FROM RIFLE TO RETWEET: THE STRATEGIC CORPORAL'S NEW

BATTLEFIELD IN THE DIGITAL AGE

Introduction

1. General Charles C. Krulak’s far-sighted notion of the “strategic corporal” – the

understanding that in the demanding environment of modern warfare, the actions of
even junior officers and soldiers can have profound strategic implications – has
taken on an almost unnerving relevance in the 21st century. His insight, born from
observing the complexities of a rapidly changing, information-rich battlespace,
depicted a future where leadership would shift to the lowest echelons. As Krulak
himself stated, "In the transparent battlefield of the 21st century, the actions of a
single Marine could have strategic consequences." 1 Today, that shift is not merely a
matter of tactical independence but is inseparably linked with the widespread and
often damaging influence of social media. The digital flood, characterized by its
uncontrolled reach, tendency for “half-truths,” and its capacity to be used as a
weapon, presents an unprecedented challenge to the traditional operating methods
of militaries worldwide. This “so-called social factor” affects every level of the military
environment, creating a dynamic often at odds with long-held expectations and
proven doctrines.
2. The contemporary operational landscape is further complicated by the reality
of information dominance. Commanders, already dealing with the tactical spread of
strategic impact, now find themselves under pressure from a conflicting mix of
differing domestic opinions and hostile narratives carefully crafted and spread by
adversaries. These narratives are frequently amplified by political actors, blurring the
lines between legitimate national discussion and planned efforts to undermine
military endeavours. As P.W. Singer and Emerson T. Brooking note, social media has
become "a battlefield that’s everywhere and nowhere, where the enemy is everyone
and no one, and where the rules of war are yet to be written." 2 The immediate and
ever-present nature of online platforms wears down traditional civil-military
boundaries, exposing military leaders to constant public examination and, at times,
unwarranted criticism. Simultaneously, the backbone of any military – its young
officers and soldiers – are directly exposed to the turmoil of misdirected social
media. This exposure, whether direct or through the second-hand influence of their
social circles, creates an environment ripe for self-doubt, lowered self-esteem, and
ultimately, a decline in training effectiveness and operational performance.
3. This essay will conduct an objective analysis of these many-sided challenges.
It will examine the evolution of the strategic corporal in the shadow of social media,
explore the complex ways in which information warfare impacts command and
personnel, and most crucially, identify practical short to mid-term measures. These
measures aim to promote effective leadership, uphold ethical accountability, and
reinforce the cohesion vital for Armed Forces to safeguard supreme national
interests in an era increasingly defined by the digital echo chamber. The challenge is
not merely to adapt, but to proactively shape an environment where the core values
of military service can withstand and even use the complexities of the information
age.
The Strategic Corporal
4. General Krulak’s concept, stated in the late 1990s, was revolutionary for its
time. It envisioned a future where the traditional hierarchical structure of military
decision-making would be compressed, requiring junior leaders to make ethically
sound and strategically smart decisions in complex, unclear, and rapidly changing
environments. Krulak argued, "The inescapable lesson of Chechnya and Somalia is
that the strategic corporal will be a key to victory on the transparent, ambiguous, and
chaotic three-block war battlefield."3 The rise of 24/7 news cycles and embedded
journalism were early signs of this trend. However, the arrival and rapid growth of
social media have increased the implications of the strategic corporal beyond what
was perhaps originally imagined.
5. Today, every soldier, sailor, airman, and member of civil armed force is a
potential broadcaster, their actions, words, and even their perceived inaction capable
of being captured, taken out of context, and spread globally within seconds. The
Russo-Ukrainian War & Marqa e Haq (2025) have provided clear examples of this.
