of Covert Propaganda: The Integrity Initiative and the UK’s Scandalous Information War By Mohamed Elmaazi and Max Blumenthal Region: Europe Global Research, December 20, 2018 Theme: Intelligence, Politics Gray Zone Project 17 December 2018 Recent hacked documents have revealed an international network of politicians, journalists, academics, researchers and military officers, all engaged in highly deceptive covert propaganda campaigns funded by the British Foreign and Commonwealth Office (FCO), NATO, Facebook and hardline national security institutions. This “network of networks”, as one document refers to them, centers around an ironically named outfit called the Integrity Initiative. And it is all overseen by a previously unknown England-based think tank registered in Scotland, the Institute for Statecraft, which has operated under a veil of secrecy. The whole operation appears to be run by, and in conjunction with, members of British military intelligence. According to David Miller, professor of political sociology in the school of policy studies at the University of Bristol and the director of the Organization for Propaganda Studies, the Integrity Initiative “appears to be a military directed push.” “The most senior government people are professional propagandists and spooks,” Miller explained. “The ‘charity’ lead on this [Chris Donnelly] was also appointed as a colonel in military intelligence at the beginning of the project — a truly amazing fact that suggests this is a military intelligence cut out.” A minister for the UK FCOhas officially confirmed that it has been funding the Integrity Network. In addition to conducting diplomacy, the FCO oversees both the Government Communications Headquarters (GCHQ) the UK equivalent to the National Security Agency, and the Secret Intelligence Services (SIS) commonly known as MI6.
    [Show full text]
  • ASD-Covert-Foreign-Money.Pdf
    overt C Foreign Covert Money Financial loopholes exploited by AUGUST 2020 authoritarians to fund political interference in democracies AUTHORS: Josh Rudolph and Thomas Morley © 2020 The Alliance for Securing Democracy Please direct inquiries to The Alliance for Securing Democracy at The German Marshall Fund of the United States 1700 18th Street, NW Washington, DC 20009 T 1 202 683 2650 E [email protected] This publication can be downloaded for free at https://securingdemocracy.gmfus.org/covert-foreign-money/. The views expressed in GMF publications and commentary are the views of the authors alone. Cover and map design: Kenny Nguyen Formatting design: Rachael Worthington Alliance for Securing Democracy The Alliance for Securing Democracy (ASD), a bipartisan initiative housed at the German Marshall Fund of the United States, develops comprehensive strategies to deter, defend against, and raise the costs on authoritarian efforts to undermine and interfere in democratic institutions. ASD brings together experts on disinformation, malign finance, emerging technologies, elections integrity, economic coercion, and cybersecurity, as well as regional experts, to collaborate across traditional stovepipes and develop cross-cutting frame- works. Authors Josh Rudolph Fellow for Malign Finance Thomas Morley Research Assistant Contents Executive Summary �������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� 1 Introduction and Methodology ��������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������
    [Show full text]
  • Kazan Kremlin (Russian Federation) No
    Category of property Kazan Kremlin (Russian Federation) In terms of the categories of cultural property set out in Article 1 of the 1972 World Heritage Convention, this is a group of buildings. No 980 History and Description History The first human occupation in the Kazan area goes back to Identification the 7th and 8th millennia BCE; there are traces of the Bronze Age (2nd to 1st millennia, late Kazan area settlement), early Nomination Historical and Architectural Complex of Iron Age (8th to 6th centuries BCE, Ananin culture), and the Kazan Kremlin early medieval period (4th–5th centuries CE, Azelin culture). From the 10th to 13th centuries Kazan was a pre-Mongol Location Republic of Tatarstan, City of Kazan Bulgar town. Today’s Kremlin hill consisted then of a fortified trading settlement surrounded by moats, State Party Russian Federation embankments, and a stockade. A stone fortress was built in the 12th century and the town developed as an outpost on the Date 29 June 1999 northern border of Volga Bulgaria. The so-called Old Town extended eastward, on the site of the former Kazan Monastery of Our Lady. The fortress was demolished on the instructions of the Mongols in the 13th century. A citadel was then built as the seat of the Prince of Kazan, including the town’s administrative and religious institutions. By the Justification by State Party first half of the 15th century, the town had become the capital The Kazan Kremlin is a unique and complex monument of of the Muslim Principality of Bulgaria, with administrative, archaeology, history, urban development, and architecture.
