Hooper Prize – Second Place: Memes or Missiles

Second Place

LNN Esme Clayton, Joint Hospital Group

Memes or missiles? Should we invest more in Information Operations?

Definitions

To be able to discuss this accurately, we need to first understand what the word ‘meme’ means. Although, it may be commonly associated by being coined by Richard Dawkins in The Selfish Gene (1976) as a ‘unit’ of culture. We can look for the meaning of the word further back in time all the way back to the Greeks, where they used the word ‘minema’ meaning ‘imitated’. To think of the word simply it can be defined as a type of behaviour, picture, text, containing information which is passed from person to person.

Missiles are easier to define as ‘an object which is forcibly propelled at a target’.

Memes – an extension of a much older concept?

Firstly, to look into the benefits of investing more into information operations, it is useful to look at an example of its use in WW2. Operation Mincemeat, was a successful British operation where they deceived the Germans into thinking that the allies were planning to invade Greece and Sardinia, when the actual target was Sicily. They did this by planting fake correspondents into a corpse dressed as a Major. As you can see from this example, the British used both tactics and sensitive information, to manipulate the opponents plans. The Germans doubled the number of troops sent to Sardinia, allowing the allies to fully capture Sicily. Another example was at the D-Day landings when they used dummy tanks to distract the enemy, and suggested that the Allies would attack other places to weaken German forces in Normandy. This would be in favour of the use of information operations in warfare, as we can see that it is very difficult to decipher what is fact and what is fiction, especially in heightened stress situations such as war. With the ever increasing knowledge behind technology and artificial intelligence, it would be vital for the UK to invest further into this, as it is impossible to predict what it could be used for in the future.

The importance of critical thinking and analysis

However, we are also able to use this example as a disadvantage of information operations, as the Germans saw the corpse of a ‘Major’ and gathered the information about the British and used it to defend their country. Although, the difficulty lies when interpreting which information is useful and which has been staged. For the proper use of information operations you need three core elements – intelligence, leadership and information systems. Firstly intelligence, intelligence is ever changing and it is one of the most dynamic elements in wartime, so it needs to be acted upon with speed and accuracy, in order to get the desired outcome. A strong leader is needed to ensure that there is strong decision making, they are able to critically think and visualise the battlefield, to come up with the best options with the information gained. And finally, the ability to acquire, analyse and store the information that is obtained. And a limitation of the final element, is that the information can be leaked or hacked, showing the importance of the first two core elements, to allow the information to be acted on immediately. With the current funding the armed forces are struggling to find the correct people who are qualified and have the desired experience for the role. It is understandable that the best minds in artificial intelligence, computers and social media are attracted to the high salaries in multi-international companies. If they invested more into intelligence operations, I believe a large percentage of this investment should be utilised to train people to correctly use information operations, as well as to decipher between correct and incorrect information.

Are Info Ops effective in a modern, media-savvy world?

There is evidence to show that although information operations in warfare was effective in the past, however, now they are more well known and exposed, meaning that they are less effective, as they are expected. For example, we can look at a more recent use of information operations in the Russia and Ukraine war. Videos were leaked of an alleged IED used by the Ukrainians at a Russian sewage treatment plant. Although, with the ever expanding technology experts have managed to debunk the claims and have concluded the video to be staged. Even though information operations have been described as ‘the epitome of what it means to fight on the information battlefield’ moments like this are a disadvantage for Russia, as the more evidence like this is debunked the less likely information operations will be effective. However, it is difficult to quantify how much of a disadvantage it is for Russia, as even though the British military can be sure this is fake. If the British public’s opinion is uncertain then the support for the British military and government is gradually eroded away. This is an advantage for the Russians, as dissolving the trust between enemy militaries increases the likelihood of breakdown and therefore increasing Russia’s chance of success. We can use Russia as an example again to prove the ineffectiveness of information operations, as they were used in the Orange revolution in Ukraine and the 2008 Russia-Georgia war with little effectiveness, and more recently in 2014 Russia was unable to persuade east Ukraine, with overt media campaigns, to be opposed to the Maidan protests. Which goes back to the core elements of information operations, which are intelligence and leadership. Personnel need to be able to constantly filter through the information and to be up to date with the battlefield, to enable you to critically think about what is useful or not. Which in a heightened stress situation is an extremely difficult skill to effectively hone in.