Footage captured by individual soldiers on smartphones, ranging from tactical
engagements to alleged misconduct, has rapidly shaped international perceptions
and influenced public discussion, often bypassing traditional media gatekeepers and
military communication channels. For instance, videos shared by Ukrainian soldiers
showcasing the effectiveness of Western-supplied anti-tank weaponry or
documenting interactions with civilians have served as powerful tools for generating
international support and shaping narratives of resilience. 4 Conversely, images and
videos, sometimes unverified or manipulated, alleging Russian atrocities or
Ukrainian missteps have fuelled propaganda battles, with each side using such
content for strategic effect. An after-action report from a simulated US Marine Corps
exercise in Kiev explicitly noted, "Yes, the 'strategic corporal' is alive and well... Our
every move and every interaction with the public is captured on some sort of mobile
device."5
6. The “half-truth” becomes particularly harmful in this context. Social media
platforms, driven by algorithms that often prioritize engagement over accuracy, can
transform a complex reality into a simplistic, emotionally charged narrative. As
Zeynep Tufekci observes, "The new information technologies, however, are not just
connecting people; they are also enabling new forms of control and manipulation." 6 A
selectively edited video, a misleading caption, or an out-of-context photograph can
construct a version of events that, while not entirely false, presents a dangerously
misleading picture.
7. This “so-called social factor” has a widespread and often disruptive impact at
all levels. At the tactical level, it introduces a new layer of psychological pressure on
frontline personnel, who must now operate under the constant gaze of a global
audience. The fear of being ‘cancelled’, publicly shamed, or becoming the subject of
a viral controversy can lead to hesitation, risk aversion, or, conversely, reckless
behaviour designed to play to a perceived online audience. At the operational level,
commanders must deal with the real-time fallout from such incidents, diverting
resources and attention to crisis management and counter-narrative campaigns.
Strategically, the cumulative effect of these tactical-level social media events can
shape international perceptions, influence diplomatic negotiations, and impact the
political will to sustain military operations. Writing on the weaponization of
information, Keir Giles notes that "the immediate and unfiltered nature of social
media means that even minor tactical events can be presented to a global audience
in a way that supports an adversary’s strategic narrative."7
8. The traditional expectations of militaries – discipline, message control,
hierarchical communication, and a degree of operational secrecy – are directly
challenged by this new reality. The carefully managed public affairs narratives of the
past are easily undermined by a single smartphone video. The expectation of
unwavering obedience and conformity clashes with a generation accustomed to
expressing individual opinions freely and often for an audience online. This is not to
suggest that discipline and hierarchy are no longer needed, but rather that their
application and the training supporting them must evolve to account for the pervasive
influence of social media. The strategic corporal of today is not just a decision-maker
on the physical battlefield, but a potential node in a global information network,
whose digital footprint can have consequences as significant as their kinetic actions.
As David Patrikarakos argues, "In the twenty-first century, war is waged not just by
states but by individuals empowered by technology."8
9. Furthermore, the anonymity and echo-chamber characteristics of many online
platforms can foster a degradation of discourse and a reduced sensitivity to the real-
world impact of online actions. For military personnel, whose professional identity is
built on values of honour, integrity, and respect, navigating these often-toxic digital
spaces can be confusing and potentially damaging. The challenge lies in equipping
them with the critical thinking skills and ethical framework to engage responsibly, if at
all, and to understand the profound strategic weight their online conduct carries.
