Datasets:

bigdata-pw

/

ArmyFM

like 0

Follow

BIG data 15

3-07

Chapter 3 police can give advice when dealing with correction or law enforcement. Attorneys can give advice on dealing with judicial and legal personnel. 3-112. In a permissive environment, military forces coordinate the criminal justice system reform effort with the country team. In a permissive environment, criminal justice system reform efforts may take the form of engagements with the host-nation military. In those cases, military police may work with host- nation military law enforcement personnel, but possibly not the civilian law enforcement personnel. Similarly, military judge advocates would work with host-nation military legal and judicial personnel in a permissive environment, but not their civilian counterparts, at least not without further coordination with the country team. A diverse and wide array of opinions across this crucial area of governance can only prove beneficial for the long-term sustainability of a nation. 3-113. Often, the personnel available for the military’s rule of law activities will be Soldiers, particularly in a nonpermissive environment. Similarly, in a nonpermissive environment the military may be unable to coordinate the criminal justice system reform effort with the country team. When only personnel are performing rule of law activities, military police should be the ones interacting with host-nation corrections and law enforcement personnel. Likewise, military judge advocates should interact with judicial and legal personnel. A purely military perspective on the rule of law may be unacceptable and can be damaging to the host nation. However, sometimes the military may be the only organization in the local area conducting rule of law activities due to the security situation. 3-114. U.S. forces have limited authority to provide assistance to foreign governments. The DOS is the lead for U.S. efforts to coordinate stabilization, security, transition, and reconstruction activities. The Army conducts operations focused on stability in support of these activities. Such support promotes the broader U.S. interests in two ways. First, it assists an existing government with internal challenges or helping to establish a new social, economic, and political domestic order in the short term. Second, it assists in the long term by establishing conditions for a sustainable peace. USAID PRINCIPLES FOR RECONSTRUCTION AND DEVELOPMENT 3-115. Commanders involved in reconstruction during operations focused on stability need to understand and apply basic reconstruction and development principles. These nine principles are the key tenets of USAID’s work. The principles are not a checklist. They are a summary of the characteristics of successful assistance programs. They cannot be applied the same way in each situation but should serve as a reference for development practitioners as they design and implement programs. The USAID principles for reconstruction and development are— * Ownership: Build on the leadership, participation, and commitment of a country and its people. * Capacity building: Strengthen local institutions, transfer technical skills, and promote appropriate policies. * Sustainability: Design programs to ensure their impact endures. * Accountability: Design accountability and transparency into systems and build effective checks and balances to guard against corruption. * Assessment: Conduct careful research, adapt best practices, and design for local conditions. * Results: Allocate resources based on need, local commitment, and foreign policy interests. * Partnership: Collaborate closely with all partners, including governments, communities, donors, NGOs, the private sector, international organizations, and universities. * Flexibility: Adjust to changing conditions, take advantage of opportunities, and maximize efficiency. * Selectivity: Allocate resources to countries and programs based on need, policy performance, and foreign policy interests. 3-116. U.S. leaders must engage failed states while understanding the potential correlation between fragile states and instability related to terrorism. Effective engagement requires the use of the tools of diplomacy, development, and defense in a collaborative fashion. The success of U.S. military strategy and development assistance policy in these countries have become mutually reinforcing. Development cannot effectively occur without the security that armed force provides, and security will not be sustained until the

3-07

Considerations to Achieve Unity of Effort local populace sees the promise of development as a viable alternative to violence to meet its needs. For example, while involved in reconstruction activities in Iraq and Afghanistan, the U.S. military was called upon to manage substantially increased levels of U.S. bilateral foreign assistance. This assistance included official development assistance funding traditionally managed by USAID. To use these resources effectively, commanders involved in reconstruction in operations focused on stability need to understand and apply basic reconstruction and development principles. Such principles have evolved by the development community through years of experience. 3-117. USAID and the development community assist fragile states with finding solutions and resources to meet their requirements for sustained development and growth. To accomplish this, the development community relies on specific operating principles for stabilization, reconstruction, and development assistance. The principles have been tested through years of practical application and understanding the cultural and socioeconomic influences in the host nation. Understanding these generally accepted principles enables those involved in development, and in the development aspects of stabilization and reconstruction, to incorporate techniques and procedures effectively. Then those involved can help countries improve the economic and social conditions of the people. 3-118. Development officials improve the likelihood of success by applying the principles of reconstruction and development. Timely and adequate emphasis on these principles increases the opportunity for immediate success or, at a minimum, provides a means to adapt to the changing conditions. Development assistance officials assume risk in their programs when these principles are violated or ignored. 3-119. The nine principles of reconstruction and development formalize customary practices and operating procedures. The principles reflect key institutional principles that most aid agencies incorporate into the reconstruction framework. The principles are designed to ensure local ownership and sustainability of program results while building local capacity and thus eventual independence from outside assistance. They take advantage of the skills and resources others can bring to the effort by forging partnerships. Following these principles helps the host nation to adjust reconstruction and development activities to the dynamic political environment usually encountered in a violent conflict or post-conflict situation. COMPREHENSIVE APPROACH 3-120. Stability efforts require contributions from a variety of partners outside the United States and the U.S. Government, including military and police forces, NGOs, international organizations, host-nation organizations, news media, and businesses. Many have no formal relationship with Army units but are, nevertheless, instrumental in achieving the desired outcomes. Army units must interact effectively with these partners to exchange information and strive for unified action. This requires interorganizational coordination, such as— * Engaging with host-nation key leaders and the population. * Conducting multinational operations. * Building partner capacity. * Establishing mechanisms such as civil-military operations centers (CMOCs) to facilitate coordination. * Providing support to other partners, such as helping with the delivery of essential goods and services. 3-121. Some partners, such as many NGOs, prefer not to be known as partners of Army forces. NGOs that maintain neutrality perform an important role in stabilization and reconstruction, and Army units should not compromise their neutrality. 3-122. The UN Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs (known as OCHA) coordinates activities among UN agencies, NGOs, and local partners. To facilitate this, fifteen global clusters have been created based on sectors of expertise. Global clusters and lead agencies are depicted in table 3-2 on page 3-20, and depending on the situation, a similar structure may exist at the country level.

3-07

Chapter 3 Table 3-2. Global clusters and lead agencies Global clusters Lead agencies Food Security Food and Agriculture Organization (co-lead). World Food Programme (WFP) (co-lead). Camp Coordination and United Nations (UN) High Commissioner for refugees (UNHCR) Management (co-lead). International Organization for Migration (co-lead). Early Recovery UN Development Programme. Education Save the Children (co-lead). UN Children’s Fund (UNICEF) (co-lead). Emergency Shelter Disaster: International Federation of the Red Cross and Red Crescent. Conflict: UNHCR. Emergency Telecommunications Process: UN Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs. Data and security communications: WFP. Health World Health Organization. Logistics WFP. Nutrition UNICEF. Protection UNHCR. Water Sanitation and Hygiene UNICEF. COORDINATION WITH OTHER PARTNERS 3-123. Army units interact with other partners to share information and, when possible, attain unity of effort to complete the primary stability tasks effectively. Stability is a multifaceted challenge with military and nonmilitary aspects. Different partners have important roles in achieving the desired outcomes; however, they will have dissimilar goals, priorities, and authorities. To the extent possible, Army units coordinate with these partners to achieve unified action, avoid gaps and redundancies, and resolve disagreements. 3-124. Army leaders determine what level of cooperation is possible and desirable with other actors. They consider guidance from the chain of command and the changing situation. Some actors may not desire a cooperative relationship even when their stabilization goals overlap with U.S. goals. The operational-level determination may differ from tactical levels in certain areas. For example, potential topics for coordination may include information regarding civilian risks and needs, humanitarian space considerations, planned operations, requests for assistance, transitions, and security concerns. Eventually, host-nation actors assume control over the stability tasks, maintain security, and achieve other desired outcomes. This can be problematic when host-nation actors who are to be entrusted with the future may be the same actors who contributed to state fragility in the past. 3-125. Different levels of interaction include coexistence, communication, information sharing, formal coordination, and collaboration. As shown in figure 3-1, higher levels of interaction may be possible when Army units share objectives with other actors and mutual trust exists. In some cases, it is only possible or necessary to understand each other’s objectives, requirements, capabilities, limitations, procedures, and terminology. However, some closer coordination is often critical; an important example is close integration with local police forces. In some cases, the Army units may conduct some level of interaction with potential adversaries.

3-07

Considerations to Achieve Unity of Effort Figure 3-1. Levels of interaction Coexistence 3-126. Coexistence describes when multiple groups are present in an area but do not interact or communicate with each other. This may be the case with certain groups who do not want any affiliation with military forces at all. Communication 3-127. Communication describes when parties have periodic contact, such as at routine meetings, but do not share substantive information on a regular basis, if at all. Parties can contact each other if necessary (for example, they may retain phone numbers for each other). When parties do not share any common interests, direct communication may not even be possible. In cases where no direct communication exists, they may sometimes relay messages through intermediaries such as civilian personnel associated with the mission or host-nation officials. Information Sharing 3-128. Information sharing occurs when parties share substantive information periodically, but such activities are often circumspect and may not occur on a regular basis. Exchanged information is likely to be limited to matters of extremely high mutual concern. For example, a NGO may be willing to provide some information regarding a mass atrocity that has occurred but will be unwilling to share details about its planned operations. Formal Coordination 3-129. Formal coordination occurs when parties regularly exchange information on a wide range of topics, to include some planned operations. This coordination includes generally answering most requests for information when parties can reasonably do so. The parties may find it beneficial to meet on a routine basis and may invite representatives to attend their own internal meetings.

3-07

Chapter 3 Cooperation and Collaboration 3-130. The highest level of interaction entails cooperation or collaboration that can include jointly conducted operations, co-location of organizations, exchange of liaisons, and other measures to achieve more effective integration. In a loosely collaborative relationship, Army units may occasionally provide direct security for the other partners (such as a convoy escort). In a closer collaboration, the interaction is substantive and more permanent. 3-131. Other partners can beneficially contribute to Army units by providing independent, external assessments of relevant issues, to include the military’s activities and benchmarking. Army units should invite partners’ input and contribution to after action reviews, either by direct participation or through acceptable intermediaries such as civilian personnel associated with the operation. 3-132. Some general guidelines will help foster improved coordination with other partners: * Take time to develop and maintain relationships. * Identify and include stakeholders early. Coordination with host-nation security forces (especially police) is particularly important to create a secure environment, particularly since police forces will become responsible for civil security. Army units should seek input from vulnerable societal groups that lack power, as these may have long been without a voice. * Consult; do not dictate. * Be honest and reliable. Back up words with action. * Be respectful. Avoid appearing arrogant or condescending. Show proper courtesy to older or higher-ranking counterparts. * Conduct vertical efforts to supplement horizontal engagements. Direct engagements with counterparts may prove futile for a variety of reasons. It may be necessary to identify a problem to higher echelons in the chain of command that can in turn encourage higher counterparts to direct or take necessary actions. * Consider the impact of and the effect on informing and influencing audiences. Challenges 3-133. Many critical actors attempt to preserve their neutrality and avoid the appearance of collaborating with political and military entities such as Army units or the host-nation government. Because of different objectives, cultures, and chains of authority, disagreements and misunderstandings between the actors occur. Additionally, the competition for scarce resources such as infrastructure and a qualified host-nation work force can create tensions between Army units and other actors. CONSIDERATIONS FOR MULTINATIONAL OPERATIONS 3-134. Multinational operations are vital to achieve efficiency, unity of effort, and synergy to perform the primary stability tasks. Multinational operations integrate the wide variety of partners essential for stability and strengthen the population’s confidence in Army units and other security organizations. Multinational operations expand mutual situational understanding and can improve the effectiveness of the participants and enhance their relationships with each other. These operations enable host-nation involvement in and ownership of the primary stability tasks, since the host-nation retains its sovereign obligations and eventually must be capable of meeting them effectively. Multinational operations also capitalize on the host-nation security forces’ understanding of the terrain and population. By providing a method to monitor and mentor host-nation security forces, multinational operations can also support security sector reform. 3-135. While it is possible to integrate individuals at the lowest unit levels (for example, Soldiers and host-nation police operate a vehicle checkpoint together), it is often more appropriate to maintain unit integrity and assign tasks to Army units only. For example, a host-nation platoon might be tasked to establish a security cordon for a search operation conducted by an Army unit, or vice versa. Language differences and the availability of interpreters determine the possible level of integration. Staff integration can be extremely useful, depending on considerations such as language skills, security access requirements, and operations security precautions.

3-07

Considerations to Achieve Unity of Effort 3-136. Multinational operations can be difficult to conduct effectively because of the potential attitudes and capabilities of the different participants. The various organizations will have dissimilar objectives, priorities, chains of authority, and cultures. They may also tend to disregard and mistrust outsiders, or otherwise cooperate reluctantly. Mistakes, misunderstandings, friction, and personality clashes can also undermine combined efforts. Army leaders, who desire effective multinational operations, may need to emphasize their importance, closely monitor their progress, and take corrective action when necessary. Patience and open-mindedness are critical to overcome inevitable obstructions. Multinational operations also have to account for logistics. Some participants may need significant support from Army units to contribute effectively, which could cause them to be perceived negatively. Interpreters are critical in many situations but often in short supply. Successful multinational operations require significant nurturing, which could divert leader focus from other pressing concerns. BUILDING PARTNER CAPACITY 3-137. Building partner capacity addresses the potentially most important stability effort, which is to support and enable partners so they can perform their roles effectively. Building partner capacity results from comprehensive interorganizational activities, programs, and sustained military engagements. Over time, building partner capacity enhances the ability of partners for security, governance, economic development, essential services, rule of law, and other critical government functions. The Army integrates the capabilities of the operating and generating forces—to include special operations forces—to support capacity-building efforts, primarily through security cooperation activities. (See ADRP 3-0 and ADRP 3-07 for more information.) 3-138. Army units are concerned mainly with the capabilities of military and other security actors but should not ignore capacities unrelated to security sectors. In some cases, Army units can help build the capacity of other international partners who in turn are attempting to improve host-nation institutions. In other cases, Army units may directly assist in improving host-nation capacity and capability. One result of comprehensive engagement with other partners should be an increase in collective capacity to protect civilians. 3-139. Building partner capacity requires a different emphasis from many of the tasks Army units typically perform. Ultimately, the host nation must have the capability to ensure a safe and secure environment and must likewise develop the capacity to maintain acceptable conditions related to good governance, the rule-of-law, social well-being, and economic development. These efforts depend on capable host-nation and international partners from military, police, and civilian sectors. 3-140. Unified action partners (see ADRP 3-0) may have capabilities and a capacity that can contribute to stability; some partners such as the host-nation or coalition military forces operating under international mandates have formal legal obligations while others such as NGO’s contribute without formal obligations. Building partner capacity has short-, mid-, and long-term dimensions that require the determination of realistic objectives. Generally, Army units can help build partner capacity in many of the following ways, to include— * Provide advisors and mentors. In addition to providing technical assistance on security affairs, advisors should emphasize such issues as respect for human rights, the proper treatment of civilians, and civil-military relations. * Assist with development of administrative and logistics systems (such as pay, training, and maintenance). * Monitor and if necessary restrain other partners regarding violence against civilians and human rights abuses. * Assist with assessing, planning, and monitoring efforts to complete any of the primary stability tasks. * Provide facilities and bases from which other partners may operate. * Provide security to other partners. * Provide transportation, communications, medical, or other logistics support to other partners (either on a routine or emergency basis).

3-07

Chapter 3 * Provide personnel augmentation to other partners. * Support and reinforce efforts of other partners by synchronizing information-related capabilities and engagements. 3-141. A major challenge is synchronizing efforts, both top-down and bottom-up, to improve host-nation capabilities. Local bottom-up efforts often begin earlier and are more critical for immediate impact on stability, but centralized top-down programs are necessary for long-term sustainability. Subsequent top- down efforts may conflict with or undermine multiple diverse bottom-up efforts that have already begun. Flexibility is required to integrate existing dissimilar local efforts with newly created centralized programs. The choice of partners must be made with care and with considerations that are more than just military. Potential partners may have questionable legitimacy because of past actions or current behavior. Additionally, Army units have limited authority, responsibility, and capability to influence other partners. Finally, other mission priorities such as daily operations limit an Army unit’s ability to focus on building the capacity of other partners. THE ROLE OF CIVIL AFFAIRS IN OPERATIONS FOCUSED ON STABILITY 3-142. Civil affairs forces support unified land operations in every environment across the range of military operations. They are essential to the conduct of successful operations focused on stability. Civil affairs personnel provide unique area and linguistic orientation, cultural astuteness, advisory capabilities, and civilian professional skills that generally parallel those of host-nation governments. They provide the commander with specialized expertise on the civil component of operational environments. The commander draws on this expertise to analyze and influence the human dimension through specific processes and dedicated resources and personnel. Civil Affairs Forces 3-143. Civil affairs forces mitigate or defeat threats to civil society and conduct responsibilities normally performed by civil governments. Civil affairs forces engage and influence the local civil populace by planning, executing, and transitioning civil affairs operations in unified action environment. Civil affairs forces support these operations by addressing civil considerations within the operational area before, during, or after a conflict or disaster. Civil affairs forces help to shape an operational environment by interacting with the local populace to facilitate military operations. A supportive local populace can provide valuable resources and critical information that supports friendly operations. A hostile local populace threatens the immediate success of military operations and may undermine domestic public support for those operations. When executed properly, civil affairs operations reduce the tensions between the local populace and the military force. Civil Affairs Operations 3-144. Civil affairs forces conduct operations that support and are nested within the overall mission and commander’s intent. Civil affairs operations improve the relationship between military forces and host- nation authorities in areas in which the military force operates. They involve applying civil affairs skills to areas normally under the responsibility of a host-nation government. Civil affairs operations establish, maintain, influence, or exploit relationships between military forces and all levels of host-nation governments and officials. These operations are fundamental to completing stability tasks successfully. 3-145. Civil affairs organizations and personnel develop detailed assessments based on civil considerations. These include information about infrastructure, civilian institutions, and attitudes and activities of civilian leaders, the local populace, and host-nation organizations. These assessments may reveal that a viable host-nation government does not exist or cannot perform its basic civil functions. In such cases, military forces may support or implement transitional military authority until a legitimate host- nation government is established. (FM 3-57 and JP 3-57 provide doctrine on civil affairs.) 3-146. Civil affairs operations help ensure the sustained legitimacy of the mission and the transparency and credibility of military operations. Civil affairs operations minimize the effects of military operations on the local populace, limit how civilians affect military operations, and provide advice to commanders on the legal and moral obligations of the force.

3-07

Considerations to Achieve Unity of Effort 3-147. Civil affairs personnel help the commander understand and visualize the civil component of the operational area. They provide detailed analysis based on careful consideration of operational and mission variables. This analysis helps determine the following within the supported unit’s operational area: * The root causes of instability and civil strife. * The requirement for CMOCs to facilitate communications and coordinate with civilian agencies and organizations. * The need to use liaison teams to enhance communications and coordination with civilian agencies and organizations to facilitate operations at all echelons. * What, when, where, and why civilians might be encountered; what ongoing or planned military operations might affect the activities of those civilians; what activities those civilians are engaged in that might affect military operations; and what actions the military force must take to mitigate the effects of those civilians. * Measures of performance and measures of effectiveness for civil affairs operations to support the larger military operation. Civil-Military Operations Center 3-148. Stability missions often require an established CMOC. A CMOC can facilitate information sharing and coordination between Army units and other partners, including the host-nation population and its institutions, such as police forces. Different echelons may establish their own CMOCs. A CMOC supports Army units as an agency to improve understanding and facilitate remedial action regarding civilian vulnerabilities and stability needs. All Army civil affairs units are organized and equipped to establish a CMOC. A CMOC is tailored to the specific tasks associated with the mission and normally augmented by assets such as engineers, medical, and transportation. It can be an accessible location for civilians to file reports or claims. It can serve as a coordination center for civilian and police organizations whose activities are vital for stability. WORKING WITH NONGOVERNMENTAL HUMANITARIAN ORGANIZATIONS 3-149. Organizations that deliver humanitarian assistance are diverse. They include UN agencies and international and local NGOs, each its own governing and accountability structure. Adherence to humanitarian principles, established codes of conduct, and civil-military guidelines vary. Moreover, many organizations can provide short-term humanitarian relief and long-term recovery and development assistance that often contributes to the sustainability of a host nation. 3-150. In addition to providing goods and services (for example, clean water, sanitation, food, and shelter), some humanitarian actors also provide protection programming such as human rights education, local conflict mediation and trust building, and monitoring, reporting and advocacy on the situation. Programming may be limited to ensuring that the provision of essential services does not create or exacerbate harm to civilians. Contributing to conditions that allow for the delivery of humanitarian assistance can support these humanitarian protection activities. In some contexts, political and armed actors may not accept humanitarian protection activities as neutral and impartial. Consequently, they may challenge or even target humanitarian workers. Commanders consider these variables when deciding how best to contribute to conditions enabling the provision of humanitarian assistance. 3-151. Some humanitarian actors have strong concerns about remaining neutral and independent to gain or retain access to communities in need. The ability of humanitarian organizations to operate according to their mandates, charters, and principles is sometimes known as humanitarian space. The common interests of humanitarian organizations include— * Security of humanitarian workers. * Mutual access between humanitarian workers and beneficiaries. * The ability of humanitarian workers to interact with nonstate armed actors. * Perceptions of humanitarian actors among beneficiaries and other actors. * Humanitarian advocacy.

3-07

Chapter 3 3-152. The neutrality and independence of humanitarian workers is especially important in politicized or conflict environments where political or armed actors are unwilling or unable to respect international humanitarian law and are targeting humanitarian workers, the assistance they provide, or the communities they are trying to assist. Humanitarian actors may also be concerned about situations where they can be confused with participants in an armed conflict. This can happen where military or other security forces provide goods and services directly to communities. Humanitarian actors may have other relationships to armed actors, such as receiving funds, even when the humanitarians are not part of the conflict. Therefore, each humanitarian agency has different interests and limitations regarding engagement with political and military actors, regardless of whether military units are tasked to facilitate humanitarian assistance or protect civilians. This diversity can create a confusing environment for Army units that may share common goals with humanitarian actors. 3-153. Humanitarians have developed guidelines to help clarify best practices for civil-military engagement and established sophisticated coordination mechanisms and offices tasked with engaging political and military actors at the tactical, operational, and strategic levels. For example, as discussed earlier, humanitarian organizations often meet in clusters. Clusters are coordinating bodies organized by functions such as water and sanitation, protection, emergency shelter, and others. The cluster leads have responsibilities to liaise with external actors. Offices such as the UN Humanitarian Coordinator and the UN Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs, if present, may also liaise with military and political actors. 3-154. Military support is more effective when Army units clearly understand the principles, codes of conduct, and policies that guide and sometimes limit humanitarian action and its interface with military actors. 3-155. Even in those situations where military forces are not directly involved, a focused and integrated humanitarian response is essential to alleviating suffering and reestablishing a stable environment that fosters a lasting peace to support broader national and international interests. Providing humanitarian aid and assistance is primarily the responsibility of specialized nonmilitary organizations and agencies, such as USAID. Nevertheless, military forces often support humanitarian response activities either as part of a broader campaign, such as Operation Iraqi Freedom, or a specific humanitarian assistance or disaster relief operation. These activities usually consist of stability tasks and generally fall under the primary stability task restore essential services. The discussion beginning with paragraph 3-156 outlines the guiding principles used by the international community to frame humanitarian response activities. 3-156. Generally, the host nation or affected country coordinates humanitarian response. However, if the host nation or affected country is unable to do so, the United Nations often leads the international community response on its behalf. The principles that guide the military contribution to that response are fundamental to success in unified land operations. These principles reflect the collective experience of a diverse group of actors in a wide range of interventions conducted over decades across the world. They help to shape the humanitarian component of operations focused on stability. 3-157. UN General Assembly Resolution 46/182 governs the humanitarian response efforts of the international community. It articulates the principal tenets for providing humanitarian assistance— humanity, neutrality, and impartiality—while promulgating the guiding principles that frame all humanitarian response activities. These guiding principles are drawn from four primary, albeit separate, sources: * InterAction and the DOD. * International Red Cross and Red Crescent Movement. * Oslo Guidelines. * The Interagency Standing Committee. InterAction and the Department of Defense 3-158. InterAction is the largest coalition of U.S.-based NGOs focused on the world’s poorest and most vulnerable people. Collectively, its members work in every developing country. Members meet people halfway in expanding opportunities. They support gender equality in education, health care, agriculture, small business, and other areas.

