29 octobre 2020 | Local, Terrestre

Fight the Information War Without Sacrificing Canadian Values

David Scanlon

Defence Watch Guest Writer

Recent news reports have shown the Canadian Armed Forces are struggling to define ethical boundaries as they expand their capability to meet the rising threats of the information age.

A global information war is now being fought in a “grey zone” where malign state and non-state actors are trying to sow confusion and division across the international community.

American professor of strategy and author Sean McFate writes that future military victories “will be won and lost in the information space, not on the physical battlefield.” But he warns that “some democracies may be tempted to sacrifice their values in the name of victory.”

Recent mishaps by Canada's military underscore this temptation.

In April, the Ottawa Citizen published this headline: “Canadian Forces ‘information operations' pandemic campaign quashed after details revealed to top general.”

The article reported that the “IO” campaign was targeted at Canadians and “called for ‘shaping' and ‘exploiting' information” with the aim of maintaining civil order and ensuring “public compliance with suppression measures” during the coronavirus pandemic.

A parallel effort involved the “data mining” of personal social media accounts in Ontario by a team assigned to military intelligence. The military shared data with the province, including findings that some of its citizens were unhappy about its response to the pandemic.

Defence Minister Harjit Sajjan ordered a review of the information operations campaign and an investigation into the legality of the data-mining activities.

Given the Canadian Armed Forces were tasked with helping the provinces of Quebec and Ontario deal with the cruel impact of the coronavirus in long-term care homes, it is disquieting that such a campaign would be contemplated, let alone put in writing.

Chief of the defence staff General Jon Vance reportedly avowed that, “as long as he was in charge information operations tactics wouldn't be used in a domestic situation, except in the case where an enemy had invaded the country.”

Despite the defence chief's promise, only six months later the armed forces were caught conducting a disinformation campaign on Canada's Atlantic coast.

Under the headline, “Canadian Soldiers Cry Wolf, Alarming Residents,” the New York Times reported that a military psychological training exercise had “gone wrong,” and that a “fake disinformation exercise had become a real one.”

For reasons as yet unexplained, military personnel circulated a forged letter from the province of Nova Scotia warning certain residents to be wary of a wandering wolfpack, backed by loudspeakers blaring the sounds of growling wolves.

It took some time for the armed forces to accept responsibility and apologize. Meanwhile, baffled local officials assured affected residents the province had not issued the letter and there were no wolves in the area.

The defence minister rightly supports training the military “on how best to respond to foreign actors who use influence activities.” But to avoid further mistakes he ordered such training paused until an investigation into the wayward wolfpacks was concluded.

Emma Briant, a US-based British academic and author who specializes in propaganda and political communication, told the New York Times she finds the recent incidents “appalling,” a “failure of governance,” a “failure to ensure restraint,” and a “failure to ensure ethics are built into training and planning operations.”

“They seem to have introduced a policy of weaponization of influence, domestically,” Briant observes. Instead, she advises, Canada's military needs to be building “a relationship of trust with the public.”

The military's pattern of ethical breaches appears to reveal an embedded operational mindset fixed on tactics, as opposed to a strategic one focussed on building public trust.

British military historian Hew Strachan wrote that armed forces are attracted to the operational level of war, as opposed to the strategic. It allows them to “appropriate what they see as the acme of their professional competence,” enabling them to operate in “a politics free zone.”

This may in part explain General Vance's decision in 2015 to “operationalize” the military's public affairs branch, which is responsible for public communication. The branch was seen as not delivering tangible “effects” in support of so-called “operations in the information environment.”

By operationalizing a strategic function like public affairs, the military was in effect reducing it to an operational or tactical capability, like special operations forces or precision-guided missiles. Ostensibly, these can deliver precise, tangible “effects” under direct military control.

Some of the perils of this new approach were exposed when a senior public affairs officer, Brig.-Gen Jay Janzen (then a colonel), began using his Twitter account to target journalists, commentators, and politicians.