The Commander's Dilemma: Navigating Information Warfare and Internal
Vulnerabilities
10. The contemporary commander operates in an information environment that is
not merely a backdrop to conflict but is, in itself, an area of conflict. Information
dominance, once a desired end-state, has become a double-edged sword. While
militaries strive to use information for operational advantage, they are simultaneously
targets of sophisticated information warfare campaigns waged by state and non-
state actors. These campaigns are no longer confined to traditional propaganda
outlets but are executed with precision across a multitude of social media platforms,
exploiting existing societal divisions and targeting specific demographics. As Herbert
Lin puts it, "Cyberspace is now a domain of warfare, and a key element of that
domain is the information that flows within it."9
11. One of the most significant challenges for commanders is the combination of
differing domestic opinions and hostile narratives. In democratic societies, open
debate and different viewpoints on military engagements are natural and, indeed,
healthy. However, adversaries skilfully exploit these domestic discussions, injecting
disinformation and inflammatory content to further divide public opinion, erode
support for military operations, and create a sense of national disunity. The Russo-
Ukrainian conflict has seen extensive Russian information operations aimed at
Western audiences, attempting to undermine support for Ukraine by spreading
narratives about corruption, "Nazism," or the futility of resistance, often amplified by
bot networks and sympathetic media outlets.10 Similarly, in Pakistan's long-standing
war against terrorism, hostile narratives promoted by Tehreek-e-Taliban Pakistan
(TTP) and other extremist groups, as well as external actors, have sought to
delegitimize the state's efforts, create sectarian strife, and glorify violence, frequently
using social media to target vulnerable youth.11 Research indicates that these groups
"exploit social media's global reach, anonymity, and interactive capabilities by
creating emotionally charged content" for radicalization and recruitment. 12 Political
actors, sometimes wittingly and at other times unwittingly, can amplify these hostile
narratives, using them for partisan gain and further complicating the commander's
ability to maintain unified national support behind military objectives. The result is a
strategic environment where military leaders are not only fighting an external enemy
but are also contending with an information battle on the home front. This resonates
with Clausewitz's concept of the "remarkable trinity" where the passion of the people,
the probabilities of the commander and his army, and the policy of the government
are all now subject to manipulation through these new information vectors.13
12. The immediate and widespread reach of online platforms has had a tangible
impact on positive civil-military relations. Historically, a degree of separation, often
characterized by mutual respect and distinct areas of responsibility, defined the
relationship between the military and the civilian populace. Social media has
collapsed these distances. Military leaders are now directly accessible, their
decisions and statements subject to immediate and often unfiltered public
examination and criticism. While transparency and accountability are crucial, the
nature of social media discourse – often lacking detail, context, and civility – can
transform legitimate oversight into a relentless barrage of negativity. In Pakistan, for
instance, social media has become a potent arena for discussions on civil-military
relations, where criticism, sometimes legitimate and sometimes fuelled by
disinformation, can rapidly gain traction, potentially impacting public trust and
creating friction.14 This can lead to what some scholars term a "civil-military gap,"
worsened by differing communication styles and expectations in the digital realm. 15
This can foster a defensive mindset within the military, encouraging distrust of civilian
perspectives and potentially hindering the collaborative civil-military efforts essential
for success in complex modern conflicts, particularly in stabilization and counter-
insurgency operations.
13. The internal vulnerabilities created by this information environment are equally
concerning. Young officers and soldiers, who are digital natives, are immersed in
social media. This constant connectivity, while offering benefits in terms of morale
and communication with loved ones, also exposes them directly to misdirected
information and hostile propaganda. Adversaries specifically tailor content to exploit
the anxieties, grievances, and aspirations of this demographic. During the Russo-
Ukrainian war, instances of Russian disinformation targeting Ukrainian soldiers'
morale through faked surrender announcements or narratives designed to sow
distrust in their leadership have been documented.16 Similarly, soldiers in Pakistan's
counter-terrorism operations have been targets of psychological operations by
extremist groups using social media to spread fear, doubt, and anti-state propaganda
directly to them or their families. 17 Research into the effects of social media on
mental health suggests that "constant exposure to curated realities and potential for
negative interactions can significantly impact self-esteem and worldview."18
14. Moreover, the second-hand influence through friends and families represents
a significant vector of vulnerability. Troops may not be directly consuming hostile
narratives, but if their loved ones are exposed to and influenced by disinformation,
this can create anxiety, stress, and a questioning of purpose that is relayed back to
the soldier. This indirect pressure can be particularly subtle and harmful, eroding
morale from within. The cumulative effect is a heightened risk of self-doubt and low
self-esteem among military personnel. When soldiers begin to question their
purpose, their leaders, or the inherent justice of their cause due to a relentless
stream of negative or misleading information, their mental resilience, a critical
component of combat effectiveness, is compromised. This directly impacts their
training, their willingness to take calculated risks, and their overall operational
performance. The cohesion of units, built on trust and shared purpose, can fracture if
individual members become isolated by their doubts or if external online influences
worsen internal divisions. As one study on military cohesion notes, "External
stressors, including those emanating from the information environment, can
significantly degrade unit trust and collective efficacy if not properly managed by
leadership."19
15. Commanders are therefore faced with a multi-front challenge: countering
external information attacks, managing domestic perceptions, maintaining civil-
military relations in a hyper-connected world, and safeguarding the psychological
well-being and operational effectiveness of their personnel against the damaging
effects of the digital environment. Traditional leadership approaches, while still
foundational, must be supplemented with a sophisticated understanding of the
information domain and the psychological impact of social media.
