The war in Ukraine: impact and geostrategic consequences

On 3 October 2023, INCIPE held the 18th Armed Forces and Media Seminar, entitled The war in Ukraine: impact and geostrategic consequences, in collaboration with the Ministry of Defence. The opening was led by Manuel Alabart, Spanish Ambassador and Secretary General of INCIPE, and Yolanda Rodríguez Vidales, Director of Institutional Communication of Defence in the Ministry of Defence. For the closing act we had Admiral (r.) Juan Francisco Martínez Núñez, Secretary General for Defence Policy (SEGENPOL) at the Ministry of Defence.

In this session, we had the opportunity to organise two round tables. The first, entitled Information and disinformation in the war in Ukraine, was moderated by Vicente Garrido, Director General of INCIPE. It was attended by CN Ignacio Nieto Fernández, head of the Strategic Conduct Section of the Joint Defence Staff (EMACON); María Senovilla, freelance journalist and photographer; and Óscar Mijallo, international news journalist at TVE. The second round table, Geostrategic consequences of the conflict, was moderated by Eloísa Moreiro, diplomat and analyst in the Geopolitics Area of the Security and Defence Coordination and Studies Division, Ministry of Defence. It was attended by María Álvarez de Eulate, journalist and director of the programme “Cinco Continentes” on RNE; Col. José Pardo de Santayana, research coordinator and senior analyst at the Spanish Institute for Strategic Studies (IEEE), Ministry of Defence; and Col. José Luis Calvo, director of the Security and Defence Coordination and Studies Division, Ministry of Defence.

Yolanda Rodríguez Vidales began her speech by talking about disinformation and stressing that we live in complex times in which the line between what is real and what is imaginary is increasingly thinner. In the post-truth era, data and objective facts have less influence in shaping public opinion than appeals to emotions. This is something we can increasingly see in the Ukrainian war, says Yolanda Rodríguez. The dissemination of narratives of attrition and division has been perfected; and disinformation, enhanced by immediacy, seeks to break the link between institutions and citizens, undermining trust, and eroding countries’ defence capabilities. Against disinformation, she argues, we need new tools, which is why we must advance research into artificial intelligence as a technology with ample potential to prevent the spread of disinformation campaigns. In hybrid conflicts like this one, she continues, we need to invest more in training to make our societies more resilient, educating in appreciation for public institutions and fostering free and objective journalism.

Information and disinformation in the war in Ukraine

During the first-round table, Information and disinformation in the war in Ukraine, Óscar Mijallo began by stressing that in this war, the two most effective propaganda apparatuses that humanity has ever known, namely the Russian and American propaganda apparatuses, are facing off against each other. He stressed that disinformation currently has two channels: it begins on Telegram and reverberates on Twitter. He also points out that in the past, reporters provided a filter of analysis to the news, whereas today any international actor can directly reach their target audience without any kind of verification.

He goes on to explain that on the Ukrainian side, where information is most manipulated is around the missiles that fall in the country, which are deflected from their target by Ukrainian anti-aircraft defences and end up falling in other places, where journalists are prohibited from filming what happened. On the Russian side, he notes that censorship is much more severe, and stresses that it is impossible for journalists to enter the Dombas. Therefore, he concludes, there is a greater commitment to transparency and access to information on the Ukrainian side.

In his intervention, CN Ignacio Nieto Fernández begins by talking about Russia’s strategy and how it uses disinformation. He stresses that Putin uses the nation’s instruments of power to send messages to the population, and at the same time uses information to position Russia as a global actor. He goes on to talk about the perfect cognitive bubble that Russia has created and how we have no ability to penetrate it. Furthermore, he explains that social networks favour information ecosystems that are becoming more radicalised. But he ends by stressing that there is still hope against this disinformation, and that the European Union and NATO have managed to complement each other perfectly, asserting their regulatory power and making use of sanctions as a tool to fight against it.

Finally, María Senovilla, who participates telematically from Ukraine, explains how the war has become professionalised in all areas in these nineteen months of conflict. This professionalisation has also reached the methods of disinformation, which, Senovilla explains, with respect to the Ukrainian authorities, is not so much disinformation as such, but rather the control of information. She also recalls how, at the beginning of the conflict, the army’s dealings with the press were not as professionalised as they are today, creating difficult situations, something that has been gradually resolved over the months. At the same time, she stresses that this professionalisation has allowed the Ukrainian authorities to control to some extent the way the war is reported.

Therefore, she argues, journalists must draw their own sources and conclusions, to be able to verify the information and not assume the institutional discourse of the Ukrainian government as their own. Since, says Senovilla, in all wars there is an intrinsic war, which is the war of information. She went on to stress that Russia is making it impossible for journalists to enter the occupied territories, while at the same time accusing them of giving biased information. She also pointed out that in recent months there has been a great escalation of violence on social networks on the Russian side.

Geostrategic consequences of the conflict

In the second-round table, Geostrategic consequences of the conflict, María Álvarez de Eulate begins by explaining how the strategy of both sides has been changing over the last few months. Russia’s bombings are now fewer in number but much more strategic; and on the Ukrainian side, its big change has been to put Crimea definitively on the war map.

Álvarez de Eulate goes on to talk about Zelenski’s declining popularity and the dissenting voices in Ukraine right now. This has been reinforced by the various cases of corruption in the government and the large number of deaths in the conflict. Many young people no longer want to go to war, and the population is suffering from attrition. Also, many analysts consider Zelenski’s criticism of Poland to have been a diplomatic mistake; and his trip to the US has been seen as a failure by the Ukrainian public opinion.

Col. José Pardo de Santayana continues this second round table by talking about how there is currently a great stalemate in the conflict and how neither side has a clear strategy for victory. Furthermore, he explains, the war in Ukraine is a catalyst for the process of change that the world is experiencing and is revealing the contradictions of the international system. We do not have the mechanisms to manage the rivalry between the great powers, he continued, and nuclear weapons are once again playing an important strategic role, which tends to destabilise the entire global nuclear system. Moreover, in his opinion, Russia and its great strategic resources have been underestimated, but at the same time, he believes that its ambition is greater than these resources.

The colonel goes on to explain Russia’s foreign strategy, which needs to maintain both a military effort and an economy powerful enough to withstand a long war and to be able to defend its great power status when the war is over. To this end, the battleground where its grand strategy wants to win is the Global South; and thus succeed in redirecting trade, technology and financial flows from Europe to this new space.

Col. José Luis Calvo concluded by explaining that in order to understand the consequences of the war in Ukraine on the international order, it is necessary to consider that any security system is based on two pillars: a hard pillar and a soft pillar. The first is deterrence and the second is dialogue, and we must always try to keep them in balance. He stresses that in the future we are going to have to build another security system, since the one that has existed until now has not prevented Russia’s attack on Ukraine. And, he stressed, when the war is over, Russia will still be there, with or without Putin, and an agreement will have to be reached with it.

Finally, regarding the war’s influence on the rest of the world, he stresses that Western supremacy is being challenged. There is a movement in the making and our relationship with the world must change.

Fiinal considerations

Admiral (r.) Juan Francisco Martínez Núñez was in charge of closing the seminar, recalling that in the face of a press that is increasingly interested in immediacy and flashy speeches, it is important to seek balanced information that helps to foght disinformation.

If we do not generate defence awareness, the admiral explained, this will happen again. We must give importance to prevention and deterrence, achieving deterrence with a strong narrative. He emphasised that this conflict has shown that the European Union is stable and strong, but that we must walk a path together that is beginning its most difficult stage, and therefore, it is time to persevere.