Marines at remote forward base enjoy rare
opportunity to use social networking sites
to communicate with family and friends
U.S. Marine Corps (Khoa Pelczar)
Mastering the Art of Wiki including gathering and vetting publicly avail-
able open source information, gauging and
Understanding Social Networking influencing public opinion, distributing “risk
communications” (such as how to respond
and National Security after a disaster), conducting research and
analysis, developing policies, planning and
implementing programs and activities in the
By J a m e s J a y C a r a f a n o field, and conducting information operations
(the integrated employment of electronic
C
warfare, computer network operations, psy-
omputers, cell phones, other digital Twitter, and, of course, Wikipedia, as well as chological operations, deception, and opera-
devices, and the systems that knit many other social networking tools (often tions security).
them together have altered how collectively called Web 2.0) that facilitate dis-
many on the planet do almost cussion, debate, and the exchange of ideas on the Online World
everything—especially how they share with a global scale.1 This unprecedented capacity There are basically two models for
each other. With over 1 billion people—some to listen and respond is inexorably restruc- effectively distilling and sharing the best
of them enemies of freedom—on the Internet, turing the ways that information is created information in an organization—top down
there is much more on the information super- and used. For example, during the 2008 U.S. and bottom up. In the top-down framework,
highway these days than information. Presidential election, the campaign of Barack the senior leaders in an organization gather
There is a traffic jam of conversation Obama mobilized social networking in revo- the best information. They use their wisdom,
facilitated by email, Facebook, LinkedIn, lutionary ways to garner popular support and experience, and judgment to ensure that
raise money, reaching a vast audience. The the information is shaped, edited, filtered,
Dr. James Jay Carafano is Deputy Director of the
impact of social networking will not end with turned into knowledge, and then proliferated
Kathryn and Shelby Cullom Davis Institute for business and politics but will inevitably affect to the organization. Hierarchical knowledge
International Studies and Director of the Douglas national security. creation and management work best in a
and Sarah Allison Center for Foreign Policy Studies Social networking has the potential static and predictable environment—one
at the Heritage Foundation. to touch every aspect of national security where senior leaders know best. In contrast, in
n d u p res s .ndu.edu issue 60, 1 st quarter 2011 / JFQ 73
COMMENTARY | Understanding Social Networking and National Security
dynamic situations where experience counts advantage across the “cyber-verse.” For Government had not completely ignored
for less, knowledge creation works best from example, the debate over the impact of social post–Cold War threats to the Nation’s peace
the bottom up. At the grassroots, the immedi- networking on the Iranian election protests and prosperity. Between 1998 and 2000,
acy of the junior leader turns out to be where centered over whether these tools offered a Congress held over 80 hearings on terrorism-
the most effective learning takes place. Their clear advantage to the protestors or the gov- related issues.3 Efforts to enhance cybersecu-
experience is more fresh and relevant. ernment. Writing in the Washington Post in rity and combating malicious activity on the
In the online world, the best knowledge the wake of Tehran’s post-election crisis, John Web were on the list of things governments
comes from that bottom-up foundation, but Palfrey, Bruce Etling, and Robert Faris offered worried about. Likewise, there was a recogni-
that reality has problems as well as promise. several counterpoints to those who had con- tion that the Internet could serve as a tool of
Common wisdom holds that among social cluded that the force of online political activ- good governance. Efforts to make the Web
networks, the group itself assumes responsi- ism is reversible. They argued that there are serve people were undertaken as well. Instead
bility for culling out bad data. This includes “sharp limits on what Twitter and other Web of creating new practices and means of knowl-
everything from battling malicious actors tools such as Facebook and blogs can do for edge creation and knowledge management,
online to pointing out simple errors—such citizens in authoritarian societies.” Govern- E-Government was mostly about putting the
as confusing pop star Michael Jackson with ments “jealous of their power can push back way government already worked online. Even
former deputy head of the Department of on cyberspace when they feel threatened.” among governments, the United States was
Homeland Security Michael Jackson. Wiki- They also noted that the “freedom to scream” not the global leader. Nations such as New
pedia, for instance, is constantly keeping online may actually help regimes by providing Zealand, Canada, and Singapore had more
an eye on celebrity bio-pages to ensure that a “political release valve.” Repressive regimes ambitious initiatives.