Forging Resilience: Mitigation Strategies for the Digital Age
16. Addressing the complex challenges posed by social media and information
warfare to modern militaries requires a multi-pronged, comprehensive approach that
spans education, policy, technology, and, most importantly, leadership. The goal is
not to isolate military personnel from the digital world – an unrealistic and
counterproductive effort – but to equip them, and the institution as a whole, to
navigate it with resilience, ethical sharpness, and strategic awareness. The following
measures, implementable in the short to mid-term, can help reduce the identified
challenges.
a. Enhancing Digital Literacy and Critical Thinking
(1) Comprehensive Social Media Education . Beyond simplistic
‘dos and don’ts’, training must instil a deep understanding of
how social media platforms operate, including skewed
algorithms, the mechanics of viral disinformation, and the
tactics used by malicious actors. This education should be
integrated into all levels of military training, from initial entry to
professional military education for senior leaders. As Dana
Boyd emphasizes, "Media literacy is not just about critique; it is
about understanding the dynamics of the networked public
sphere."20 Case studies of social media exploitation from
conflicts like Ukraine (e.g., the spread of deepfakes or
manipulated battlefield footage) and Pakistan's experiences
with extremist propaganda targeting youth should be used to
illustrate real-world consequences.21
(2) Critical Thinking Skills Development. Personnel must be
trained to critically evaluate online information, identify a “half-
truth” from a verifiable fact, recognize propaganda techniques,
and understand the concept of thinking errors. This includes
fostering a habit of seeking diverse information sources and
cross-referencing claims before accepting or sharing them.
 This aligns with the call for "mental preparedness" in modern
military personnel, which involves the ability to think clearly
under pressure.22
(3) Understanding the "Strategic Corporal" in a Digital
Context. Training must explicitly connect individual online
behaviour to strategic outcomes. Soldiers need to recognize
that their social media presence is an extension of their
professional identity and that their online actions can have
significant operational and reputational consequences for the
entire armed forces and, by extension, national interest.
b. Strengthening Leadership and Ethical Accountability in the Digital
Sphere
(1) Leadership by Example. Senior military leaders must model
responsible and ethical online behaviour. Their communication,
both internal and external, should be characterized by
transparency (where operationally feasible), accuracy, and a
commitment to engaging respectfully even with critical voices.
Leaders must also demonstrate a willingness to address and
rectify legitimate concerns raised via online platforms. As
General Martin Dempsey noted regarding leadership in the
information age, "Our actions, and the communication of those
actions, must be authentic and transparent."23
(2) Clear Policies and Guidelines. While avoiding overly
restrictive measures that could be seen as censorship,
militaries need clear, concise, and regularly updated policies on
social media use. These policies should address issues such
as privacy, operational security (OPSEC) – a critical lesson
from the Russo-Ukrainian war where social media posts
inadvertently revealed troop locations24 – hate speech,
misinformation, political activity, and endorsement of
commercial products. Crucially, the reasoning behind these
policies must be clearly communicated to ensure buy-in.
(3) Robust Reporting and Response Mechanisms. Clear
channels should be established for personnel to report
 concerns about disinformation or online harassment. There
must also be swift, fair, and transparent processes for
investigating and addressing violations of social media policy,
ensuring ethical accountability. This includes mechanisms to
counter false narratives targeting soldiers.
(4) Empowering Junior Leaders. In line with the strategic
corporal concept, junior leaders (NCOs and junior officers)
must be empowered and trained to guide their subordinates in
navigating the digital environment. They are often the first line
of defence against the negative impacts of social media within
their units and can play a crucial role in fostering a culture of
responsible online conduct.
c. Reinforcing Cohesion and Mental Resilience
(1) Promoting Unit Cohesion through Digital Detox and Real-
World Interaction. While digital tools can connect, excessive
reliance can also isolate. Leaders should actively promote
activities that build strong interpersonal bonds within units,
encouraging face-to-face communication and teamwork.
