Download - Foreign Military Studies Office - U.S. Army

since many can help slow or prevent the use of force. These uses may also
affect force projection, mobilization, and movement, thus affecting the
capability to conduct actual conflict.
Another virtual peacemaking use is to energize the diplomatic language
of treaties. For example, any treaty utilizing the words “develop, plan, train, or
engage in” has a use for virtual peacemaking. “Develop” can refer to the ability
to expand on existing capabilities through, for example, new satellite links;
“plan” can refer to the construction of an Internet capability or the laying of
fiber optic cable; “train” can refer to the use of simulations to learn how to use
preventive techniques, or to follow logic trees that would demonstrate the
negative impact of some decisions; and “engage” can refer to IT methods to
conduct negotiations through the use of information technology means
(communication systems, etc.)
Governments can use virtual peacemaking tools as well. They can use
IT as a deterrent or a confidence-building measure to contain or block access to
other information or technology. As a deterrent, IT can help explain an action,
put pressure on people or organizations, help instill fear over potential actions,
and even find expression as an information saturation operation. IT can also
deter by threatening to expose a leader’s state secrets, by demonstrating the
impotence of a nation to offer a credible threat, or by exposing troop
deployments or other forms of military buildups, thereby uncovering blatant
lies or military plans designed to manipulate public opinion.
A final virtual peacemaking use by governments is to help achieve
economic leverage over potential combatants through inducements and
incentives to be brought into the Information Age or, failing complicity, by
using IT to establish economic blockades and affect indicators of stability and
vitality, among other measures. Virtual peacemaking relies heavily on images
and communications, with words and visuals becoming a currency of sort.
The military must learn to integrate virtual peacemaking mechanisms
into its preventive deployments and defensive postures. The military can fool
potential combatants about the actual situation before them, gain information
on potential combatants, and exert pressure. It can also take preventive steps by
planning ahead to control the consequences that might develop. In the final
analysis, virtual peacemaking complements General Reimer’s strategic
preemption concept.
Thus, the balance of power in the world is no longer simply about bi- or
multi-polar issues. Nor is it simply about balancing issues of diffuse, profound,
and ancient collective-memory problems (race, religion, history, national
121