In April 2018, for instance, he sparked a heated Twitter exchange with opposition defence critic James Bezan. The defence committee had been debating a military deployment to Mali to help defeat cancerous African offshoots of ISIS and al-Qaeda.

Janzen tweeted that questions about the mission from opposition Members of Parliament were “nonsensical.” He even proposed “better” questions for opposition parties to ask.

For a serving senior officer to publicly criticize elected officials was unprecedented. Government ministers must have been perplexed to see a high-ranking service member tweeting better debate questions to opposition MPs.

Janzen's tweets, which appear to have at least the tacit approval of his superiors, set an example for other service members.

Another perplexing public information moment occurred last April when the Canadian military reported that a Canadian frigate patrolling off the Greek coast had “lost contact” with its Cyclone maritime helicopter.

It was later revealed the helicopter was moments from landing on the ship when, as the CBC reported, “it went down in full view of horrified shipmates.” Tragically, all six aboard the Cyclone were killed in the crash.

The military was widely criticized for misrepresenting the facts—contact was in fact never “lost” and officials failed to explain the miscommunication.

Some practitioners of public affairs and information operations have been telling their military bosses that with scientific techniques like “target audience analysis” they can change people's perceptions and behaviours with astounding precision.

Canada's defence department recently paid over a million dollars to Emic Consulting Limited (whose founder worked at the UK's controversial and now defunct Strategic Communication Laboratories) to teach public affairs officers and others how to conduct “actor and audience analysis” and otherwise weaponize behavioural science.

But is this training being misapplied?

One aim of information operations is to change the perceptions and behaviours of target audiences using a range of influence techniques, including “psychological” and “deception” operations.

As the defence chief alluded, such techniques should not be approved for use in Canada, other than in exceptional circumstances against clearly defined foes, such as terrorists.

Military public affairs, by contrast, is about ensuring Canada's armed forces follow federal communications policy, which calls for maintaining “public trust,” and directs that federal communications “must be objective, factual, non-partisan, clear, and written in plain language.”

In a free and democratic society, public trust is a priceless strategic “effect.”

As malign actors seek to create confusion and division, Canadians need trusted sources of information. Surveys consistently show that Canadians trust their military. Military leaders and their public affairs advisors must preserve this trust.

As called for in defence policy, Canada's armed forces do need the tools to wage information and cyber warfare. They are already facing such threats on missions overseas.

But the armed forces also need the tools to communicate with Canadians and other friendly audiences in a timely, truthful, and accurate fashion.

Transparency is a potent democratic deterrent against disinformation.

Informed by the investigations into recent mishaps, the defence minister and chief of the defence staff should consider the following:

o To ensure that information operations have proper approvals and oversight, and are conducted ethically, robust policy, doctrine, and governance are essential.

o To ensure broad awareness of ethical considerations when conducting influence activities, related training and education needs to be incorporated at all rank levels.

o To explain their actions and help build public trust, the armed forces need to field uniformed spokespersons more often. (The military's “chief spokesman” cited by the New York Times in the “wolves” story was a civilian.)

o To ensure coherent doctrine and effective implementation of information-related capabilities, a professional total force cadre of practitioners should be created.

o Military public affairs must be reinvigorated as a strategic capability that promotes transparency, provides unhindered advice to commanders at all levels, and ensures close coordination with the civilian communication arms of government.

o Policy and doctrine, along with leaders, operators, and information practitioners, must clearly differentiate between activities intended to inform Canadians, such as public affairs, and information operations designed to influence or deceive adversaries.