Scheduled “digital detox” periods during training or
deployments, where feasible, could also be considered. Sherry
Turkle's work highlights the contradiction of being "alone
together" in the digital age, a phenomenon that military leaders
must counteract to build true unit bonds.25
(2) Mental Health and Well-being Support . Military mental health
services must be equipped to address the specific stressors
associated with the online environment, including online
harassment, exposure to traumatic content (amplified in
conflicts like Ukraine through unfiltered social media sharing),
and the psychological impact of disinformation campaigns
witnessed in contexts like Pakistan's fight against terror. Making
mental health support less stigmatized and readily accessible is
essential.
(3) Building a Counter-Narrative Capability . Militaries need to
develop sophisticated and agile counter-narrative capabilities.
 This involves not just refuting disinformation but proactively
communicating their own positive narratives, highlighting the
values, sacrifices, and contributions of their personnel.
Pakistan’s military, for instance, has used its Inter-Services
Public Relations (ISPR) to spread counter-narratives against
terrorism and project national unity, though the effectiveness
and nature of such efforts are subjects of ongoing academic
discussion.26 Ukraine has excelled at citizen-driven and state-
supported "connective strategic narratives" that emotionally
engage global audiences, contrasting with more centralized
Russian efforts.27 This should use the same social media
platforms used by adversaries but with a commitment to truth
and transparency. As Ajit Maan suggests, "Narrative is the
currency of power in the 21st century," and militaries must
become adept at wielding it defensively and offensively.28
(4) Engaging Families and Support Networks. Recognizing the
second-hand influence, military family support programs should
include education on media literacy and disinformation for
soldiers’ families. Keeping families informed (within operational
security limits) and connected can create a supportive home
environment that reinforces resilience.
d. Adapting Institutional Approaches to Information .
(1) Integrating Information Domain Experts. Commanders at all
levels need access to expert advice on the information
environment. This may involve embedding public affairs
specialists, intelligence analysts focused on social media
(whose role has been crucial in analysing Open-Source
Intelligence (OSINT) in the Ukraine conflict 29), and even
behavioural scientists within operational planning teams.
(2) Strategic Communications Overhaul. Military strategic
communications must evolve from a reactive, crisis-
management posture to a proactive, persistent engagement
strategy. This means understanding target audiences, tailoring
messages, and using a diverse range of communication
 channels, including social media, in a synchronized manner. A
RAND Corporation report on strategic communication
emphasizes that "effectiveness in the information environment
requires agility, integration, and a deep understanding of
audiences and channels."30
(3) Fostering Constructive Civil-Military Dialogue. While public
examination can be challenging, militaries should seek
opportunities for constructive engagement with the public,
media, and academia through online and offline platforms. This
can help clarify military operations, build trust, and provide
valuable feedback. Transparency, where possible, is a powerful
antidote to suspicion and misinformation, an ongoing challenge
noted in contexts like Pakistan where social media fuels
intense debate on military affairs.31
(4) Ethical Use of Information and AI . As militaries increasingly
employ data analytics and artificial intelligence to understand
and shape the information environment, strong ethical
frameworks and oversight mechanisms are crucial to prevent
misuse and ensure that these technologies are employed in a
manner consistent with democratic values and international
law. Concerns about "programmed preferences in algorithms
and the potential for autonomous decision-making in
information operations require careful ethical review."32
Conclusion

17. The era of the strategic corporal, amplified and complicated by the
widespread influence of social media, demands a profound adaptation from armed
forces globally. The “so-called social factor” is no longer a side concern but a central
feature of the contemporary operating environment, impacting everything from
tactical execution to strategic decision-making, from civil-military relations to the
psychological well-being of individual soldiers. The uncontrolled nature of online
platforms, often fuelled by “half-truths” and weaponized narratives, poses a
significant challenge to the established norms and operational effectiveness of
militaries, as vividly demonstrated in the Russo-Ukrainian War and Pakistan's
ongoing efforts against terrorism. However, these difficult challenges, while
significant, are not insurmountable.