3-07

Considerations to Achieve Unity of Effort 3-159. InterAction was a key participant in the development of the 2005 Guidelines for Relations Between U.S. Armed Forces and Non-Governmental Humanitarian Organizations in Hostile or Potentially Hostile Environments (reprinted in JP 3-08). The Guidelines were developed by a working group consisting of military and civilian participants from interagency partners, the United States Institute for Peace, a consortium of U.S. NGOs, and the Army’s Peacekeeping and Stability Operations Institute. The Guidelines were endorsed by the director of the Joint Staff and disseminated to U.S. forces through the combatant commands. Although the endorsement was not directive in nature, the endorsement advised implementation of the Guidelines when possible. Note. In 2012, the DOS’s Office of the Coordinator for Stabilization and Reconstruction (formerly known as S/CRS) was replaced by the Bureau of Conflict and Stabilization Operations (known as CSO). International Red Cross and Red Crescent Movement 3-160. The International Red Cross and Red Crescent Movement encompass two institutions and nearly 200 national societies. The institutions are the International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC) and the International Federation of Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies. The ICRC is an impartial, neutral, and independent organization. Established in 1863, its exclusively humanitarian mission aims to protect the lives and dignity of victims of war and internal violence and to provide them with assistance. It directs and coordinates the international relief activities conducted by the International Red Cross and Red Crescent Movement in conflicts. It also endeavors to prevent suffering by promoting and strengthening laws pertaining to human rights and universal humanitarian principles. Fundamental Principles of the Red Cross 3-161. Seven fundamental principles bond together the national Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies, the ICRC, and the International Federation of the Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies. The principles ensure the continuity of the International Red Cross and Red Crescent Movement and its humanitarian work (see JP 3-08 for more information). These principles are— * Humanity. * Impartiality. * Neutrality. * Independence. * Voluntary service. * Unity. * Universality. The International Red Cross and Red Crescent Movement and Nongovernmental Organization Code of Conduct 3-162. In the summer of 1994, the code of conduct for the ICRC and NGOs in disaster relief was developed. (See table 3-3 on page 3-28.) Eight of the world’s largest disaster response agencies agreed on this code. It represents the body of international standards for disaster response. Before then, no accepted body of professional standards existed to guide their work. Today, the international community uses the code of conduct to monitor its own standards of relief delivery and to encourage other agencies to set similar standards.

3-07

Chapter 3 Table 3-3. The International Red Cross and Red Crescent Movement and Nongovernmental Organization Code of Conduct in Disaster Relief • The humanitarian imperative comes first. • Aid is given regardless of the race, creed, or nationality of the recipients and without adverse distinction of any kind. Aid priorities are calculated based on need alone. • Aid will not be used to further a particular political or religious standpoint. • We shall endeavor not to act as instruments of government foreign policy. • We shall respect culture and custom. • We shall attempt to build disaster response on local capacities. • Ways shall be found to involve program beneficiaries in the management of relief aid. • Relief aid must strive to reduce future vulnerabilities to disaster as well as meeting basic needs. • We hold ourselves accountable to both those we seek to assist and those from whom we accept resources. • In our information, publicity, and advertising activities, we shall recognize disaster victims as dignified human beings, not hopeless objects. 3-163. Like most professional codes, the code of conduct is voluntary. It applies to any NGO, national or international, regardless of size. It provides ten principles that all NGOs should adhere to in their disaster response work. The code of conduct also describes the relationships that these groups should seek with donor organizations, host-nation governments, and the UN. The code is self-policing; no NGO is going to force another NGO to act in a certain way. At the time this manual was prepared, no international association for disaster response NGOs possessed any authority to sanction its members. (A more detailed discussion of The International Red Cross and Red Crescent Movement and Nongovernmental Organization Code of Conduct in Disaster Relief appears on the International Committee of the Red Cross Web site.) Oslo Guidelines 3-164. The Oslo Guidelines were completed in 1994. They were the result of a collaborative effort by over 180 delegates from 45 nations and 25 organizations. These delegates drafted the Oslo Guidelines to establish a framework on the use of foreign military and civil defense assets in disaster relief. This framework aims to formalize and improve the effectiveness and efficiency when using United Nations military and civil defense assets for international disaster relief operations. The core principles of the Oslo Guidelines are— * Humanity. * Neutrality. * Impartiality. In addition to the core principles, key concepts include sovereignty and the complementing military and civil defense forces. (A more detailed discussion of the Oslo Guidelines, including additional key concepts, can be found on the UN Web site known as ReliefWeb.) Interagency Standing Committee Principles and Concepts on Civil-Military Relationship in Complex Emergencies 3-165. The Interagency Standing Committee was established in June 1992, in response to UN General Assembly Resolution 46/182 on the strengthening of humanitarian assistance. It is the primary mechanism for interagency coordination of humanitarian assistance. It is a unique forum involving the key United Nations and other humanitarian partners. All humanitarian action, including civil-military coordination for humanitarian purposes in complex emergencies, must be conducted in accordance with the overarching principles (shown in table 3-4). This section outlines these principles and concepts to follow when planning or undertaking civil-military coordination. (A more detailed discussion of the IASC principles and concepts is in the Civil-Military Guidelines & Reference for Complex Emergencies and on the UN Web site known as ReliefWeb.)

3-07

Considerations to Achieve Unity of Effort Table 3-4. Interagency Standing Committee principles for civil-military relationships in complex emergencies • Humanity, neutrality, and impartiality • Humanitarian access to vulnerable populations • Perception of humanitarian action • Needs-based assistance free of discrimination • Civil-military distinction in humanitarian action • Operational independence of humanitarian action • Security of humanitarian personnel • Do no harm • Respect for international legal instruments • Respect for culture and custom • Consent of parties to the conflict • Option of last resort • Avoid reliance on the military

3-07

Chapter 4 Stability Assessment Frameworks This chapter begins by discussing the importance of assessing stability tasks. Then it presents two interagency frameworks that can support the activities of the operations process and enhance unity of effort. IMPORTANCE OF ASSESSING STABILITY TASKS 4-1. Army commanders measure the effectiveness and performance of stability tasks in relation to accomplishing Army missions and achieving progress toward overall United States (U.S.) stability goals. Determining how completed stability tasks support overall goals, especially in post-conflict situations, is important but challenging because measuring effects may take months or years. Commanders need to establish accurate indicators and track them at repeated intervals, in coordination with interagency partners. Interagency assessment tools can facilitate coordination of measurement efforts. Measuring the success of stability tasks includes— * Identifying and reducing the causes of instability. * Reestablishing or building host-nation capability to reduce, manage, or prevent conflict. 4-2. Army forces use the operations process described in ADRP 5-0 to plan, prepare, execute, and assess operations. The assessment process described in ADRP 5-0 consists of, but is not limited to— * Monitoring the current situation to collect relevant information. * Evaluating progress toward attaining end state conditions, achieving objectives, and performing tasks. * Recommending or directing action for improvement. 4-3. The assessment frameworks discussed in this chapter can support the activities of the operations process. These frameworks were developed collaboratively by the departments and agencies of the U.S. Government to identify the root causes of instability, develop activities to diminish or mitigate them, and evaluate the effectiveness of the activities in fostering stability. Unified action partners commonly use these frameworks. They are tools for interagency planning, and they can inform Army planning and enhance unity of effort. These frameworks are not intended to be prescriptive. In this context, terminology usage may differ from standard doctrinal terminology. 4-4. At each level of monitoring and evaluation, commanders identify lessons to improve future stabilization activities or sustain successful ones. For example, military forces may learn certain external factors prevented an activity from being successful. Subsequent efforts need to address those external factors or take a different approach to addressing the sources of instability. DISTRICT STABILITY FRAMEWORK 4-5. To increase the effectiveness of stability missions, the United States Agency for International Development (known as USAID) developed the District Stability Framework. The District Stability Framework was designed to guide and support stabilization efforts by helping civilians and military organizations identify the causes of instability, develop activities to diminish or mitigate them, and evaluate the effectiveness of the activities in fostering stability at the tactical or operational level. The District Stability Framework can be used to create local stabilization plans and provide data for the Interagency Conflict Assessment Framework, which has a strategic (country or regional) focus. The District Stability Framework supports unity of effort by providing partners with a common framework to— * Understand an operational environment from a stability-focused perspective. * Maintain focus on the local population and its perceptions.

3-07

Chapter 4 * Identify the sources of instability in a specific local area. * Design activities that specifically address the identified sources of instability. * Monitor and evaluate activity outputs and impacts, as well as changes in overall stability. (See ATP 3-07.5 for a more detailed description of the District Stability Framework.) 4-6. The District Stability Framework helps overcome many of the challenges to successful operations focused on stability. It can help— * Keep military formations focused on the center of gravity for operations focused on stability— the population and its perceptions. * Provide a common operational picture for all interagency teams in an area of operations. By focusing on sources of instability, partner organizations can focus their varied resources and expertise on shared priorities. * Prioritize activities based on their importance to the local populace and their relevance to the overarching mission of stabilizing the area. * Enhance continuity between military formations. Units can easily pass District Stability Framework data along from one unit to the next, establishing a clear baseline that identifies sources of instability and the steps taken to mitigate them. * Empower tactical-level formations by giving them hard data useful for decisionmaking at their level and for influencing decisions at higher levels. * Identify measures of performance and measures of effectiveness for unit activities rather than simply tracking measures of performance. * Track indicators of overall stability by assessing whether an area is becoming more stable. * Identify issues that matter most to the population; the District Stability Framework helps identify information themes that resonate with the population. 4-7. The District Stability Framework has four steps. Ideally, all interagency partners in the area participate in the process, organized through the creation of an interagency stability working group. Figure 4-1 illustrates the four basic steps. Figure 4-1. District Stability Framework process SITUATIONAL AWARENESS 4-8. The District Stability Framework uses four lenses to achieve a population-centric, stability oriented, situational awareness of an area of operations. The stability working group by examines the area of operations from four perspectives: an operational environment; cultural aspects; stability and instability dynamics; and local perceptions. The District Stability Framework examines the area of operations and helps leaders achieve a situational awareness of stability conditions and underlying factors. ANALYSIS 4-9. After gaining situational awareness in step 1, the District Stability Framework provides tools to analyze and identify potential sources of instability, their causes, the desired objectives, and the indicators

3-07

Stability Assessment Frameworks that measure progress in addressing each source of instability. The second step of the District Stability Framework, analysis, consists of four tasks: identify potential sources of instability, vet each source against instability criteria, determine if the source meets two of the three instability criteria, and prioritize the sources of instability. The instability criteria are— * Decreased support for the government or legitimate governance institution. * Increased support for adversaries or enemies. * Undermining of the normal functioning of society. After identifying and prioritizing the sources of instability, practitioners fill out a tactical stability matrix for each source of instability. DESIGN 4-10. In the third step of the District Stability Framework, practitioners design, prioritize, and synchronize stabilization activities. The stability working group develops activities to diminish the sources of instability identified during the analysis step. The process begins by brainstorming potential stabilization activities. It continues by filtering and refining the proposed activities against a set of stability criteria, design principles, and resource availability. This step is similar to the Army design methodology’s activities develop an operational approach and develop the plan, described in ADRP 5-0. MONITORING AND EVALUATION 4-11. The final step in the District Stability Framework takes place during and after the implementation of stability activities. Monitoring and evaluation are conducted in three ways: * Measures of performance: track implementation of an activity. * Measures of effectiveness: measure the effect that an activity achieved. * Overall stability: assess the overall stabilizing effect of all the activities conducted over a longer period, as well as the influence of external factors. 4-12. As practitioners conduct this monitoring and evaluation, they identify lessons about what worked, what did not work, and what partners can do to improve their stability efforts as they repeat the District Stability Framework process in the future. 4-13. The District Stability Framework can support effective monitoring, evaluating, and decisionmaking. It focuses on the perceptions of the population and informs a common operational picture for Army units and their interagency partners. Furthermore, it helps inform and influence audiences by identifying themes that resonate with the population. INTERAGENCY CONFLICT ASSESSMENT FRAMEWORK 4-14. Interagency partners begin helping host nations prevent, mitigate, and recover from violent conflict by developing shared understanding about the sources of violent conflict or civil strife. To assess conflict situations systemically and collaboratively, interagency teams use a tool known as the Interagency Conflict Assessment Framework (ICAF), published by the Department of State in 2008. The ICAF supports interagency planning for conflict prevention, mitigation, and stabilization. 4-15. Army forces conducting stability operations often are involved in interagency processes. To be effective, Army forces should be familiar with the ICAF. Army forces frequently participate in interagency conflict assessment activities. Using the ICAF for interagency activities also informs Army operational assessments. PURPOSE OF THE INTERAGENCY CONFLICT ASSESSMENT FRAMEWORK 4-16. The ICAF provides interagency partners a framework for developing a common perspective about the dynamics driving and mitigating violent conflict in a country. Partners use the ICAF to create shared understanding that informs national policy and planning decisions. The ICAF may also be used to inform strategic-level decisionmaking.

3-07

Chapter 4 4-17. The ICAF outlines key concepts, processes, and products essential to conflict assessment. Interagency partners develop supplementary documents, appropriate tools, and data collection procedures as needed. Partners set the composition and functions of each interagency conflict assessment team. 4-18. The ICAF draws on conflict assessment tools used by interagency and interorganizational partners. It is not intended to duplicate or replace independent analytical processes, such as those conducted within the intelligence community. Rather, the ICAF builds upon those and other analytical efforts to provide a common framework. It facilitates shared knowledge and understanding. 4-19. The ICAF is distinct from other forecasting tools that identify countries at risk of instability or collapse and that describe relevant conditions. The ICAF builds on other forecasts and social science expertise. It helps interagency teams understand the reasons conditions exist and identify effective ways to engage and transform those conditions. The ICAF provides a shared, strategic perspective of the conflict against which future progress can be measured. (See ADRP 3-07 for a discussion of conflict transformation in the performance of stability tasks.) APPLICATION OF THE INTERAGENCY CONFLICT ASSESSMENT FRAMEWORK 4-20. The ICAF guides the determination of which partners initiate and participate, when and where the process occurs, the type and application of products needed, and the appropriate level of classification. When interagency partners use the ICAF, they need to complete all of its analytical steps. The nature and scope of the assessment vary according to the situation. 4-21. The ICAF is a flexible, scalable interagency tool suitable for use in— * Steady-state engagement and conflict prevention planning. * U.S. Government reconstruction and stabilization contingency planning. * U.S. Government reconstruction and stabilization crisis response planning. Steady-State Engagement and Conflict Prevention Planning 4-22. Steady-state or conflict prevention planning efforts normally provide interagency partners with sufficient time for a thorough assessment and a permissive operational environment. Steady-state engagement and conflict prevention planning efforts may include— * Preparing an embassy for National Defense Authorization Act funding. * Answering requests by an embassy or combatant command for interagency assistance in understanding and planning for leveraging U.S. interests in fragile or at-risk countries. * Assisting with the development of combatant command theater campaign plans, including security cooperation planning. * Developing country assistance strategies or mission strategic plans. * Designing interagency prevention efforts for countries listed on state failure watch lists and early warning systems. United States Government Reconstruction and Stabilization Contingency Planning 4-23. Reconstruction and stabilization contingency planning are based on a hypothetical future. The ICAF provides concrete background information about existing dynamics that could trigger, exacerbate, or mitigate violent conflict. The ICAF is a robust element of planning, providing critical information for situational analysis, regardless of where the assessment and planning occur. United States Government Reconstruction and Stabilization Crisis Response Planning 4-24. The ICAF provides detailed situational analysis that can contribute critical information for initial interagency planning. Interagency partners update the ICAF analysis as they have more information available and better access to inform the policy formulation, strategy development, and interagency implementation. When used for crisis response, the ICAF might be a tabletop assessment completed in as little as one and one-half days by an interagency team based in Washington. Conversely, it could occur

3-07

Stability Assessment Frameworks over several weeks, with conversations back and forth between Washington and interagency partners in the field. Roles and Responsibilities in the Interagency Conflict Assessment Framework 4-25. Planners determine which partners serve on an ICAF team and in what capacities. The agency or individual responsible for managing the overall planning process proposes the tools and requests participation of partners. An established country team may use the ICAF to inform country assistance strategy development while a geographic combatant command uses the ICAF to bring an interagency perspective to theater security cooperation planning. In crisis response, the ICAF normally is part of the strategic planning led by a group focused on reconstruction and stabilization of the country in crisis. The ICAF may also be used among partners as part of collaborative planning. 4-26. As a rule, participants using an ICAF include the broadest possible representation of partners with expertise or a stake in a given situation. An ideal interagency team represents diverse skill sets and brings together the collective knowledge and experience of various U.S. departments and agencies. Participants might include relevant regional bureaus, sector experts, intelligence analysts, and social science or conflict specialists. When interagency partners use the ICAF to support planning, the interagency field team includes members of the strategic planning team. The interagency field team expands as needed to include local stakeholders and international partner representatives. 4-27. To ensure the most comprehensive analysis, members of the interagency team must provide all relevant information retained by each department or agency, including the results of past assessments and related analyses. Members of the interagency team must retain reachback capability with their agencies to obtain further information to fill critical information gaps identified through the ICAF process. 4-28. The ICAF includes two major tasks: conflict diagnosis and transition into planning. STEPS OF CONFLICT DIAGNOSIS IN THE INTERAGENCY CONFLICT ASSESSMENT FRAMEWORK 4-29. ICAF’s first major task is conflict diagnosis. Conflict diagnosis allows the interagency team to deliver a product that describes the context, core grievances and resiliencies, drivers of conflict and mitigating factors, and opportunities for increasing or decreasing conflict. Figure 4-2 illustrates the steps of conflict diagnosis: * Evaluate the context of the conflict. * Understand core grievances and social and institutional resilience. * Identify drivers of conflict and mitigating factors. * Describe opportunities for increasing or decreasing conflict. Figure 4-2. Conflict-diagnosis process of the interagency conflict-assessment framework

3-07

Chapter 4 Step 1—Evaluate the Context of the Conflict 4-30. During the first step of conflict diagnosis, the team evaluates and outlines key contextual issues in an operational environment. Context does not cause conflict but describes the often long-standing conditions that resist change. Issues may include environmental conditions, poverty, youth bulge, or recent or long- term conflict in a region. Contextual conditions can reinforce divisions between communities or contribute to pressures making violence appear attractive for advancing individual interests. Contextual conditions can shape perceptions of identity groups. Key actors can use the conditions to manipulate and mobilize constituencies. 4-31. Each ICAF step begins with identifying the contextual conditions and issues from which the conflict evolved. This process, depicted in figure 4-2, reflects the complex interaction between the context and the other elements of the ICAF. Step 2—Understand Core Grievances and Sources of Social and Institutional Resilience 4-32. The team should understand, agree upon, and communicate the concepts of core grievances and sources of social and institutional resilience. They should describe them within the specific situation. Under the ICAF, a core grievance is any societal group’s perception that other groups or social institutions threaten its physical security, livelihood, interests, or values. A source of social and institutional resilience is any group’s perception that social relationships, structures, or processes are in place that can resolve disputes and meet basic needs through nonviolent means. 4-33. During the second step of conflict diagnosis, the team must— * Describe identity groups who perceive threats to their identity, security, or livelihood. * Articulate how societal patterns reinforce perceived deprivation, blame, and intergroup cleavages; articulate how those societal patterns promote harmony and peaceful resolution of disputes. * Explain how positive or negative institutional performance contributes to or aggravates the resolution of conflict. 4-34. Identity groups are groups of people that identify with one another, often because of characteristics used by outsiders to describe them. These characteristics can include ethnicity, race, nationality, religion, political affiliation, age, gender, economic activity, or socioeconomic status. Identity groups are inclined to conflict when they perceive that other groups’ interests, needs, and aspirations compete with and jeopardize their identity, security, or other fundamental interests. 4-35. Societal patterns associated with conflict reinforce divisions between groups. These patterns can include elitism, exclusion, corruption, chronic state capacity deficits, and unmet expectations. Capacity deficits consist of systemic economic stagnation, scarcity of necessary resources, and ungoverned spaces. Unmet expectations may be a lack of a peace dividend, land tenure issues, disillusionment, and disenfranchisement. Impacts of societal patterns often include negative economic consequences for disadvantaged groups. 4-36. Institutional performance considers formal and informal social structures to determine the groups’ performance level and if they contribute to or mitigate conflict and instability. Formal social structures consist of governments, legal systems, religious organizations, public schools, security forces, and economic institutions. Informal social structures include traditional dispute resolution bodies; families, clans or tribes; and armed groups. Assessing institutional performance involves distinguishing between outcomes and perceptions. Institutional outcomes are results that can be measured objectively; perceptions are the evaluative assessment of those outcomes. To diagnosis the conflict, teams must understand how various groups within a society perceive outcomes, especially in terms of effectiveness and legitimacy. Step 3—Identify Drivers of Conflict and Mitigating Factors 4-37. The team should understand and outline the drivers and mitigating factors of conflict and enumerate them within the situation being assessed. Drivers of conflict represent the active energy moving the conflict—the dynamic situation resulting from key actors’ mobilization of social groups around core grievances. While core grievances can be understood as the potential energy of conflict, key actors translate

3-07

Stability Assessment Frameworks that energy into drivers of conflict. Mitigating factors represent the dynamic situation resulting from key actors’ mobilization of social groups around sources of social and institutional resilience. Mitigating factors can be understood as the energy produced when key actors mobilize the potential energy of social and institutional resilience. 4-38. During the third step of conflict diagnosis, the team identifies the key actors central to producing, perpetuating, or profoundly changing the societal patterns or issues of institutional performance identified previously. The team determines whether key actors are motivated to mobilize constituencies toward inflaming or mitigating violent conflict and the means they have at their disposal. To perform the analysis required in this step, the team— * Identifies the key actors. * Identifies key actors’ constituencies. Identify the Key Actors 4-39. The team identifies the people, organizations, or groups who have leadership abilities or power— such as political position, moral authority, charisma, wealth, and weapons. These key actors can affect societal patterns and institutional performance, shape perceptions and actions, and mobilize people around core grievances or social and institutional resilience. 4-40. The team identifies the locations of key actors in leadership positions in governing, social, or professional organizations or networks (either within or external to a state or territory). They include private businesses, religious organizations, government positions, informal and illicit power structures, media, and academic institutions. 4-41. The team identifies what motivates key actors to exert influence on each of the political, economic, social, and security systems within the host nation—such as commitment to a cause or a people, greed (money or notoriety), and religious beliefs. The team identifies the methods key actors use to exert their influence (leadership capability, moral authority, personal charisma, access to resources or weapons, or networks). Identify Key Actors’ Constituencies 4-42. The team first identifies key actors’ supporting and opposing constituencies. Then the team identifies their core grievances or social or institutional resilience around which they are being mobilized. The team identifies the key actors’ critical motivations, means, and resources. 4-43. Using this information, the team drafts brief narrative statements describing the methods and reasons that key actors mobilize specific constituencies around core grievances and sources of social and institutional resilience. Each statement relating to core grievances becomes an entry in the list of drivers of conflict. Each relating to sources of social and institutional resilience becomes an entry in the list of mitigating factors. Step 4—Describe Windows of Vulnerability and Windows of Opportunity 4-44. In the final step of conflict diagnosis, the team— * Identifies potential situations that could contribute to an increase in violent conflict. * Identifies potential situations that might offer opportunities for mitigating violent conflict and promoting stability. 4-45. The team should specify situations for increasing and decreasing conflict and describe those expected within the specific situation being assessed. These situations are described as windows of vulnerability and windows of opportunity. Windows of vulnerability are potential situations that may trigger conflict escalation. They often result from large-scale responses such as an increase of uncertainty during elections or following an assassination. They also result from an exclusion of parties from important events (such as negotiations or elections) or attempts to marginalize disenfranchised followers. Windows of vulnerability are moments when events threaten to rapidly and fundamentally alter the balance of political or economic power. Elections, devolution of power, and legislative changes illustrate possible windows of vulnerability. Key actors may seize, retain, and exploit the initiative during these moments to amplify the drivers of

3-07

Chapter 4 conflict. Windows of opportunity describe potential situations that may enable significant progress toward achieving stable peace. These windows may include situations where overarching identities assume prominence among disputing groups, natural disasters affect multiple identity groups, the situation requires a unified response, or a key leader driving the conflict is killed. These windows are moments when overarching identities become more important than subgroup identities. These occasions may present opportunities to provide additional support for factors that mitigate conflict. 4-46. The team completes conflict diagnosis by considering windows of vulnerability and windows of opportunity and prioritizing drivers of conflict and mitigating factors identified previously. The team uses the list of prioritized drivers and mitigating factors as the basis for its findings. STEPS OF TRANSITION INTO PLANNING IN THE INTERAGENCY CONFLICT ASSESSMENT FRAMEWORK 4-47. ICAF’s second major task is transition into planning. When the ICAF is used to support crisis response or deliberate planning, the findings of the conflict diagnosis feed into the situational analysis and policy formulation steps of interagency, whole-of-government planning. When the ICAF is used to support steady-state engagement or conflict prevention planning, the team begins preplanning activities after completing conflict diagnosis. During the transition into these types of planning, the team maps existing diplomatic and program activities against the prioritized lists of drivers of conflict and mitigating factors. This mapping identifies gaps in current efforts as they relate to conflict dynamics. However, this is not intended as an evaluation of the overall impact or utility of any specific program or initiative. The team uses these findings as a basis for making recommendations to planners on potential entry points for interagency activities. 4-48. When the ICAF is used to support steady-state engagement or conflict prevention planning, six steps are used to facilitate the transition into planning (summarized in table 4-1). Table 4-1. Interagency conflict assessment framework transition into planning Step 1 Specify current U.S. activities (identify U.S. departments and agencies present in the country and the nature and scope of their efforts) by— • Identifying the impact of these efforts on drivers of conflict and mitigating factors. • Identifying efforts that target similar outcomes and coordination mechanisms in place. Step 2 Specify current efforts of partners not part of the United States Government, including bilateral agencies, multilateral agencies, nongovernmental organizations, and private sector and local entities by— • Identifying the impact of the efforts on the drivers of conflict and mitigating factors. • Identifying efforts that target similar outcomes (including efforts of interagency partners) and coordinating mechanisms in place. Step 3 Identify drivers of conflict and mitigating factors not sufficiently addressed by existing efforts (gaps). Step 4 Specify challenges to addressing these gaps. Step 5 Describe risks associated with failing to address gaps (relate directly to windows of vulnerability). Step 6 Describe opportunities to address gaps (relate directly to windows of opportunity). 4-49. The team draws on the information generated from the transition into planning to determine potential entry points for U.S. efforts. The description of these entry points explain how the dynamics outlined during conflict diagnosis may be susceptible to outside influence.

