Some Countries Want To Ban 'Information Weapons' 321
DrgnDancer sends in an NPR piece on recent efforts to control so-called "information weapons" on the Internet. What's interesting is that the term "information weapon," as defined by many of the countries trying to limit them, doesn't mean what you would think. It's closer to the old Soviet term "ideological aggression." "At a UN disarmament conference in 2008, Sergei Korotkov of the Russian Defense Ministry argued that anytime a government promotes ideas on the Internet with the goal of subverting another country's government — even in the name of democratic reform — it should qualify as 'aggression.' And that, in turn, would make it illegal under the UN Charter. 'Practically any information operation conducted by a state or a number of states against another state would be qualified as an interference into internal affairs,' Korotkov said through an interpreter. 'So any good cause, like [the] promotion of democracy, cannot be used as a justification for such actions.' The Russians, and a lot of other countries such as Iran and China, apparently consider the free exchange of information to be an information technology threat. One that must be managed by treaty."
Many in eastern europe did turn to democracy (Score:5, Informative)
Yeah, it's not like they turned into a Democracy when the government finally collapsed.
Poland, Czechoslovakia, East Germany, Georgia, etc did.
The cold war was not waged exclusively against the soviet union. It was also waged against the soviet "client" states throughout eastern europe, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Warsaw_Pact [wikipedia.org]. Much of the info campaign was directed at these states.
Re:Why would the US / EU want to broadcast Democra (Score:5, Informative)
Just because Russia propper isn't the most shining example of a Democracy, it doesn't mean that Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, Belarus, Moldova, Ukraine, Armenia, Azerbaijan, Georgia, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan, Turkmenistan and Uzbekistan aren't.
Sure, I'm sure there's corruption in some of those too, but by no means all of them.
for some reason my control-v is broke right now, but looking at wikipedia it's showing a positive outlook on Latvia, Lithuaia and Estonia, and a 'very serious situation' in Turkmenistan.
Re:Why would the US / EU want to broadcast Democra (Score:2, Informative)
They do alot better at trying that they did from, oh infinity to 1991.
Re:Why would the US / EU want to broadcast Democra (Score:5, Informative)
Air America, the radio network, was a left-wing radio network in the US.
It was a CIA fronted aviation company in the 1960s.
I think you are looking for Voice of America.
Sigh (Score:5, Informative)
Just because you came up with a new name for it, its still "censorship".
Maybe they should call it "High Fructose Information Sugar" and people won't notice.
Definition of "propaganda" (Score:4, Informative)
Second, if he posits that the internet should not be a permitted avenue for propaganda, how is this suddenly a threat to information technology?
There are three different ways you can use propaganda to destabilize an opponent:
When one country is trying to destabilize or take down another country's government, the most effective approach is to use a blend of truth, lies, and mixed statements. The government attempting to resist outside propaganda will declare that all incoming propaganda are sheer lies, but the danger there is that the public will realize that at least some of the propaganda is true, which will make them suspicious about government statements about the false information.
But consider recent comments from Iran about America's use of the death penalty. The statement that we are putting a woman to death are completely true, even though the Iranian government is making the statement in order to cast America in a poor light. It would be easy under a system of rules designed to prohibit outside subversion, to classify such a statement as subversive propaganda.
Thus facts, lies, and mixtures of facts and lies can all be considered subversive propaganda. Is there any other form of discourse left after these three are removed?
Re:Why would the US / EU want to broadcast Democra (Score:3, Informative)
Let's have a closer look at them one by one:
Estonia and Latvia have fascist apartheid laws, denying citizenship rights to one quarter and one third of their respective population.
Lithuania has democratically voted back the commies right after they got a taste of democacy.
Belarus is Europe's Last Dictatorship
Moldova's main export is white babies, prostitutes, slaves and human organs. A European country with a GDP per capita of Sudan.
Ukraine is marginally richer than Moldova, with a similar export profile. The worlds busiest slave port is Odessa, Ukraine.
Armenia is slightly poorer than Moldova (after being one of the most prosperous republics of the USSR).
Azerbaijan is a hereditary absolute monarchy with no democracy in sight. Also, an oil- and gas-emirate.
Georgia is a Stalinist dictatorship with a largely impoverished population (after being THE most prosperous republic of the USSR). A police officer makes about five to ten times as much as a university professor. Nuff said.
Kazakhstan is happily ruled on by the same dude that was the first secretary of the Communist Party. Without interruption, mind you.
Kyrgyzstan is on the brink of civil war and would be by far the poorest post-Soviet state, were it not for
Tajikistan, which is already in the state of civil war.
Turkmenistan is a shining democracy and has always been, no doubt. Google for Turkmenbashi, if you need any proof.
In Uzbekistan, the situation is largely the same as in Kazakhstan, minus mineral wealth plus a huge impoverished population.
So?
Re:Why would the US / EU want to broadcast Democra (Score:3, Informative)
Re:Why would the US / EU want to broadcast Democra (Score:2, Informative)
More like a bankrupt treasury.
I give zero credit to the 24 hour propaganda radio.
I think 24 hour propaganda radio had a lot to do with driving the treasury into bankruptcy. Western radio, TV, and film showing the technological and social advances made in the west provided a lot of the pressure for the soviet block to push their own development and at least to maintain the appearance of a dominant military in an international version of Keep Up With the Joneses.
In the absence of Western propaganda, the internal soviet propaganda could just spout the latest triumphs of the glorious workers' state and not have to push the crumbling (and shattered, after WWII) economy to out-do the US's latest military wonder.
Re:Why would the US / EU want to broadcast Democra (Score:3, Informative)
Russia collapsed in bankruptcy, but it seems almost certain that cultural influences and "24 hour propaganda radio" were contributing factors in that financial over-extension. It contributed to the paranoia and ego spending to keep up militarily, as well as stressing them to support a domestic economic image. The people wanted western goods and envied images of western lifestyles. The population was always told they were the greatest most powerful nation on earth with the best government and best economic system, and so they wanted more than they had, they felt entitled to more than they were getting. A population will be relatively content at almost any standard of living so long as they have nothing to compare it to, or if they don't feel entitled to equality. On the other hand when there is economic discontent that energy generally flows into ideology and ideals. Since they envied western goods and western lifestyles that energy would naturally get funneled into western ideology and ideals. To the extent the Soviets failed to keep up the domestic image it fueled problematical political pressures, and to the extent they did sustain the domestic image it overstretched their economy.
I don't mean to oversimplify the causes of the Soviet economic implosion, but I don't think it is correct to completely discount "24 hour propaganda radio" and surrounding media and cultural influences. I believe they increased, and focused, the pressures that ultimately drove them off the financial cliff.
-