Information, the new force multiplier
Dinesh Kumar
When
Karachi airport came under attack from the Taliban on June 8, the
Pakistani Army took the unusual measure of keeping the media in
Pakistan pro-actively informed about its anti-terrorist operations
through Twitter. During such sensational incidents in today's age when
rumours appear to travel faster than the speed of light, often with
disastrous consequences, the Pakistani Army resorted to this
innovative measure considering that much was at stake. The outcome of
its use that night should make a subject of study for any student of
Communication Studies. But in the meantime it has marked an
interesting innovation from which the Indian security establishment
could learn.

The armed forces will have to guard against information lag and equip themselves to prevent rumours from spreading |
Curiously, 10 days later on June 18,
the Ministry of Information and Broadcasting issued an advisory to the
Ministry of Defence (MoD) asking them to enhance its presence on
social media such as Twitter and Facebook. It is not known whether the
decision was influenced by the Pakistani Army's recent resort to using
Twitter or whether it stems from Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s
penchant for using social media for dissemination of information and
perception management. As
of now, the Indian Army is making limited use of Twitter and Facebook,
which again is confined to being used by the Army's Additional
Director-General (Public Interface) or ADG (PI). Its limited
utilisation is mostly confined to “safe” subjects. Otherwise the
three services make use of their respective public relations officers
(PROs) posted in the Ministry of Defence and their various respective
formations around the country. Overall,
the structure and functioning of the MoD's public relations
establishment has remained largely the same. Service officers posted
as PROs around the country technically come under the directorate of
public relations in the MoD, headed by an Additional Principal
Information Officer who in turn belongs to the Indian Information
Service. PROs posted in news active formations such as in either or
both the Srinagar and Nagrota-based corps headquarters (both located
in Jammu and Kashmir) are functionally under their respective
commands. On occasions this has led to difference in views, if not
friction, between the MoD's directorate of public relations and the
PROs who are under direct instructions from the ground formations. Dissemination
of information Beginning in
the first half of the 1990s, the “civilian control” on information
dissemination led to the Army resorting to some innovative measures.
On taking over as the Chief of Army Staff in July 1993, General Bipin
Chandra Joshi issued a list of 10 commandments which, most
significantly, had included the point about needing to make use of the
“media as a force multiplier”. These commandments listed on small
laminated cards were issued to all officers, especially those posted
in insurgency-afflicted areas of Jammu and Kashmir and the North-East.
The Army had then gone on to further activate a section each in the
military intelligence (MI) and military operations (MO directorate –
section 24 in the MI directorate (earlier known as MI-24) which dealt
with psychological warfare and section 11 in the MO directorate
(earlier known as MO-11. Both engaged in disseminating information off
the record and without attribution. Not surprisingly, a turf war begun
between these two sections which led to their being merged into what
is now known as the Army Liaison Cell or ALC which is headed by the
ADG (PI) in the rank of a major general who in turn reports to the
Director General of Military Intelligence (DGMI). The ADG (PI), who
meets and briefs journalists only off the record, is the only other
point of “official” contact for the media. The Indian Navy has
established a Foreign Cooperation and Intelligence department headed
by a rear admiral who, again, meets and briefs only off the record.
The Indian Air Force has a Director Operations, Media and Public
Relations, a post held by a group captain who again is known to rarely
meet the media. Social
media revolution Social
media such as Facebook, Twitter and Youtube is causing its own
revolutions. An unimaginative and insensitively produced video clip
posted on Youtube in the faraway United States province of California
resulted in attacks on Americans in Libya and Egypt during which the
US Ambassador to Tripoli was assassinated. Provocative MMSes on mobile
phones sparked fear among the youth from India's North-Eastern states
in cosmopolitan Bengaluru that led to a temporary exodus from the
country's key IT hub. These
new forms of media have contributed immensely to information warfare.
Like the ongoing revolution in military affairs or RMA, the ongoing
revolution in Information and Communication Technologies or ICTs is
posing considerable challenges to the armed forces and security
agencies. Technology has empowered everyone. Information can today be
transmitted instantly by anyone anywhere everywhere. The ongoing
revolution in ICTs has been as benevolently unifying as it has
demonstrated its ability at the same time to be mercilessly divisive.
It has transcended all humanly created barriers and even nature
itself. It has rendered irrelevant geographical and sovereign
boundaries. It does not recognise the diverse and divisive forms of
classification of human beings such as ideology, religion, ethnicity,
nationality, sects, communities, race, colour etc. Yet, like all good
things it also comes with a curse. It has had an equally polarising
effect along the lines of these social classifications. Social
media, in particular, is about here and now and often borders on the
sensational. Yet, it has on many occasions been setting the agenda.
The time between events and their reportage has shrunk to there now
often being a zero gap between these two. Simply put, it is instant.
This requires near instantaneous responses and sometimes proactive
measures such as what was used by the Pakistani Army earlier this
month. This involves imagination and innovation. More importantly, it
requires a realisation and a will to change. Live
coverage The use of
Unmanned Aerial Vehicles or UAVs, until recently the preserve of the
armed forces the world over, is now being taught in journalism
departments of a few universities in the United States. It is
currently in limited use by media organisations. But it may only be a
matter of time before these remotely controlled aerial ‘reporters’
will both video record and accord live aerial coverage to wars,
conflicts, encounters, riots and almost every other form of human
violence. Imagine the challenge it could pose to the armed forces and
other security agencies deployed in Jammu and Kashmir or any part of
India under terror attack or political violence. The
Indian armed forces and security agencies have been slow to change.