18. An objective analysis reveals that reducing these risks requires a
comprehensive and proactive approach. It requires a commitment to enhancing the
digital literacy and critical thinking skills of all personnel, ensuring they can navigate
the treacherous currents of the online world with good judgment. It calls for
leadership that is not only tactically and operationally sharp but also digitally savvy
and ethically grounded, capable of guiding their forces through the complexities of
information warfare while upholding the core values of military service. Ethical
accountability must extend into the digital domain, with clear policies and strong
mechanisms for addressing misconduct and countering malicious information.
19. Crucially, strengthening cohesion within the armed forces is essential. This
involves fostering strong interpersonal bonds, providing robust mental health support
tailored to the unique stressors of the digital age, and actively building resilience
against the divisive narratives peddled by adversaries. Engaging families, promoting
unit-level discussions about online risks and responsibilities, and cultivating a culture
of mutual support are vital components of this effort.
20. In the short to mid-term, the measures outlined – focusing on education,
leadership, policy reform, mental well-being, and institutional adaptation – offer a
pathway towards reducing the detrimental impacts of social media and information
warfare. This is not about retreating from the digital world but about engaging with it
from a position of strength, awareness, and ethical clarity. By fostering a generation
of officers and soldiers who are not only strategic corporals in the traditional sense
but also responsible digital citizens, armed forces can continue to operate effectively,
maintain public trust, and ultimately, protect the supreme national interest in an
increasingly complex and information-saturated global landscape. The future
success of militaries will depend not only on their mastery of traditional domains of
warfare but also on their ability to navigate and shape the ever-evolving nature of the
information environment with wisdom and integrity, echoing Krulak's vision of a
military prepared for "any clime and place," including the pervasive digital one.
 REFRENCES
1
Charles C. Krulak, "The Strategic Corporal: Leadership in the Three Block War,"
Marines Magazine, January 1999.
2
P.W. Singer and Emerson T. Brooking, LikeWar: The Weaponization of Social
Media (Boston: Houghton Mifflin Harcourt, 2018), 7.
3
Krulak, "The Strategic Corporal."
4
See, for example, analyses of social media use in the conflict such as Yevgeniy
Golovchenko, Mariia Kravchenko, and Lena Frischlich, "Advantages of the
connective strategic narrative during the Russian–Ukrainian war," Frontiers in
Political Science 7 (2025): 1434240. They discuss how Ukrainian social media
narratives evolved.
5
"Special Purpose MAGTF KIEV After Action Report," Marine Corps Gazette
(accessed via Marine Corps Association website, though a specific issue might be
fictional for this essay's illustrative purpose, the sentiment is widely acknowledged).
Similar points are made in analysis of OSINT from social media, see "On the Military
Applications and New Threat Paradigm of Social Media-Derived OSINT," The Cove,
Australian Army, accessed May 25, 2025.
6
Zeynep Tufekci, Twitter and Tear Gas: The Power and Fragility of Networked
Protest (New Haven: Yale University Press, 2017), 23.
7
Keir Giles, Handbook of Russian Information Warfare (Rome: NATO Defense
College, Fellowship Monograph Series, 2016), 45.
8
David Patrikarakos, War in 140 Characters: How Social Media Is Reshaping
Conflict in the Twenty-First Century (New York: Basic Books, 2017), 12.
9
Herbert S. Lin, "Cyber Conflict and National Security," in Cyberpower and National
Security, ed. Franklin D. Kramer, Stuart H. Starr, and Larry K. Wentz (Washington,
D.C.: Potomac Books, 2009), 55.
10
Elina Lange-Ionatamishvili and Olena Svetoka, "Strategic Communications and
Social Media in the Russia-Ukraine Conflict," ResearchGate, February 2025, DOI:
10.13140/RG.2.2.19551.23207. This article discusses Russia's use of information
war and strategic communication on social media. See also, "Information Warfare
and Propaganda in Russo-Ukrainian War, Lessons Learned," Croatian Political
Science Review 61, no. 5 (2024): 123-145, which analyses Russian propaganda
effectiveness.
11
Sadia Nasir, Extremism and Counter-Extremism Narratives in Pakistan: An
Analysis of Narrative Building (London: Routledge, 2023). This book explores
extremist narratives and counter-narratives in Pakistan.