Fighting disinformation is a serious whole-of-nation challenge. It requires an informed public, ethical and transparent government, an engaged private sector, a vigorous and valued free press, and armed forces that respect and reflect Canadian values.

https://www.thechronicleherald.ca/news/canada/fight-the-information-war-without-sacrificing-canadian-values-513691/

Sur le même sujet

  • Joint Support Ship cost up by $1.1 billion - taxpayers will now spend $3.4 billion on project

    11 juin 2018 | Local, Naval

    Joint Support Ship cost up by $1.1 billion - taxpayers will now spend $3.4 billion on project

    DAVID PUGLIESE, OTTAWA CITIZEN Taxpayers will have to spend $1.1 billion extra on new navy supply ships that are going to be built starting this summer, the Liberal government now acknowledges. Previously the cost of building the two ships at Seaspan shipyards in Vancouver, BC had been pegged at $2.3 billion. But the government ordered a review of that cost figure and in an email to Postmedia, Procurement Minister Carla Qualtrough's office now confirms the cost for the Joint Support Ships, or JSS, is set at $3.4 billion. Pat Finn, the head of procurement at the Department of National Defence, said the new price tag came as the government decided to do an additional analysis of the project and include other items it had not previously included. In some cases equipment for the ship has been purchased so there are better costs available on those items, Finn said in an interview Monday. Also taken into account was new infrastructure and the delays with the program, which, in turn, drove up the price as the cost of material increased over the years. “The build period has changed quite dramatically,” Finn acknowledged. At one point, the first ship was supposed to arrive in 2012. That has been changed a number of times with the government later hoping for a 2018 delivery and then a 2019 arrival for the first vessel. The Department of National Defence is now hoping for the delivery of the first ship in 2022 or 2023. Construction will begin at Seaspan this summer of some initial portions of the vessels, Finn said. The government hopes starting construction on the supply ships in the summer will head off any potential layoffs of skilled employees at Seaspan. Finn said of the $3.4 billion figure, the actual cost of building the two ships accounts for a little more than 60 per cent. Finn said the new costing model for the JSS is more akin to the one used by the parliamentary budget office. That office had an even higher estimate for JSS when it concluded in 2013 that the final tally for taxpayers would be $4.13 billion. The Joint Support Ships are critical for the navy as they provide fuel and supplies for warships at sea. But the Royal Canadian Navy retired its last two aging supply ships years ago. One was damaged beyond repair in a fire. The other was removed from service because of excessive corrosion. The Canadian military had been relying on the Spanish and Chilean navies to provide supply vessels for short periods of time to help fuel up Canadian warships at sea. Because of the delays in the JSS program, the previous Conservative government entered into agreement with Davie Shipyards in Quebec to lease a commercial vessel that had been converted into a refueling and supply ship. That ship, the MV Asterix, is at the heart of federal government's case against Vice Admiral Mark Norman. Norman has been accused by the RCMP of warning Davie in the fall of 2015 that Liberal cabinet ministers wanted to derail the Asterix project. Word of the Liberal plan leaked out to the news media and the resulting embarrassment forced the Trudeau government to back down on its plans and the conversion of Asterix proceeded. Norman was put under investigation and Prime Minister Justin Trudeau predicted on two occasions the officer would ultimately end up in court. In March, the RCMP charged Norman with a single count of breach of trust. A date for the trial has not yet been set. Norman denies the charge and has said he looks forward to clearing his name. Asterix is considered a rare achievement in Canadian military procurement in that it was delivered on time and on budget. The supply ship is now at sea with Royal Canadian Navy and is headed to a major military exercise to begin later this month. http://ottawacitizen.com/news/national/defence-watch/joint-support-ship-cost-up-by-1-1-billion-taxpayers-will-now-spend-3-4-billion-on-project

  • Seaspan Announces Closing of Second $500 Million Investment by Fairfax Financial Holdings Limited

    16 janvier 2019 | Local, Naval

    Seaspan Announces Closing of Second $500 Million Investment by Fairfax Financial Holdings Limited