Instances of innovations and proactive measures in disseminating
information have been few. Among the more recent event was the mystery
encounter in J&K's Karen sector, where the Army was reportedly
engaged in a fortnight-long encounter starting from September 23 to
October 8, 2013 during which 10 to 12 terrorists were reportedly
killed. No dead bodies of the reportedly slain terrorists were
recovered and the last shot was fired by the Army on October 2, six
days before the encounter officially ended. The encounter had begun as
mysteriously as it had ended, raising more questions than answers
which had subsequently led to former defence minister Arackaparambil
Kurien Antony to order an inquiry into the Army's claims. The inquiry
report remains classified. The Army can ill-afford such mishandling
considering the sensitivities involved in a strife-torn state such as
Jammu and Kashmir. But
then such mishandling is not new. In May 1995, after the media was
first allowed to meet Pakistani terrorist Mast Gul and his gang inside
the holy Sufi shrine in Charar-e-Sharief located in the Kashmir
Valley's Badgam district, the Army subsequently clamped down on the
media preventing them from coming within a 10-km radius of the
township in order to prevent any ‘oxygen of publicity’ to the
gathered terrorists. On the night of May 11, the mosque and adjoining
buildings were reportedly set on fire by Mast Gul who managed to
escape to Pakistan. The incident created an uproar across the
politically sensitive state. Yet, the following day, the Army's XV
Corps headquarters in Srinagar was forbidden by the government from
permitting the media to visit Charar-e-Sharief thereby fuelling more
rumours. By the time the MoD conducted a media trip to the spot, the
damage had been done. The local populace was by then convinced that it
was the Army which had set fire to the shrine after first spraying gun
powder from its helicopters during the night. The Army did not even
care to explain that Army helicopters then not only did not have night
flying capabilities but also maintained a safe distance from the
ground while flying in order to avoid being shot down by
terrorists. Then four
years later on August 10, 1999, a Pakistani Navy Atlantique maritime
patrol-cum-reconnaissance aircraft was shot down by an air-to-air
missile fired from a MiG-21 fighter aircraft that had been scrambled
following the Pakistani aircraft's intrusion in the Rann of Kutch area
of Gujarat. Yet the information of the aircraft being shot down came
not from India but from Islamabad which was quick to issue a
condemnatory statement. It sent journalists scrambling telephones and
scurrying to South Block for information that took time coming. This
put on defensive the IAF which took time explaining the facts.
Apparently, the IAF took time because they had to get a series of
clearances from higher levels of the government before coming out with
details. The resultant loss of time led to round one going to
Pakistan. With considerable effort and diplomacy India was
subsequently able to establish that the Pakistan Navy's French-made
aircraft had violated Indian airspace. Defence Attaches of all
countries were extensively briefed by the IAF, which subsequently also
took a media party to the area in Mi-8 helicopters that had to abort
its flight after it came under ground fire from Pakistan. Interestingly,
the Pakistani government had done what the US Navy had done 11 years
earlier. On July 3, 1988, a US warship, the USS Vincennes, had shot
down an Iran Air Airbus A300 passenger aircraft over the Persian Gulf
flying from Tehran to Dubai killing all 290 on board after reportedly
mistaking it to be an Iranian air force fighter aircraft. The US
Chairman of Joint Chiefs of Staff Admiral William J Crow had then
taken the proactive measure of briefing the media within a few hours
of the incident thereby wresting the initiative from the genuinely
aggrieved Iranians who had been slower to react. The
armed forces and other security forces will need to work towards
quickly adapting to the ongoing revolution in ICTs and factoring the
fast-paced changes in information dissemination. Handling this is
undoubtedly only getting more complicated and unwieldy as is
perception management in today's age of information overload, which
many times is not necessarily authentic. What is needed is timely and
proactive dissemination of information in today's highly challenging
information-packed environment which is often marked by fog and
questions rather than clarity and authentic information. The
new weapon *
The Indian armed forces and security agencies have been slow to
change. Instances of innovations and pro-active measures in
disseminating information have been few *
The information flow is often instantaneousness. The live coverage of
spectacular events such as the 9/11 terror attacks on the Twin Towers
in New York (2001) and the 26/11 terror attacks in Mumbai (2008) have
demonstrated how there is now a zero time gap between the event and
its reportage. *
What is needed is timely and sometimes pro-active dissemination of
information in today's highly challenging information-packed
environment. When info
is power In recent years,
however, the pace of information itself has changed.
Consider the following *
The radio took 40 years to reach an audience of 50 million. *
The TV took 15 years to reach an audience of 50 million. *
The landline took 130 years to reach one billion subscribers. Now
consider this for some mind-boggling rapidity and incomparable growth *
The World Wide Web (www) took just three years to reach its first 50
million users on the Internet. Internet subscribers today are in
excess of 2.75 billion. *
From just a solitary website in 1990, the number of websites had
crossed 700 million by the end of 2013, with projections of touching 1
billion by this year end. *
Mobile phones subscribers increased from 11 million worldwide in 1990
to over 6 billion in 2013 with projections of touching 7 billion by
the end of 2014. The staggering
growth in such a short span of these new vehicles of communication
does not even compare.
 |