3-07

Glossary The glossary lists acronyms and terms with Army or joint definitions. Where Army and joint definitions differ, (Army) precedes the definition. Terms for which FM 3-07 is the proponent (authority) manual are marked with an asterisk (*). The proponent manual for other terms is listed in parentheses after the definition. SECTION I – ACRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONS ADP Army doctrine publication ADRP Army doctrine reference publication AR Army regulation ATP Army techniques publication CBRN chemical, biological, radiological, and nuclear CMOC civil-military operations center CPA Coalition Provisional Authority DA Department of the Army DOD Department of Defense DOS Department of State FM field manual HIV/AIDS human immunodeficiency virus/acquired immunodeficiency syndrome ICAF Interagency Conflict Assessment Framework ICRC International Committee of the Red Cross ICITAP International Criminal Investigative Training Assistance Program IGO intergovernmental organization JP joint publication MOE measure of effectiveness MOP measure of performance NGO nongovernmental organization PKSOI Peacekeeping and Stability Operations Institute U.S. United States UN United Nations USAID United States Agency for International Development WMD weapons of mass destruction SECTION II – TERMS demobilization The process of transitioning a conflict or wartime military establishment and defense-based civilian economy to a peacetime configuration while maintaining national security and economic vitality. (JP 4-05) dislocated civilian A broad term primarily used by the Department of Defense that includes a displaced person, an evacuee, an internally displaced person, a migrant, a refugee, or a stateless person. (JP 3-29)

3-07

Glossary foreign internal defense Participation by civilian and military agencies of a government in any of the action programs taken by another government or other designated organization to free and protect its society from subversion, lawlessness, insurgency, terrorism, and other threats to its security. (JP 3-22) information-related capability A tool, technique, or activity employed within a dimension of the information environment that can be used to create effects and operationally desirable conditions. (JP 3-13) integration The arrangement of military forces and their actions to create a force that operates by engaging as a whole. (JP 1) interagency coordination Within the context of Department of Defense involvement, the coordination that occurs between elements of Department of Defense, and engaged US Government agencies and departments for the purpose of achieving an objective. (JP 3-0) interorganizational coordination The interaction that occurs among elements of the Department of Defense; engaged United States Government agencies; state, territorial, local, and tribal agencies; foreign military forces and government agencies; intergovernmental organizations; nongovernmental organizations; and the private sector. (JP 3-08) phase (Army) A planning and execution tool used to divide an operation in duration or activity. (ADRP 3-0) reintegration The process through which former combatants, belligerents, and displaced civilians receive amnesty, reenter civil society, gain sustainable employment, and become contributing members of the local populace. (ADRP 3-07) security cooperation All Department of Defense interactions with foreign defense establishments to build defense relationships that promote specific US security interests, develop allied and friendly military capabilities for self-defense and multinational operations, and provide US forces with peacetime and contingency access to a host nation. (JP 3-22) security force assistance The Department of Defense activities that contribute to unified action by the US Government to support the development of the capacity and capability of foreign security forces and their supporting institutions. (JP 3-22) security sector reform A comprehensive set of programs and activities undertaken to improve the way a host nation provides safety, security, and justice. (JP 3-07) Soldier and leader engagement Interpersonal interactions by Soldiers and leaders with audiences in an area of operations. (FM 3-13) *transitional military authority A temporary military government exercising the functions of civil administration in the absence of a legitimate civil authority.

3-07

References All URLS accessed on 15 May 2014. REQUIRED PUBLICATIONS These documents must be available to intended users of this publication. ADP 3-07. Stability. 31 August 2012. ADRP 1-02. Terms and Military Symbols. 24 September 2013. ADRP 3-07. Stability. 31 August 2012. JP 1-02. Department of Defense Dictionary of Military and Associated Terms. 08 November 2010. RELATED PUBLICATIONS These documents contain relevant supplemental information. JOINT AND DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE PUBLICATIONS Most joint publications are available online: http://www.dtic.mil/doctrine/new_pubs/jointpub.htm. JP 1. Doctrine for the Armed Forces of the United States. 25 March 2013. JP 3-0. Joint Operations. 11 August 2011. JP 3-05. Special Operations. 18 April 2011. JP 3-07. Stability Operations. 29 September 2011. JP 3-07.3. Peace Operations. 01 August 2012. JP 3-08. Interorganizational Coordination During Joint Operations. 24 June 2011. JP 3-13. Information Operations. 27 November 2012. JP 3-22. Foreign Internal Defense. 12 July 2010. JP 3-24. Counterinsurgency. 22 November 2013. JP 3-29. Foreign Humanitarian Assistance. 03 January 2014. JP 3-40. Combating Weapons of Mass Destruction. 10 June 2009. JP 3-41. Chemical, Biological, Radiological, and Nuclear Consequence Management. 21 June 2012. JP 3-57. Civil-Military Operations. 11 September 2013. JP 4-05. Joint Mobilization Planning. 21 February 2014. ARMY PUBLICATIONS Most Army publications are available online: http://www.apd.army.mil/. ADRP 3-0. Unified Land Operations. 16 May 2012. ADRP 5-0. The Operations Process. 17 May 2012. AR 27-20. Claims. 08 February 2008. ATP 3-07.5. Stability Techniques. 31 August 2012. ATP 3-57.10. Civil Affairs Support to Populace and Resources Control. 06 August 2013. FM 1-06. Financial Management Operations. 04 April 2011. FM 2-22.2. Counterintelligence. 21 October 2009. FM 3-13. Inform and Influence Activities. 25 January 2013. FM 3-22. Army Support to Security Cooperation. 22 January 2013. FM 3-24. Counterinsurgency. 15 December 2006.

3-07

References FM 3-57. Civil Affairs Operations. 31 October 2011. FM 27-10. The Law of Land Warfare. 18 July 1956. OTHER PUBLICATIONS Civil-Military Guidelines & Reference for Complex Emergencies [Part 2]. Available at http://ochaonline.un.org/cmcs/guidelines. Geneva Conventions. Available at http://avalon.law.yale.edu/subject_menus/lawwar.asp. Guidelines for Relations Between U.S. Armed Forces and Non-Governmental Humanitarian Organizations in Hostile or Potentially Hostile Environments. Available at http://www.usip.org/sites/default/files/guidelines_handout.pdf. Guidelines on the Use of Foreign Military and Civil Defence Assets in Disaster Relief—“Oslo Guidelines.” Available at http://reliefweb.int/sites/reliefweb.int/files/resources/8706B7B69BD77E00C1257233004F057 0-OCHA-Nov2006.pdf. The Hague Conventions. Available at http://avalon.law.yale.edu/subject_menus/lawwar.asp. Interagency Conflict Assessment Framework. Available at http://pdf.usaid.gov/pdf_docs/PCAAB943.pdf. Lessons-Learned: Demobilization, Disarmament, and Reintegration (DDR) in Stabilization and Reconstruction Operations—A Guide for United States Government Planners. Available at https://www.pksoi.org/document_repository/doc_lib/SCRS_DDR_A%20Guide%20for%20U SG%20Planners_April_2006.pdf. The Management of Security Cooperation (also known as The Green Book). Available at http://www.disam.dsca.mil/pages/pubs/greenbook.aspx. Managing Performance in Peacebuilding: Framework for Conflict-Sensitive Monitoring and Evaluation. Available at http://www.undp.org/content/dam/philippines/docs/CPRU/Managing%20Performance%20in %20Peacebuilding.pdf. Manual for Military Commissions United States. Available at http://www.mc.mil/Portals/0/pdfs/2012ManualForMilitaryCommissions.pdf. Measuring Progress in Conflict Environments (MPICE). Available at http://www.usip.org/sites/default/files/MPICE%20Aug%2008.pdf. Post-Conflict Reconstruction Essential Tasks. Available at http://2001- 2009.state.gov/s/crs/rls/52959.htm. Security Sector Reform. Available at http://www.state.gov/documents/organization/115810.pdf. Senior Leader’s Guide to Transition Planning Version. Available at https://call2.army.mil/docs/doc7017/13-01.pdf. The Sphere Handbook. Available at http://www.sphereproject.org/handbook/. Strengthening of the Coordination of Humanitarian Emergency Assistance of the United Nations. Available at http://www.un.org/documents/ga/res/46/a46r182.htm. United Nations General Assembly Resolution 46/182. Available at http://www.un.org/documents/ga/res/46/a46r182.htm. United Nations Security Council Resolution 1540. Available at http://www.un.org/en/ga/search/view_doc.asp?symbol=S/RES/1540%20(2004). UNITED STATES LAW Most acts and public laws are available http://thomas.loc.gov/home/thomas.php. Foreign Assistance Act of 1961. National Defense Authorization Act. Title 10, United States Code. Armed Forces.

3-07

References Title 22, United States Code. Foreign Relations and Intercourse. Tom Lantos and Henry J. Hyde United States Global Leadership Against HIV/AIDS, Tuberculosis, and Malaria Reauthorization Act. WEB SITES International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC). Available at http://www.icrc.org. North Atlantic Treaty Organization. Available at http://www.nato.int. Peacekeeping and Stability Operations Institute (PKSOI). Available at http://pksoi.army.mil. ReliefWeb (a service of the United Nations Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs). Available at http://www.reliefweb.int. United Nations (UN). Available at http://www.un.org. PRESCRIBED FORMS None. REFERENCED FORMS Unless otherwise indicated, DA forms are available on the Army Publishing Directorate Web site at http://www.apd.army.mil/. DA Form 2028. Recommended Changes to Publications and Blank Forms.

3-07

Index Entries are by paragraph number. civil administration, exercise of, responsibilities, 1-35, 1-40, A 2-43 2-70, 2-105, 3-102, 4-1 acting as if, managing emotions, interim civil authority and, rule of law and, 3-111 3-47 2-101 transition, 2-22 ACTion approach, steps, 3-38 transitional military authority, common ground, building, 3-76– active listening, communication 2-54–2-55 3-79 and, 3-31–3-33 civil affairs, considerations, 3-147 strategies for building, 3-78 actors, comprehensive approach, forces, 3-143 communication, 3-127 2-23 operations, 3-144–3-147 active listening and, 3-31–3-33 cooperation with, 3-124 personnel, 3-145, 3-147 improving, 3-28–3-53 engage, 1-60 stability and, 3-142–3-148 strategies, 3-30 humanitarian, 3-150 support from, 3-142 comprehensive, security sector identifying key, 4-39–4-41 civil authorities, cooperation with, reform, 1-85–1-86 influence by, 1-54 1-82 comprehensive approach, 3-120– neutrality, 3-151–3-152 civil control, establish, 1-12–1-17 3-165 Soldiers and, 1-46 phases of stability framework, funding and, 3-92 agencies, perceptions of, 3-25 1-14–1-16 integration, 2-23 alliances, developing, 3-59–3-63 civil security, establish, 1-7–1-11 security sector reform, 1-77 strategies for, 3-63 phases of stability framework, transition, 2-6 analysis, civil affairs, 3-147 1-8–1-10 conditions, stabilize, 1-3 District Stability Framework, civilians, challenges to protection, confirmation bias, 3-42 4-9 1-62 conflict, managing, 3-72–3-75 archives, preservation, 2-87 oversight, 1-87–1-91 strategies for managing, 3-75 protection of, 1-44–1-62 art, preservation, 2-88 understanding potential, 3-72 reintegration and, 1-113–1-114 assessment, activities, 1-33 risks to, 1-49 conflict diagnosis, Interagency by Soldiers, 3-49–3-53 security of, 2-69 Conflict Assessment civil affairs, 3-145 threats to, 1-51, 1-126 Framework, 4-29–4-43 District Stability Framework, treatment of, 2-71 step 1, 4-30–4-31 4-5–4-13 vulnerabilities, 1-50 step 2, 4-32–4-36 tools, 2-36, 4-18 step 3, 4-37–4-43 civil-military engagement, step 4, 4-44–4-46 assessment frameworks, stability guidelines for, 3-153 tasks, 4-3 conflict transformation, civil-military operations center, reconciliation, 2-7 assessment process, stability, 4-2 stability and, 3-148 consensus, building, 3-77 assistance, funding for, 3-87 coexistence, 3-126 context, evaluate, 4-30–4-31 atrocities, effects of, 2-89 collaboration, coordination and, contingency, planning, 4-23 authority, military, 2-75 3-130–3-132 transitional military authority, funding and, 3-90 cooperation, collaboration and, 2-40–2-48 interagency, 3-59 3-130–3-132 successful, 3-76 requirements for, 3-67 B combat power, stability and, 1-34 coordination, challenges, 3-133 behaviors, assessment of, 3-51 formal, 3-129 command responsibility, bias, common types, 3-39–3-43 transitional military authority, guidelines, 3-132 humanitarian response, 3-155 boundaries, transitional military 2-40–2-48 interorganizational, 3-120 authority and, 2-50-2-52 commanders, See also leaders military forces, 2-108–2-110 building partner capacity, 3-137– actions by, 2-67, 4-4 partners, 3-122–3-133 3-141 civil administration and, 2-57 systems of, 3-16–3-17 emphasis by, 3-139 considerations, 2-64, 2-72, whole-of-government 2-73–2-74, 3-80, 3-85 approach, 3-1–3-2 C funding considerations, 3-88– core grievance, conflict diagnosis, CBRN, 1-117–1-118 3-90 4-32 challenges, coordination, 3-133 understanding, 4-32–4-36

3-07

Index Entries are by paragraph number. corrections, security sector sector goals of, 2-77 funding risks, 3-91 reform, 1-101 stability necessities of, 2-81 guidance and authorities on, corruption, rule of law and, 3-102 stimulants, 2-82 3-81–3-93 transitional military authority emotions, management of, 3-44– legal restrictions, 3-84 and, 2-90 3-48 management, 3-84 other authorities, 3-98 costs, disarmament, engagement, steady state, 4-22 oversight, 3-83 demobilization, and environment, shape, 1-61 sources, 3-82, 3-94–3-98 reintegration, 1-107 stabilize, 1-3 Title 10, 3-95 counterinsurgency, 1-132–1-135 essential services, phases of Title 22, 3-97 planning, 1-135 stability framework, 1-19–1-21 types, 3-80–3-98 courts, transitional military restore, 1-18–1-22 funds, quick impact, 3-87–3-92 authority and, 2-92–2-97 establish civil control, 1-12–1-17 G criminal justice system, subtasks, 1-17 components of, 3-107 governance, 1-23 establish civil security, 1-7–1-11 rule of law and, 3-108 subtasks, 1-11 government, host nation, 2-61– criminal justice system reform, 2-67 evaluate, step 1 of conflict actions for, 3-110 officials, 2-62 diagnosis, 4-30–4-31 whole-of-government evaluation, District Stability H approach, 3-107–3-114 Framework, 4-11–4-13 host nation, assistance to, 1-5 crisis response, planning, 4-24 challenges of, 1-75 support to, 4-47 F counterinsurgency, 1-134 cultural agility, 3-13 factors, identify mitigating, 4-37– development of, 1-75 cultures, organizational, 3-18 4-43 government, 2-61–2-67 females, in engagement, 1-42 government actions, 2-28 customs, transitional military laws, customs, boundaries, authority and, 2-50–2-52 forces, actions of, 1-48 2-50–2-52 assistance from, 3-114 D responsibilities of, 1-78 focus by, 3-138 security concept, 1-80 demobilization, definition, 1-110 partners and, 3-123 security sector reform and, Department of Defense, foreign disaster relief, 1-125 1-71–1-73 InterAction and, 3-158–3-159 foreign humanitarian support to, 2-8 assistance, 1-130 Department of State, interagency human rights, 1-83 coordination and, 3-12 foreign humanitarian assistance, humanitarian action, military 1-125–1-131 design, District Stability support to, 3-154 Army support to, 1-127–1-129 Framework, 4-10 types, 1-130–1-131 humanitarian actors, interests of, development, USAID principles 3-151–3-152 foreign internal defense, 1-136– for, 3-115–3-119 support from, 3-150 1-140 disarmament, 1-109 definition, 1-136 humanitarian assistance, disarmament, demobilization, and tasks, 1-137 interagency standing committee reintegration, 1-105–1-115 and, 3-165 foreign police forces, assistance costs, 1-107 nongovernmental to, 1-95 goals of, 1-105 organizations and, 3-149– fostering sustainability phase, civil success of, 1-108 3-165 control, 1-16 dislocated civilian, definition, humanitarian efforts, civil security, 1-10 1-131 organizational differences, 3-25 essential services, 1-21 District Stability Framework, 4-5– support to economic and humanitarian operations, See also 4-13 infrastructure development, foreign humanitarian assistance assistance from, 4-6 1-31 actors in, 1-129 steps of, 4-7–4-13 support to governance, 1-26 humanitarian response, principles, drivers of conflict, identify, 4-37– foundations, security sector 3-155–3-165 4-43 reform, 1-78–1-84 sources, 3-157 dynamics, understanding, 1-55 fragile states, assistance to, 3-117 I engagement with, 3-116 E identity groups, 4-34 fundamental attribution error, 3-40 economy, recovery stimulants for, influence, development, 3-21 2-78–2-79 funding, activities, 3-82 areas of, 3-86–3-93

3-07

Index Entries are by paragraph number. information, accessibility, 3-29 interagency standing committee, transitional military authority sharing, 3-123, 3-128 humanitarian assistance and, and, 2-50–2-52 information-related capability, 3-165 leaders, See also commanders 1-39–1-43 interagency team, evaluation by, and officials definition of, 1-39 4-30–4-31 assessment by, 2-37 synchronized, 1-40 Interagency Conflict collaboration with, 3-56 in-group/out-group bias, 3-43 Assessment Framework considerations, 2-6, 2-29, 3-5, and, 4-25 3-17, 3-22, 3-26, 3-55, initial response phase, civil responsibilities, 4-33, 4-37– 3-124 control, 1-14 4-38, 4-44 dynamics and, 1-55–1-56 civil security, 1-8 engagement, 3-116 essential services, 1-19 intergovernmental organization, focus of, 2-14, 3-15 support to economic and security sector reform and, 1-70 interagency groups and, 3-27 infrastructure development, interim civil authority, 2-98–2-110 responsibilities, 1-52, 2-1, 1-29 activities of, 2-102 3-62, 3-68 support to governance, 1-24 characteristics of, 2-101–2-103 situational understanding, instability, criteria, 4-9 military and, 2-104–2-110 1-53–1-56 forecasting, 4-19 occurrence of, 2-98–2-100 support from, 2-25 organization, 2-103 integration, comprehensive leadership, organizational approach, 2-23 internal defense and differences, 3-21 definition, 2-4 development, 1-139–1-140 legal restrictions, funding, 3-84 multinational operations, 3-135 lines of effort, 1-140 transition and, 2-4–2-5 objectives, 1-139 legal system, security sector reform, 1-99–1-100 InterAction, Department of international law, transitional Defense and, 3-158–3-159 military authority, 2-40 legislative branch, security sector reform and, 1-89 interaction, levels of, 3-125 International Red Cross, code of conduct, 3-162–3-163 legitimacy, civil affairs, 3-146 interagency collaboration, establishment of, 1-71 facilitating, 3-59 Red Crescent Movement and, justice system, 1-94 3-160–3-163 Interagency Conflict Assessment law enforcement, 1-95–1-98 Framework, 4-14–4-49 interorganizational coordination, transparency and, 2-12 application of, 4-20–4-28 definition, 3-2 lines of effort, internal defense conflict diagnosis, 4-29–4-43 stability efforts and, 3-120 and development, 1-140 purpose of, 4-16–4-19 J location, interagencies, 3-60 responsibilities of, 4-25–4-28 joint force commander, tasks of, 4-28 M responsibilities of, 2-49 transition into planning, 4-47– 4-49 judge advocates, coordination by, mass atrocity, response, 1-63 3-105 measurement, tools, 2-36 interagency coordination, 3-5– 3-18 justice, transitions, 2-10 mediation, relationships and, 3-73 benefits of, 3-9–3-11 justice system, See also criminal military forces, combination of, 1-4 characteristics of, 3-6–3-8 justice system coordination by, 2-108 competencies for, 3-12–3-18 development of, 1-94 development of, 1-93 considerations, 3-20 reform, 1-99 foreign humanitarian definition, 3-1 justice system reform, U.S. assistance and, 1-127 fostering, 3-5 Government partners and, 1-67 interim civil authority, 2-104– relationships and, 3-74 2-110 understanding, 3-14–3-15 K responsibility of, 1-33 interagency group, considerations key actors, constituencies, 4-42– responsibilities, 1-97 by, 3-57 4-43 security sector reform and, interagency partners, assistance identify, 4-39–4-41 1-78 size needed, 1-4 from, 4-14 L stability operations and, 4-15 capabilities of, 3-16–3-17 collaboration, 3-10 law enforcement, development, strategies for, 3-58 responsibilities of, 3-108 1-95–1-98, 1-104 support from, 1-5, 1-69 oversight of, 1-91 military police, support from, 1-96 interagency partnerships, challenges, 3-8 law of war, civilians and, 1-45 military support, humanitarian laws, penal, 2-93 action, 3-154

