WASHINGTON — Since the end of the Vietnam war, the military's public affairs officials have tried to rebuild the Defense Department's credibility by putting distance between themselves and Pentagon efforts that use deception, propaganda and other methods to influence foreign populations.
A 2004 memo by Gen. Richard B. Myers, then the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, codified the separation between public affairs, which communicates with the press and public, and "information operations," which attempts to sway people in other countries.
But Gen. David H. Petraeus, the top U.S. commander in Iraq, has asked for changes that would allow the two branches to work more closely. His request has unleashed a debate inside the Pentagon between those who say the separation has made the Defense Department less agile and those who believe that restructuring the relationship would threaten to turn military spokesmen into propaganda tools.
A senior military officer close to Petraeus said the memo now in place prevents coordination between the information operations officers and public affairs officers.
"The way it is written it puts a firewall between information operations and public affairs," the officer said, speaking on condition of anonymity when discussing the internal debate. "You shut down things that need to be done."
Petraeus, who is considered adept at handling the American media, asked in mid-March that the 2004 memo be rescinded or revised. A Defense official said Tuesday that Myers' memo would not be revoked, but that the Pentagon would begin work on a new policy outlining the relationship and interaction between information operations and public affairs.
Pentagon officials have told Petraeus' aides that while the new policy is being developed, they should not interpret Myers' memo as a prohibition against coordination between public affairs and information operations.
Members of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, the Pentagon's top military planning group, considered a new version of the memo that would have stripped much of Myers' language on the need to keep the two functions separate. Instead, the proposed rules would have stressed the need for coordination.
"Conflicting efforts could impede operational success," the proposed new wording warned, emphasizing the need for the two branches to "be aware of each other's activities."
