It is a perilous subject on which the armies have wanted to position themselves for a long time. After having postponed the date several times, the Ministry of the Armed Forces finally presented, Wednesday, October 20, its new doctrine of computer influence struggle (L2I), supposed to define the contours of possible military maneuvers in the media space, in particular on the ” social media ” during external operations.
The French army has always taken action in the information field, but it now assumes it loud and clear, like other military powers. This was essentially the meaning of the presentation organized on Wednesday at the headquarters of the military staff in Paris. And this, just under a year after the armies were pinned down by Facebook in a report revealing for the first time that fake profiles were engaged in “Information warfare” in Africa.
At the time, this report was released in the context of a latent clash between Paris and Facebook linked to the birth of the Digital Service Act, a package of European measures aimed in particular at obtaining greater transparency in the algorithms of social networks. The methods of the French military had been put on the same level as the manipulation of Russian information. Something that the armies had badly experienced, considering that they had rather shown inhibition until then, notably refraining from electoral matters, unlike Russia.
“To mislead” the opponent
Since then, water has flowed under the bridges and “Public elements” doctrines presented, although summary, are intended as a way out of the rut. “The informational field (…) is a place of strategic competition, justified the Minister of the Armed Forces, Florence Parly. False, manipulated or subverted information is a weapon. “ Words immediately accompanied by an important precaution in the eyes of the armies: these actions are carried out “With strict respect” of the United Nations Charter and of international humanitarian law (IHL). A narrow margin, while IHL is not very talkative when it comes to information warfare.
The new doctrine thus assumes that the armed forces – beyond simple digital monitoring – will now be able to resort to the distribution of content for ” to mislead “ the opponent. They may be brought to “Denounce, contain, weaken or discredit, including by trickery, an informational attack”. With their tools, they will also be able to “Promote the action of forces”, of “Denounce the inconsistencies or lies of the adversary”, even of “Convince the actors of a crisis to act in the desired direction”. A verbal balancing act, in order to avoid possible accusations of maneuvering “Treacherous”, prohibited, on paper, by international humanitarian law.
You have 48.78% of this article to read. The rest is for subscribers only.