    [Show full text]
  • A Retrospective on the So-Called Revolution in Military Affairs, 2000-2020
    SECURITY, STRATEGY, AND ORDER A RETROSPECTIVE ON THE SO-CALLED REVOLUTION IN MILITARY AFFAIRS, 2000-2020 MICHAEL O’HANLON A RESTROSPECTIVE ON THE SO-CALLED REVOLUTION IN MILITARY AFFAIRS, 2000-2020 MICHAEL O’HANLON EXECUTIVE SUMMARY1 This paper revisits the debate that raged in American defense circles in the 1990s over whether a revolution in military affairs was imminent in the early parts of the 21st century. It also seeks to establish a benchmark, and reaffirm as well as refine a methodology, for forecasting future changes in military-related technologies by examining what has transpired in the first two decades of the 21st century. Taking this approach helps improve and validate the methodology that is employed in my forthcoming book, The Senkaku Paradox: Risking Great Power War Over Small Stakes (2019). A subsequent paper seeks to extrapolate a similar analysis out to 2040, gauging the potential for major breakthroughs in military technology and associated operational concepts over the next two decades. Such analysis is of critical importance for evaluating American and allied military and strategic options relevant to great-power war and deterrence in the years ahead. The paper’s category-by-category examination of military technology mirrors the approach that I employed in a book published in 2000, Technological Change and the Future of Warfare (though it really should have been entitled, The So-Called Revolution in Military Affairs, because I was largely challenging the then-popular notion that a military revolution of historic importance was afoot). Much of the research foundation of that book was the study of a list of 29 different types of technologies in an attempt to gauge which might undergo revolutionary change by 2020.
    [Show full text]
  • Resisting Foreign State Propaganda in the New Information Environment: the Case of the EU, Russia, and the Eastern Partnership Countries ISBN 978-9934-8536-9-2
    RESISTING FOREIGN STATE PROPAGANDA IN THE NEW INFORMATION ENVIRONMENT: THE CASE OF THE EU, RUSSIA, AND THE EASTERN PARTNERSHIP COUNTRIES ISBN 978-9934-8536-9-2 UDK 32.019.5 Re708 This publication is a part of the project “Resisting state propaganda in the new information environment: The case of EU member states and EU Eastern Partnership states vis-à-vis the Russian Federation publication/re- search” organised by the Foundation for European Pro- gressive Studies (FEPS) with the support of Brīvības un Solidaritātes Fonds (BSF). RESISTING FOREIGN STATE PROPAGANDA IN THE NEW INFORMATION ENVIRONMENT: THE CASE OF THE EU, RUSSIA, AND THE EASTERN PARTNERSHIP COUNTRIES Table of contents Foreword Dr. Ernst Stetter 11 Foreword Ervins Labanovskis 17 PART I: INCREASING RESISTANCE TO PROPAGANDA WITHIN THE EU Countering propaganda in Europe: Responses and options Ben Nimmo 23 The role of national strategic narrative in raising resilience to hostile foreign propaganda in European societies Māris Cepurītis 39 Increasing the resistance of democratic states to hostile foreign propaganda— what is the right recipe? Elīna Lange-Ionatamišvili 52 The Audiovisual Media Services Directive and propaganda Andris Mellakauls 71 7 Key findings of the EED’s Feasibility PART III: THE VIEW FROM Study on independent Russian- THE EASTERN PARTNERSHIP COUNTRIES language media initiatives in the Eastern Partnership and beyond Farther from Russky Mir, Jerzy Pomianowski 89 Closer to the West Tamar Kintsurashvili 173 PART II: THE VIEW FROM THE BALTIC STATES Russian propaganda
    [Show full text]
  • 12 Day Russia in Depth
    12 DAY RUSSIA IN DEPTH DESTINATIONS — MOSCOW The information provided in this document is subject to change and may be affected by unforeseen events outside the control of Inspiring Vacations. Where changes to your itinerary or bookings occur, appropriate advice or instructions will be sent to your email address. Call 1300 88 66 88 Email [email protected] www.inspiringvacations.com TOUR ITINERARY DAY 1 Destination Moscow Meals included Accommodation N/A Zdrastvutye! Welcome to Russia. The great city of Moscow has survived centuries of revolution and tumult, from the days of the tsars through the communist era to today's contemporary society. Moscow is a fascinating, historic city with a wealth of sights to see. You will be collected from the airport on arrival and transferred to your hotel if you have booked an airport transfer with us prior to travel. There will be an important welcome meeting at 6 pm where you will meet your group leader. After the meeting, perhaps head with everyone for an optional dinner so you can get acquainted with your fellow travellers and enjoy your first taste of delicious Russian cuisine. DAY 2 Destination Moscow Meals included Breakfast Accommodation N/A This morning, hop on the metro and join your leader on an tour to the Novodevichy Convent and Cemetery. The fortress like Convent is a true architectural masterpiece of the 16-17th century, representing the Baroque style popular in Moscow at the time. It has also played a crucial part in Russia's political and religious history. Next to it is the peaceful cemetery, where many of the greatest Russian minds rest forever, including Nikita Khrushchev, Boris Yeltsin, Mikhail Bulgakov, Nikolai Gogol, Konstantin Stanislavskiy and many others.
