Messing with the Enemy

by Clint Watts

  I refer to this method of evaluating expertise—experience, observations, and analysis—by the acronym EOA. It helps me determine who to listen to and who not to listen to. When I hear pundits or even colleagues suggest that they should be listened to because they’ve “been doing this for twenty years,” I usually stop listening, as they’re not telling me how they arrived at their conclusions or where they personally gleaned their insights. If I’m in Washington, D.C., and I hear the same phrases and terms muttered at several different agencies by government officials pushing their expertise, I immediately ignore what they’re saying, as they’re playing to the crowd, pushing the clickbait populism of the Beltway.

  On social media, the most effective way to challenge a troll comes from a method that’s taught in intelligence analysis. To sharpen an analyst’s skills and judgment, a supervisor or instructor will ask the subordinate two questions when he or she provides an assessment: “What do those who disagree with your assessment think, and why?” The analyst must articulate a competing viewpoint. The second question is even more important: “Under what conditions, specifically, would your assessment be wrong?” This forces analysts to consider what they should be looking for so they can spot when their own assumptions are mistaken, when the alternative, rather than their assessment, is the correct one. If analysts haven’t thought through their assessment, they won’t be able to clearly indicate when they are wrong, and that’s a strong signal that they’ve not explored all the possibilities or the merits of their challenger’s argument. When I get a troll on Facebook, I’ll inquire, “Under what circumstance would you admit you were wrong?” or “What evidence would convince you otherwise?” If they don’t answer or can’t articulate their answer, then I disregard them on that topic indefinitely.

  When working in the U.S. government, I also learned how to evaluate information sources through a set methodology that provides a rubric for discerning what to listen to in a social media feed. I employ the acronym CMPP to quickly examine sources online or in person. The C stands for competency: Is the source of the information capable of knowing, gathering, or understanding the information they are providing? The M represents motivation: Why is the source providing the information? In the case of RT, Russia’s English-language state-sponsored media outlet, the Kremlin’s motivation is to advance its narratives and foreign policy among Western audiences while degrading its adversaries. The New York Times seeks to inform the public and sell newspapers. When the Times does its job well, these two objectives mutually reinforce each other.

  The first P is product: What is the type of information being consumed? Print, audio, video, social media—each type of information can convey different meanings and impressions of reality. The most famous example of this effect came on September 26, 1960, when John F. Kennedy and Vice President Richard Nixon debated. Radio listeners thought Nixon had won the debate, but television viewers saw a sweaty, vacillating Nixon and instead thought the calmer and confident Kennedy had won.21 The added dimension of emerging false audio and video will even further sway us emotionally in this fashion and has the potential to fundamentally misinform our understanding of the world.

  The process, the final P in the acronym, asks how the information was acquired. Were the sources primary or secondary? Did the article or post represent its own research or simply pick and choose selected bits of data and opinions to support the overall conclusion? Did anything occur during collection of the information that could change or distort its meaning? Each of these process questions seeks to understand where biases and misinterpretations might be conveyed to the consumer.

  Social media users must understand when crowds are smart and when they’re dumb in order to know when clickbait populism moves society in a positive or negative direction. Crowds do well when they provide feedback on things they’ve actually experienced, when they are diverse in their perspectives and opinions, independent in their thoughts, and decentralized in their gathering of knowledge—everything today’s preference bubbles are not. Clickbait populism, social media nationalism, and disregard for expertise make preference bubbles collectively dumb, particularly when they assess complex problems like war and peace in the Middle East, highly specialized disciplines like research into autism or climate change, and future-focused strategies and policies of which they have no EOA. When I see social media preference bubbles herding under these conditions, I look to the outliers, those individuals brave enough, as Tocqueville wrote, to challenge the tyranny of the majority.

