Searching for Digital Hilltops A Doctrinal Approach to Identifying Key Terrain in Cyberspace (original) (raw)
Related papers
The Value of Values for IO, SC, INTEL, p 29
Everyone from Secretary Gates to the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff to various Under Secretaries of Defense and the Defense Science Board are saying that we need to understand cultures better. There are many efforts underway to do this, but many people think that those efforts are fragmented, incoherent, short term and unable to be integrated. If we had taken more time to think about what kind of data we really need, how to analyze it and how to integrate it, by now we might have a coherent data base that would be useful for every operational purpose from strategic to tactical. However, it is probably not too late, if we made a concerted effort to do it right. This “thinkpiece” was prompted by my own concerns that we are not developing a strategic understanding of our adversaries or host nations; and by two documents: the DSB Report on Understanding Human Dynamics1 , March 2009, and Fixing Intel: CNAS Report, January, 2010. Understanding values is not a panacea – but values underpin every aspect of society, including its culture, politics, economy, industry, attitudes, consumption, and even the development of technology. Thus, values provide a basis by which to understand the context within which people live and operate in a society. And values determine motivations, so that we can understand better why someone or some group is doing whatever it is doing.
2019
This work addresses a void in the literature discussing the use of Design Methodology to understand contemporary conflict that often manifests as small wars. Much of the existing work on the topic focuses on various ways to employ the methodology and rarely present examples of successful use. Many descriptions also seek to convert the methodology into a linear progression, much like traditional military planning processes. Additionally, U. S. Joint Doctrine conflates Design Methodology with the traditional operational art concept of Operational Design which hurts the ability to fully understand both important concepts. This article uses interviews with a senior U. S. Marine planner present on the ground to describe the first successful use of Design Methodology in the Battles of Fallujah, Iraq in 2004. It stresses the need to employ the methodology as its originators intended; as conceptual planning meant to be an open, flowing group discussion of what is learned about the complex problem at hand. Proper use of Design Methodology will aid decision makers, in understanding current and future small wars as complex problems, enabling them to better decide whether to act or not, and if action is desired to develop ways to move the existing problem to a desired different state.
Operations in cyberspace are enabled by a digitized battlefield. The ability to control operations in cyberspace has become a central goal for defence forces. As a result, terms like cyber power, cyberspace operations and cyber deterrence have begun to emerge in military literature in an effort to describe and highlight the importance of related activities. Future military personnel, in all branches, will encounter the raised complexity of joint military operations with cyber as the key enabler. The constant change and complexity raises the demands for the structure and content of education and training. This interdisciplinary contribution discusses the need for a better understanding of the relationships between cyberspace and the physical domain, the cognitive challenges this repre‐ sents, and proposes a theoretical framework-the Hybrid Space-allowing for the application of psychological concepts in assessment, training and action.