Sara Russo
Much of the debate around cognitive warfare has been largely revolved around definitions. Is it merely a continuation of information operations? A kind of psychological warfare that uses digital technologies? Or is it a completely new domain? These questions have been at the center of policy debates, doctrinal documents, and public discussions. However, by focusing on these questions, an additional issue that is as significant as the starting point of a common definition has been overlooked.
The real question, in addition to what cognitive warfare is, is why it works so persistently.
The explanation does not only lie in the novelty of the phenomenon or the technological superiority; rather, it is about the cost. The influence sphere of cognitive warfare is effective because it is cheap to start, hard to pinpoint the perpetrator, and a lot more expensive to counter. One single ambiguous action – may it be legal, narrative, administrative, or informational – has the potential to trigger a cascade of reviews, coordination mechanisms, public responses, and internal alignment activities that would overwhelm the initial investment.
No comments:
Post a Comment