  We can each help ourselves by also understanding our enemies. In information warfare, don’t fear David or Goliath, but Judas. Those you trust with your information, your secrets, those who once loved you or friended you on Facebook but are now jealous of your social media experiences or angered by your beliefs—they will be the ones to betray you. Know who you are sharing your information with and how they might ultimately use it against you. Even further, in the world of kompromat, where everyday information released under the guise of transparency or justice hits the internet and spins in social media, make sure to read the actual disclosure for yourself rather than let an influencer push it to you. If an article cites a study, read the study and make sure it describes the narrative of the news article before passing it on. If an allegation, such as an election hack, advances a narrative based on stolen information or leaked secrets, make sure you understand the context and have read the base information—stolen emails, confidential documents, whatever it might be—yourself before passing it on.

  * * *

  The internet is not secure, and social media is public. I treat everything I type as if the whole world were watching, and increasingly I use phone calls or in-person meetings even when others want to do conference calls or chats. Encrypted applications like Slack, Signal, and Wickr have become my go-to communication methods. I’ve purchased subscriptions to the best newspapers and magazines. I’ve curbed my social media news consumption, further increased my cybersecurity measures, and prepared for the worst. And I accept that, despite all of these preparations, I’ll never be fully safe on social media.

  I wake up most mornings and wonder which of my enemies will strike back at me today. It might be a smear campaign from Russia, claims I’m a McCarthyite from transparency enthusiasts, charges of “deep state” from the alt-right, a knock on the door from a terrorist sympathizer pissed off about something I said on Twitter, a lawsuit threat from a political opposition group, or simply a betrayal from a Judas among my Facebook friends. Some of these things have already happened, more will follow, and each is not just likely but inevitable. Fame is fleeting, and infamy is forever, and on the social media battlefield, everyone is known for their biggest mistake, not their greatest achievement.

  But I know my enemies, and I will mess with them. Social media sharks, hackers, and manipulators are all caught with bait. I’ll pick some fights and lose them just so I can see who is attacking me. The penis picture they release of me someday, the one they hacked from my hard drive—that’s not my penis. (I wish.) If they want to steal my personal information and tarnish my reputation, I’ll confuse their facts and fictions about me. When they come to my information well, I put a little poison in it. When they infiltrate my Facebook and LinkedIn friends and follow me on Twitter, I let them in, and feed them some of what they want and some of what I want them to have. Those in my social media feeds should rightly wonder if they are part of a discussion, participants in an experiment, or trapped in an information battlefield where things are only partly what they seem. The answer to all of these questions is yes.

  When you began reading this book, you may have had a different impression of me than you do now. Now, at the end, you may be confused, or even put off. Yes, I think like a terrorist, and that is why it’s easy for me to talk to them. When I see my friends, I play practical jokes, and they in turn play them on me. Yelp is the app where I go to entertain myself with silly reviews, and when new social media applications come o
nline, I imagine crimes that could be committed or people who could be duped by these new technologies. I often find more in common with terrorists on Twitter than I do with my neighbors, and I think more like a Russian propagandist than a Pentagon administrator. I’m a social engineer by nature, but I’ve had advantages and blessings that separate me from my enemies.

  * * *

  I grew up under the guidance of two great parents who instilled in me a strict sense of right and wrong from an early age. I attended a state-sponsored institution, the United States Military Academy, which imparted the values of my country, respect for the rule of law, and adherence to a code to protect and defend America’s citizens from all enemies, foreign and domestic, and, surprisingly, the latter have outpaced the former in recent times. As with Assange and WikiLeaks, you should evaluate the measures I’ve taken based on their outcomes. Ultimately, I don’t think you’ll have much concern with my actions, as hopefully you now understand my intentions. I still believe in the American Dream, and I don’t want my country or the rest of the world to be dominated by the privileged, the fortunate, and the corrupt who now use social media to suppress the very principles of freedom and democracy for which I, and many others, have fought and will continue to fight.