some star or head of state is not prematurely can also employ social networking for their The “reality” of social network competi-
pronounced dead. Still, while the “rely on the own ends, hawking propaganda and spread- tion emerges again and again. It is wrong
crowd” method of adjudicating information ing disinformation.2 Indeed, during the crisis, to look at cyberspace as a place for a static
may be suitable during normal social network- the Iranian government exploited all these contest. There is no technology, government
ing interactions, there is a real question over advantages and in the end was able to largely policy, law, treaty, or program that can stop
whether it is appropriate in matters touching stifle overt social unrest. the acceleration of competition in the cyber
on national security where lives and treasure On the other hand, the Iranian govern- universe. Governments will not stop trying to
may be at stake, where there is not time to ment did not silence the voice of the people. rein things in, but it will always be a fight to
let the network sort things out on its own, or Technology is continuously evolving, as are the finish. No advantage will be permanent or
where classified information once revealed the practices of how the Internet is used. For unassailable. There will always be an enemy
cannot be put back in the safe. instance, the regime in Tehran thought it trying to take the cyber-heights.
The information jungle is a dangerous could maintain permanent dominance of the Likewise, the platforms that carry
place. It has empowered both our scientific Web by allowing only slow, expensive dial-up network applications will likely change and
and narrative cultures. Information technol- service. That assumption proved wrong. evolve as well. Indeed, we are already seeing
ogy allows individuals to conduct more and Social networking tools helped dissidents dramatic shifts in user preferences from
better analysis, but it also allows opinion- overcome the limitations of the nation’s tech- personal computers to laptops to cloud com-
makers to spin better, more compelling stories nological infrastructure. puting to cell phones. Some, in fact, argue
faster, and to proliferate them more widely. There are also limits to what govern- that computing is quickly becoming more a
Digital-quick transparency can unmask evils ments can do. If a regime such as Iran, for utility than a product. Software and hardware
or unearth secrets. Information that is massed example, elected a “nuclear option” and tried to will mean less and less to social networkers
to protect us can quickly be used against us. completely shut down the Internet to suppress as time progresses. Meanwhile, others are
Secrets meant to be seen by almost no one can internal dissent, it might well shut down its already predicting how online services will
in minutes be leaked to everyone. The com- industrial, energy production, and financial evolve, touting that Web 3.0 (where networks
placent may not survive long. sectors as well as crippling its capacity to intuitively connect individuals to relevant
Information assurance cannot rely on control public media. Likewise, in a global information, not just other people) will soon
the online crowd when national security is on economy, states or groups that conduct massive supersede Web 2.0.
the line. On such occasions, it is unrealistic cyber attacks could do as much damage to Still others look beyond and muse about
to hold to the belief that negotiated Internet themselves as to their enemy. Thus, a kind the role of artificial intelligence in social
interactions are a sufficiently effective mecha- of “mutual assured destruction” deterrence networks. How we do what we do in social
nism for determining factual and dependable appears to be evolving in the cyber world. At networks will likely continue to evolve, as
information. Trusted actors and trusted net- the same time, while some independent mali- will what we do with new applications. The
works must be established before crunch time, cious actors may have no compunction about bottom line is that it is a mistake to pin think-
the terrible moment when lives and the fate of taking on a country, nations have every reason ing about how social networks will work or
nations may be at risk. Trust and confidence to seek to limit their ability to run amok. That, what they will do in the future on any current
are a must for a social network that can be however, does not mean they will not try. platform or application. For now, what can
depended on under stress. But nations have never been defense- be said of the global competition is that the
Since the Internet is neutral, no party less online, and even before America became two kinds of nations that are likely to be the
can count on a decisive and unassailable super–security conscious after 9/11, the U.S. most dominant competitors are those whose
74 JFQ / issue 60, 1 st quarter 2011 ndupres s . ndu. edu
CARAfAno
U.S. Navy (Michael B. Lavender)
U.S. Army (C. Todd Lopez)
Army is evaluating commercial Sailor holds iPhone
handheld command and control displaying America’s
solutions using Macintosh platforms Navy application
regimes are the most authoritarian—and White House, the administration found itself them a benefit they want. The recent prolifera-
those whose societies are most free. Authori- pummeled by Iranian government accusa- tion of applications such as Web 2.0 Suicide
tarian regimes will utilize the brute force of tions of interference, including a charge that Machine and Seppukoo (which allow users to
control to seize social networking heights. an innocent bystander had been shot by the purge their presence from online sites such as
Free societies will exploit the advantages of Central Intelligence Agency to foment a riot. Facebook) reflects not so much a rejection of
creativity, competition, and innovation. Both The disappointing results are not sur- social networking as an affirmation that indi-
will prove remarkably resilient in online prising. While the White House and many viduals are not terribly interested in a network
warfare. Both will be the main drivers in the Federal agencies are experimenting with from which they feel they derive no real value.
