The recent debate over the tightening of regulations pertaining to military blogs has reverberated in the mass media and the govenrment. According to the April 19 Army Regulation 530-1, the restriction on OPSEC content "includes, but is not limited to letters, resumes, articles for publication, electronic mail (e-mail), Web site postings, web log (blog) postings, discussion in Internet information forums, discussion in Internet message boards or other forms of dissemination or documentation." Christopher Griffin, the associate editor of Armed Forces Journal, has recently pointed out a brewing First Amendment conflict between milbloggers, their commanders, and the media--a dispute that may lie at the root of the newest policy. Strangely enough, it has now become an issue of concern for the Russian media as well. Yesterday, Izvestiya printed a provocative article, titled "I am Tired . . . I Cannot Do This Any Longer," where the paper (one of the largest in circulation in Russia) presents a compilation of Russian-language blog entries by an American who is currently serving in Iraq. The article leads with this "breaking news," stating that "From now on, [American] military staff and officers--under the threat of punishment--are banned from publishing in their blogs (online journals) news that sullies the image of the US Armed Forces." Apparently, having had the fortune of locating such a journal in the Russian blogosphere, Izvestiya reporter Dmitry Sokolov-Mitrich directly copy and pasted around a dozen entries from the American soldier's blog. The entries, presented in chronological order, are clearly meant to reflect the sense of desperation and discontent among the Army's ranks: according to Izvestiya's compilation, the U.S. soldier in question decries sanitary conditions, frequent explosions near the base, petty conflicts among military personnel, and expresses a sense of personal frustration. In the conclusion of the article, another Izvestiya contributor, Petr Inozemtsev, adds that "American soldiers in Iraq face morale and physiological-related issues" and concludes with the observation (attributed to Russian news agency ITAR-TASS) that "only 47 % of [US] Army soldiers and 38% of Marines agree that the local population must be treated with respect." Besides the issue of dubious journalistic ethics-- Izvestiya also printed the soldier's name, rank, and even a photo--and propagandistic intent, the publication of such articles must now raise another concern for Army brass: "The Army of One" is decidedly not "The Army of One Language."
According to the latest report by the Office of Army Demographics, the percentage of Hispanic soldiers in the active-duty service, for instance, has increased nearly twofold in the last 20 years (from 26,000 in 1985 to 51,000 in 2005). Moreover, as the Boston Globe recently reported, the Pentagon is considering expedited citizenship for foreign nationals serving in the U.S. military--their number has already increased sixfold in the last few years (from 750 in 2001 to 4,600 in 2005). In the March edition of Armed Forces Journal, Max Boot and Michael O'Hanlon argue that the recruitment of foreign nationals should become permanent policy: "Unlike most issues in the immigration debate, the idea of offering citizenship to foreigners who first join the armed forces should be a winner for everyone." Implicit within these numbers and arguments, of course, is the rise in linguistic diversity. Although the newest Army regulation purportedly does not differentiate among linguistic mediums, this isolated incident may serve as a warning to the sheer difficulty of prior censorship. The blog cited by Izvestiya concluded with an entry on May 5: "The ban on [military] blogs has found such a resonance, that it made in into the newspapers. But how exactly do they plan to monitor my writings? By looking for Russian speakers? In Iraq?... Considering the number of bloggers in the Army, special services [sic] will have to go into emergency mode, [and] learn a ton of languages…" These are all valid points to consider for the Army leadership in this country. Unless, of course, the plan is to rely on the military attaché in Moscow perusing his freshly-delivered copy of Izvestiya on a daily basis. Editor's Note: The posts discussed in the Izvestiya article are no longer publicly available, and therefore none of the information contained in the article can be confirmed, nor can we confirm the identity of the soldier in question. As of early this morning, the following note had been posted on the blog:
SGT O aksed me notify her friends in case something happens to her. Last nite she went to carrdiac arrest and was medevaced. Her fiancee was notified via red cross. Pls, pray for her.
LT