  Finally, I know what I believe in, and why. I know there is good and bad in everyone, and that the direction they choose depends on the opportunities, resources, and freedoms they have to pursue the best version of themselves. American democracy, a highly imperfect system, remains the best chance for citizens to thrive and strive, and I will continue to support and pursue its best interests, in both the physical and virtual worlds. When you see me on social media, bantering, babbling, or battling, remember: I’m probably just messing with my enemies and pushing beyond my preference bubble. I hope you’ll join me in doing the same.

  Acknowledgments

  In this book, and throughout my life, a small part of which is captured here, I am deeply indebted to the family, team, and colleagues I’ve worked with. I owe thanks to two broad ranges of people: those that keep me in line and on track, and those who’ve helped me serve my country and track and engage my enemies. I’ll begin with the first.

  No one has taught me more about myself than my daughter, Pepper. Her smiles and hugs are genuine, and her love is unconditional. Thank you Pepper for getting me to look at the world from a different perspective, one that’s been invaluable for understanding the new world of social media, which for all its connections is surprisingly isolating.

  I was blessed from birth with an amazingly supportive family—my parents, Ronna and Gary, and my sister, Wendy. They taught me right from wrong, stood by me through all the twists and turns in my life, and gave me unending support during life’s roughest patches. In this book, I’ve hopefully answered part of the question “What do you do exactly?” Thank you for sticking with me when you didn’t really know the answer to that question.

  I’m not sure I would have ever written publicly about Russia’s influencing of Americans in the lead up to the presidential election of 2016 if it weren’t for a conversation I had with Emmy on a New Jersey sidewalk in July of 2016. Emmy helped me gain the courage to write that first article in the face of smear campaigns, and has since provided unending support and constructive input for this book, something I desperately needed as a first-time author. I can’t thank you enough for being there for me.

  Thanks to my 1995 West Point classmates and the members of the Long Gray Line. They’ve been an amazing network I can count on any time and any place I’ve landed in the world. They are the greatest Americans I’ve ever met and they all continue to serve their country and their communities across the United States and overseas. Thanks to John for his support on the wisdom of outliers and Jim for being a great teammate in and out of the army.

  Thanks to Krista for her support during my years of projects, travel, turn-ins, and short timelines. And much appreciation to Julie for keeping me on track and on target as I navigated the ups and downs of messing with my enemies.

  I owe much appreciation to my teachers and professors at Fort Zumwalt North High School in O’Fallon, Missouri, the U.S. Military Academy at West Point, and the Middlebury Institute of International Studies at Monterey, California—particularly Phil Morgan, Fernando DePaolis, Glynn Wood, and Ed Laurance, who equipped me with the skills needed for tackling the research in this book.

  Thanks to the members of the Richard A. Pack Society and their families, who’ve served as a reliable cadre of supporters that continue to defend the country as either public servants or private citizens. You’ve all been there for me when I needed you the most, and I hope I can return the favor to each of you someday.

  Great thanks goes to the two Irish Will’s I’ve come to know: one in the Army and one after. Will McDonough kept me out of trouble and has been a great friend and confidant from my first days at West Point up through now. He, Pat, and Jack (Team 621) have all shown up for me in a big way in recent years. Will McCants and I have worked together since 2005. He’s been an amazing supporter and sounding board for my best and worst research ideas. In 2007, I joked about writing a book with Will while sitting alongside the Nile River. Will stayed on me to see it through, urged me to start blogging at SelectedWisdom.com, provided excellent feedback over the years, and kept me going when times were particularly bleak. Thank you for making sure that I didn’t quit.

  You may have noticed during the past few hundred pages I’ve had a meandering career, and I often took the path less traveled. Two leaders recognized how to leverage my crazy, understood how I thought, and encouraged and empowered me to achieve when most others would have left me in the wilderness:

  I owe tremendous gratitude to General Wayne A. Downing, the first commander of U.S. Special Operations Command. General Downing was the first general I met that displayed humility, listened more than he talked, and sought to empower those around him. General Downing got me motivated, knew how to nudge me with timely anecdotes, and always encouraged me to push the edges, take on some risk, and march to the sound of the guns, not away from them.