course of the competition. social networking tools, their efforts are
But the U.S. Government and, for that largely unguided by sound research or clear the Past Was Prologue
matter, many other governments are not well and coherent policies that encourage innova- Government has had a hard time getting
prepared to exploit social networking for tion while protecting individual liberties and the “adapting” to technology part right from
national security. Bureaucracies often respond privacy. The hierarchical practices of tradi- the onset of the information age. In 1996, the
poorly to dynamic change and disruptive tional government are not keeping pace; they Clinger-Cohen Act placed major emphasis
technologies. Web 2.0 can be both. There is are inadequate for exploiting the explosion of on information technology acquisition. It
growing unease that despite all the Wash- social networking systems.5 required Federal agencies to treat information
ington talk of tackling cyber security and There are a few lessons to remember technology as a “capital investment,” hoping
implementing cyber government, increasingly when exploiting social networks, and for now to get the government to think more strategi-
America may be “cyber-screwed.” For starters, we know what works. While there may not cally about all the hardware and software it
Washington is well behind in its willingness be hard and fast rules for social networking, was buying. The focus of the law, however,
and capacity to adapt to the world of Web 2.0. there are some pretty good rules of thumb— was on how agencies acquired new technolo-
Even President Obama, with his Blackberry principles for effective adoption of social gies rather than on what kinds of technologies
by his side and a well-earned reputation as networking tools that address the nature of and capabilities they were developing. Many
being Web savvy, has had his troubles. One the technology, structure of the social interac- government investments involved developing
of the first things the administration did in tion, and value assigned to social networking Intranets (private computer networks), stand-
2009 after moving into the White House was transactions.6 alone databases, and proprietary software.
to revamp the President’s Web site. A panel The preference in social networking is When the tsunami of social networking
of experts assembled by the Washington Post to adopt proven and widely available software applications hit the market and open software
gave the new WhiteHouse.gov site an average and systems that seem user friendly. Simple offered a rich variety of tools for innovation
grade of C+.4 That grade seemed to track well rules and simple operational routines are the and collaboration, the U.S. Government stood
with the administration’s response to the hallmark of widespread adoption of social to the side saddled with a huge investment
Iranian election protests. Even though there networking tools. The more intuitive the tool in systems and databases that operated inde-
was a flood of information driving the global appears, the more likely it is to be adopted. pendently from the Internet and one another.
debate, as the protests grew, the President And there has to be something in it for the Government struggled to keep up with private
remained equivocal until several days into the user. Users are drawn to social networks sector technology, let alone try to network the
crisis. Yet despite subdued rhetoric from the because they believe participation will bring public and private worlds.
n d u p res s .ndu.edu issue 60, 1 st quarter 2011 / JFQ 75
COMMENTARY | Understanding Social Networking and National Security
During the Clinton administration, Vice the program came under intense criticism. enforcement agencies and security associa-
President Al Gore gave a good deal of thought In response to the controversy, the Terrorist tions. In addition to the ISACs, critical busi-
to defending the information superhighway. Surveillance Act of 2006 provided additional ness sectors have Sector Coordinating Coun-
In Clinton’s second term, policy guidance authority to conduct electronic surveillance cils that develop policy recommendations in
started to pour forth from the White House. and assigned the special Federal court estab- coordination with government agencies.