3-07

Index Entries are by paragraph number. ministry of defense, partners, assistance from, 3-120 physiological regulation, responsibilities of, 1-88 benefits from, 3-131 managing emotions, 3-48 mission objectives, organizational capabilities of, 4-26 planners, Interagency Conflict differences, 3-22 challenges of, 2-34 Assessment Framework, 4-25 support to, 3-70 coordination of, 3-122, 3-123– partners, 2-15 3-133 MOEs, transition phases, 2-35 transition phases, 2-17 differences in, 3-19 transitions, 2-2, 2-30 monitoring, District Stability forces and, 3-123 Framework, 4-11–4-13 integration, 3-103 planning, conflict prevention, 4-22 counterinsurgency, 1-135 MOPs, transition phases, 2-35 Interagency Conflict partners, 2-3 Assessment Framework multinational operations, 3-134– reconstruction and stabilization and, 4-20 3-136 contingency, 4-23, 4-24 neutrality of, 3-121 participants, 3-136 rule of law and, 1-98 planning, 2-3 security sector reform, 1-74– N responsibilities, 1-73 1-76 security sector reform, 1-73 naïve realism, 3-41 transition, 2-11, 4-47–4-49 strengths, 3-70 neutrality, humanitarian actors support from, 2-24 policies, security sector reform, and, 3-151 transfer from, 2-33 1-84 nongovernmental organizations, transitions, 2-5, 2-38 policy, strategy and defense, 1-76 code of conduct, 3-162–3-163 transparency and, 2-13 populace, assessment of, 3-49 humanitarian, 3-149–3-165 U.S. Government, 1-66–1-68 attitudes, 3-136 nonpermissive environment, partnerships, building, 3-54 expression, 2-11 criminal justice system reform, interagency, 3-6 participation by, 2-65 3-113 patience, transition and, 2-14– treatment of, 2-71–2-75 O 2-15 principles, security sector reform, patterns, institutional, 4-36 1-77 officials, criteria for, 2-63 transitions, 2-6–2-15 selecting, 2-66 peace building, civilian protection, 1-58 protection, challenges, 1-62 operational environment, civilians, 1-44–1-62 understanding, 3-16 peace development, civilian guidelines for, 1-52–1-61 protection, 1-58 operational form, transitional positive outcomes for, 1-57 military authority, 2-54–2-56 peace operations, 1-120–1-124 transitional military authority, political objectives and, 1-123 operational level, transition, 2-1 2-75 types, 1-120 opportunity, describe, 4-44–4-46 provincial reconstruction teams, perceptions, focus on, 4-13 3-11 organizational culture, 3-18 interagency partners, 3-24 public health, infrastructure, 2-84 organizational differences, 3-18– transparency and, 2-12 transitional military authority 3-23 permissive environment, criminal and, 2-83–2-84 organizations, differences, 3-18– justice system reform, 3-112 public law, sources for funding, 3-23 perspective taking, 3-53 3-94–3-98 Oslo Guidelines, 3-164 ACTion approach, 3-38 purpose, building shared, 3-76– outcomes, desired, 1-57–1-58 benefits, 3-35 3-79 challenges, 3-37 oversight, civilian, 1-87–1-91 social, 3-34 Q funding, 3-83 legislative branch and, 1-89 perspectives, understanding, quick impact funds, 3-87–3-92 responsibilities, 1-88 3-34–3-53 R phase, definition, 2-17 P reconciliation, conflict phases of stability framework, civil participants, See also actors, transformation, 2-7 control, 1-14–1-16 civilians, military forces, developing, 2-8 civil security, 1-8–1-10 partners, populace, transition, 2-7–2-11 essential services, 1-19–1-21 stakeholders stability transition phases, 2-21 reconstruction, USAID principles inclusion of, 1-81 support to economic and for, 3-115–3-119 multinational operations, 3-136 infrastructure development, reconstruction and stabilization, partner capacity, building, 3-137– 1-29–1-31 contingency planning, 4-23 3-141 support to governance, 1-24– crisis response planning, 4-24 building, 3-140 1-26

3-07

Index Entries are by paragraph number. recovery, economic stabilization law enforcement agencies and, stability efforts, challenges, 2-9 and, 2-76–2-82 1-91 support to, 3-120 Red Crescent Movement, code of transition and, 1-90 stability framework, phases, 1-8– conduct, 3-162–3-163 transitional military authority, 1-10, 1-14–1-16, 1-19–1-21, International Red Cross and, 2-42 1-24–1-26, 1-29–1-31 3-160–3-163 security cooperation, funding, stability framework, transition and, Red Cross, principles of, 3-161 3-93 2-20 support to, 1-119 reframing, managing emotions, stability sectors, stability tasks in, 3-46 security force assistance, 1-2 definition, 1-92–1-104 reintegration, 1-111–1-115 stability tasks, accomplishment of, foreign internal defense and, definition, 1-111 1-34 1-138 goals, 1-112 assessment of, 4-1–4-4 security forces, capabilities, 1-103 related missions, stability, 1-38– categories of, 1-5 development of, 1-92–1-104 1-140 coordination, 2-109 other, 1-102–1-104 counterinsurgency, 1-132 relationship building, strategies security sector reform, 1-64–1-104 executing, 3-102 for, 3-54–3-79 civilian oversight established, identification of, 1-34–1-37 relationships, fostering, 3-64–3-66 1-87 multinational operations and, leveraging, 3-67–3-71 comprehensive, 1-85–1-86 3-134 preserving, 3-73 definition, 1-64 peace operations and, 1-122 strategies for identifying, 3-71 desired outcome, 1-65 primary, See also individual strategies for positive, 3-66 establishment of, 1-72 primary tasks religious, customs and foundations of, 1-78–1-84 primary, 1-1–1-33 organizations, 2-86 host nation, 1-71–1-73 primary list, 1-6 IGO and, 1-70 proportion of, 1-1 resilience, understand, 4-32-4-36 military support to, 1-69 stability sectors, 1-2 resources, availability, 3-23, 3-81 planning, 1-74–1-76 support to, 1-98 organizational differences, principles of, 1-77 transition of, 2-16–2-38 3-23 security requirements, 1-102 transition phases, 2-20 responsibilities, understanding, sustainment of, 1-74 stability transition phases, phases 3-55–3-58 U.S. government partners, of the stability framework, 2-21 1-66–1-68 restore essential services, 1-18– stabilization, economic recovery unity of effort, 1-85 1-22 and, 2-76–2-82 whole-of-government subtasks, 1-22 planning, 4-23–4-24 approach, 1-66 risks, civilians, 1-49 stakeholders, interagency, 3-81 situation, assessment of, 3-52 funding and, 3-91 relationships with, 3-69 understand, 1-53–1-56 reducing, 1-59 strategic level, transition, 2-1 situational awareness, District roles, understanding, 3-55–3-58 Stability Framework, 4-8 strategy and defense policy, rule of law, adherence to, 1-13 security sector reform and, 1-76 social perspective taking, 3-34 civil control and, 1-12 success, measurement, 2-35– criminal justice system and, societal patterns, 4-35 2-38, 3-27, 4-1 3-108 Soldier and leader engagement, criteria, 3-100 definition of, 1-41 support, from Army, 1-129 establishment of, 3-109 information-related capabilities support to economic and planning, 1-98 and, 1-41 infrastructure development, rule of law activities, categories of, Soldiers, actions, 3-49, 3-54 1-28–1-33 3-106 behaviors, 3-65 phases of stability framework, execution of, 3-100 collaboration with, 3-79 1-29–1-31 rule of law programs, transfer considerations of, 1-43, 3-72 subtasks, 1-32 of, 3-104 development by, 3-59 support to governance, 1-23–1-27 rule of law reform, interactions with, 3-64 phases of stability framework, whole-of-government approach, protection of civilians and, 1-46 1-24–1-26 3-99–3-106 responsibilities, 3-28 subtasks, 1-27 stability, civil affairs in, 3-142– synchronization, challenges of, S 3-148 3-141 security, assessment, 1-105 humanitarian response, 3-155 systems, support from, 2-27 coordination, 3-3 related activities, 1-38–1-140 host nation concept, 1-80 unity of effort and, 3-4

3-07

Index Entries are by paragraph number. T stability tasks, 2-16–2-38 U understanding, 2-2 tactical level, transition, 2-1 U.S. Government partners, teams, establishments of, 3-7 transition into planning, responsibilities, 1-66–1-68 Interagency Conflict provincial reconstruction, 3-11 understand, conflict diagnosis Assessment Framework, 4-47– teamwork, organizational step 2, 4-32–4-36 4-49 differences, 3-24 unified action partners, stability, steps for, 4-48 territorial form, transitional military 3-140 transition phase 1, 2-24–2-26 authority, 2-57–2-60 transition, 2-19 transition phase 2, 2-27–2-32 threats, 1-51 units, influence of, 1-54 transition phase 3, 2-33–2-34 time, considerations, 3-26 unity of effort, establishment, 2-14 use of, 3-55 transition phases, planners, 2-17 security sector reform, 1-85 transitional military authority, stability and, 3-4 Title 10, programs, 3-95–3-96 2-39–2-97 support to, 4-5 Title 22, programs, 3-97 authority, 2-40–2-48 USAID, District Stability transfer plan, transition, 2-31 command responsibility and, Framework, 4-5 transformation phase, civil control, 2-40–2-48 principles, 3-115–3-119 1-15 considerations, 2-85–2-91 V civil security, 1-9 courts and claims, 2-92–2-97 essential services, 1-20 criteria, 2-49 vetting, transitional military support to economic and definition, 2-39 authority and, 2-91 infrastructure development, degree of control, 2-48 vulnerability, describe, 4-44–4-46 1-30 establishment of, 2-46–2-48 support to governance, 1-25 focus of, 2-76 W forms of, 2-53–2-60 transition, challenges, 2-38 weapons of mass destruction, guidelines for, 2-68–2-91 commanders support to, 2-22 1-116 operational form, 2-54–2-56 disarmament, demobilization, whole-of-government approach, organization, 2-49–2-67 and reintegration, 1-106 3-1–3-119 public health and, 2-83–2-84 integration and, 2-4–2-5 criminal justice system reform, religious considerations, 2-86 interim civil authority, 2-102 3-107–3-114 requirements of, 2-97 justice and, 2-10 interim civil authority, 2-105 roles of, 2-41 managing, 2-18 rule of law reform, 3-99–3-106 success of, 2-61 partners, 2-5 security sector reform, 1-66 territorial form, 2-57–2-60 patience, 2-14–2-15 windows of opportunity and phases, 2-17, 2-24–2-26, transparency, civil affairs, 3-146 vulnerability, assessment of, 2-27–2-32, 2-33–2-34 transition and, 2-12–2-13 4-45–4-46 planning for, 2-11 treatment, factors for, 2-73–2-74 principles, 2-6–2-15 security and, 1-90 stability levels, 2-1–2-15

3-07

FM 3-07 2 JUNE 2014 By order of the Secretary of the Army: RAYMOND T. ODIERNO General, United States Army Chief of Staff Official: GERALD B. O’KEEFE Administrative Assistant to the Secretary of the Army 1414201 DISTRIBUTION: Active Army, Army National Guard, and United States Army Reserve: Distributed in accordance with

3-24

FM 3-24 MCWP 3-33.5 INSURGENCIES AND COUNTERING INSURGENCIES MAY 2014 DISTRIBUTION RESTRICTION: Approved for public release; distribution is unlimited.

3-24

This publication is available at Army Knowledge Online (https://armypubs.us.army.mil/doctrine/index.html). To receive publishing updates, please subscribe at

3-24

FM 3-24/MCWP 3-33.5, C1 Change No. 1 Headquarters Department of the Army Washington, DC, 2 June 2014 Insurgencies and Countering Insurgencies 1. Change 1 to FM 3-24/MCWP 3-33.5, 13 May 2014, amends text as necessary. 2. A plus sign (+) marks new material. 3. FM 3-24/MCWP 3-33.5, 13 May 2014, is changed as follows: Remove Old Pages Insert New Pages pages 1-13 through 1-14 pages 1-13 through 1-14 pages 2-3 through 2-4 pages 2-3 through 2-4 pages 4-1 through 4-2 pages 4-1 through 4-2 pages 4-5 through 4-6 pages 4-5 through 4-6 pages 4-11 through 4-12 pages 4-11 through 4-12 pages 7-5 through 7-10 pages 7-5 through 7-10 4. File this transmittal sheet in front of the publication for reference purposes.

3-24

FM 3-24/MCWP 3-33.5, C1 2 June 2014 By Order of the Secretary of the Army: RAYMOND T. ODIERNO General, United States Army Chief of Staff Official: GERALD B. O’KEEFE Administrative Assistant to the Secretary of the Army 1414902 BY DIRECTION OF THE COMMANDANT OF THE MARINE CORPS: DISTRIBUTION: Active Army, Army National Guard, and U.S. Army Reserve: To be distributed in accordance with the initial distribution number 121724, requirements for FM 3-24.

3-24

*FM 3-24/MCWP 3-33.5 Field Manual Headquarters Department of the Army No.3-24 Washington, DC Marine Corps Warfighting Publication Headquarters Marine Corps Combat Development Command No. 3-33.5 Department of the Navy Headquarters United States Marine Corps Washington, DC 13 May 2014 Insurgencies and Countering Insurgencies Contents Page PREFACE............................................................................................................... v INTRODUCTION .................................................................................................. vii PART ONE STRATEGIC AND OPERATIONAL CONTEXT Chapter 1 UNDERSTANDING THE STRATEGIC CONTEXT............................................ 1-1 United States’ Strategy and Policy to Counter an Insurgency ........................... 1-4 Land Forces and the Range of Military Operations ............................................ 1-6 Legitimacy and Control ....................................................................................... 1-8 Understanding Unified Action ........................................................................... 1-10 Strategic Principles ........................................................................................... 1-19 Chapter 2 UNDERSTANDING AN OPERATIONAL ENVIRONMENT ............................... 2-1 Demographic and Urbanization Trends .............................................................. 2-1 The Operational Variables .................................................................................. 2-2 The Mission Variables and Civil Considerations .............................................. 2-10 Chapter 3 CULTURE........................................................................................................... 3-1 Understanding Culture ........................................................................................ 3-1 Assessing a Cultural Situation ............................................................................ 3-2 Organizing to Understand Culture ...................................................................... 3-4 Distribution Restriction: Approved for public release; distribution is unlimited. *This publication supersedes FM 3-24/MCWP 3-33.5, dated 15 December 2006. Marine Corps PCN: 143 000124 00

3-24

Contents PART TWO INSURGENCIES Chapter 4 INSURGENCY PREREQUISITES AND FUNDAMENTALS .............................. 4-1 Intrastate War ...................................................................................................... 4-1 Insurgency Prerequisites .................................................................................... 4-3 Insurgency Fundamentals ................................................................................... 4-5 Other Analytical Frameworks ............................................................................ 4-22 Chapter 5 INSURGENCY THREAT CHARACTERISTICS ................................................. 5-1 Disposition and Activities .................................................................................... 5-1 Support Activities ................................................................................................ 5-3 Associated Threats ............................................................................................. 5-5 PART THREE COUNTERINSURGENCIES Chapter 6 MISSION COMMAND AND COMMAND AND CONTROL ................................ 6-1 Command in Counterinsurgency ........................................................................ 6-1 Headquarters Use In Counterinsurgency ........................................................... 6-4 Conventional Forces and Special Operations Forces Synchronization .............. 6-5 Chapter 7 PLANNING FOR COUNTERING INSURGENCIES ........................................... 7-1 Conceptual Planning ........................................................................................... 7-4 Transitions ......................................................................................................... 7-10 Operational Considerations .............................................................................. 7-12 Information Operations ..................................................................................... 7-18 Chapter 8 INTELLIGENCE .................................................................................................. 8-1 Intelligence Fundamentals .................................................................................. 8-2 All-Source Intelligence ........................................................................................ 8-3 Human Intelligence ............................................................................................. 8-4 Chapter 9 DIRECT APPROACHES TO COUNTER AN INSURGENCY ............................ 9-1 Shape-Clear-Hold-Build-Transition Framework .................................................. 9-1 Other Direct Enablers ....................................................................................... 9-11 Chapter 10 INDIRECT METHODS FOR COUNTERING INSURGENCIES........................ 10-1 Nation Assistance and Security Cooperation ................................................... 10-1 Generational Engagement ................................................................................ 10-2 Negotiation and Diplomacy ............................................................................... 10-4 Identify, Separate, Isolate, Influence, and Reintegrate ..................................... 10-6 Other Indirect Enablers ................................................................................... 10-10 Chapter 11 WORKING WITH HOST-NATION FORCES .................................................... 11-1 Assessing and Developing a Host-Nation Force .............................................. 11-2 Relationships ..................................................................................................... 11-6 Security Cooperation Planning ......................................................................... 11-8 Chapter 12 ASSESSMENTS ............................................................................................... 12-1 Assessment Frameworks .................................................................................. 12-1 Assessment Methods ........................................................................................ 12-2 Assessment Considerations ............................................................................. 12-2 Developing Measurement Criteria .................................................................... 12-3

3-24

Contents Chapter 13 LEGAL CONSIDERATIONS ............................................................................ 13-1 Authority to Assist A Foreign Government ....................................................... 13-1 Rules of Engagement ....................................................................................... 13-2 Law of War ....................................................................................................... 13-2 Non-International Armed Conflict ..................................................................... 13-7 Detention and Interrogation .............................................................................. 13-8 Enforcing Discipline of U.S. Forces ................................................................ 13-10 Training and Equipping Foreign Forces ......................................................... 13-11 Commander’s Emergency Response Program .............................................. 13-12 Claims and Solatia .......................................................................................... 13-13 Establishing the Rule of Law .......................................................................... 13-13 SOURCE NOTES .......................................................................... Source Notes-1 GLOSSARY .......................................................................................... Glossary-1 REFERENCES .................................................................................. References-1 INDEX .......................................................................................................... Index-1 Figures Figure 1-1. Country team command relationships ............................................................... 1-17 Figure 4-1. Conflict resolution model ................................................................................... 4-15 Figure 4-2. Organizational elements of an insurgency ......................................................... 4-16 Figure 4-3. Networked insurgencies ..................................................................................... 4-18 Figure 4-4. Examples of dyads ............................................................................................. 4-19 Figure 4-5. Examples of dyad networks ............................................................................... 4-21 Figure 4-6. Example of changes to tactics based on density shift ....................................... 4-22 Figure 7-1. Design concept .................................................................................................... 7-5 Figure 7-2. Sample of individual lines of effort ....................................................................... 7-9 Figure 9-1. The capability spectrum of counterinsurgency conflict ........................................ 9-5 Figure 9-2. Example of a possible transition framework ...................................................... 9-11 Figure 10-1. Generational engagement ............................................................................... 10-2 Figure 10-2. Negotiation and diplomacy ............................................................................... 10-5 Figure 11-1. Host-nation security force meter ...................................................................... 11-5 Figure 11-2. Counterinsurgency command relationships ..................................................... 11-6 Figure 11-3. Country planning .............................................................................................. 11-9 Figure 11-4. Phases of building a host-nation security force ............................................. 11-11 Figure 13-1. Provisions binding high contracting parties ..................................................... 13-8 Tables Table 1-1. Ends, ways, means, and risk in countering an insurgency ................................... 1-5 Table 2-1. Interrelated dimensions of the information environment ....................................... 2-8

3-24

Contents Table 11-1. Developing a host-nation security force ........................................................... 11-1 Table 11-2. Host-nation contributions ................................................................................ 11-13 Table 13-1. Extract of the Detainee Treatment Act of 2005 ................................................ 13-9

3-24

Preface Field Manual (FM) 3-24/ Marine Corps Warfighting Publication (MCWP) 3-33.5 provides doctrine for Army and Marine units that are countering an insurgency. It provides a doctrinal foundation for counterinsurgency. FM 3-24/MCWP 3-33.5 is a guide for units fighting or training for counterinsurgency operations. The principal audience for FM 3-24/MCWP 3-33.5 is battalion, brigade, and regimental commanders and their staffs. Commanders and staffs of Army and Marine Corps headquarters serving as joint task force or multinational headquarters should also refer to applicable joint or multinational doctrine concerning the range of military operations and joint or multinational forces. Trainers and educators throughout the Army and Marine Corps will also use this publication. Commanders, staffs, and subordinates ensure their decisions and actions comply with applicable United States (U.S.), international, and, in some cases, host-nation laws and regulations. Commanders at all levels ensure their Soldiers operate in accordance with the law of war and the rules of engagement. (See FM 27-10.) FM 3-24/MCWP 3-33.5 implements standardization agreement (STANAG) 2611. FM 3-24/MCWP 3-33.5 uses joint terms where applicable. Selected joint, Army, and Marine Corps terms and definitions appear in both the glossary and the text. For terms and their definitions shown in the text, the term is italicized and the number of the proponent publication follows the definition. FM 3-24/MCWP 3-33.5 applies to the United States Marine Corps, the Active Army, Army National Guard/Army National Guard of the United States, and United States Army Reserve unless otherwise stated. The proponent of FM 3-24/MCWP 3-33.5 is the United States Army Combined Arms Center. The preparing agency is the Combined Arms Doctrine Directorate, United States Army Combined Arms Center. Send comments and recommendations on a DA Form 2028 (Recommended Changes to Publications and Blank Forms) to Commander, U.S. Army Combined Arms Center and Fort Leavenworth, ATTN: ATZL-MCK-D (FM 3-24/MCWP 3-33.5), 300 McPherson Avenue, Fort Leavenworth, KS 66027-2337; by e-mail to [email protected]; or submit an electronic DA Form 2028.

3-24

Preface ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS “Al-Sahawa: An Awakening in Al Qaim.” Dr. William Knarr. The Combating Terrorism Exchange Journal. Copyright © 2013. Institute for Defense Analyses. Reproduced with permission of the Institute for Defense Analyses, Alexandria, Virginia. “If a Tactic Works in This Province, it Might Not Work in The Next: The Case of the Dan Aw Patan District, Afghanistan, 2010.” Combat Studies Institute. Unpublished article. 2013. Reproduced with permission of the Combat Studies Institute, Fort Leavenworth, Kansas. “Intelligence and the Shining Path.” Christopher Paul. Unpublished article. 2013. RAND National Defense Research Institute. Reproduced with permission of the RAND Corporation, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania. “Laos, 1959-1975.” Christopher Paul. Paths to Victory: Detailed Insurgency Case Studies. Copyright © 2013. RAND National Defense Research Institute. Reproduced with permission of the RAND Corporation, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania. “Philippines (Huk Rebellion) 1946-1956.” Molly Dunigan. Paths to Victory: Detailed Insurgency Case Studies. Copyright © 2013. RAND National Defense Research Institute. Reproduced with permission of the RAND Corporation, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania. “Regimental Command in Counterinsurgency.” Brigadier General W. Blake Crowe, United States Marine Corps. Counterinsurgency Leadership in Afghanistan, Iraq, and Beyond. 2011. Marine Corps University Press. Reproduced with permission of the Marine Corps University Press, Quantico, Virginia. “Security Cooperation in El Salvador.” Christopher Paul. Unpublished article. 2013. RAND National Defense Research Institute. Reproduced with permission of the RAND Corporation, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania. “South Vietnam, 1960-1975” Christopher Paul. Paths to Victory: Detailed Insurgency Case Studies. Copyright © 2013. RAND National Defense Research Institute. Reproduced with permission of the RAND Corporation, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania. “Sri Lanka, 1976-2009.” Colin P. Clarke. Paths to Victory: Detailed Insurgency Case Studies. Copyright © 2013. RAND National Defense Research Institute. Reproduced with permission of the RAND Corporation, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania.

