Taliban Blaming Any Election Casualties on Casualties Themselves

[The Bread Guy]

The Taliban is promising both kinetic and info propaganda ops during the run-off election coming 7 Nov 09 - English-language statement here, PDF at non-terrorist site here.

Highilghts (emphasis mine):

The Mujahideen of the Islamic Emirate of Afghanistan have worked out programs to foil and prevent this process. They closely monitor all workers, officials and voters including other related programs hammered out in this regard. Every one is responsible for the harm he sustains as a result of his participation in the elections. The Mujahideen have repeatedly warned the people and announced their program of action.

All Mujahideen should make efforts to foil this wicked process; should carry out operations against their centers; prevent people from participating in the elections and block all roads and paths for all public and government vehicles one day before the day of the polling and inform people about this. Similarly, with the help of religious scholars , clerics and elders, educate people about the clandestine motives behind the elections. Create awareness among people regarding the conspiracies of the enemy.

A bit more here.

- edited to update re:  Technoviking's micro-tutorial -

 

[vonGarvin]

Let us not forget that Info Ops is much, much more than "propaganda", as is so often misunderstood by many.
From the US' JP 3-13 "Information Operations":

IO are described as the integrated employment of electronic warfare (EW), computer network operations (CNO), psychological operations (PSYOP), military deception (MILDEC), and operations security (OPSEC), in concert with specified supporting and related capabilities, to influence, disrupt, corrupt or usurp adversarial human and automated decision making while protecting our own.

IO are primarily concerned with affecting decisions and decision-making processes, while at the same time defending friendly decision-making processes

In short, it's about protecting our OODA loop and defeating his OODA loop.  It's about influencing decision making processes, not about influencing populations.  That, sadly, is what many (including our military) think it is.
I would offer that what the TB is doing is not IO (It is not targeting the NATO or OEF decision making process, eg: the military), but is instead launching a propaganda campaign.

Anyway, sorry, just throwing a bit of doctrine out there.

Now, on topic, where in the hell is OUR propaganda machine?

 

[The Bread Guy]

I would offer that what the TB is doing is not IO (It is not targeting the NATO or OEF decision making process, eg: the military), but is instead launching a propaganda campaign.

Very good point, and point taken

Anyway, sorry, just throwing a bit of doctrine out there.

Nothing to apologize for - always good getting more info out there this way.

Now, on topic, where in the hell is OUR propaganda machine?

Here?  Wait, wait, wait - you meant FOR our side, right? ;D

<media rant>
Along these lines, note the CBC's headline for this statement:  "Taliban call for Afghans to boycott run-off".  I have to agree with the Canada-Afghanistan Blog on this one.  The Tailban isn't ASKING anyone to boycott, it's saying what will happen to anyone who tries to vote - threat =/= request.
</media rant>

 

[vonGarvin]

Hey, no worries.  It's just a pet peeve of mine that we (the royal "CF-wide" we) seem to say "Info Ops" or "IO" when we really mean "propaganda" or "influence". 

 

[TangoTwoBravo]

The Canadian Army doctrinal underpinning for Information Operations from B-GL-300 has three core activity areas for Information Operations:

a. Influence Activities (IA) -  any activity for which the primary purpose is to influence the understanding, perception and will of the target audience, be it friendly or hostile.

b. Counter-Command Activity

c.  Information Protection Activity

I only bring this up to say that Information Operations are not just about the enemy's OODA loop. The Canadian Army IO definiation, taken from NATO, mentions "other approved parties" and not just enemies. Canadian doctrine gives Influence Activities as the main focus of Information Operations. In addition, since IA are a sub-set of IO I figure that it is not a doctrinal crime to use the term IO when talking about the bits of IA. It is certainly more precise, however, to use the term IA when talking about PSYOPs etc.

 

[vonGarvin]

Tango2Bravo:
Excellent points.  I only bring up (brought up?) that which I did because though Influencing the population, protecting the friendlies, etc is a key component of IO, I found that IO is so misunderstood, that the other elements seemed to have been forgotten.  At least in my experience.

I have my own opinion (and it's free: meaning it's worth every penny ;D) on the main effort of IO.  I just feel that IA (Influence Activities) is so different from classic IO (Information Operations, the old "OODA Loop stuff"), that the two should be separate.  In short, getting inside the enemy command decision/action cycle is too important to be grouped with IA, which is equally important.  I found that many Info Ops Officers only focussed on IA, at the expense that IO (classic) is neglected and picked up by poor plans officers.