On May 22, 1998, the administration pub- lished under the Foreign Intelligence Surveil- In addition to the strategies outlined by
lished Presidential Decision Directives (PDDs) lance Act with the responsibility for issuing Homeland Security in the NIPP, the Depart-
62 and 63. PDD–62 highlighted the growing any required warrants for investigations. ment of Justice kept a foot in the cyber war.
range of unconventional threats, including Most of what became known about post- Information-sharing between the Govern-
cyberterrorism, and initiatives for defending 9/11 “offensive” efforts on the Internet became ment and private sector receives consider-
against them. PDD–63 focused specifically on instantly controversial. On the other hand, able support from InfraGard, a program
protecting the Nation’s critical infrastructure, the Intelligence Community’s “defensive” originally established by the Federal Bureau
which included the backbone of the World capabilities were more mundane and less like of Investigation under President Clinton. First
Wide Web telecommunications systems and lightning rods. In particular, strengthen- developed to assist in cybercrime investiga-
the electrical grid, as well as significant users ing cybersecurity was a key objective of the tions, InfraGard expanded collaboration with
of online services such as the government, Information Sharing Environment (ISE) law enforcement, business, and academia on
transportation, and financial sectors. Wash- established in 2007. The ISE is a collection of a range of security-related issues after 9/11.
ington also spent a lot of time and money policies, procedures, and technologies that InfraGard chapters facilitate information
(about $100 billion) getting ready for “Y2K,” permits the exchange of terrorism informa- collection, analysis, and training and provide
an effort to ensure computer systems would tion, including intelligence and law enforce- discussion forums to share best practices. It
not fail as a result of trying to account for ment data. It aims to promote a culture of also provides a secure Web-based communi-
dates in the year 2000.7 data-sharing among its participants to ensure cations platform.
The combination of the Y2K scare, that information is readily available to support Private sector companies, universi-
emergent fears over cyberterrorism, and their missions. The ISE is supposed to connect ties, research centers, and nongovernmental
growing dependence on the Internet led to Federal, state, local, and tribal governments. It organizations have also developed capabilities
the creation of the National Infrastructure also envisioned a critical role for private sector to combat malicious cyber activities and to
Protection Center (NIPC), a joint government and foreign actors in sharing information to investigate or disrupt terrorist operations on
and private sector partnership that includes counter terrorist threats.8 Even 3 years after it the Internet. Perhaps the best known of these
representatives from Federal, state, and local was called for, however, it remains—to put it groups is the Internet Security Alliance, a
government agencies. NIPC tried to incorpo- kindly—a work in progress.9 collaboration among the Electronic Industries
rate lessons learned from the Federal Govern- In 1988, in response to a computer Alliance, a federation of trade associations,
ment’s Y2K efforts and threats of millennial virus called the “Morris Worm,” which was and Carnegie Mellon University’s CyLab,
attacks, launching a series of law enforcement unleashed through the Internet by Massachu- established to provide a forum for informa-
and counterterrorism initiatives. In 2000, the setts Institute of Technology student Robert tion-sharing and to generate suggestions for
White House formulated the first national Tappan Morris, Jr., and affected 10 percent strengthening information security.
cybersecurity strategy. of the Internet, the Government issued a Many other organizations and private
Networking would have been a natural contract with Carnegie Mellon University to sector companies support America’s cyber
solution for the public-private cooperation set up a computer emergency response team defenses. After 9/11, the U.S. Military
and information-sharing called for in the (CERT), the first Federally funded team to Academy at West Point established a Combat-
cyber crime report. Discussions of social respond to malicious outbreaks online. After ing Terrorism Center. It joined Company-
networking, however, were noticeably absent 9/11, another Government initiative was Command and PlatoonLeader (both military
in the report. Clinton and Gore may have the National Infrastructure Protection Plan networks) as innovative projects started by the
been the first President and Vice President (NIPP). Since most sectors of the economy academy to help “big Army” adjust to the new
to exchange emails, but Web 2.0 was simply utilize the Internet, cyber became a focal challenges of the online battlefield. Among
not on the White House radar screen. The point of the NIPP, which relied on several the center’s studies is the “Islamic Imagery
Government’s Terrorist Surveillance Program institutions, particularly information-sharing Project: Visual Motifs in Jihadi Internet
proved another intensely controversial initia- and analysis centers, to facilitate the exchange Propaganda,” which provides a ready guide to
tive. The covert program, first revealed to the of information with critical business sectors, commonly used terrorist graphics, symbols,
public in a December 16, 2005, article in the such as financial institutions and energy com- icons, and photographs.