3-24

Introduction The 2006 version of FM 3-24/ MCWP 3-33.5, Counterinsurgency, filled an important doctrinal gap at a time when U.S. forces were engaged in counterinsurgency operations. This version of FM 3-24/MCWP 3-33.5 builds on that important manual. This field manual provides doctrine that frames counterinsurgency within the context of the range of military operations and provides a framework for the different ways land forces could counter an insurgency. Understanding insurgencies and the operational environment in which they exist, the ways in which the U.S. will attempt to counter insurgencies, and how commanders synchronize their efforts to achieve end states is at the core of what this manual provides to both the Army and the Marine Corps. This version is organized differently than the 2006 version. The new title, Insurgencies and Countering Insurgencies, provides insight into the thinking behind the organization. Overall, FM 3-24/MCWP 3-33.5 is divided into three parts. Part one provides strategic and operational context, part two provides the doctrine for understanding insurgencies, and part three provides doctrine for defeating an insurgency. In short, FM 3-24/MCWP 3-33.5 is organized to provide the context of a problem, the problem, and possible solutions. Part one, the “Strategic and Operational Context,” provides a framework for understanding the environment where a counterinsurgency exists. Part one consists of chapters one through three. Part two, “Insurgencies,” provides a doctrinal framework for understanding an insurgency. Part two consists of chapters four and five. Part three, “Counterinsurgencies,” describes how to plan and execute operations to enable a host nation to defeat an insurgency. Chapter 1, “Understanding the Strategic Context,” answers the questions of how and why U.S. forces might get involved in a counterinsurgency. Chapter 1 highlights that there are many different ways U.S. forces could counter an insurgency and that there are a range of various contexts in which an insurgency can occur. Commanders and staffs must understand the conditions in which an insurgency occurs and the overall strategy for countering that insurgency so they can effectively support it. Chapter 2, “Understanding an Operational Environment,” provides context for an operational environment where an insurgency might be occurring. Chapter 3, “Culture,” describes the role of culture in counterinsurgency operations. Understanding culture is essential in any effort to support a counterinsurgency effort. Culture is of unique importance in understanding an operational environment. Chapter 4, “Insurgency Prerequisites and Fundamentals,” provides doctrine for understanding the prerequisites of an insurgency and the root causes that allow an insurgency to keep and gain legitimacy. It than provides a framework for understanding the strategic decisions an insurgency might make and eight dynamics for analyzing any particular insurgency. Chapter 5, “Insurgency Threat Characteristics,” provides doctrine for understanding the threat characteristics of an insurgency. Chapter 6, “Command and Control and Mission Command,” provides doctrine for executing command and control under the philosophy of mission command. In a counterinsurgency effort, many units may perform many different tasks in decentralized operations. Understanding decentralized operations and ensuring these units are meeting the overall commander’s intent is essential for successful counterinsurgency operations. Chapter 7, “Planning and Operational Considerations,” provides guidance on how commanders and staffs can work from conceptual planning to detailed planning in counterinsurgency operations. It also provides

3-24

Introduction important operational considerations, such as attack the network, that are essential in counterinsurgency operations. Chapter 8, “Intelligence,” provides considerations for intelligence in counterinsurgency. Because understanding the environment is essential in counterinsurgency, intelligence facilities successful operations. Chapter 9, “Direct Approaches to Counter an Insurgency,” provides guidance on how the Army and the Marine Corps directly counter an insurgency at the operational and tactical level. The operational philosophy behind the direct approach is shape-clear-hold-build-transition. If tactical units are directly interfacing with a society, they will perform shape-clear-hold-build-transition. In addition to guiding U.S. forces’ actions, shape-clear-hold-build-transition also provides a framework for understanding host-nation actions. If U.S. forces have to be the primary counterinsurgency force until the host nation can deploy its forces, shape-clear-hold-build-transition provides an effective operational approach. Chapter 10, “Indirect Methods for Countering Insurgencies,” provides a framework for working with and through a host nation. While the U.S. may provide the primary counterinsurgent forces, it may also work indirectly through the host nation. There are also important indirect enablers. Chapter 11, “Working with Host-Nation Forces,” provides a foundation for understanding how security cooperation efforts are integrated into a counterinsurgency effort. Whether U.S. forces are, for a time, the primary counterinsurgent forces or they are working indirectly through a host nation, enabling the host nation through security cooperation activities is essential. Chapter 12, “Assessments,” provides doctrine for understanding how a counterinsurgency environment changes and determining if counterinsurgent actions are having an effect on achieving the desired end state. Continued assessments are fundamental to understanding how an environment is evolving and reframing the basic problems commanders and staffs are facing. Chapter 13, “Legal Considerations” provides some legal considerations that are important for commanders and staffs to consider in all counterinsurgency operations. FM 3-24/MCWP 3-33.5 provides doctrine on how to understand a counterinsurgency environment, determine the counterinsurgency problem, and plan and execute operations in that environment. It provides guidance to commanders and staffs facing the unique challenges of countering an insurgency. This field manual is one manual in a larger doctrinal library that commanders and staffs need to understand in order to be effective in countering an insurgency. Any effort to counter an insurgency must be built on broad professional competence. The Army uses the term intelligence preparation of the battlefield while the Marine Corps uses the term intelligence preparation of the battlespace. Both Services use the same definition for these terms. This manual uses the term intelligence preparation of the battlefield/battlespace to align with FM 2-01.3/MCRP 2-3A.

3-24

PART ONE Strategic and Operational Context When the United States (U.S.) conducts or supports counterinsurgency operations, it does so in a unique strategic and operational environment. While this is true for all operations, this is of particular importance when the U.S. is countering an insurgency. Tactical actions often have strategic effects in a counterinsurgency. This makes it essential to understand both the strategic and operational context when countering an insurgency. In this manual, part one provides an overview for commanders and staff to understand the environment and context of an insurgency and the decision to counter that insurgency. Chapter 1 provides the strategic context of a counterinsurgency. When the U.S. becomes involved in a counterinsurgency, policy and strategic decisions affect operations. Chapter 2 provides an overview of an operational environment and operational variables. In a counterinsurgency, there are unique considerations that operators and planners consider. Of particular importance in a counterinsurgency is culture. Chapter 3 provides an in-depth overview of culture and its relationship to counterinsurgency. Chapter 1 Understanding the Strategic Context 1-1. Any decision by the President to commit United States (U.S.) forces must be understood within the larger sphere of U.S. policy. Soldiers and Marines must first understand the strategic context that the U.S. is acting in to best plan, prepare, conduct, and assess a counterinsurgency operation to protect national interests. Countering an insurgency should incorporate previous or continuing security cooperation efforts and other activities, U.S. and host-nation objectives, and U.S. and host-nation whole-of-government efforts to address the root causes of the conflict. (For more information on root causes, see paragraphs 4-14 through 4-22.) Despite its irregular nature and generally less intense level of combat, counterinsurgency may be just as critical to U.S. vital interests as conventional warfare. 1-2. Irregular warfare is a violent struggle among state and non-state actors for legitimacy and influence over the relevant population(s) (JP 1). Irregular warfare favors indirect approaches, though it may employ the full range of military and other capacities in order to erode an adversary’s power, influence, and will. Because of its irregular nature, U.S. involvement in a counterinsurgency demands a whole-of-government approach. Defeating an insurgency requires a blend of both civilian and military efforts that address both assisting the host-nation government in defeating the insurgents on the battlefield and enabling the host nation in addressing the root causes of the insurgency. Moreover, after large scale combat or in an ungoverned space, there may not be a functioning host-nation government. In those cases, U.S. forces must work with population groups in the area and enable them to build governmental capacity. In either case, U.S. civilian and military participants in counterinsurgency cannot compensate for lack of will, acceptance of corruption, or counterproductive behavior on the part of the supported government or the population. 1-3. Insurgency in the most basic form is a struggle for control and influence, generally from a position of relative weakness, outside existing state institutions. Insurgencies can exist apart from or before, during, or after a conventional conflict. Elements of a population often grow dissatisfied with the status quo. When a

3-24

Chapter 1 population or groups in a population are willing to fight to change the conditions to their favor, using both violent and nonviolent means to affect a change in the prevailing authority, they often initiate an insurgency. An insurgency is the organized use of subversion and violence to seize, nullify, or challenge political control of a region. Insurgency can also refer to the group itself (JP 3-24). Counterinsurgency is comprehensive civilian and military efforts designed to simultaneously defeat and contain insurgency and address its root causes (JP 3-24). Warfare remains a clash of interests and will between organized groups characterized by the use of force. In conventional warfare, there are clear determinants of victory. However, achieving victory for an insurgent may depend less on defeating an armed opponent and more on a group’s ability to garner support for its political interests (often ideologically based) and to generate enough violence to achieve political consequences. 1-4. Counterinsurgency is not a substitute for strategy. When counterinsurgents attempt to defeat an insurgency, they perform a range of diverse methods intended to counter an insurgency. Commanders must effectively arrange these diverse methods in time and space to accomplish strategic objectives. The U.S. can use a range of methods to aid a host nation or group in defeating an insurgency. The various combinations of these methods with different levels of resourcing provide the U.S. with a wide range of strategic options to defeat an insurgency. The strategy to counter an insurgency is determined by the ends the U.S. wishes to achieve, the ways it wishes to achieve those ends, and the resources or means it uses to enable those ways. (See paragraphs 1-10 through 1-13 for more information on strategy.) 1-5. There is a spectrum of involvement in countering an insurgency. The U.S. could enable a host nation by not providing forces that are directly involved in securing the population or attacking the insurgents. For example, the U.S. could provide training or intelligence support to a host nation. Moreover, even if the U.S. is directly involved in defeating the insurgency, its primary role can be only to enable a host nation. A host nation may be capable of providing civil control and security. The U.S. commander can integrate a force into the host-nation’s efforts that provides a force to perform direct action or fires provided by airpower or field artillery. U.S. involvement can range from a modest and supporting commitment to a major ground force commitment that may, for a time, take the role of primary counterinsurgent force while host-nation forces become better able to take on that role themselves. 1-6. Ideally, the host nation is the primary actor in defeating an insurgency. Even in an insurgency that occurs in a country with a nonfunctioning central government or after a major conflict, the host nation must eventually provide a solution that is culturally acceptable to its society and meets U.S. policy goals. The conclusion of any counterinsurgency effort is primarily dependent on the host nation and the people who reside in that nation. Ultimately, every society has to provide solutions to its own problems. As such, one of the Army and Marine Corps’ primary roles in counterinsurgency is to enable the host nation. 1-7. A counterinsurgency can occur as part of a major combat operation, but it often occurs without a major conflict. For example, an external threat may sponsor an insurgency, and this could be part of an effort to attain other strategic objectives. As such, the objectives of a counterinsurgency must be contextual to that insurgency. Creating objectives that are relevant to a particular insurgency is essential to defeating that insurgency. Effective counterinsurgency requires clearly defined and obtainable objectives that result in an end state acceptable to the host-nation government, the populace, and the governments providing forces. When the U.S. directly involves itself in a counterinsurgency, stability may be essential. Although all tasks executed to establish the conditions to reach a desired end state are significant, stability operations may be critical in a counterinsurgency. (The Army understands all operations are made up of offensive, defensive, and stability tasks. See ADRP 3-07 and FM 3-07 for more information on operations focused on stability.) 1-8. The military role should be coordinated with the other instruments of national power that include diplomatic, informational, and economic parts. The Army and Marine Corps are only part of the instruments of national power that the U.S. can use to counter an insurgency. At times, they may be used in a supporting role. For example, Soldiers and Marines may be withdrawn from active counterinsurgency efforts while the U.S. uses other instruments of national power as the primary enablers of a host nation. In such cases, the Army and Marine Corps may play a supporting role by performing security cooperation tasks. 1-9. The Laos insurgency highlights the unique nature of an insurgency. This insurgency took place in the context of Vietnam. Here, internal groups with various interests and outside groups from North Vietnam

3-24

Understanding the Strategic Context and the U.S. created a unique context for the Laos insurgency. Moreover, the corrupt and ineffective host government was not able to wage its own counterinsurgency campaign effectively. To effectively counter the insurgency in Laos, the U.S. needed an operational approach that would work in that environment, if a successful operational approach were possible. Unfortunately, U.S. forces failed to create an effective strategy to counter the insurgency in Laos. Thus, the U.S. government failed to find the needed ways and means to meet the policy goal. The Laos Insurgency Lamented as “the forgotten war,” the insurgency in Laos was heavily influenced (and often overshadowed) by the conflict in neighboring Vietnam. A victim of geography, half-hearted fighting between the different factions in Laos may well have worked itself out in a lasting compromise if not for pressure from North Vietnamese communists to control areas of Laos for the infiltration of men and materiel into South Vietnam (along the Ho Chi Min trail) and U.S. efforts to oppose communist presence and influence. Beginning in earnest in 1959, fighting pitted variously rightist Royal Lao forces supported by Hmong guerillas against the leftist Pathet Lao (indigenous communists) and their North Vietnamese supporters. These participants were at times joined by other players, including U.S. advisors, Filipino troops, U.S. air power, Thai commandos and artillery formations, as well as “neutralist” Lao forces. During the period of conflict, Laos was underdeveloped in every way, including its government, its economy, and its military. The government and military were corrupt and ineffective and the economy was wholly dependent on outside support. As the United States became more invested in Vietnam, it also increased support to Laos; by the end of 1955, the U.S. provided 100% of the Lao military budget. North Vietnamese backers of the Pathet Lao sought to grow that force, supporting a significant recruiting campaign and sending many of the recruits to North Vietnam for schooling and training. This led to greater investment by the U.S. in materiel and training for government forces, and included, beginning in 1957, efforts to arm Hmong guerillas, who would play an important role later in the conflict. Vietnamese interest in Laos was primarily in securing the so called “panhandle” region, through which the Ho Chi Min trail allowed the North Vietnamese to infiltrate men and materiel into South Vietnam. A secondary consideration was the support of a fellow communist movement (the Pathet Lao). Once fighting began in 1959, the Vietnamese used government chaos to their benefit, increasing attacks on government forces and expanding the territory under their influence or control. During this period, many attacks took the form of North Vietnamese Army regulars attacking and overwhelming a position, and then letting their Pathet Lao allies occupy the area and claim the victory, thus at least paying lip service to maintaining the neutralization of Laos. These North Vietnamese Army-led attacks and several attempted counterattacks by Royal Laotian Forces against Pathet Lao positions revealed the gross incompetence of the government’s regular forces. This lack of capability stemmed from several sources, including a half-hearted martial tradition in general, a preoccupation with profiteering and political games by the senior leadership, lack of efforts by the French who were responsible for their training until late 1958, and a fundamental lack of motivation. Despite the vigorous efforts of U.S. trainers and millions of dollars in materiel throughout the course of the conflict, Royal Lao Forces would never become a consequential fighting force. In this phase, the only effective forces on the government side were the Hmong tribesmen, trained and provisioned by the Central Intelligence Agency and fighting as guerillas. International pressure (from the United States as well as from China and Russia preferring to avoid unnecessarily provoking the United States) and support (from the United States and other allies) prevented the complete collapse of the government of Laos in 1962 and pushed for neutralization through a coalition

3-24

Chapter 1 government. The North Vietnamese were content to allow negotiations to take place, as they had succeeded in securing what they needed: the Ho Chi Min trail. After months of wrangling, 1962 finally saw another Geneva agreement, this time for a neutralized Laos with a coalition government representing the three major factions: the rightists, the leftists, and the neutralists. Part of the neutralization agreement included the removal of foreign forces from Laos. While U.S. and allied personnel who had been fighting on the side of the Royal Lao Government were withdrawn from the country, very few of the substantial number of North Vietnamese Army forces withdrew. Nor did the Central Intelligence Agency cease its work with the Hmong. The new coalition government proved shaky. Turmoil again rocked the Lao government with continued political maneuvering by greedy generals and a string of coups. Military region commanders ran their zones like private fiefdoms, rarely dispatching their troops outside the Mekong River valley. A series of spectacular failures by the Royal Lao forces all but ensured those forces would never seek to take the initiative and act in other than a strictly defensive capacity again. Between 1964 and 1968, the conflict was primarily between the U.S.-supported paramilitaries (backed by U.S. airpower), and the Pathet Lao. The cycle of dry season and wet season, each favoring one side or the other, saw very modest back and forth movement between the two primarily irregular forces, with little change from year to year. That all changed in 1969. The communist dry season offensive of 1968 did not end with the onset of the rainy season, and gains were substantial. In early 1970, the communists seized a provincial capital for the first time, and later that year they seized another. In the now traditional way, Hmong guerillas counterattacked. However, after nearly a decade of war, the Central Intelligence Agency’s secret army was nearly fought out. Fighting against superior numbers of regular troops, the Hmong became more and more reliant on U.S. airpower and on support from Thai artillery. Bombing in southern Laos expanded such that by 1971, it was more extensive than bombing in South Vietnam and Cambodia combined. The communist dry season offensive that started in December of 1971 brought extraordinary pressure on the government. For the first time, North Vietnamese Army forces used significant armor, as well as large tube artillery. The Hmong were battered and quickly thrown back. After another year of significant communist gains, the Lao government and its international supporters once again sought a ceasefire. By the time of the 1973 ceasefire and neutralization, the government of Laos controlled little more than the capital and the Mekong river valley, and that only by virtue of the Hmong and U.S. airpower. With the withdrawal of U.S. support (both airpower and funding) in 1973, the Hmong were demobilized and the Lao government was left to its fate, which was to fall relatively quickly to the communists. UNITED STATES’ STRATEGY AND POLICY TO COUNTER AN INSURGENCY 1-10. When and how the U.S. government provides assistance to other states to counter an insurgency is a question of policy and strategy. Commanders and staffs should understand that the U.S. can respond with a range of measures, many of which do not directly involve U.S. forces securing the population or performing offensive operations, in a counterinsurgency. This manual provides the reader with information on how counterinsurgents may organize tactical tasks in time and space to reach an end state. It cannot and should not be the only reference to conduct counterinsurgency operations for someone who wishes to fully understand the policy tools available to the U.S. to aid a host nation in fighting a counterinsurgency. (See JP 3-24, Allied Joint Publication 3.4.4, and the U.S. Government Guide to Counterinsurgency for more information on counterinsurgency policy tools.)

3-24

Understanding the Strategic Context 1-11. Effective counterinsurgency operations require an understanding of the military profession. The tasks counterinsurgents perform in countering an insurgency are not unique. It is the organization of these tasks in time and space that is unique. For example, geographic combatant commanders employ theater strategy to align and shape efforts, resources, and tasks to support strategic goals and prepare for conflict and contingencies in their region. In support of this goal, theater strategies normally emphasize security cooperation activities, building partner capacity and force posture, and preparing for contingencies and other tasks those are not unique to counterinsurgency operations. For example, a unit can perform security cooperation tasks in support or not in support of countering an insurgency. (See FM 3-22 for more information on security cooperation tasks.) Those units that carry out security cooperation tasks to support a counterinsurgency should understand security cooperation and the tasks they are performing and teaching. Moreover, they should understand how these tasks are used in defeating an insurgency. Soldiers and Marines must start from a foundation of professional knowledge and competence to have a framework for understanding and aiding a host nation in defeating an insurgency. Whether a unit is directly performing the tasks to defeat an insurgency or indirectly supporting a host nation, this manual provides a doctrinal framework for counterinsurgency operations. However, to be effective, Soldiers and Marines must be professionally competent. This is the foundation in understanding another nation’s or group’s actions to defeat an insurgency and in providing aid to that nation or group. (See ADRP 1 for more information on professional competence.) 1-12. Political leaders and commanders must have a dialogue to decide the optimal strategy to meet the security needs of the U.S and states or groups the U.S. supports. Different capabilities provide different choices that offer different costs and risks. U.S. strategy is defined by how it combines these capabilities (the ways), resources them (the means), and its willingness to accept risk in attaining its policy goals. Commanders inform political leaders about the prospects for victory and the different costs and risks of various options, and political leaders weigh these costs and risks against their importance to U.S. national interests. Once U.S. policymakers have determined the goals (the ends) of the U.S., the military evaluates operational approaches to conduct counterinsurgency efforts depending on the ends, ways, means, and acceptable risk. The joint force provides a range of capabilities that it integrates into the overall strategy. For example, in a functioning state that is facing an insurgency, the joint force may employ a range of security cooperation tools. Moreover, other tools fall outside of security cooperation, such as direct action and counter threat financing, that the U.S. can integrate into the mix of ways that it will use to defeat or contain an insurgency. The U.S. government integrates the various instruments of national power to create a range of strategic options, of which military involvement is only one part. (For a further discussion on strategy, see MCDP 1-1.) (See table 1-1.) Table 1-1. Ends, ways, means, and risk in countering an insurgency Ends Ways Means Risk Defeat or contain an Direct methods Unified action Determined by a insurgency. (See chapter 9.) • Military force. mismatch in the • Other ends, ways, and Support strategic goals Indirect methods governmental means. capabilities and end state defined by (See chapter 10.) policy makers. 1-13. An operational approach is a description of the broad actions the force must take to transform current conditions into those desired at end state (JP 3-0). The commander may use direct or indirect approaches to counter threats. Commanders may find their operational approach is mainly direct, indirect, or a mixture of both. The approach is the manner in which a commander contends with a center of gravity. A direct approach attacks the enemy’s center of gravity or principal strength by applying combat power directly against it. An indirect approach attacks the enemy’s center of gravity by applying combat power against a series of decisive points that lead to the defeat of the center of gravity while avoiding the enemy strength. Commanders may use a single direct or indirect approach or, more likely, may employ a combination of approaches to counter an insurgency and its influence. Additionally, the emphasis on or combination of approaches may have to evolve as the security situation and insurgent networks evolve. The commander’s intent and the approach(es) the commander selects will drive the methods used by counterinsurgents. These methods may be direct or indirect. Approaches and methods must be nested and

3-24

Chapter 1 clearly linked, since they often involve support from diplomatic, economic, and informational efforts by non-military forces. (See chapter 9 for more information on direct methods and chapter 10 for more information on indirect methods. See JP 5-0 for more information on direct and indirect approaches.) LAND FORCES AND THE RANGE OF MILITARY OPERATIONS 1-14. The U.S. Army and Marine Corps can prevent or defeat an insurgency across the range of military operations. This is true if an insurgency starts in the context of a major combat operation or if it starts during peace. Across the range of military operations and in accordance with U.S. strategy, U.S. land forces take actions and set priorities to shape an environment to reduce the possibility of insurgencies. In some instances an operational environment and its related variables are unstable or fragile and hostile actions against a host-nation government begin. In this environment, the U.S. may make a decision to use some type of military capability. Commanders must understand the effects that the actions and priorities of the U.S. force have on an operational environment. When acting in this environment, commanders must have situational understanding of the environment and the effects of U.S. actions in that environment. This influences how the commander attempts to shape the environment. An insurgency can also occur in the context of another conflict. For example, during major combat operations, land forces must take actions to prevent insurgencies from occurring during operations and once the opposing conventional force is defeated. While an insurgency is only a possibility in a major combat operation, it could occur during major operations or afterwards. Commanders and staffs must assess the possibility of an insurgency in any operational environment and take actions to prevent one from occurring. These actions can include a range of stability operations and security cooperation activities. (See ADRP 3-07 for more information on stability operations and FM 3-22 for more information on security cooperation.) 1-15. The circumstances of U.S. involvement in a counterinsurgency are important in understanding the operational and tactical actions of U.S. forces. The type and scale of involvement, whether the Army and Marine Corps are involved temporarily as the primary counterinsurgent forces or are providing modest indirect and direct support to a counterinsurgency effort, will be determined by the circumstances of U.S. involvement. U.S. forces participate at the direction of the President, based on national security interests. One example circumstance is the collapse of a fragile state in a geographically strategic area. Even if U.S. land forces are not in place when the government collapses, the President may deploy land forces to counter an insurgency and restore stability. The use of indirect capabilities in a failed state is complex because the commander often has to work with groups outside of the legitimately constituted government. Building capacity and enabling existing capabilities is difficult when a state lacks functional institutions. Because these areas lack state institutions to provide various governmental functions to include security forces, large scale direct involvement is often resource intensive. The U.S. can use smaller direct capabilities to support groups outside the legitimately constituted government, but this also adds to uncertainty and strategic risk. 1-16. U.S. forces can participate at the request of a government that seeks to counter an insurgency in its country with assistance from the U.S. When a requesting government is capable and functioning, the U.S. can offer a wide range of capabilities. Having a capable government changes the relationship between ends, ways, and means. A capable government could require fewer resources to intervene, or it could only require indirect and direct enablers in order to be successful. However, as with any involvement to counter an insurgency, often unforeseen risks could lead to greater U.S. involvement. 1-17. U.S. involvement can also occur in a country where there are ongoing security cooperation activities. If the U.S. is performing security cooperation activities in a country and an insurgency develops, continued security cooperation efforts could result in U.S. involvement in a host nation’s counterinsurgency efforts. Efforts to train and equip host-nation forces will likely be seen as U.S. involvement by both the insurgents and the international community. Moreover, U.S. forces could also transition to direct involvement in an insurgency. Whatever the degree of involvement, a clear policy decision should be made to include the development of a national strategy. 1-18. Insurgencies could also be part of large scale combat or fueled by a regional or global adversary. In a protracted large scale operation, an insurgency often develops in controlled areas with populations sympathetic to the enemy. As such, planning for prevention of an insurgency and integrating stability operations into a prolonged operation is essential. If an insurgency develops, it will require resources to