On the other hand, we can look back to 1944 when the prime minister Winston Churchill stated “set Europe ablaze”, for an example of when limited trained individuals effectively used information operations. The Special Operations Executive (SOE) was formed to utilise sabotage and subversion, ultimately being in charge of information operations. Violette Szabo was a SOE agent and had brief training to prepare her for her operations and still managed to excel and damage German communications. This information allowed allies to refine the degree of knowledge they had on the German units. And they managed to inflict around 100 acts of sabotage from 5-6^th June 1944, delaying trains by damaging the tracks, which ultimately delayed troops and supplies. The use of information operations helped with the D-Day success, and did truly set Europe ablaze.

Missiles: a known and understood concept, with clear results!

Moving away from information operations and onto the redundancy or importance of missiles in the current day. Just by reading the news you can see that the threat of missiles is ever increasing, in just one weekend 300 airborne missiles were launched by Iran on Israel. We know that the UK has been cutting costs when it comes to missiles and drones. After the Soviet Union collapsed, bloodhound missiles were taken out of service, and air bases and fast jet squadrons were reduced to save money in 1991. The BBC reported that HMS Vanguard failed to launch a Trident missile (each worth 17 million) for the second time in a row in February 2024. However, the UK government has promised to increase defence spending to 2.5% by 2030, reaching 87 billion a year. Although, as we are currently living in dangerous times this puts into question whether 2.5% of GDP is enough to keep up with the advances of technology.

On the other hand, the Royal Navy (RN) has played a big part recently in showing the successful use of and the importance of further investment in missiles. This was when HMS Diamond used both the Sea Viper missile system, when she came under three separate Houthi drone attacks, destroying nine drones in April 2024. Even though in 2023 the United States, China and Russia in gross terms had the highest military spending the UK has managed to keep up with the ever evolving missile technologies. It would still be wise to continue to invest in missiles, as technology has improved, allowing missiles to be more easily concealed to evade detection, meaning that the UK cannot just rely on missile defences. If we look at what other militaries are investing in, Russia, China, Iran and North Korea, have all invested in the development of missiles, and these four countries are arguably our biggest threats. However, the RN only has three type 45s which are operational, which are purposely built for anti-aircraft missile warfare.

So what are the negatives?

When we look at the negative impacts of investing in missiles, one main impact is the environmental and social limitations. The fuel used is carcinogenic to humans and due to the hazardous fuel it has turned a large area of Russia grassland into an ecological disaster zone. This is a limitation, as it means that the soil has been poisoned for decades to come. When we look at where missiles are normally fired, it is in developing countries, where there is often a higher population living together, sanitation is poor, they have a low quality of water and clean air. When a missile hits places like these, the destruction is widespread, not only with innocent civilian death, but also infrastructure damage. When buildings are destroyed they can release harmful chemicals, such as asbestos, which causes health problems and poses a long term hazard to the public. This causes civilian displacement in these countries, which puts strains on the government, and further increases mortality of these innocent individuals. This questions whether the UK can morally invest into these destructive and deadly weapons, when the devastation they cause is common knowledge.

Conclusions

In conclusion, I believe that prioritising either memes or missiles is a mistake and the perceived weakness may be pounced upon by our enemies. Since the end of the Cold War there has been a ‘Peace Dividend’ there has largely been less need for a powerful military and the deterrent effect of missiles has largely been enough to ensure peace. Since Putin’s war in Russia, the world has seemed a more dangerous place and investment has increased.

The head of the British Armed Forces, Admiral Sir Tony Radkin, believes in the importance of investing in missile defence systems, as they believe that they will be required at a future point of time. Currently due to the heightened threat of conflict is it important to invest further into missiles and missile defence systems for the future. As, we cannot rely on type 45s being in the UK waters and working. Deterrence is the cornerstone of NATO, and as proven throughout this essay, having a formidable and up to date missile system is the biggest act of deterrence that the UK could take.

However, it is important to not devalue the increasing significance of information operations in warfare. Being able to manipulate minds with memes or otherwise is a powerful tool that can be utilised. During warfare you need to try and keep everyone on ‘your side’, as well as trying to  negatively impacting the mood of your opponent, and this can be effectively achieved with  information. With the rise of social media allowing messages to reach billions of people within seconds at the expense of the accuracy of the information, the internet is the new fighting tool which the military should invest in to enhance information operations as well as conventional forces to make other countries threaten to attack us.