New York Times, authorized monitoring of panies. If the CERTs were the field soldiers The University of Arizona has also con-
every electronic social networking tool from of cyber response, the Information Sharing ducted a multi-year project called Dark Web,
telephones to the Internet, email, and text and Analysis Centers (ISACs) were the rear which attempts to monitor how terrorists use
messaging. Since the surveillance might have command posts. ISACs were established and the Internet. The university’s Artificial Intel-
included communications to U.S. Persons funded by the private sector, with the data ligence Lab has accumulated the world’s most
(a term that denotes American citizens and they handled largely provided by private extensive database of terrorist-related Web
other persons legally resident in the United sector participants. ISACs also receive infor- sites—over 500 million pages of messages,
States), but did not require a search warrant, mation from other entities, including law images, and videos—and has made it available
76 JFQ / issue 60, 1 st quarter 2011 ndupres s . ndu. edu
CARAfAno
to the U.S. military and Intelligence Com- pandemic. Later American efforts wrangled Ironically, knowledge discovery is prolif-
munity. Some of its sophisticated software equally inelegantly, attempting to promote erating in every field except national security.
exposes social linkages among radical groups and protect freedom and provide for free and While the means of knowledge discovery have
and seeks to identify and track individual open expression, all at the same time. Govern- become more sophisticated, the process of
authors by analyzing their writing styles. ment officials have always had a hard time public policymaking has become increasingly
The Middle East Media Research Institute figuring out whether their job is to push out intuitive. In Washington, talking points, gut
(MEMRI) publicizes extremist messages on government’s point of view or simply provide feelings, partisan preferences, and ideological
the Internet, including terrorist Web sites, a forum for “objective” discussion. Public fervor crowd out cutting-edge analysis. Build-
discussion forums, and blogs. After MEMRI diplomacy and information programs during ing cyber-strategic leaders from this will be
published a comprehensive survey of Islamist World War II were chaotic. Even America’s like building castles on sand unless the knowl-
Web sites in 2004, many of them were closed vaunted efforts at combating the ideology edge and skills imparted to them are based
down by their Internet service providers. of communism during the Cold War were on comprehensive, practical, and unbiased
marked by as many setbacks as successes.10 research—research that specifically serves
Richard Solomon, the head of the U.S. the needs of governments. Knowledge of the
nongovernmental Institute of Peace, observed, “The opportunity present is not good enough to be a first-class
organizations and private is there for State to put out American perspec- cyber competitor.
companies provide a variety tives on almost any issue, for anybody to pick The debate over how great ideas can
of analytical and investigative up—the question is: What should the gov- be created through Web 2.0 and what comes
ernment be putting out?”11 This is the same after it is far from over. Research in the field
tools for penetrating terrorist question public diplomacy has been asking of social networking is hard pressed to keep
operations on the Internet since long before the Internet was invented. up with the rapid pace of change in how
Washington still lacks a clear sense of purpose information technologies are fielded and
In addition to these efforts, nongovern- online and that is just as big a problem as employed. Understanding social network-
mental organizations and private companies grappling with the bureaucratic hurdles of ing requires a multidisciplinary approach
provide a variety of analytical and investiga- exploiting new technologies. In mastering the to research that combines the techniques
tive tools for penetrating terrorist operations struggle for the cyber high ground on both of the social sciences with “hard science”
on the Internet. For example, the Washing- ends of the power curve, not knowing what disciplines. This mix of disciplines, which
ton-based SITE Intelligence Group routinely you are trying to do is a real obstacle. examines how networks function, is often
monitors, translates, and posts information A big part of why Washington struggles called “network science.”12 Practitioners study
from terrorist Web sites and often shares that is that it is just not good at problem-solving. diverse physical, informational, biological,
information with U.S. intelligence agencies. The last quarter-century has seen an explo- cognitive, and social networks searching for
Finally, software and hardware provid- sion in the human capacity to create and common principles, algorithms, and tools
ers continue to respond to the needs of the manipulate new knowledge. Despite that fact, that drive network behavior. The understand-
marketplace with new services and products the instruments used to inform public policy ing of networks can be applied to a range of
to counter illicit online activity, from combat- choices are as creaky as ever. Washington challenges from combating terrorist orga-
ing unauthorized intrusions and countering makes policy largely by intuition shaped by an nizations to organizing disaster response.