3-24

Understanding the Strategic Context defeat the insurgents. This will reduce the resources available to defeat the enemy in large-scale combat. In addition, an adversary can fuel an insurgency in a host nation to undermine U.S. interests. In this case, the insurgency is part of an adversary’s overall strategy and policy. (See FM 3-05, chapter 2, for more information on unconventional warfare. It provides a U.S. perspective on enabling an insurgency.) 1-19. An insurgency can also occur at the conclusion of a large scale combat operation when an organized movement seeks to challenge the authority of the U.S. and its partners. The organized movement may be remnants of the defeated force or an opportunistic movement that seeks to obtain power using a political-military challenge to the existing authority. In either case, U.S. land forces, along with other unified action partners, must be prepared at all stages of conventional warfare to assess the capability of an insurgency occurring either during the conflict or after hostilities cease. Soldiers and Marines must also recognize that the presence of U.S. forces in the region can lead to the conditions for an insurgency. U.S. land forces can help to prevent an insurgency from occurring in the manner in which they conduct conventional warfare and in the conduct of post-conflict operations. Should prevention fail, U.S. forces will be exponentially more successful in countering an insurgency if they shape the environment during and immediately following conventional warfare for an effective transition to counterinsurgency. 1-20. In the military operations, U.S. forces can prevent an insurgency from occurring in large scale combat operations by integrating stability operations. If an insurgency does begin, U.S. forces can shape its formation and make it easier to defeat. U.S. land forces can also prevent an insurgency from occurring in peacetime through security cooperation activities and other capabilities that support the host nation or other groups. If there is an insurgency, the U.S. can integrate a number of capabilities into an overall operational approach to defeat that insurgency. 1-21. From the U.S. land forces’ perspective, insurgencies range along a spectrum depending on the scale of effort and resources the Army and Marine Corps must take to counter them. In a worst-case scenario, an extremely capable insurgency that has a significant impact on the population exists in a failed state region in which there is little or no host-nation government capability. The U.S. may have to commit significant combat power to offset the momentum of the insurgency. While the U.S. can avoid using land forces in direct combat, the use of other capabilities will often support groups that are not the recognized government. In such cases, the U.S. would be enabling one group to gain control over the state. For example, the U.S. could equip groups within a state and empower them to take control over an area. While the initial cost may be lower, this course of action is fraught with possible unintended consequences. The group that counterinsurgents enable, which is essentially another insurgency, may act in ways that are counter to U.S. interests once it gains control of the area. On the other hand, direct involvement could be extremely costly and provoke a wider conflict. If the U.S. operates in a failed state to defeat an insurgency, it must create a policy and strategy that matches its goals and the resources that it is willing to spend. Moreover, it must be willing to accept a large degree of uncertainty and strategic risk. 1-22. The best-case scenario is when the host nation has the capability to defeat an insurgency and the U.S. plays only a supporting role in enabling the insurgencies’ defeat with equipment, training, or intelligence. A middle case occurs when a functional state has an insurgency in a remote area where the host-nation government cannot exert complete control. The existing insurgency is not a challenge to the continued authority of the host-nation government, but it may seek to gain control of a specific region or area. This type of scenario can require much fewer resources for U.S. land forces to counter the insurgency than the worst-case scenario. Since the capacity of the host-nation security forces exists to contain the insurgency to a specific region or area, the U.S. can integrate a number of capabilities into the host government’s efforts to increase the effectiveness and capabilities of the host nation. While every insurgency is unique, this basic framework offers the U.S. the opportunity to achieve policy goals while spending fewer resources and offering less uncertainty and risk. However, as with any conflict, unintended consequences can change the insurgency and increase the cost and uncertainty of U.S. involvement. 1-23. In all cases, specific national policies govern U.S. land forces’ actions to counter an insurgency. An insurgency’s goals and actions are influenced by the conditions the insurgency develops in. An insurgency’s objectives are not exclusive to the condition of the state, but each can occur anywhere along the range of state conditions. However, the operational environment an insurgency develops in will affect how it understands its goals and will affect its actions (See chapter 2 for more information on an

3-24

Chapter 1 operational environment and section II for more information on understanding the actions of an insurgency). 1-24. There may be multiple insurgencies in an operational environment. A networked insurgency may have conflicting goals within its organization and its actions are not controlled by a command structure. These insurgencies can have links to other insurgencies or criminal organizations. Networked insurgencies might divide or combine with groups. In such cases it is difficult to analyze an insurgency or insurgencies if they are treated as monolithic actors. Instead, counterinsurgents must understand the dynamics within the insurgency or multiple insurgencies. (See paragraphs 4-88 through 4-103 for more information on networked insurgencies.) 1-25. Victory in a counterinsurgency may not be as clear as winning in a conventional conflict. U.S. national ends determine the criteria for success, regardless of how the U.S. land force is deployed to conduct counterinsurgency operations. As it applies to U.S. national objectives, success in an insurgency often depends on developing host-nation capacity to contain, reduce, and defeat the insurgency without requiring direct U.S. involvement. In a counterinsurgency, the host nation often determines the criteria for success. U.S. counterinsurgents should avoid judging host-nation criteria based on their own cultural expectations. Achieving success may depend less on defeating the armed element of the insurgency and more on the ability to legitimize host-nation institutions to the populace. Short and mid-term success in counterinsurgency may be developing a host-nation government that has sufficient capability to secure itself and address an insurgency on its own. This success allows the U.S. to continue to support the host nation through a long-term relationship that addresses that nation’s legitimacy. Success includes enabling the development of resiliency within the host-nation population and host-nation institutions to sustain the ability to counter the insurgency in the future and prevent the conditions in the area from allowing an insurgency to gain strength. Achieving the conditions for success may require a mix of application of force, information operations, cultural acceptance, and building capacity and competency within host-nation institutions. Counterinsurgents may either persuade the people to support the government or dissuade them from supporting the insurgents. What capabilities the U.S. uses to counter an insurgency is dependent on the context of that insurgency and U.S. national interests. 1-26. U.S. forces should expect that the host-nation government will have its own interests that may not coincide with U.S. national interests. It may not be willing to undertake the political changes necessary to address the root causes of the insurgency. The commitment of U.S. forces may depend upon the degree to which U.S. policy makers consider the affected government to be receptive to assistance, advice, and reform. How Soldiers and Marines are employed will also require a clear determination by national decisionmakers as to what post-conflict commitments by military and civilian organizations will be required. Outside counterinsurgents, however, can never fully compensate for lack of will, incapacity, or counterproductive behavior on the part of the supported government. If a government is unambiguously committed to the defeat of insurgency, it is more likely to defeat it, regardless of the actions (or commitment level) of an outside supporter. LEGITIMACY AND CONTROL 1-27. Legitimacy, the acceptance of an authority by a society, and control are the central issues in insurgencies and counterinsurgencies. This is true however the U.S. enables a host nation to defeat an insurgency. The population of a particular society determines who has legitimacy to establish the rules and the government for that society. A population’s values and cultural norms will determine who that society perceives as a legitimate authority. Both the insurgency and the host nation attempt to control the population by some mixture of consent and coercion. Insurgents use all available tools, including political (diplomatic), informational (including appeals to religious, ethnic, historical, national, class, political, tribal or ideological beliefs), and social, military, and economic tools to overthrow or undermine an existing authority. Likewise, the host nation will use all available tools to maintain acceptance of its authority. This authority may be an established government or an interim governing body. It may be a generally accepted social order. Control of a population, however, may not be the end state desired by an insurgent. A criminal enterprise might seek to undermine existing political power in order to enable it to continue its criminal activities or insurgents could seek political power in order to impose an ideological (or religious) system on an unwilling population. In counterinsurgencies, if the affected government wants to end the insurgency, it

3-24

Understanding the Strategic Context should use all instruments of its national power to prove its legitimacy, to defeat the insurgency, and to reduce the likelihood of another crisis emerging. 1-28. Legitimacy is essential to understanding the political variable in an insurgency. Who a population accepts as legitimate is dependent on the norms and values within that particular population. Legitimacy can change as a society evolves and groups or individuals change their conceptualization of who they are and what authority they accept. Sometimes large changes, such as the American War of Independence or the unification of Germany in 1871, create a change in group identity and accepted authority. Sometimes group identity changes by slow evolution, as is the case with the European Union. However, at the core, who a group accepts as providing legitimate authority to govern their actions is that group’s legitimate authority. (See paragraphs 2-16 through 2-19 for information on the political variable.) 1-29. Legitimacy provides willing acceptance of authority and thus requires fewer resources to enforce its authority than illegitimacy. Most populations are controlled through a combination of consent and coercion. The host-nation government generally needs some level of legitimacy among the population in order to retain power. This provides some level of consent. Legitimacy is an indicator of the extent to which systems of authority, decisions, and conduct are accepted by the local population. Political legitimacy of a government determines the degree to which the population will voluntarily or passively comply with the decisions and rules issued by a governing authority. Legitimacy determines the transaction costs of political and governmental power. Low legitimacy may breed contempt on the part of the population and may require extensive prodding and incentives by the government to secure compliance of the population; high legitimacy generally invites compliance by the population and therefore requires less effort by the government to ensure compliance. An illegitimate government’s only method of controlling its population is coercion, which can be resource intensive. A legitimate government has to use coercion for policing power, but its population, in general, sees the rules and directions of its government as intrinsically correct. A population will follow a legitimate government’s rules and norms passively, and those who break those rules or norms are disapproved of by the society. Who the population sees as a legitimate authority is a central issue of a counterinsurgency. 1-30. All population groups are controlled by some combination of consent and coercion. Some governments may use a range of coercive methods to control the population. Coercive methods can damage legitimacy if the methods cannot be justified under the values and norms of the population. However, counterinsurgents should not think of coercion and consent as counter forces to one another. If coercive acts by the government or insurgency are justifiable under the norms and values of the population, those acts do not necessarily undermine the legitimacy of the government or host nation. Acts by both the government and the insurgency must be viewed from the perspective of the population experiencing those acts and not from an outside perspective that will bring its own bias to viewing actions of the host government or insurgency. 1-31. The struggle for legitimacy with the population is typically a central issue of an insurgency. The insurgency will attack the legitimacy of the host-nation government while attempting to develop its own credibility with the population. The host-nation government should reduce the credibility of the insurgency while strengthening its own legitimacy. A government that is seen as legitimate magnifies the resources and capabilities needed to defeat an insurgency and allows the host nation to concentrate finite resources on targeting the insurgency. However, legitimacy is a condition perceived by the population. Who the population sees as legitimate will be determined by that population’s norms and values. For example, if a population does not see outside forces as legitimate, this can undermine the legitimacy of the host-nation government trying to counter an insurgency. 1-32. The legitimacy of the host-nation government is achieved because the population accepts its authority and how it governs can be justified in terms of the population’s beliefs. It is not enough for the host-nation government to be simply seen as effective and credible. The governmental structure must be justifiable to the population and that justification must be based on the population’s norms and values. In some situations, providing effective governance may be essential to establish legitimacy among the population. However, this is not a uniform rule. The key is that legitimacy is ultimately decided in the minds of the population. Counterinsurgents must understand how the population will perceive a government. A host nation that is less efficient but perceived as legitimate by the population will be more

3-24

Chapter 1 effective than an efficient host-nation government that cannot be justified by the values and norms of the population. 1-33. Even if a population does not see an insurgency or a government as legitimate, control can be established effectively by coercion. Many states and insurgencies have used domestic intelligence apparatus or other means to control every aspect of their populations. Illegitimate governments often use distrust and divisions within a population to effectively control a society. Moreover, a population is not monolithic. It is made up of many groups and subgroups. In many autocratic regimes, various groups within a population have a vested interest in continuing the current government, even if it is repressive. Likewise, an insurgency might receive support from elements within the population, even if it is repressive and uses coercive methods. Legitimacy must be seen from the different perspectives of the different groups within a society. UNDERSTANDING UNIFIED ACTION 1-34. Once the U.S. decides to become involved in a counterinsurgency, all instruments of national power provide the U.S. important capabilities to defeat an insurgency. Unified action is essential for all types of involvement in any counterinsurgency. Unified action is the synchronization, coordination, and/or integration of the activities of governmental and nongovernmental entities with military operations to achieve unity of effort (JP 1). Paragraphs 1-34 through 1-76 provide commanders and staffs with an understanding of how civilian agencies and military departments and forces synchronize and integrate their operations to achieve unity of effort. Paragraphs 1-41 through 1-48 explain both a whole-of-government and a comprehensive approach to defeat insurgencies and achieve U.S. and host-nation objectives. Paragraphs 1-59 through 1-76 also explain the roles of intergovernmental, nongovernmental, multinational forces, private sector organizations, and host-nation government and host-nation forces in counterinsurgency. 1-35. Unified action must be integrated into the overall host-nation efforts. The focus of U.S. efforts is to support the host nation’s internal defense and development. Internal defense and development is the full range of measures taken by a nation to promote its growth and protect itself from subversion, lawlessness, insurgency, terrorism, and other threats to its security (JP 3-22). Internal defense and development focuses on building viable institutions that respond to the needs of society. Security cooperation activities must work with and support a nation’s own internal defense and development programs. Within the context of counterinsurgency, commanders and staffs must understand and support a host nation’s internal defense and development strategy. In the long run, the host nation, and not the U.S., will either defeat or be defeated by the insurgency. Supporting a host nation’s internal defense and development plan is one of the more effective ways in which the U.S. enables a host nation to defeat an insurgency. (See JP 3-22 for more information on internal defense and development.) ETHICAL APPLICATION OF LANDPOWER IN UNIFIED ACTION 1-36. Army and Marine Corps leaders should clearly understand how adherence to a professional ethic provides the moral basis for unified action and how it becomes a force multiplier in all operations. The actions of Army and Marine Corps professionals are framed by the disciplined, ethical application of force. This is the foundation for unified action. Effective, ethical leaders must communicate to their Soldiers and Marines that American values affect every aspect of how U.S. forces fight and win a counterinsurgency. This instills in them the concept of honorable service and builds esprit de corps, two essential characteristics of the military profession, while enhancing resilience and preventing or reducing moral injuries to Soldiers and Marines. Unified action requires the judicious use of lethal force balanced with restraint and tempered by professional judgment. Combat in counterinsurgency often obligates leaders, Soldiers, and Marines to apply force in a precise manner to accomplish the mission without causing unnecessary loss of life or suffering. To maintain U.S. legitimacy, to ensure international credibility, and to safeguard the U.S., Soldiers and Marines cannot afford to misuse the lethal power provided to them by the U.S. government. 1-37. Soldiers and Marines are not permitted to use force disproportionately or indiscriminately. Typically, more force reduces tactical risk in the short term. But in counterinsurgency, the more force that is used, the less effective it can be. It is more likely that counterinsurgents will achieve an end state by protecting a

3-24

Understanding the Strategic Context population, not the counterinsurgency force. When military forces remain in secure compounds, they lose touch with the situation, appear to be indifferent to the population, simplify enemy intelligence operations, or appear afraid to engage the insurgents. In effect, they concede the initiative to the insurgents. To be successful, counterinsurgency forces must work with and share risks with the host-nation forces and the population. Soldiers and Marines must accept some risk to minimize harm to noncombatants. Accepting prudent risk is an essential part of the warrior ethos and an obligation of honorable service. 1-38. Leaders must accept ambiguity and risk, which are inherent to decentralized operations. The presence of a local population within which insurgents may disappear creates a high degree of ambiguity. Operationally adaptable leaders observe the rapidly changing situation, identify its key characteristics, determine what has to be done in consultation with subordinates and host-nation forces, and determine the best method to accomplish the mission. They must assess and accept prudent risk, and they must adjust rapidly as conditions change. They must be able to shift operational tasks from capacity building to combat and back again in days, or even hours. Alert junior leaders recognize the dynamic context of a tactical situation and can use their professional judgment to apply informed lethal and non-lethal force to achieve the commander’s intent. Any use of force generates a series of reactions. The general rule for the use of force for the counterinsurgents is “do not create more enemies than you eliminate with your action.” The more force is applied, the greater the chance of collateral damage and mistakes. There will be times when an overwhelming effort is necessary to destroy or intimidate an opponent and reassure the populace. However, counterinsurgency forces should calculate carefully the type and amount of force to be applied and who wields it for any operation. Using force precisely and discriminately strengthens the rule of law that needs to be established in the host nation. Normally, counterinsurgency forces can use escalation of force procedures to minimize unnecessary loss of life or suffering. These procedures are especially appropriate during an operation in which the counterinsurgent security force interacts with the local population. All interactions between security forces and the population directly impact legitimacy. (See chapter 13 for legal information on the use of force). 1-39. Who wields force is also important. If the police have a reasonable reputation for competence and impartiality, it may be better for them to execute urban raids than military forces because the population is more likely to view their application of force as legitimate. This is true even if the police are not as well armed or as capable as military forces. Local circumstances, however, affect this decision. For example, if the police are seen as part of an ethnic or sectarian group oppressing the general population, their use may be counterproductive. (See chapter 10 regarding the development of host-nation security forces and chapter 12 regarding assessing counterinsurgency operations. For further discussions on use of force, see chapter 13.) 1-40. The environments where counterinsurgency operations exist can be much more ethically complex than those associated with conventional conflicts. Many leadership and ethical imperatives are prominent and, in some cases, unique to counterinsurgency. The dynamic and ambiguous environment of modern counterinsurgency places a premium on leadership at every level, from sergeant to general. Application of decentralized authority and decisionmaking is more prevalent in counterinsurgency than other types of military operations. Combat in a counterinsurgency is frequently a small-unit leader’s fight; however, senior leaders set the conditions and the tone for all actions by subordinates. Today’s Soldiers and Marines must rapidly adapt cognitively and emotionally to the perplexing challenges of counterinsurgency and master new competencies in dynamic contexts. Those in leadership positions must provide the moral compass for their subordinates as they navigate this complex environment. Underscoring these imperatives is the fact that exercising leadership in the midst of ambiguity requires intense, discretionary professional judgment. Army and Marine Corps leaders are expected to demonstrate their competence, character, and commitment to their professional ethic. All leaders must continually reconcile mission effectiveness, ethical standards, and thoughtful stewardship of the nation’s precious resources—human and material—in the pursuit of national aims. Leaders must link tactical actions to strategic objectives and to the host nation’s essential political goals. U.S. forces must use the combat multiplier of seeking and maintaining the moral high ground in a counterinsurgency. Doing so guarantees maintaining trust with the American people and upholds the ideals of the profession of arms.

3-24

Chapter 1 A WHOLE-OF-GOVERNMENT EFFORT 1-41. Accomplishing U.S. policy objectives in any conflict requires government expertise and resources outside of the Department of Defense (DOD). Policy objectives, especially during a conflict, require a whole-of-government effort. A whole-of-government approach integrates the collaborative efforts of the departments and agencies of the U.S. government to achieve unity of effort toward a shared goal. A whole-of-government effort is vital to achieving the balance of resources, capabilities, and activities that reinforce progress made by one of the instruments of national power while enabling success among the others. It relies on coordination among the agencies of the U.S. government, including DOD, to ensure that the full range of available capabilities are used, synchronized, and applied to a given policy objective. Government agencies usually agree upon relationships and authorities in a memorandum of agreement or understanding. Military commanders exercise only the authority outlined in these agreements and are often directed by another agency. The terms in these documents may form the basis for establishing some form of relationship between commanders and agency chiefs. When unity of command is not possible, commanders strive to achieve unity of effort. Often, the interpersonal relationships that commanders establish with their interagency partners are essential. 1-42. A whole-of-government effort incorporates all of the capabilities of the U.S. government to achieve U.S. national objectives. In many counterinsurgencies, for example, political objectives include assisting the host nation with managing the nonmilitary aspects of the insurgency. Therefore, these political objectives include eliminating the root causes of the insurgency. However, counterinsurgency commanders and planners must understand that, in the end, societies must address their own root causes of insurgency. Imposing major reforms may result in unintended consequences. Enabling a host nation to address the insurgency’s root causes increases its chances of defeating it. In dealing with the sorts of complex socio-cultural problems that counterinsurgents frequently face, “host-nation good enough” is normally better than what the U.S. would consider perfect, if it meets U.S. objectives. 1-43. A primary challenge for integrating civilian and military efforts into a whole-of-government effort is the differing capabilities, capacities, cultures, objectives, and approaches in civilian agencies compared to those of military forces. A successful whole-of-government effort requires that all actors— * Are represented, integrated, and actively involved in the process. * Share an understanding of the situation and problem to be resolved. * Strive for unity of effort toward achieving a common goal. * Integrate and synchronize capabilities and activities. * Collectively determine the resources, capabilities, and activities necessary to achieve their goal. 1-44. The importance of the commander’s personal involvement in building interorganizational trust, understanding, mutual respect, and friendships cannot be overstated. If organizational leaders do not set the appropriate tone and establish the necessary climate, the best whole-of-government plan will fail. 1-45. A clear understanding of the desired end state and national objectives should infuse all efforts, regardless of the agencies or individuals charged with their execution. Given the primacy of political considerations, military forces often support civilian efforts. However, the nature of counterinsurgency operations means that lead responsibility often shifts among military, civilian, and host-nation authorities. In other words, as the U.S. shifts its policy and strategy, different agencies take on different roles during an operation. Different or changing relationships with the host nation may also drive shifts in lead responsibility between different authorities. Military leaders prepare to assume local leadership for counterinsurgency efforts if civilian leadership is unavailable or cannot access the area. 1-46. U.S. land forces conducting counterinsurgency operations must recognize the legal authority of the Department of State, their chief country team, and the chief of mission. The chief of mission, who is normally the ambassador, is the principal officer in charge of a diplomatic facility of the U.S. The country team is the senior, in-country, U.S. coordinating and supervising body. Commanders ensure that they gain an understanding of the purposes, goals, and restrictions under which their interagency partners are operating. Without such an understanding, the military and nonmilitary efforts may frustrate and interfere with one another because the military and civilian organizations are functioning under separate statutory obligations that may lead to conflicting guidance and direction.

