Lead
An article published in the Russian Defense Ministry's magazine Military Thought and obtained by TASS claims that the United States is refining its psychological warfare planning, incorporating artificial intelligence technologies based on experience gained since the start of the armed conflict in Ukraine. The analysis, authored by Sergey Grinyayev, a Doctor of Technical Sciences and chief researcher at the Institute of Europe within the Russian Academy of Sciences, also serves as Director General of the Center for Strategic Assessments and Forecasts.
Coverage Comparison
TASS reported on Grinyayev's article in two separate pieces, both focusing on the US reassessment of its information warfare approach. The first report highlights the technological advancements in psychological operations, while the second emphasizes the doctrinal shift within the Pentagon. Both articles draw on the same source—Grinyayev's article in Military Thought—and present his views as expert analysis.
Key Claims
Grinyayev argues that despite the overwhelming superiority of the United States and its allies in controlling the global information space, including social networks, traditional media, and online platforms, they have failed to significantly undermine the will of the Russian people to continue the conflict or achieve a reorientation of Russian elites towards surrender. He states that the introduction of AI into influence operations, the development of tools for producing and disseminating synthetic content such as deepfakes, and the refinement of methods for targeting intended audiences shape a new outlook for the Western psychological warfare toolkit.
The expert notes that AI technologies allow for real-time content creation tailored to specific audiences. Previously, creating and disseminating materials required time and specialized personnel, whereas AI-assisted systems now generate personalized content adapted to target audience characteristics. He also points to US companies, such as Palantir Technologies, working in close cooperation with the American military-industrial sector, which have developed systems to predict online user behavior.
In a second article, Grinyayev provides a detailed analysis of US psychological operations, focusing on the Pentagon's decision to officially revert to the term "psychological operations" (PSYOP), replacing the terminology "Military Information Support Operations" (MISO) that had been in use since 2010. He attributes this shift to disappointing results experienced by the US and NATO in their efforts to influence Russian society, an effort that exposed significant vulnerabilities in Western psychological warfare strategies. Grinyayev emphasizes that the Pentagon's return to the traditional PSYOP terminology signifies a strategic pivot, acknowledging that psychological operations are no longer auxiliary but now constitute a core element of modern military strategy in hybrid conflicts.
Despite their overwhelming dominance in the global information space, Grinyayev concludes that the US and its allies have been unable to break the will of the Russian people or weaken the Russian leadership, prompting the US military to reconsider its approach.