denial-of-service attacks to preventing the orthodox adherence to 20th-century problem- Without understanding, the science is all just
disruption or exploitation of systems or data. solving—ideas that have barely evolved since guesswork and luck (for good or ill).
Providing security services and products is a the Cold War. Some governments and parts of govern-
multibillion-dollar-a-year industry. Even so, something dramatic has been ments “get it.” One element that gets it is the
added to the arsenal for analyzing today’s U.S. Army, which in 2003 set up the Institute
Befuddled Washington challenges—the proliferation of computer for Collaborative Biotechnologies. One area
Government social networking has technology, the Internet, and everything else of focused research for the institute is “bio-
an even greater challenge because it is not that goes with the “information revolution.” inspired networks,” studying “high-perfor-
clear if Washington knows what it is trying Modern researchers have access to vast digital mance” biological networks for insights into
to do online. This problem is nowhere more libraries and databases as well as powerful how manmade networks can be made more
apparent than in government’s effort to get search and computational programs. New scalable, robust, and energy efficient. In 2010,
its message out—a task usually called “public means of manipulating data, such as informat- the institute oversaw 50 interdisciplinary
information” when the message is for Ameri- ics (the science of information processing), research teams spanning 8 different academic
can audiences and “public diplomacy” when data-mining (extracting and analyzing data to departments at the Massachusetts Institute of
communicating with the rest of the world. identify patterns and relationships), computer Technology, University of California at Santa
Struggling to get the message out and get it simulation (modeling a system), and open Barbara, and the California Institute of Tech-
right is not new—particularly where matters source intelligence (acquiring and analyzing nology. It is possible that the more scientists
of national security are concerned. In World information from publicly available sources look to biological systems, the more applicable
War I, the policies promoted by George Creel, to produce actionable intelligence), to name a lessons they are finding for understanding
the head of the U.S. Committee on Public few, are delivering revolutionary instruments computer systems and the activities on those
Information, tried to manage the global of knowledge discovery. systems, including social networking.
n d u p res s .ndu.edu issue 60, 1 st quarter 2011 / JFQ 77
COMMENTARY | Understanding Social Networking
NEW
The potential of network science and tonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/06/19/
its impact on social networks is too big an AR2009061901598.html>.
from NDU Press Laura K. Donohue, “In the Name of
3
opportunity for free nations to ignore if
National Security: U.S. Counterterrorist Measures,
for the they want to be respectable competitors in
1960–2000,” BCIA Discussion Paper 20001–6, John
Africa Center for Strategic Studies networked environments. All that said, while
F. Kennedy School of Government, Harvard Uni-
comparing cells and cellular phone networks versity, August 2001.
Africa Security Brief No. 6 sounds interesting, it is not easy science. A 4
Jose Antonio Vargas, “Grading WhiteHouse.
Africa’s Fragile States: Empowering 2005 report by the U.S. National Academies gov,” The Washington Post, March 24, 2009.
