Strategic Communications Conference, Riga 2023: Day 2

Yesterday was the second and final day of the Strat Com conference.  I discussed day 1 here.  The first panel was on Deterrence of the Next Decade.  I thought this would be more about deterring electoral inference and other comms stuff, but it turned into a nuclear deterrence panel.  Interesting, scary, but not what I expected.  Francesca Giovanni talked about the renaissance of nuclear weapons--that they are more relevant these days.  Woot?  Her talk basically reinforced my concerns about the autocratic advantage in the stability-instability paradox--that when countries are deterred by mutual destruction at the nuclear level, they may not be so deterred at lower levels, and that autocratic countries can play the risky game of escalation at lower levels better due to narrower audiences.  Fun!  She argued that lots of the guardrails from the Cold War aren't here--like the officials of the PRC don't pick up the phone during a crisis.

She also made an important point--that deterrence works when the other side is assured that your side will not attack if they don't do the thing you are seeking to deter.  My take on this is the big brother syndrome--big brothers are bad at deterrence because they may pound you whether you submit or not.  Not that my brother did that.  The relevance here is that if one threatens, say, regime change or sending someone to the Hague for war crimes even if they give in, then the incentive to give is low....  So, deterring Putin only works if we don't threaten him if he goes along with the status quo.  

The next panel was the Global Battle of the Narratives, moderated by the CDSN's own and Canada's own JC Boucher.  I believe he was the only Canadian on any of the panels.  Good thing he repped us all very well.  It was a very interesting panel where folks from a variety of places--Japan, US, Australia, and Microsoft--presented their takes on mostly China.   Key points include: we need to be better at explaining our value proposition in the world especially in the Global South (although panelists hate this term as it makes it seem more homogeneous, unitary, other, etc); that the Russia/China partnership is not going away as they need each other, some speculation about another Trump adminitration (oy), Japan's government is moving but its public is not.

 I missed the last panel, but did not miss the concluding reception, which was lovely.  Very good beer in a very nice venue.  They brought in a group of folks representing traditional Latvia.  They did some games, including one where young women would throw wreathes onto a tree--if the wreath stayed, the women would be married soon.  Not too soon given the outcomes, but once they started throwing the wreathes like frisbees, they got better results. 

 

 

Over the course of the two days, I meant a bunch of folks from across Europe but also Americans and Canadians.  The NATO Field School, a course run by Simon Fraser University (a CDSN partner), led by Alex Moens and a few key young women (Hannah and Amy) had 45 young people from North America and Europe asking good questions during the panels and then afterwards.  It was great to meet them, and our group of Canadian scholars will be meeting with them on our last day in Riga and their halfway point of their course.  They went to the NATO Defense College for two weeks, now here for two, and then Brussels for 2.  

I learned a lot and will still learn more on our last day with meetings at the Latvia Ministry of Defense (where I will be tempted to ask questions for my comparative defense agency project) and the Canadian Embassy.  This trip was definitely worth it, as I have clearer ideas both about what is going on here in Latvia and the trends in Strategic Communications.

Strategic Communications Conference, Riga 2023: Day 1

Our team of Canadian academics and fellow travelers are here in Riga this week because of NATO's Centre of Excellence on Strategic Communications, based here, is throwing their annual conference.  The folks from ADM Public Affairs built visits to various interesting folks before and after, but the timing is driven by this event.   So, what did I learn today besides these folks having amazing production values--the AV and all that was terrific.

One consistent theme throughout the visit thus far: "we told the West that Russia was aggressive and you didn't believe us--we were right."  This is not just "I told you so," which, well, it is, but it is also, "hey, don't get smug, we are still in danger."  So, the Latvians are definitely putting out that message strategically so that they get the help that they really believe that they will need.  

I thought a good related message made by Latvia's President, Krišãjanis Kariņš, was that WWII generation and those who remember it may be passing from the scene, but those who lived through Communism and Totalitarianism are still very much around.

Graham Brookie, I believe, made the point in the second panel that to do Strat Comm well, you have to stand for something.  This was a recurring theme as well.  He also argued the battle was not between us and them controlling the info space but us fostering a free info environment.  Talk to Elon Musk, I did not shout.

My favorite panel was the Masterclass by Ukraine, which the folks on the panel then spent much of the time discussing how Ukraine has done it well but not perfectly.  Hanna Sheslet, who is a Ukrainian PhD working in a couple of different jobs--Director of Security Programmes at the Foreign Policy Council (No idea what that is) and editor-in-chief at Ukraine Analytica--was easily the best speaker of the day (the President was pretty good, too).  She was clear, persuasive, and had great bits of data and stories.   Among the things she said:

• Narratives come back.  You can't be satisfied with winning one battle against a specific narrative, as it will come back.  
• We are winning but still in the middle of an info war.
• We need to be better about our language--saying it is the Ukrainian conflict allows Russia to avoid agency/responsibility.  The passive voice (!) does the same--kids were kidnapped?  No, Russia kidnapped the kids.  She also used a Voldemort reference, so between that and the passive voice rant, she won me over.  
• She was asked that since the democracy/autocracy thing didn't play in the Global South, why not try Russians as imperialists/colonial power (which, well, is true)?  She responded that in her focus groups with folks from the Global South, they rejected that appeal for two reasons--that Ukrainians are white so they can't be victims of imperialism and that the Russians have inherited the Soviet mantle of being anti-imperial.  Damn.
   

 The panel also had a relatively less coherent speaker who also hit my sweet spot by showing NYT stories about the dam bursting (see, the passive voice denies agency, don't do this, kids) covering it with their favorite flavor--false equivalence sauce (been a long time since I have developed a new sauce!).  Would you really want to be a journalist saying: hey, we gave the Jews five minutes, we need to give Hitler five?

Patrick James Christian, the third speaker on this panel, explained that there are some key ingredients to a successful strategic comms effort: reality, responsibility, right/wrong.  Reality means that you have to speak to the basic facts and not deny them.  Defeats happen, acknowledge them, don't pretty them up.  Responsibility means emphasizing how everyone is responsible for each other--this ties people together and reduces despair.  What is the right thing to do?  Give guidance to what you want folks to do and not do.  Help the people understand with meaning so they don't break.

I met a variety of folks during the various breaks including some of the NATO Field School people who will soon be sharing their experiences via the CDSN Podcast Network's new podcast--NATO Field Notes.  The 45 students plus their leaders spent two weeks in Rome at the NATO Defense College and will be heading off to Brussels after two weeks here in Riga.  They are getting some of the same briefings we did.  It was good to see them.  I also met a variety of other folks and got their impressions.

 The conference is in a neat space--a former railroad station. Overall, a very good first day of StratComm stuff.  Tomorrow, one of our crew, JC Boucher, moderates a session so we will try to make things difficult for him.