Information warfareis not currently defined in U.S. Department of Defense (DoD) or U.S. Army doctrine, but it is a term found in past doctrine.¹ What is in today’s DoD lexicon is the terminformation environment, the “aggregate of individuals, organizations, and systems that collect, process, disseminate, or act on information” (U.S. Joint Chiefs of Staff, 2010b). Joint doctrine (e.g., JP 3-13.1) makes clear that “there is an electromagnetic spectrum portion of the information environment” (U.S. Joint Chiefs of Staff, 2007, p. vii).² Thus, wired and wireless technology fit in this landscape.

As a term,information warfare, or IW, remains...

Since the creation of the Internet’s predecessor, the ARPANet, the constant characteristic of the information environment has been one of kaleidoscopic change. A notable change in recent years has been the merging of the wired and wireless worlds as wireless technology becomes increasingly widespread and capable.

The rapid pace of change makes it difficult for even nimble corporations to keep up, and the challenge for the U.S. military is even greater. Acquiring materiel rapidly is difficult, given governmental controls and processes, and it is difficult to make rapid changes in the personnel structure. Thus, keeping up with major changes, such...

Before discussing IO in greater detail, it is first helpful to set the concept in a larger context. IO take place in the information environment and are a subset of information warfare (IW). This chapter further describes the information environment as introduced in Chapter One. It identifies its components and reviews past and proposed terms that are relevant to understanding how the information environment can and should be compartmentalized.

As noted in Chapter One, the official DoD lexicon (JP 1-02) identifiesinformation environmentas the “aggregate of individuals, organizations, and systems that collect, process, disseminate, or act on information” (U.S....

Current joint doctrine defines IO as

the integrated employment, during military operations, of information-related capabilities in concert with other lines of operation to influence, disrupt, corrupt, or usurp the decision-making of adversaries and potential adversaries while protecting our own. (Gates, 2011)

Figure 3.1 is an expanded version of Figure 2.2 in Chapter Two. It depicts the doctrinal organization of IO in the Army today. As the figure shows, doctrinal IO emphasizes the integration of five “core capabilities” (though it also includes the integration of a number of “supporting” and “related” capabilities). The shading divides these five capability areas into two...

This chapter attempts to construct a more coherent vision of IO that captures its essential functions. The chapter is organized as follows. First, we pose three key questions that need to be addressed to better define IO. Lengthy discussions follow that provide a range of possible answers for each question considered. At the end of the chapter, we propose a new definition of IO.

Our approach to defining IO was to pose three questions, the answers to which would help develop a coherent vision for IO:

1. Is the role of IO integration, advocacy, or a capability in its own...

Our proposed definition concerns one of the problems identified in how IO is characterized today. The next issue is how IO should be organized. This chapter takes up the issue of EW and how it overlaps with other key areas, including EMSO, SIGINT, and cyber operations.

We analyzed a number of EW and EMSO tasks and assessed their commonalities and overlap. Specifically, we assessed the degree of overlap in these tasks by comparing a list of EMSO tasks to a list of EW tasks. TheElectronic Warfare Capability-Based Assessment(EW CBA), issued by the TRADOC Analysis Center, provided a list...

Fundamental areas in the psychological realm, which are closely related but currently kept separate, are PA and MISO.

As defined in JP 1-02 (U.S. Joint Chiefs of Staff, 2010b), PA includes “those public information, command information, and community relations activities directed toward both the external and internal publics with interest in the Department of Defense.” It typically focuses on fact-based truth to maintain credibility. The JP on PA was last revised in May 2005 and covered the following topics:

the rapid expansion of social media use, even by combatant commands

Internet access

unclassified web pages to communicate with external audiences...

Consolidation and coordination need to be considered among the functional areas that relate to IW. There are a number of major factors driving this need:

1. the aforementioned convergence of mediums and applications

2. the expansion of cyberspace in the information environment

3. the need for efficient use of manpower.

In this chapter, we assert that the relevant realms that contain the functional areas pertaining to IW are just two: the psychological and the technical. The psychological, which incorporates the considerations provided for our proposed definition of IO, is focused on content and the target is people. The technical realm...

In Chapter Four, we proposed a new definition for IO that is focused on what we call the psychological realm, or content-based capabilities. In this chapter, we recognize that organization and staffing changes should be commensurate, but there are significant considerations that must occur before courses of action can be clarified. This chapter identifies these considerations for the psychological realm.

Much of the IO reform debate centers on how, exactly, IO and various core, supporting, and related capabilities ought to be assigned to staffs. A clear vision of the nature and goals of IO should significantly advance the debate.

In...

Today, the wireless and wired mediums are converging. Computer and telecommunication networks are becoming one and the same. Transmission of digitized packets over Internet-protocol networks is rapidly supplanting the old technology (e.g., dedicated analog channels), particularly for information sharing and media broadcasting. In short, the information environment is changing in fundamental ways, and Army doctrine needs to change to accommodate those changes. The Army is aware of many of the challenges in this area, and it is in the process of pursuing change. As noted earlier in this monograph, IO is a “moving target,” and several changes had been implemented...