World War, Episode III: The War For Reality

Or: ‘The Mobile Phoney War’

So. According to various observers (including Ukrainian Ambassador to the UK Valeriy Zaluzhniy), we are either on the brink of a world war, or are starting to enter it.

Is that a relief to acknowledge? I have no idea what people in the UK or across the continent felt in 1939 as Europe engaged in the phoney war. From reading a small selection of writings on that period, there seems to have been a mixture of incredulity and opposition (especially in the United States) about the prospect of a global confrontation.

A real Ukrainian telephone, fighting against the abstract, Kyiv, 2016 (author’s own)

I suspect that many Ukrainians would welcome an acknowledgement from other supposed partner governments that this war is now global, with a host of countries being involved in a variety of ways (manpower, hardware, technology, informational resources and more). That realisation would remove the ability from governments all over the world from abrogating their responsibility to the Ukrainians, or from understanding how the fate of Ukraine impacts us all.

I am personally caught, as I wrote to a friend this morning, between trying to formulate a rational assessment of how this war will develop and the nature of recent military developments, and not indulging my vulnerability to Russian messaging that supposed escalation from Ukraine’s partners will result in a global war (I have frequently argued that Russia’s cultural threshold to use nuclear weapons is likely much lower than we suspect). Part of me does also suspect that Moscow is deliberately pushing the idea of imminent war now in order to help Trump present himself as a subsequent peacemaker (the guy who prevented World War III).

The Russian leadership almost certainly wants to intimidate Ukraine’s partners, warning us that supporting the Ukrainians will have severe implications for us (threats of war), and the Ukrainians. Putin is already using new weapons to strike Ukraine as part of that intimidation and pressure on European politicians and societies.

I am not clear as to what ‘war’ means now, or how the new type of global conflict will develop. I am not a military expert, and find it frustrating when people attempt to comment outside their areas of specialism.

But I shall comment on media and information manipulation. Constant messaging – especially videos – to our mobile devices, of barbaric attacks on Ukrainian towns and cities, is almost certainly designed to have a psychological impact on us. It is almost certainly aimed at disrupting how we consider concepts of war and how we ready ourselves (and permit our governments to take the required steps) for future conflict.

Perhaps this is why we are more in a phoney war, where our interactions with our mobile telephones are being manipulated to prevent us from appreciating the true situation around us. (I am very much inspired in thinking on this by David Patrikarakos’s seminal book War in 140 Characters: How Social Media Is Reshaping Conflict in the Twenty-First Century and its description of the evolving role of social media in modern war.)

The relationship between kinetic war and informational manipulation (especially the psychological operations that are wielded to accompany military operations) is complex and evolving rapidly. I suspect the Russians understand this, and – although at times they have struggled to manage the speed with which this delicate balance is shifting – are agile and able to react at pace.

I suspect that Putin understands that his nuclear pressure and threats over a third World War only have limited viability in terms of the length of their impact, and can only get him so far. In the short term, I think Moscow has decided to use increasingly barbaric attacks against Ukraine, in order to demoralise the Ukrainians and deter European governments and populations. I would not be surprised if Russian assets conduct more daring and sensationalist acts of sabotage in Europe.

So: is Putin bluffing when he says that our continued support for Ukraine could lead us to some kind of ‘escalation’, or does he mean it?

To my mind, it is not a question of opposition: I think both those possibilities hold true at the same time. He can be threatening us and have malicious intent at the same time. Trying to decipher Russia’s strategy through their statement is getting increasingly difficult, almost to the point of impossibility, given the breakdown of meaning in their discourse. But what is crucial is not be swayed from supporting the Ukrainians: if Putin does escalate against them, it is for them – and them alone – to decide how to respond. And we must support them.

What is war?

I wrote above that I try to avoid commenting on military issues, not having the expertise or experience. However, it is clear that the nature of war is changing, and also the value and techniques of information manipulation as a method of doing harm on a state level.

I think that in order to understand the better the nature of modern war, one has to examine the purpose of war.

Russian protagonists are clear now: the war on Ukraine is a war for ‘minds and souls’. The war on Ukraine is less about territorial conquest for itself, than about forcing people to accept a new kind of reality. Information manipulation and the mediasation of the world enable this in part, but the process of russification across enslaved Ukraine is a demonstration of how Moscow is using various means to persuade people to accept a new mindset.

The Ukrainians are at the centre of this war over reality. They are refusing to accept the imposition of the Kremlins worldview, its supposition that violence and vertical notions of authority should shape culture and society.

The Ukrainians realise that giving into Moscow would mean the destruction of their culture, identity, and worldview. This has been happening in parts of Ukraine for over a decade, but marks a particular relationship between military conflict and information manipulation: in Ukraine, Russia is trying to enslave people so it can impose on them its own informational dictatorship.

Outside Ukraine, it has to take a different approach. Moscow is intent on convincing people that the Kremlin’s approach to culture and society is superior and worth emulating: the idea of an autocratic culture where leaders are able to pursue their interests without opposition. The Russian leadership that, if other countries adopt the similar system, this makes it easier for them to conduct their foreign policy aims.

This russification is being conducted brutally by Russians within Ukraine – and in other countries that Moscow has invaded. But the war for minds, to force minds to accept the Kremlin’s reality, continues and is likely to evolve. We must be alert to how it mutates and develop our resilience accordingly. We must confront the sources of information manipulation before they can do harm. This is a new way we have to fight.

And we must not be persuaded to abandon the Ukrainians.

*********************************

This Substack will always be free. But I would ask readers to share this post.

Please consider making a payment to the Hell Hornets, a reconnaissance unit of the Ukrainian Armed Forces, which has been operating in Donetsk Oblast since the start of the invasion. They are saving lives. Drones do save lives, and you can help.

Unit's PayPal: mykytenkoy@gmail.com

Please make sure you write 'Private donation' as a payment note.