    [Show full text]
  • Russian Intelligence Services and Special Forces
    BRIEFING PAPER Number CBP 8430, 30 October 2018 Russian intelligence By Ben Smith services and special forces Contents: 1. KGB reborn? 2. GRU 3. Spetsnaz 4. What’s new? www.parliament.uk/commons-library | intranet.parliament.uk/commons-library | [email protected] | @commonslibrary 2 Russian intelligence services and special forces Contents Summary 3 1. KGB reborn? 4 1.1 FSB 4 1.2 SVR 5 1.3 FSO and GUSP 5 2. GRU 7 Cyber warfare 7 NCSC Review 8 3. Spetsnaz 9 4. What’s new? 12 Cover page image copyright: Special operations forces of the Russian Federation by Ministry of Defence of the Russian Federation (Mil.ru). Licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International license / image cropped. 3 Commons Library Briefing, 30 October 2018 Summary The Salisbury incident and its aftermath brought the Russian secret services into the spotlight. Malcolm Chalmers of Royal United Services Institute said Russian security services were going well beyond normal spying practice: “By launching disruptive operations that threaten life in target societies, they blur the line between war and peace”. The main domestic service, the FSB, is a successor to the Communist-era KGB. It is responsible for counter-terrorism and counter espionage and Russian information security. Critics say that it continues the KGB’s work of persecution of ‘dissidents’ and is guilty of torture and other human rights violations, and of extortion and corruption. One estimate put its staff complement at 200,000, and it has grown in power, particularly since the election of Vladimir Putin as President of Russia.
    [Show full text]
  • HJS 'Putin Sees and Hears It All' Report.Qxd
    Putin SeeS and HearS it all: How ruSSia’S intelligence agencieS Menace tHe uK BY DR ANDREW FOXALL DEMOCRACY | FREEDOM | HUMAN RIGHTS November 2018 First published in 2018 by The Henry Jackson Society. The Henry Jackson Society Millbank Tower 21-24 Millbank London SW1P 4QP Registered charity no. 1140489 Tel: +44 (0)20 7340 4520 www.henryjacksonsociety.org © The Henry Jackson Society, 2018. All rights reserved. The views expressed in this publication are those of the author and are not necessarily indicative of those of The Henry Jackson Society or its Trustees. Title: “PuTiN SEES AND HEARS iT ALL: HOW RuSSiA’S iNTELLigENcE AgENciES MENAcE THE uK” By: Dr Andrew Foxall Putin SeeS and HearS it all: How ruSSia’S intelligence agencieS Menace tHe uK BY DR ANDREW FOXALL November 2018 PuTiN SEES AND HEARS iT ALL “Dr. Foxall’s report forcefully reminds us that Russian Intelligence activity in the West is still large scale and intrusive, and that we need to devote significant resources and expertise ourselves to monitoring and blunting this threat to our national security. As during the Cold War an effective counterintelligence capability remains an essential part of our own intelligence and security community.” Sir richard dearlove KcMg oBe chief of the Secret intelligence Service (Mi6) (1999-2004) “Anyone who is relaxed or complacent about Russian intelligence activity in the United Kingdom should read this Report. Not only have we experienced the murder of Litvinenko and the attempted murder of the Skripals on British soil, Britain and the West as a whole face an unrelenting assault from Putin’s bloated intelligence and security agencies.
    [Show full text]
  • Uit De Kast, in De Kamer
    Uit de kast, in de Kamer Een onderzoek naar de representatie inzake seksuele oriëntatie Thimo Plaisant van der Wal S1415476 Bachelorscriptie Politicologie 8379 woorden Begeleider: Dr. Hans Vollaard Juni 2017 Inhoudsopgave 1. Inleiding ...................................................................................................................................... 3 1.1 Aanleiding ...................................................................................................................................... 3 1.2 Relevantie ...................................................................................................................................... 4 1.3 Doelstelling & Onderzoeksvraag ................................................................................................... 6 1.4 Leeswijzer ...................................................................................................................................... 6 2. Theoretisch kader ........................................................................................................................ 7 2.1 Representatie ................................................................................................................................ 7 2.2 Verband tussen descriptieve en substantieve representatie ........................................................ 8 2.3 Seksuele oriëntatie ...................................................................................................................... 10 3. Onderzoeksmethoden ..............................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Chechen War: Motivator for Military Reform?
    WARNING! The views expressed in FMSO publications and reports are those of the authors and do not necessarily represent the official policy or position of the Department of the Army, Department of Defense, or the U.S. Government. Information Warfare in the Second (1999-Present) Chechen War: Motivator for Military Reform? by Timothy L. Thomas, Foreign Military Studies Office, Fort Leavenworth, KS., 2002. This article was previously published in Russian Military Reform 1992-2002 Published by Frank Cass Publishers, 2003 Chapter 11, Page 209-233 During the past ten years, the Russian military has attentively studied the subject of information war (IW). The main catalyst for this interest was the successful use of IW by coalition forces during Operation Desert Storm. Russian military theorists watched coalition planes bomb Iraqi targets in real time with precision and understood that warfare had entered a new phase, one dominated by information-based equipment and resources. Two further motivators were the poor use of IW by the Russian armed forces during the first Russian-Chechen war (1994-1996), which contributed to the loss of Russian morale, and the successful use of IW by NATO during the conflict over Kosovo. The success of the coalition forces in both Desert Storm and Kosovo indicated that military reform would be bankrupt if the technical aspect of reform did not include information-based technologies. These technologies must be imbedded into new military equipment, from sensors and radars to jet fighters and cruise missiles. However, Russia was also concerned about the impact of information technologies on the brain and consequently morale.
    [Show full text]