    HONG KONG, Jan. 15, 2019 /CNW/ - Seaspan Corporation (NYSE: SSW) ("Seaspan") announced today the closing of the second tranche of the $1 billion aggregate investment commitment by Fairfax Financial Holdings Limited and its affiliates (collectively, "Fairfax") in Seaspan. As with Fairfax's initial $500 million investment in Seaspan, and pursuant to definitive agreements entered into on March 13, 2018 and announced on March 14, 2018, this second tranche of funding (the "Second Fairfax Investment") is structured as a $250 million issuance of (i) 5.50% senior notes due 2026 and (ii) approximately 38.46 million warrants (the "2019 Warrants"). Pursuant to a definitive agreement entered into and announced on May 31, 2018, Fairfax has agreed to immediately exercise the 2019 Warrants at an exercise price of $6.50per warrant, for additional equity proceeds to Seaspan of $250 million. As a result, Seaspan's aggregate proceeds from the Second Fairfax Investment will be $500 million. This brings Fairfax's total investment in Seaspan to $1 billion, the proceeds of which will be used to fund future growth initiatives, repay debt and for general corporate purposes. With the closing of the Second Fairfax Investment, Fairfax's aggregate shareholdings in Seaspan are 76.9 million Class A common shares or approximately 36% of shares outstanding. Fairfax continues to hold the 25 million seven year warrants, with an exercise price of $8.05, which were issued to it on July 16, 2018. Summary of Fairfax Investments1 Investment Date Issued/Exercised Proceeds to Seaspan 2025 Notes February 14, 2018 $250 million 2018 Warrants July 16, 2018 $250 million 2026 Notes January 15, 2019 $250 million 2019 Warrants January 15, 2019 $250 million 1 Does not include the 25 million seven year warrants outstanding as of the date hereof David Sokol, Chairman of Seaspan Corporation commented, "The closing of this follow-on Fairfax investment bolsters Seaspan's balance sheet for the future. Seaspan's management team and Board of Directors are proud to continue building upon the strong partnership created with Fairfax. This additional investment will enhance Seaspan's ability to execute on our long-term goals of deleveraging, strengthening our balance sheet, and creating value through disciplined and thoughtful capital allocation." Prem Watsa, Chairman and Chief Executive Officer of Fairfax said, "With the closing of this investment, we are excited to expand our partnership with Seaspan, which now represents one of Fairfax's largest investments." About Seaspan Seaspan is a leading independent charter owner and operator of containerships with industry leading ship management services. We charter our vessels primarily pursuant to long-term, fixed-rate, time charters to the world's largest container shipping liners. Seaspan's operating fleet consists of 112 containerships with a total capacity of more than 900,000 TEU, an average age of approximately 6 years and an average remaining lease period of approximately 4 years, on a TEU-weighted basis. Seaspan has the following securities listed on The New York Stock Exchange: Symbol: Description: SSW Class A common shares SSW PR D Series D preferred shares SSW PR E Series E preferred shares SSW PR G Series G preferred shares SSW PR H Series H preferred shares SSW PR I Series I preferred shares SSWN 6.375% senior unsecured notes due 2019 SSWA 7.125% senior unsecured notes due 2027 SSW25 5.500% senior notes due 2025 About Fairfax Financial Holdings Limited Fairfax is a holding company which, through its subsidiaries, is engaged in property and casualty insurance and reinsurance and investment management. Investor Inquiries: Mr. Matt Borys Investor Relations Seaspan Corporation Tel. +1-778-328-5340 Email: mborys@seaspanltd.ca SOURCE Seaspan Corporation https://www.newswire.ca/news-releases/seaspan-announces-closing-of-second-500-million-investment-by-fairfax-financial-holdings-limited-848167000.html

  • National Defence executives rake in almost $3.5 million in bonuses

    3 août 2023 | Local, Sécurité

    National Defence executives rake in almost $3.5 million in bonuses

    National Defence civilian executives were awarded almost $3.5 million in bonuses with one public servant being paid an extra $101,000.

Toutes les nouvelles