3-24

Understanding the Strategic Context COMPREHENSIVE EFFORT 1-47. A comprehensive effort, at a minimum, incorporates all the capabilities of U.S and host-nation governments, and may include intergovernmental and regional organizations, and nongovernmental organizations (NGOs) to address the root causes of the insurgency, in conjunction with military operations aimed at the insurgents themselves. This is difficult because many organizations will be operating in the same area, some conducting combat operations and others using non-lethal methods such as education programs and humanitarian assistance. Each organization will have different perspectives or interests. Foreign area officers may be essential in ensuring these various organization work in a comprehensive effort. Some organizations that may be part of a comprehensive effort are— * Other governments’ agencies. * Multinational forces. * Multinational corporations and contractors. * Intergovernmental organizations, such as the United Nations. * NGOs. * Private sector corporations. * Other organizations that wield diplomatic, informational, and economic power. 1-48. These various organizations may work with, in parallel to, separately from, or counter to U.S. government and civilian agencies supporting counterinsurgency efforts. Those organizations whose goals align at least partially with U.S. government goals frequently have capabilities that, if properly synchronized and coordinated, can be critical to achieving success in counterinsurgency operations. Aligning U.S. military, NGO, and intergovernmental organization capabilities requires collaboration and cooperation focused toward a common goal. This can be more difficult than working with other U.S. government agencies. Where military operations typically demand unity of command, the challenge for military and civilian leaders is to forge unity of effort among the diverse array of actors involved in a counterinsurgency. Often, the legal, cultural, and operational requirements prevent direct collaboration between U.S. land forces and non-U.S. civilian organizations. U.S. forces may encounter NGOs not aligned with any insurgent faction who are providing humanitarian assistance. These organizations can be neutral or hostile to U.S. policy goals. Commanders should handle such groups carefully and professionally. Commanders work to understand the objectives and priorities of each organization. Unity of effort between U.S. forces and host-nation forces is particularly critical. Understanding these organizations is essential to understanding the operational environment and shaping effects on organizations that are hostile or neutral to U.S. policy goals. (See JP 3-08 for more information on NGOs.) UNITY OF COMMAND AND EFFORT 1-49. Unity of command is the operation of all forces under a single responsible commander who has the requisite authority to direct and employ those forces in pursuit of a common purpose (JP 3-0). Where possible, counterinsurgency leaders achieve unity of command by establishing and maintaining formal command or support relationships. While designated officers will exercise unity of command of military forces, such relationships will not usually include nonmilitary U.S. government organizations engaged in a counterinsurgency mission. (See ADRP 5-0 for more information on unity of command.) 1-50. Unity of command of military forces is operationally desirable and important for the military to establish. However, unity of command is almost impossible to achieve among all of the various actors in a counterinsurgency. Differing political objectives, national caveats, the legal limitations on the use of force, and sensitivities about subordinating national forces to those of other states or intergovernmental organizations often preclude strong command relationships. While agreements that establish a multinational force provide a legal foundation for determining the scope and limitations on authorities, responsibilities, command, support, or other relationships, the reality might be less clear. Unity of command is one of the most sensitive and difficult to resolve issues in a counterinsurgency. 1-51. When unity of command with part or all of the force, including nonmilitary elements, is not possible, commanders work to achieve unity of effort. Unity of effort is coordination and cooperation toward common objectives, even if the participants are not necessarily part of the same command or organization, which is the product of successful unified action (JP 1). In a counterinsurgency operation, an example of

3-24

Chapter 1 unity of effort could be a military commander and a civilian leader ensuring that governance and economic lines of effort are fully coordinated with military operations. Unity of effort among nationally, culturally, and organizationally distinct partners is difficult to maintain, given their different layers of command. To achieve unity of effort requires participants to overcome cultural barriers and set aside parochial agendas. It also requires that each organization understand the capabilities and limitations of the others. COORDINATION 1-52. In counterinsurgency operations, coordination efforts should include key participants from the outset. The joint commander, through the strategic concept, works with the engaged civilian organizations to build an interagency coordination plan during the joint operation planning process. Subordinate joint force commanders and Army commanders also build civilian organization participation into their operations plans. This is essential in integrating other government agencies and NGOs. Within an area of responsibility and a joint operations area, appropriate decisionmaking structures are established at combatant command, joint task force headquarters, and tactical levels in order to coordinate and resolve military, political, and humanitarian issues. 1-53. The complex diplomatic, informational, military, and economic context of insurgency and counterinsurgency precludes military leaders from exercising unity of command over civilian organizations—and they should not try to do so. Interagency partners, NGOs, and private organizations have many interests and agendas that military forces cannot control. In addition, the degree of independence of local institutions affects their legitimacy to the population. However, military leaders should make every effort to ensure that counterinsurgency actions are as well integrated as possible, taking into consideration the distinct mission, need for independence, and security requirements of other organizations. Coordination between the various actors in a counterinsurgency is essential. 1-54. U.S. government agencies should participate in coordination meetings to ensure integration with military and host-nation plans. At the joint headquarters level, the commander establishes joint interagency coordination groups. A joint interagency coordination group provides timely, usable information and advice from an interagency perspective to the commander. Joint interagency coordination groups share and integrate information and assist with synchronization, training, and exercises. Joint interagency coordination groups may include representatives from other federal departments and agencies, state and local authorities, and liaison officers from other commands and DOD components. The interagency representatives and liaison officers are the subject matter experts for their respective agencies and commands. They provide the critical bridge between the commander and interagency organizations. (See JP 3-08 for more information on joint and interagency coordination.) 1-55. Coordination between NGOs may be difficult or impossible. Direct interaction among various organizations may be impractical or undesirable because of various goals of NGOs and a NGO’s desire to be seen by the society as autonomous. The differing goals and fundamental independence of NGOs and local organizations usually prevent formal relationships governed by command authority. In the absence of such relationships, military leaders seek to cooperate with other participants to contribute to achieving counterinsurgency objectives. Informal or less authoritative relationships include coordination and liaison. Basic awareness and general information sharing may be all that is possible. Nevertheless, NGOs and other organizations may resist or refuse cooperation because of the appearance of cooperating with military forces. However, government and internal agencies offer links to the various NGOs so coordination can be accomplished without directly interacting with NGOs and causing potential security issues for them. 1-56. Commanders are responsible for coordinating the activities of military forces and cooperative nonmilitary organizations in their areas of operations. To carry out this responsibility, military and civilian leaders may establish a coordinating structure, such as an area coordination center or civil-military operations center at each subordinate political level of the host-nation government. Area coordination centers and civil-military operations centers provide forums for sharing information, conducting coordination and liaison, and ensuring an effective and efficient division of labor. Active commander involvement ensures coordination, establishes liaison (formal and informal), and shares information. Influencing and persuading groups outside a commander’s authority requires skill and subtlety. In some cases, informal meetings with a civilian group at a civil-military operations center will grow to an informal

3-24

Understanding the Strategic Context liaison that eventually leads to close cooperation. (See JP 3-22 for more information on coordinating structures.) 1-57. Leaders ensure the various organizations supporting counterinsurgency operations in each area know which commander is responsible for the respective areas of operation. Multiple organizations operating within a land force commander’s area of operations—such as U.S. government, multinational forces, host nation, interagency organizations, and special operations forces—might increase the risk of fratricide, insider threats, and civilian casualties and may create tactical and operational gaps that insurgents can exploit. 1-58. Entities best qualified to accomplish nonmilitary tasks may not always be available. In such cases, military forces may need to perform those tasks until civilian-led capabilities become available. Within the Army, civil affairs is the branch ideally organized, trained, and equipped to assist commanders in these functions. Sometimes forces already have the skills required, and at other times they learn them during execution. By default, U.S. and multinational military forces often possess the only readily available capability to meet many of the local population’s fundamental needs. As such, it is important for commanders to assess the capabilities of their forces and other organizations on the battlefield. UNIFIED ACTION PARTNERS 1-59. Army and Marine forces conduct counterinsurgency with unified action partners. Unified action partners are those military forces, governmental and nongovernmental organizations, and elements of the private sector with whom Army and Marine Corps forces plan, coordinate, synchronize, and integrate during the conduct of operations. Unified action partners include joint forces and components, multinational forces, U.S. government agencies and departments, and some intergovernmental and NGOs. Some important unified action partners in a counterinsurgency are— * Host-nation government and forces. * Joint forces. * Department of State. * Multinational forces. * NGOs. * Other organizations. Host-Nation Government and Forces 1-60. The essential unified action partner is the host nation and its own forces. The purpose of counterinsurgency operations, from the viewpoint of the U.S., is to support or enable the host nation to defeat an insurgency. In the worst case situation, this may require the U.S. becoming the primary counterinsurgent or working with groups inside a state to build a legitimate government. However, even in the worse case, the goal is still for the host nation and its forces to defeat an insurgency. Joint Force 1-61. The maritime component plays a critical role in controlling the seas, which may be vital to isolating an insurgency, both physically and psychologically. The expeditionary character and versatility of maritime forces provide an advantage in areas where access is denied or limited. Maritime forces may provide direct support to a joint task force that does not include combat operations, to include civil-military operations, logistic support, intelligence, communication sharing, humanitarian relief, maritime civil affairs, and expeditionary medical aid and training. 1-62. Air forces and capabilities play a vital role in the military contribution to a counterinsurgency. Air contributions include close air support precision strikes; personnel recovery, air interdiction, intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance, communications, electronic warfare, combat support, and air mobility.

3-24

Chapter 1 Department of State 1-63. The U.S. Department of State is responsible for implementing U.S. foreign policy and diplomacy efforts and plays a key role in integrating the capabilities of the U.S. The Department of State leads. It also oversees U.S. government support to counterinsurgency efforts. Several functional bureaus and offices have substantive roles in the development and execution of counterinsurgency strategy. These offices include the Bureau of Political-Military Affairs; the Bureau of Conflict and Stabilization Operations; the Bureau of International Narcotics and Law Enforcement; the Bureau of Democracy, Human Rights, and Labor; the Bureau of Population, Refugees, and Migration; the Bureau of Intelligence and Research; and the Legal Advisor’s Office. The Department of State is responsible for diplomatic programs that assist a host nation with countering an insurgency. In many U.S. military operations—such as governance capacity building—the Department of State is the U.S. supported element and the military is the supporting element. 1-64. One important capability that the State Department maintains is the civilian response corps. The civilian response corps maintains active members who are full time responders whose specific job is to train for, prepare, and staff overseas conflict prevention and stabilization operations. Active members of the civilian response corps can deploy on a 48-hour notice. The civilian response corps also maintains standby members. They are current full-time employees of the U.S. government or retirees of the U.S. Foreign Service. Members in the standby component must be available to deploy within 30 days, for up to 90 days, with the possibility to extend their deployment. The civilian response corps’ work focuses on six skill sets: Planning, operations, and management; security and rule of law; diplomacy and governance; essential services; and force protection. Country Team 1-65. The country team is the senior, in-country, United States coordinating and supervising body, headed by the chief of the United States diplomatic mission, and composed of the senior member of each represented United States department or agency, as desired by the chief of the United States diplomatic mission (JP 3-07.4). In a foreign country, the chief of mission is the highest U.S. civil authority. The chief of mission leads the country team and is responsible for integrating U.S. efforts in support of the host nation. The defense attaché, usually a foreign area officer, will work directly with a county team. The defense attaché provides important links to the country team for the commander. As permanently established interagency organizations, country teams represent a priceless counterinsurgency resource. They often provide significant local knowledge and interaction with the host-nation government and population. (See figure 1-1 for an illustration of country team command relationships. See JP 3-07.4 for more information on the country teams.) Some of the government agencies normally represented on a country team include— * The United States Agency for International Development. * The Department of Justice. * The Department of Treasury’s Office of Terrorism and Financial Intelligence. * The Department of Homeland Security. * The Department of Agriculture.

3-24

Understanding the Strategic Context Figure 1-1. Country team command relationships 1-66. An important enabler for ensuring unity of effort in countering an insurgency, especially when the U.S. is enabling a host nation with various capabilities, is foreign area officers. These officers can be an essential link to an embassy’s country team. By virtue of unique language proficiency and cultural and regional expertise, foreign area officers can be critical in helping to integrate various capabilities into the host nation’s ongoing efforts. While foreign area officers are often associated with security cooperation activities, such as foreign military sales, foreign area officers have historically provided essential strategic thinking and planning necessary to enable a host nation. As core members of the security cooperation organization and defense attaché office within the embassy country team, foreign area officers serve as key advisors to ambassadors and combatant commanders. Foreign area officers routinely operate in a whole-of-government, joint, intergovernmental, and multinational environment. They can be essential in integrating resources, capabilities, and activities throughout U.S. and multinational agencies to achieve unity of effort and accomplish national counterinsurgency objectives. Multinational Forces 1-67. Soldiers and Marines normally function as part of a multinational force, for example, by supporting the United Nations or as part of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization. Each multinational participant provides capabilities and strengths that U.S. forces may not have. Many other countries’ military forces provide cultural backgrounds, historical experiences, and other capabilities that can be particularly valuable to counterinsurgency efforts.

3-24

Chapter 1 1-68. Nations join multinational efforts for various reasons. Although the missions of multinational partners may appear similar to those of the U.S., rules of engagement, host-nation policies, and sensitivities may differ among partners. U.S. military leaders require a strong cultural and political awareness of other multinational military partners. Planners must be aware that multinational forces may also require significant U.S. enabling capabilities such as medical evaluation and logistic support. (See JP 3-16 and the American, British, Canadian, Australian, and New Zealand (ABCA) Coalitions Operations Handbook for more information on multinational partners.) Nongovernmental Organizations 1-69. A nongovernmental organization is a private, self-governing, not-for-profit organization dedicated to alleviating human suffering; and/or promoting education, health care, economic development, environmental protection, human rights, and conflict resolution; and/or encouraging the establishment of democratic institutions and civil society (JP 3-08). There are several thousand NGOs of many different types. Organizational charters and their members’ motivations govern their actions. Some NGOs receive at least part of their funding from national governments or intergovernmental organizations. Some may become implementing partners according to grants or contracts. For example, the United States Agency for Internal Development contracts some NGOs to perform certain functions. In these cases, the funding organization often gains oversight and authority over how to use the funds. 1-70. To ensure their own security and gain access to vulnerable populations in theaters of conflict, most NGOs maintain neutrality, impartiality, and independence from all sides in a counterinsurgency. These positions provide NGOs protection against claims of favoritism by the parties to armed conflict and enhance the credibility and security of these organizations. 1-71. Depending on the degree to which NGOs follow these principles, NGOs may carry out their work with a very different frame of reference from that of the government. Rather than perceiving their organization as supporting the overall U.S. or multinational stabilization effort, they may view the situation from the perspective of the victims of conflict, regardless of their affiliation with belligerent parties. They may give preference to individuals and communities based on humanitarian need, rather than meeting operational objectives. 1-72. While NGOs sometimes choose to coordinate their activities with the U.S. government for security, policy, or funding, often they are reluctant for fear of being associated with the government’s political goals in conflict. This creates a natural but often unavoidable tension in the relationship. Commander’s ease this tension through a mutual understanding of respective mandates and a clear delineation of tasks. For example, some organizations, such as the International Committee of the Red Cross, refuse to take armed escorts in conflict zones, relying instead on their wide recognition as neutral, independent, and impartial humanitarian actors. Commanders ensure information is available to NGOs to allow them to deconflict ground and air routes and provide contact information for them to coordinate safe passage in areas with active air or ground defense measures. At a minimum, air information should be passed through International Civil Aviation Organization notices to airmen and host-nation aeronautical information publications. 1-73. Many NGOs may operate in conflict areas long before external military forces arrive. These NGOs may remain after forces depart. Depending on their mandate, they can support critical host-nation government functions, or can contribute to the stabilization effort. To the greatest extent possible, commanders attempt to complement rather than override their capabilities. Commanders strive to build a complementary, trust-based relationship based on mutual understanding and a clear delineation of objectives and tasks. Other Organizations 1-74. An intergovernmental organization is an organization created by a formal agreement between two or more governments on a global, regional, or functional basis to protect and promote national interests shared by member states (JP 3-08). Regional organizations like the Organization of American States and European Union or global organizations such as the United Nations may be involved in some counterinsurgency

3-24

Understanding the Strategic Context operations. The United Nations, in particular, has many subordinate and affiliated agencies active worldwide. 1-75. In the private sector, multinational corporations and other businesses often operate in a conflict environment. At a minimum, commanders should know which companies are present in their area of operations and where those companies are conducting business. Understanding the overall profit motivation of these business will help commanders understand their actions in the operational environment. 1-76. When the U.S. government pays contractors, the principle of unity of command should apply. Commanders should influence contractors’ performance through U.S. government contract supervisors. Commanders should identify contractors operating in their area of operations and determine the nature of their contract, accountability mechanisms, and appropriate coordination relationships. (See FM 4-92 for more information on contractors.) STRATEGIC PRINCIPLES 1-77. Whatever type of strategy and operational approach that a counterinsurgency takes, several strategic principles are normally relevant. Whether the U.S. is enabling a host nation with certain capabilities or directly using its land forces, the principles listed in paragraphs 1-78 through 1-92 are relevant to most counterinsurgency operations. However, these principles are not meant to be exclusive rules for every conflict. They are provided for the practitioner and planner as a foundation for how they think about planning and executing counterinsurgency operations. LEGITIMACY IS THE MAIN OBJECTIVE 1-78. Fostering development of effective governance by a legitimate government that can provide security and acts in the best interests of its people may be essential to countering an insurgency. Legitimacy can be seen as the willing acceptance of a government by its population. Counterinsurgency forces may achieve this objective by the balanced application of both military and nonmilitary means. Governments rule through a combination of consent and coercion. Governments that are “legitimate” normally rule with the consent of the governed; those described as “illegitimate” tend to rely mainly or entirely on coercion. Citizens of the latter tend to obey the state for fear of the consequences of doing otherwise, rather than because they voluntarily accept its rule. Legitimacy is a perceived condition by the population that can only be achieved by host-nation government actions that lead to an acceptance of its primacy by the people. (See paragraphs 1-27 through 1-33 for more information on legitimacy and control.) COUNTERINSURGENT FORCES MUST UNDERSTAND THE ENVIRONMENT 1-79. Successful conduct of counterinsurgency operations depends on thoroughly understanding the society and culture within which they are being conducted. In most counterinsurgency operations in which foreign forces participate, insurgents hold a distinct advantage in their level of local knowledge. They speak the language, move easily within the society, and are more likely to understand the population’s interests. Thus, for foreign forces participating in counterinsurgency operations, they require a greater emphasis on certain skills, such as language and cultural understanding. Understanding the operational environment allows the counterinsurgent to identify the conditions which impact the prerequisites for the insurgency and the root causes that are driving the population to accept the insurgency. Only through understanding the operational environment can the counterinsurgent plan and execute successful operations to counter the conditions that allow the insurgency to exist in the first place. Nevertheless, U.S. forces must never assume they will be welcomed by a local population. They may even be viewed as occupiers. (See chapter 2 for a discussion on developing an understanding of the operational environment.) INTELLIGENCE DRIVES OPERATIONS 1-80. Effective counterinsurgency operations are shaped by timely, relevant, tailored, predictive, accurate, and reliable intelligence, gathered and analyzed at the lowest possible level and disseminated throughout the force. Without accurate and predictive intelligence, it is often better to not act rather than to act. Gaining situational understanding before action is often essential in avoiding long term damage to mission objectives. In environments where commanders do not have situational understanding, the first action they

3-24

Chapter 1 should take is to use forces to gain that understanding while not creating unintended and lasting harm to the mission. (See chapter 11 for more information on intelligence.) 1-81. Because of the dispersed nature of counterinsurgency operations, the actions of counterinsurgency forces are key generators of intelligence. In counterinsurgency operations, a cycle often develops where intelligence drives operations, which produces additional intelligence that facilitates subsequent operations. Reporting by tactical units and civilian agencies is often of greater importance than reporting by specialized national intelligence assets. These factors, along with the need to generate a favorable tempo (rate of military operations) drive the requirement to produce and disseminate intelligence at the lowest practical level. Commanders are responsible for driving the intelligence process. 1-82. Understanding the operational environment extends beyond insurgent combatants and insurgent leaders. To truly counter an insurgency, counterinsurgents must gather, analyze, and disseminate civil information pertaining to the population. If legitimacy is the primary principle of counterinsurgency operations, then identifying what is preventing legitimacy is as important, if not more so, than intelligence pertaining to enemy actions. Since Army and Marine Corps forces conduct counterinsurgency with unified action partners, it is vital to separate intelligence and civil information. Some partners, particularly NGOs, may not exchange information with Army and Marine Corps forces if that information is overtly tied to intelligence collection. Achieving a common situational understanding with unified action partners will require exchanging information outside of the intelligence realm. SECURITY UNDER THE RULE OF LAW IS ESSENTIAL 1-83. Whenever possible, security forces should be provided by the host nation. To establish legitimacy, the affected government must strive to transition security activities from military authorities to host-nation law enforcement authorities as quickly as feasible. When insurgents are seen as criminals, they lose public support. Prior to any transition to full host-nation responsibility, however, the violence level must be reduced enough for the host-nation counterinsurgency forces to maintain order; otherwise, the host-nation counterinsurgency forces will be unable to secure the population and the host nation may lose the legitimacy gained by the transition. U.S. counterinsurgent forces must also understand how the military and police are viewed by the population and not assume they are always seen as protectors. The goal of a change to a host-nation security force is an accountable, self-sustaining, capable, and credible force able to meet the security challenges faced by the host nation and seen as legitimate by the population. 1-84. Security forces use a legal system that conforms to local culture and practices to deal with insurgents and criminals and that enhances the affected government’s legitimacy. To succeed in countering an insurgency, the host-nation government must develop its legal and conflict resolution systems, including police forces, judicial systems, and penal facilities. The legal use of population control measures, including curfews, movement restrictions, travel permits, registration cards, and biometric census may assist in identifying the insurgents and protecting the population. COUNTERINSURGENT FORCES SHOULD PREPARE FOR A LONG-TERM COMMITMENT 1-85. Counterinsurgency operations can be protracted. Though most insurgencies are quickly defeated by the host nation and its military forces, U.S. involvement normally comes in insurgencies that are not quickly defeated. Insurgents can become extremely difficult to identify, track, and interdict if they are effective in acting clandestinely. Insurgencies may persist for many years after the main threat has been broken. Thus, counterinsurgency operations may demand considerable expenditures of time and resources. The population must have confidence in the staying power of both the affected government and any counterinsurgency forces supporting it. The population may prefer the affected government to the insurgents; however, people do not actively support a government unless they are convinced that the government has the means, ability, stamina, and will to win. Stabilizing the security situation and transforming a failed, failing, or ineffectual government into a functional one is an extremely difficult task that may take an extended period to complete. (See paragraphs 4-70 through 4-75 for information on the seventh dynamic, phasing and timing.)

3-24

Understanding the Strategic Context MANAGE INFORMATION AND EXPECTATIONS 1-86. Information and expectations are related; skillful counterinsurgency forces manage both. To limit discontent and build support, the affected government and any counterinsurgency forces assisting it create and maintain a realistic set of expectations among the population, friendly military forces, and the international community. The key tools to accomplish this are information operations through the effective coordination and synchronization of information related capabilities. Effective counterinsurgency commanders tell the truth; they refuse to give projections; and they do not promise more than can be provided. Achieving steady progress toward a set of reasonable expectations can increase the population’s tolerance for the inevitable inconveniences of ongoing counterinsurgency operations. Where a large foreign force is present to help establish a regime, this progress can extend the period until foreign forces are perceived by the population as an army of occupation. 1-87. Effective counterinsurgency forces must ensure that their deeds match their words and both are consistent with the broader narrative. They should also understand that any action has an information reaction. Counterinsurgency forces should carefully consider that information reaction’s impact on the many audiences involved in the conflict and on the sidelines. They should work actively to shape responses that further their ends. In particular, messages to different audiences must be consistent. In the global information environment, people in the area of operations can access the internet and satellite television to determine the messages counterinsurgency forces are sending to the international community. Any perceived inconsistency reduces credibility and undermines counterinsurgency efforts. USE THE APPROPRIATE LEVEL OF FORCE 1-88. Any use of force generates a series of reactions. There will be times when an overwhelming effort is necessary to destroy or intimidate an opponent and reassure the population. However, counterinsurgency forces, whether they are land, maritime, or air, calculate carefully the type and amount of force to be applied and who wields it for any operation. Normally, counterinsurgency forces can use escalation of force procedures to minimize unnecessary loss of life or suffering. These procedures are especially appropriate during any operation in which the counterinsurgent security force interacts with the local population. 1-89. All interactions between security forces and the population directly impact legitimacy, and if the counterinsurgent security forces show restraint in the eyes of the population, the entire counterinsurgency effort is further legitimized. The general rule for the use of force for the counterinsurgents is “do not create more enemies than you eliminate with your action.” Escalation of force does not limit the right of self-defense, including the use of deadly force when such force is necessary to defend against a hostile act or demonstrated hostile intent. However, counterinsurgency forces must be properly trained in such procedures and, more importantly, in methods of shaping situations so that tactical leaders have to make fewer split-second, life-or-death decisions. LEARN AND ADAPT 1-90. An effective counterinsurgency force is a learning organization. Insurgents connected with other organizations constantly exchange information about their enemy’s vulnerabilities—even with insurgents in distant theaters. However, skillful counterinsurgency forces can adapt at least as fast as insurgents. Every unit needs to be able to make observations, draw and apply lessons, and assess results. Commanders must develop an effective system to circulate best practices throughout their command. Commanders might also need to seek new policies that authorize or resource necessary changes. Insurgents shift their locations looking for weak links, so widespread competence is required throughout the counterinsurgency force. EMPOWER THE LOWEST LEVELS 1-91. Local commanders have the best grasp of their situations, but they require access to or control of the resources needed to produce timely intelligence, conduct effective tactical operations, and manage intelligence and civil-military operations. Leaders encourage individual initiatives and facilitate the learning that must occur at every level. Effective counterinsurgency operations are decentralized, and higher commanders owe it to their subordinates to push as many capabilities as possible down to their levels. However, this must be balanced with ensuring that tactical leaders have the situational

3-24

Chapter 1 understanding of the wider operational and strategic consequences of their actions. While tactical missions are essential, commanders ensure that tactical missions support the overall objectives to defeat the insurgency. SUPPORT THE HOST NATION 1-92. In the situation of U.S. and multinational forces committed to assisting a host-nation government with its counterinsurgency strategy, the long-term goal is to leave a government able to stand by itself. In the end, the host nation has to win on its own. Achieving this requires development of viable local leaders and institutions. External assistance can help, but host-nation authorities must accept responsibilities to achieve real victory. Depending upon the condition of the host-nation government (failed, failing, or viable), a robust whole-of-government approach is critical to enabling that government to accept those responsibilities. In a failed or failing state, there may be no functioning government or national economy. The counterinsurgent, therefore, will be forced to create institutions necessary to provide governance and support economic development. While it may be easier for U.S. military units to conduct operations themselves, it is better to work to strengthen local forces and institutions and then assist them. Host-nation governments have the final responsibility to solve their own problems. Eventually all foreign armies are seen as interlopers or occupiers. The sooner the decisive effort can transition to host-nation institutions without unacceptable degradation, the better.