  Tom Harrington did what I imagine few FBI leaders would ever do. He not only brought me back to the FBI after I quit, but empowered me in the Counterterrorism Division, providing an amazing second experience in the Bureau—the one I thought I’d have when I first joined. Tom has been a behind-the-scenes hero in America’s counterterrorism fight and led the rebuilding of the FBI into an intelligence-led organization. He mentored me through tough times personally and professionally, and I can’t thank him enough for the opportunities he’s given me.

  Two other characters who’ve been essential to the research in this book are J. M. Berger and Andrew Weisburd. J. M. is one of the best analysts of social media, terrorism, disinformation, dystopian fiction, and the television show Lost in the entire world. J. M.’s relentless quest for novel insights from deep data dives made much of this book possible. Andrew is the best digital shoe-leather investigator I’ve ever met. I’m constantly amazed by the length and breadth of his research. Andrew’s tireless commitment to pursuing bad guys doing bad things has been truly inspiring to me over the last decade. I thank both of them for sticking with the Russia research even when it didn’t make any practical sense to pursue it anymore. It’s been an honor to work with you both.

  I owe my colleagues during my time at the Combating Terrorism Center at West Point a great deal of gratitude. Kip, Joe, Bill, Squeeze, Afshon, Brian, Lianne, Jake, Sammy, Vahid, Becky, Hellfire, Andrew, Jeff, Rick, and all of the outside researchers and staff of the Department of Social Sciences who contributed to great insights in the field of counterterrorism and powered the Harmony projects.

  Thanks to the men of 2nd Battalion, 327th Infantry, 101st Airborne Division and 2nd Battalion, 3rd Infantry Regiment, 2nd Infantry Division for letting me learn while leading, particularly the noncommissioned officers—Jason, Scooter, Mike, Shane, and Jeff. Same to the members of the FBI’s Counterterror
ism Division and National Security branch during my second go-around in the “Bu,” and the FBI’s Portland Joint Terrorism Task Force, Squad 9, who taught me so much during my first stint—hopefully you all know that while I didn’t stay long, I never went too far away.

  Thanks to my agent, Flip Brophy, and my publisher, HarperCollins. Both took a gamble on me when many others had passed. Thank you for supporting my concept and for giving me such an excellent editorial team in Jonathan Jao and Sofia Groopman, who gave me essential feedback and got this manuscript up to speed.

  Lastly and maybe most strangely, thanks to The Howard Stern Show. After more dark days than I care to count, either watching terrorist posts or Russian trolling, you gave me a chuckle when I needed it the most.

  Notes

  CHAPTER 1: OMAR AND CARFIZZI

  1.The original videos of Omar Hammami’s raps have been removed and were previously at the following link: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MDDYqV9V5kA. A transcript of the rap song that includes this lyric was obtained from J. M. Berger, which summarized the Al Shabaab, Al-Kataib video production entitled “Ambush At Bardale.”

  2.Clint Watts and Andrew Lebovich, “Hammami’s Plight Amidst Al-Shabaab and al-Qaeda’s Game of Thrones,” Center for Cyber and Homeland Security, Commentary 25, (March 19, 2012). https://cchs.gwu.edu/sites/cchs.gwu.edu/files/downloads/Commentary_25_HSPI.pdf.

  3.J. M. Berger, “Omar and Me,” Foreign Policy (September 17, 2013). http://foreignpolicy.com/2013/09/17/omar-and-me.

  CHAPTER 2: THE RISE AND FALL OF THE VIRTUAL CALIPHATE

  1.Peter Bergen, “The Account of How We Nearly Caught Osama Bin Laden in 2001,” The New Republic, December 30, 2009. https://newrepublic.com/article/72086/the-battle-tora-bora.