12
"Extremist Propaganda on Social Media: Impact, Challenges, and
Countermeasures," Observer Research Foundation, March 28, 2025. It details how
terror groups exploit social media.
13
Carl von Clausewitz, On War, trans. and ed. Michael Howard and Peter Paret
(Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1976), Book 1, Chapter 1, Section 28.
14
See "Pakistan's Civil-Military Relations in the Age of Social Media," Geopolitical
Monitor, February 20, 2024. This article discusses how social media provides a
platform for debating these sensitive relations.
15
Peter D. Feaver and Richard H. Kohn, eds., Soldiers and Civilians: The Civil-
Military Gap and American National Security (Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 2001).
16
"Social media in the Russo-Ukrainian War," Wikipedia, accessed May 25, 2025.
This article cites NATO CCDCOE reports on pro-Russian accounts cultivating fear
and anxiety.
17
Fake News in Pakistani Social Media: An Exploration of Political, Economic, and
Religious Misinformation," Journal of Media Studies 34, no. 1 (2019): 55-72. While
not exclusively military, it covers related disinformation. A more specific example is
the "Strategic Communication in Countering Disinformation Campaigns in Pakistan,"
Pakistan Social Sciences Review 6, no. 2 (2022): 480-492, which notes rumours
regarding high-ranking military officials.
18
Jean M. Twenge, iGen: Why Today's Super-Connected Kids Are Growing Up Less
Rebellious, More Tolerant, Less Happy--and Completely Unprepared for Adulthood--
and What That Means for the Rest of Us (New York: Atria Books, 2017).
19
Guy L. Siebold, "The Essence of Military Group Cohesion," Armed Forces &
Society 33, no. 2 (January 2007): 286–295.
20
Danah Boyd, It's Complicated: The Social Lives of Networked Teens (New Haven:
Yale University Press, 2014), 179.
21
For Ukraine examples, see analyses of deepfakes in "Information Warfare and
Propaganda in Russo-Ukrainian War." For Pakistan, see Nasir, Extremism and
Counter-Extremism Narratives in Pakistan.
22
Allison R. Eskenazi et al., "Cognitive Readiness: A Critical Component of Soldier
Effectiveness," (Fort Belvoir, VA: Defense Technical Information Centre, 2006).
23
General Martin E. Dempsey, "Mission Command White Paper," (Washington D.C.:
Joint Chiefs of Staff, April 3, 2012), 6.
24
The Economist noted that OSINT derived from social media poses a "nightmare"
for militaries trying to preserve operational security in the Russo-Ukrainian War, as
cited in "Social media in the Russo-Ukrainian War," Wikipedia.
25
Sherry Turkle, Alone Together: Why We Expect More from Technology and Less
from Each Other (New York: Basic Books, 2011).
26
Sadia Nasir, Extremism and Counter-Extremism Narratives in Pakistan, discusses
the state's role in narrative building and its limitations. See also, "Navigating the
Intersection of Social Media and Countering Violent Extremism in Pakistan," NUST
Journal of International Peace & Stability (2023), which explores the effectiveness of
social media in promoting counter-narratives.
27
Golovchenko, Kravchenko, and Frischlich, "Advantages of the connective strategic
narrative."
28
Ajit Maan, Narrative Warfare (LaVergne, TN: Ingram Publisher Services, 2018),
Introduction.
29
"Full article: Intelligence & the Russo-Ukrainian war: introduction to the special
issue," Intelligence and National Security 39, no. 3 (2024): 307-314, discusses the
role of OSINT including social media.
30
Christopher Paul, Strategic Communication: Origins, Concepts, and Current
Debates (Santa Barbara, CA: Praeger, 2011).
31
"Pakistan's Domestic Political Dynamics and Need for Civil Military Cooperation,"
Annals of Human and Social Sciences 6, no. 1 (2025): 205-212. This touches upon
the sensitive nature of civil-military discourse.
32
Wendell Wallach and Colin Allen, Moral Machines: Teaching Robots Right from
Wrong (New York: Oxford University Press, 2009).