Extremists, Exporting Terrorism laid out some daunting obstacles, including 5
James Jay Carafano, Social Networking and
the difficulty in modeling and analyzing National Security: How to Harness Web 2.0 to
Zachary Devlin-Foltz begins by noting that, large, complex networks; developing better Protect the Country, Heritage Foundation Back-
among the regions of the world, Africa has experiments and measurements of network grounder No. 2273 (Washington, DC: The Heritage
the highest number of states deemed at Foundation, May 18, 2009), available at .
inverse relationship exists between extremist participate in network science.13 6
Quotations from Clay Shirky, Here Comes
influence and state strength, because fragile Everybody: The Power of Organizing Without Orga-
states foster environments that enhance seizing Cyber High Ground nizations (New York: Penguin, 2008), 269, 271, 294.
the leverage of Islamist extremists versus Thinking about the future is a vital 7
The spending estimate is based on National
moderates. Although robust state security part of holding the cyber heights. Part of Communications System, Report 99–62, available
operations can neutralize extremists in the the answer is seizing and holding the initia- at . For an overview
term unless coupled with opportunities for the competence of social networking, the of Y2K lessons learned, see David Mussington,
moderates to engage in the political process. foundation of knowledge discovery could Concepts for Enhancing Critical Infrastructure Pro-
Thus, the author calls for maintaining tection: Relating Y2K to CIP Research and Develop-
well hinge on the capacity to conduct
moderate Islamist support for the state as a ment (Santa Monica, CA: RAND, 2002), 11–18.
cutting-edge network science. Forecasting
central stabilization objective. 8
“Information Sharing Environment, Infor-
the future is equally important for serious
mation Sharing Environment Implementation
cyber warriors. Social networking and
Plan,” November 2006, available at .
for Tackling Africa’s Urban Violence appreciating how complex dynamic systems 9
The Markle Foundation Task Force on
and competitions will unfold over time. National Security in the Information Age, “Nation
Endemic and worsening violent crime in Mastering these methods and combining at Risk: Policy Makers Need Better Information
Africa’s cities is placing increasing demands them to form even richer insights will give to Protect the Country,” Washington, DC, March
on the continent’s police departments. As 2009, available at ; Govern-
future challenges.
are woefully underresourced, poorly trained, ment Accountability Office (GAO), Information
unaccountable, and distrusted by local Finally, it is important to look over the
Sharing Environment: Definition of the Results to Be
communities—and therefore ineffective in horizon and begin to plan how to deal with
Achieved in Improving Terrorism-Related Informa-
addressing these security challenges. On the future challenges. Knowing they are out there
tion Sharing Is Needed to Guide Implementation
other hand, nonstate or community-based and doing nothing to either exploit them or and Assess Progress, GA0–05–492 (Washington,
policing groups often enjoy local support, prepare to counter them means a competitor DC: GAO, June 2008), available at .
Baker recommends that African governments of social networking will remain as dynamic 10
See Nicholas Evan Sarantakes, “Word War-
seek partnerships with acceptable nonstate as the competition to harness it. If Washing- riors: Information Operations during World War
providers as an affordable and sustainable ton does not develop the human capital to II,” in Mismanaging Mayhem: How Washington
way to extend urban policing. Responds to Crisis, ed. James Jay Carafano and
create first-class cyber leadership, it will wind
up as an also-ran in the social networking war Richard Weitz (Westport, CT: Praeger, 2007),
of warfare. JFQ 27–45; Carnes Lord, “Marketing Freedom:
Cold War, Public Diplomacy, and Psychological
Warfare,” in Mismanaging Mayhem, 46–66.
NOtEs 11
Bryant Jordan, “Net Diplomacy,” Federal
1
Josef Kolbitsch and Hermann Maurer, “The Computer Week, October 29, 2000, available at
Transformation of the Web: How Emerging Com- .
Journal of Universal Computer Science 2, no. 2
12
See, for example, Committee on Network
(2006), 187–207. Science for Future Army Applications, Network
Visit the NDU Press Web site Science (Washington, DC: The National Academies,
for more information on publications 2
John Palfrey, Bruce Etling, and Robert Faris,
at ndupress.ndu.edu “Reading Twitter in Tehran?” The Washington 2005).
Post, June 21, 2009, available at
13
Ibid., 48, 49.
78 JFQ / issue 60, 1 st quarter 2011 ndupres s . ndu. edu