3-24

Chapter 2 Understanding an Operational Environment 2-1. Regional and strategic conditions affect United States (U.S.) involvement in opposing an insurgency. How and why the U.S. becomes involved in an insurgency is important. However, some important strategic trends can also affect the context of an insurgency. These global trends include demographic changes, globalization, the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction, religious extremism, and failed states leading to an era of persistent conflict. Persistent conflict is the protracted conflict among state, non-state, and individual actors who are increasingly willing to use violence to achieve their political and ideological ends. These trends not only affect the likelihood of conflict, but they also affect the capabilities and action of friendly, threat, neutral, and nonaligned actors. 2-2. Understanding the conditions that may affect the stability of a nation or region assists commanders as they focus on a specific operational environment to determine the root causes that led to an insurgency. Whether operating at the operational or tactical level, commanders must understand and anticipate the effects of their operations and how they fit into the broader mission. The U.S. may enter situations with long-standing conflicts and established ways of life that have implications beyond the boundaries of a specific area of operations. Commanders identify relationships within that area that may exert external influence on other governments that have their own agendas in the region. Commanders also recognize that in the modern, interconnected world, actions at any level may have far broader impact than intended. This, coupled with certain global trends, may provoke more insurgencies in the future. DEMOGRAPHIC AND URBANIZATION TRENDS 2-3. In the future, the world will become more populated and urbanized. Global population will increase by approximately 1.2 billion people by 2025 with more than a billion new urban dwellers in that time. Most population growth will occur in the developing world. Population growth, urbanization, and competition for limited resources in the Middle East, Africa, and South Central Asia will contribute to increased resource scarcity and may present governance challenges. Climate change combined with increased population centers in or near coastal environments may challenge the ability of failing and fragile states to respond to natural disasters. These conditions enhance the possibility of insurgencies in highly populated developing countries whose governments lack the capacity to provide effective governance, including security and the rule of law. These trends could lead to failed states and problems that will affect regional and global security because of globalization. 2-4. Urbanization is the growth of urban areas due to both a population surge and migration. In 1950, 29 percent of the world’s population lived in urban areas; by 2050, scientists estimate that 60 percent of the world’s population will live in urban areas. This rapid growth of urban areas, and the accompanying crowded conditions with the potential for high unemployment, creates a greater potential that future insurgencies may arise in urban areas. GLOBALIZATION 2-5. Globalization is a combination of the technological, economic, social, cultural, and political forces that are bringing nation-states and the people of the world closer together. Globalization affects an insurgency by providing a freer flow of arms, information, and money to an insurgent group or insurgents and allows an insurgency to have a wider strategic effect than in the past. It is easy for ethnic groups or ideological groups to connect internationally because of globalization. Globalization provides a greater likelihood that insurgents will have access to outside resources, or that they will try to affect objectives outside of their local area. Through technology, globalization allows an insurgent to gain access to cyber electromagnetic tools that could be used to attack any country. It also makes ideologically or religiously motivated insurgencies more prevalent due to closer contact between traditional and modern societies.

3-24

Chapter 2 PROLIFERATION OF WEAPONS 2-6. The proliferation of weapons of mass destruction and precision weapons will increase the potential for catastrophic attacks. The threat or use of weapons of mass destruction by terrorist organizations is as real as it is deadly. Weapons of mass destruction present significant possibilities beyond terrorist actors. If an insurgent group acquires them, they can allow the insurgent group to pressure the host nation or attack a target that would have countrywide, regional, or global strategic affects. These weapons can provide an insurgent group with capabilities unmatched in the history of irregular warfare. The likelihood of an insurgent group obtaining these weapons has never been higher because of both globalization and the number of failed states. As ethnic and ideological groups enhance bonds that go beyond state boundaries, and insurgent groups create vast safe haven areas within failed states, the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction creates new possibilities for insurgencies. Not only will insurgents strive to obtain weapons of mass destruction, but the continued availability of more precise, cheaper, and more lethal conventional weapons will make insurgent actions more deadly than in the past. (See FM 3-11/MCWP 3-37.1 for more information on chemical, biological, radiological, and nuclear operations.) FAILING OR FAILED STATES 2-7. Governments of nation-states face increasingly greater challenges in providing effective support to their growing populations. The problems of both demographic changes and the pressures of globalization, corruption, lack of government services, and decaying infrastructure can lead to a failed state. A failed state can provide insurgent groups safe havens to build their organizations, but it may also hinder their ability to promulgate their message and actions due to a lack of infrastructure. (See FM 3-07 for a detailed discussion on a failed state framework.) THE OPERATIONAL VARIABLES 2-8. An operational environment is a composite of the conditions, circumstances, and influences that affect the employment of capabilities and bear on the decisions of the commander (JP 3-0). Commanders and staffs analyze and describe an operational environment in terms of eight interrelated operational variables: political, military, economic, social, information, infrastructure, physical environment, and time. The operational variables are fundamental to developing a comprehensive understanding of an operational environment. 2-9. When viewing an operational environment, it is important to identify friendly, neutral, and hostile actors. However, it is uniquely important in counterinsurgency operations that commanders and staff do not view these actors as static and unchanging over time. Actors can become more hostile or become less hostile. It is the interaction between the actors and the changes between their interactions that is important. The actors have many influences on their actions and those influences help determine if an actor stays the same, becomes friendlier, or becomes more hostile. (See JP 2-01.3 for more information on an operational environment.) 2-10. In Iraq's Anbar Province, the eight interrelated operational variables created a unique operational environment. The al Qaim tribes had different interests, both political and economic, than both the Americans and al Qaeda. Religion, economic interests, culture, and other variables helped to shape the actions of everyone in the operational environment. The Marine Corps had to act in this environment and attempt to shape it. This was a process that required situational understanding and an appreciation for the unique environment. The Anbar Province Operational Environment The Anbar Province’s al Qaim district became increasingly important to Abu Musab al-Zarqawi’s al Qaeda in Iraq after November 2004 when it lost its sanctuary to the American forces’ offensive in the second battle of Fallujah. The al Qaim district is located on Iraq’s border with Syria. Although the district represents only 10% of the Anbar population, the area holds strategic importance due to its location along the Iraqi/Syrian border as well as the Euphrates River. Al Qaim is and always has been a lucrative smuggling route for black market goods and served as al Qaeda in Iraq’s

3-24

Understanding an Operational Environment lifeline to infiltrate Baghdad with foreign fighters, money, and other resources that fueled the insurgency. With the loss of Fallujah, al Qaim became al Qaeda in Iraq’s newfound sanctuary. Al Qaeda in Iraq arrived with offers of partnering with al Qaim’s tribes to defeat and expel the Americans. They promised the indigenous population money and other resources for their support. As Muslims and Arabs, al Qaeda in Iraq members exhorted that it was their obligation, their Jihad, to fight the crusaders. After all, the Americans, supposedly ignorant of tribal customs, religion, and traditions, allegedly had disrespected and dishonored the people of al Qaim and a patriotic resistance had already formed in the district. The tribes of al Qaim saw the al Qaeda movement as the answer to their problem with the Americans. The tribes, together with al Qaeda in Iraq, felt that the time was ripe to rid the area of the infidel occupiers. Al Qaim tribes varied in available resources and were incapable of defeating the American occupiers on their own. For example, the Albu-Mahal tribe, the strongest tribe in the area, organized and resourced the Hamza Battalion specifically to fight the Americans. However, it, along with the other tribal militias, lacked the weaponry, ammunition, and other equipment to win such a fight on their own. Al Qaeda in Iraq’s offer was tempting and most of the tribes accepted. As time went on it became apparent that al Qaeda in Iraq’s offer was deceptive; this partnership was not what it seemed. Al Qaeda in Iraq provided weaponry and funding, but in return they demanded to lead the Jihad with the intent of first destroying and then transforming the social fabric of the tribes and al Qaim. Al Qaeda in Iraq started by taking over the smuggling routes, skimming large profits and killing those that resisted. They then imposed a radical form of Sharia on the community with fanatical punishments for transgressors. Religion was used to justify al Qaeda in Iraq’s actions, which included marriages to the local women, not allowing cigarettes, the ban of music and films, and the common intimidation tactic of beheading those that resisted. 3rd Battalion 6th Marines (3/6) executed Operation IRON FIST the first week of October, attacking from east to west through the town of Sadah and eastern Karabila, ultimately stopping at the Emerald Wadi in the center of the al Qaim region. They built four combat outposts, Chosin, Iwo Jima, Belleau Wood, and Khe Sahn, and left Marines and Iraqis in place, providing a combined, permanent, persistent, presence. The next clearing operation was conducted the first week in November by 3/6 and 2/1 commanded by Regimental Combat Team 2. This operation cleared the Husaybah, Karabilah, Sadah and Ubaydi areas of all insurgents. Immediately upon clearing the areas, 3/6 began constructing combat outposts in all of the cities. By late November 3/6 had constructed 14 combat outposts in the areas from Husaybah to Ubaydi. Each combat outpost consisted of a U. S. Marine platoon and an Iraqi Army platoon or company. Those positions completed and reflected combined, permanent, persistent presence, where the Marines and Iraqi Army lived together and among the people. The next step was to engage the people. Mission analysis led to assigning company areas based on the tribal distribution. The idea was to link a company with a tribe. This was not an exact science because the tribes were intermingled, but they did locate companies in areas where a majority of a tribe resided. The next step was a concerted drive to recruit tribesmen into the police force. The Marines solicited help from the Sheikhs to nominate men from their tribes, and started developing police stations near the combat outposts. This would allow the Marines and Iraqi Army forces to partner with the local police forces in those areas and further engender trust and confidence from the local people. Moving goods across the Iraqi and Syrian border was closely connected to the local economy. Undermining this trade would jeopardize a fragile relationship that U.S. forces worked hard to develop. In fact, U.S. forces had learned from the sheikhs

3-24

Chapter 2 that disruption of trade was one of the major grievances the locals had against al Qaeda in Iraq. Local tribes agreed to allow U.S. forces to stop and inspect all vehicles coming into the country to ensure no foreign fighters, money, or weapons were entering Iraq. The tribes also agreed to help with the inspection. New local police largely conducted these inspections with the Iraqi Army (with Marines in overwatch.) The tribes had picked the Iraqi government’s side in the struggle against al Qaeda in Iraq and wanted to stop foreign fighters, money, and weapons from entering Iraq as much as the U.S. forces did. 2-11. Understanding is necessary to begin planning the initial development of measures of effectiveness and performance. The commander must understand what has happened in an operational environment and determine the nature, scope, and severity of its problems. A situation is usually more complicated than it seems when the military force first becomes involved. Understanding an operational environment is a collaborative effort of the unified action partners. These partners may include U.S. government military and civilian personnel, international civilian and military personnel, and host-nation civilian and military personnel. To the maximum extent possible, the military force and unified action partners strive to have a common situational understanding from the beginning of an operation. If the partnering agencies do not have the same situational understanding, they can quickly find themselves working at odds with each other. Commanders will rarely have enough time to fully understand an operational environment. Understanding an operational environment is a continued and iterative process that will continue throughout an operation. 2-12. An area of operations is an operational area defined by the joint force commander for land and maritime forces that should be large enough to accomplish their missions and protect their forces (JP 3-0). For land operations, an area of operations includes subordinate areas of operations as well. 2-13. A commander’s area of operations may be relatively static, but people, weapons, commodities, and information continuously flow through an area of operations. An area of operations can cross physical structures, such as roads and rivers, and span diverse population groups. Fabricated borders that divide natural groupings can create problems in understanding an area of operations. For example, cross-border ties allow insurgents safe havens outside of a tactical unit’s area of operations. Moreover, international boundaries often divide population groups. The span of an insurgency may be far larger than the defined area of operations and areas outside the area of operations may be relevant to a commander. For example, areas outside a commander’s area of operations may provide a safe haven for an insurgency, or an adjacent state may support an insurgency. In an insurgency, an area of interest may be large. 2-14. The area of interest is that area of concern to the commander, including the area of influence, areas adjacent thereto, and extending into enemy territory. This area also includes areas occupied by enemy forces who could jeopardize the accomplishment of the mission (JP 3-0). It is the area in which events could have significant impact on areas of operations. An area of interest can be large relative to the area of operations. When defining an area of interest, commanders should consider the operational variables. (See JP 3-0 for more information on an area of influence.) 2-15. Commanders analyze operational variables to understand the operational environment in which they are conducting operations. An operational environment is not static; it continues to evolve. Introducing units into an operational environment causes shifts and changes. As a result, commanders, their respective staffs, and all Soldiers and Marines must continuously reassess an operational environment for changing conditions. Moreover, in addition to understanding U.S. interests and desired end states in an environment, a commander must understand the environment from three additional perspectives: those of the host nation, the enemy, and the population. POLITICAL 2-16. The political variable describes the distribution of responsibility and power at all levels of governance—formally constituted authorities, as well as informal or covert political powers. The counterinsurgent seeks to understand not just the formal political system, such as political parties and elected officials, but also the informal systems of political influence, such as ethnic groups and other centers of power. There is a connection between the political variable and the social variable. For example,

3-24

Understanding an Operational Environment a tribal grouping or a social caste may directly affect whom that group sees as a legitimate authority in an area. Moreover, these social groupings can affect the formal power structure. For example, in an electoral system, groups will often vote as blocs, giving them added political power in that formal system. (See ADRP 5-0 for more information on the political variable.) 2-17. Often, informal groups such as tribes or local councils are the essential actors in the distribution of political power, especially at the local level. Political power is the ability to influence behavior. The biggest influence of behavior is often local groupings that can create a norming effect on a population. Most groups hold power only because the population accepts that power distribution. 2-18. However, the opposite can also be true and the formal political system can change group identity and influence the actions of any social group. States can create identity in a population through education and information. For example, an education program that instills nationalist views in an individual from an early age can be a powerful tool in shaping a person’s identity and in turn whom that person sees as a legitimate authority. Group and individual identities are not static, nor is whom a population views as legitimate static. While groups have internal means to view identity, variables outside the group, including the host nation, also affect them. 2-19. The commitment and motivation of a host nation to defeat an insurgency is an important motivation. Governments with more than one of the following traits have tended to lose historically, even when supported by competent and committed external forces: * Government sponsors or protects unpopular economic and social arrangements or cultural institutions. * Government is involved in corrupt and arbitrary personalistic rule. * Government operates as a kleptocracy. * Government is controlled by elites with perverse incentives to continue conflict. * Government is economically dependent on external actors. The harsh reality for counterinsurgents is that some of these negative characteristics are usually present, and they are key factors in sparking insurgencies in the first place. As a result, the interests of a host-nation government are often at odds with what the best practices would be to solve its political problems. (See paragraphs 1-27 through 1-33 for more information on legitimacy and control.) MILITARY 2-20. The military variable explores the military and paramilitary capabilities of all relevant actors (enemy, friendly, and neutral) in a given operational environment. For many countries, the army’s predominant purpose is to be the military force responsible for maintaining external security. However, this is not a universal rule, and many militaries become involved in internal security and even governance. In some cases, there is a degree of military control over the government, which then blends the political and military variables. This can range from a military dictatorship to a praetorian guard type military that periodically intervenes in the governance of a society. Even in cases where a host nation appears to have complete objective control over its military forces, these military forces can be an important bureaucratic and political actor. The interaction between the military and the political structure is important to understanding this variable’s relationship with the political distribution of power in a society. (See ADRP 5-0 for more information on the military variable.) 2-21. A host of institutions including police, paramilitary, intelligence, and other organizations can maintain internal security. Thus, commanders and staffs need to consider them within the military variable. In many autocratic societies, intelligence agencies provide an essential means of control over a society. Many societies maintain civil control and civil security by an accepted rule of law and a police force that enforces the rule of law. In a counterinsurgency, the host nation may use the military or a paramilitary to defeat an insurgency. 2-22. The military variable includes all forces involved in both internal and external security. U.S. counterinsurgents must fully understand how the host nation maintains internal and external security. Moreover, they must understand both neutral and enemy military forces. Neutral military forces are common in a counterinsurgency, as some states or multinational corporations will employ or contract for

3-24

Chapter 2 limited forces to protect personnel, resources, or infrastructure for their own interests. A peacekeeping force may be maintaining a position of neutrality in the conflict. There can also be informal groupings of military power. For example, local gangs, armed militias, and private security agents can be a factor in local areas. 2-23. Commanders and staffs should analyze friendly, neutral, and enemy forces with both qualitative and quantitative data. Some aspects to consider include— * Position of forces in national and local governmental structure. * General organization, training, and doctrine. * Economic basis (to include the appropriations system). * Conscription or recruitment systems. * Police role in the nation’s internal security. * Rapport with population. * The impact of other international forces already there or there in the recent past. These considerations are particularly important with regard to the insurgents. Knowing from what groups and sources, both within the country of conflict and outside of it, are providing what kinds of support (for example, financial, personnel, materiel, and provisions) and by what processes or routes is critical. Insurgencies that continue to meet their tangible support needs are difficult to defeat. 2-24. One enemy force in a counterinsurgency can vary widely from another. Some may be based on cellular organizations while others may be more hierarchical. Moreover, there may be a wide variance in enemy capabilities. Some insurgencies may have capabilities to conduct large scale and well coordinated attacks that may rival the capability of a host nation’s military. Others may have less capability and may rely on small-unit tactics. (See paragraphs 4-76 through 4-103 for a discussion of the eighth dynamic, organizational and operational patterns, and see chapter 5 for a further discussion on enemy military forces.) ECONOMIC 2-25. The economic variable encompasses individual and group behaviors related to gaining access to, producing, distributing, and consuming resources. These behaviors determine incentives and disincentives that encourage or discourage economic decisions. The sum of these individual and group decisions may determine the production, distribution, and consumption of economic resources. Typically, an economy is conceptualized as currency, stocks, major commodities, banking, and trade controlled and monitored by the government. However, informal economies, trade, or economic exchange outside state-controlled or money-based transactions may be of equal or greater importance than formal economies in understanding an operational environment. While the world economy continues to grow more interdependent, local economies remain relatively distinct. These differences significantly influence political choices, including individuals’ decisions to support or subvert the existing order. When commanders and staffs analyze a local economy, they consider both governmental policies and the type of local economy. 2-26. Types of economies vary widely. When looking at economic activities, commanders and staffs strive to understand the relative importance of the various sectors of an economy. Comparing the percentage of the economy in the public sector versus the private sector provides some understanding of the structure of the economy. Moreover, the private and public sector can potentially be divided into different sectors based on type of activities. Agriculture, raw materials, services, and other types of production play an important role in defining the economy of a local area. It is important to analyze governmental policies. Corruption, the rule of law, and macroeconomic policy play a role in the structure of a local economy. 2-27. Another important factor in analyzing economic activity is the informal economy. In weak states, understanding the informal economy is key to providing a full understanding of an operational environment. The informal economy is those economic interactions and exchanges that are not recognized, regulated, controlled, or taxed by a state government. In this case, informal does not always equal illegitimate. For example, a black market is a form of informal economy based on criminal activities such as racketeering, money laundering, prostitution, drug trafficking, and smuggling. On the other hand, open-air markets and barter systems are legitimate activities that often contribute to an informal economy.

3-24

Understanding an Operational Environment In every country there is a balance between formal and informal economies. In successful states, the informal economy may be relatively small. However, in failing states the informal economy may form the majority of all economic activities. The local population may depend on informal markets for their most basic needs. It is difficult but important for counterinsurgents to develop an understanding of these informal economies (both legitimate and illegitimate.) Because they are outside host-nation government oversight, insurgents can exploit even legitimate formal economies as a source of funding. The black market, on the other hand, will most likely be a direct enabler of an insurgency in terms of both funding and logistics. 2-28. The counterinsurgent must consider other informal economies. Most people work, buy, and sell in this economy, operating outside legal frameworks but not engaging in illicit or criminal activity (except perhaps for taxation issues). Sensitivity to the rules of an informal economy is one piece of cultural sensitivity to the population and the host nation in general. Examples of the rules of an informal economy include the following: * People earn income in non-cash payments such as benefits or goods. * People often use land for decades (or more) through traditional usage rights granted by village heads and chiefs with no legal title. * People may work without pay (in arrangements such as the traditional divisions of household and farm labor). 2-29. Economic variables also tie into other elements of a society. For example, ownership or control of land and debt indicate something about the power structure within a society. Many developing societies have highly concentrated ownership of land, which can serve as a driver for social conflict and discontent. Whoever owns land or controls land has the power to use it for economic profit. Maintaining this ownership or control during an insurgency indicates a degree of power in a society. The same is true of debt. The ability to collect a debt indicates a degree of power in a society. Land and debt are examples of how economic factors link into other social factors. 2-30. If a population views economic conditions as unjust, a lack of economic opportunity can be a root cause of an insurgency. (See paragraphs 4-14 through 4-22 for more information on motives for an insurgency.) As part of developing an understanding of an operational environment, counterinsurgents assess the current economic variables, the economic opportunities available to different segments of the population, and the effect insurgent and counterinsurgent operations are having on the population’s ability to meet their most basic economic needs. Economic survival, especially in an area where an insurgency is occurring, is almost as important and as immediate a challenge for households as physical security. For this reason, leaders at all levels of the counterinsurgency operation (including platoons and companies) need to assess the impacts of military operations on the following simple elements of the economic welfare of households and communities: * Income (including the capacity to earn streams of income in future). * Assets and property (used to earn income). * Work (including traditional patterns of unpaid work). 2-31. Commanders strive to understand the economic impact of the unit’s presence in an area. For better or worse, the presence of an Army or Marine Corps unit affects normal economic incentives and disincentives for individual behavior. Introducing foreign wealth can have unintended negative consequences. For this reason, careful thought and planning are needed for a project intended to have local economic impact. Commanders anticipate the economic impact of their arrival and their continued presence in the area of operations. Additionally, commanders and staffs carefully weigh the costs and benefits associated with all economic activity. Some factors to consider are— * Prospects of long-term sustainability. * Possibility of local price inflation. * Disrupting natural incentives (such as farmers leaving fields to work on trash pickup projects). SOCIAL 2-32. The social variable describes the cultural, religious, and ethnic makeup within an operational environment and the beliefs, values, customs, and behaviors of society. Understanding the society is

3-24

Chapter 2 foundational to understanding the social variable. A society is defined as a population whose members are subject to the same political authority, occupy a common territory, have a common culture, and share a sense of identity. However, no society is completely homogeneous. A society usually has a dominant culture, but it can have secondary cultures. Different societies may share similar cultures, as Canada and the U.S. do. Societies are not static, but change over time. (For more information on this variable, see chapter 3 of this publication and ADRP 5-0.) INFORMATION 2-33. The information variable describes the nature, scope, characteristics, and effects of individuals, organizations, and systems that collect, process, disseminate, or act on information. The information environment is the aggregate of individuals, organizations, and systems that collect, process, disseminate, or act on information (JP 3-13). Understanding the communications systems is important because they influence international, national, regional, and local audiences. Insurgents often use information and disinformation to gain credibility and legitimacy with the population, while simultaneously undermining their opponents. Understanding how people communicate and who influences them on a daily basis is essential. This is important at all levels. For example, identifying local gathering places is important to understand or influence the spread of information, rumors, and gossip. 2-34. The information environment is made up of three dimensions: physical, informational, and cognitive. The cognitive dimension encompasses the mind of the decisionmaker or specific audience and is the dimension where people think, perceive, visualize, and decide. The informational dimension is the place where information is collected, processed, stored, disseminated, displayed, and protected with key components of the content and flow of information. The physical dimension is composed of systems, human beings (including decisionmakers, leaders, and military forces), and supporting infrastructure that enable individuals and organizations to create effects conduct operations across air, land, maritime, space and cyberspace domains across multiple domains. (See table 2-1.) Table 2-1. Interrelated dimensions of the information environment Dimension Description Cognitive • Exists in the minds of human beings. dimension • Consists of individual and collective consciousness. • Where information is used to develop perceptions and make decisions. • Significant characteristics include values, beliefs, perceptions, awareness, and decisionmaking. Informational • Created by the interaction of the physical and cognitive dimensions. dimension • Where information is collected, processed, and disseminated. • Significant characteristics are information content and flow. Physical • The tangible, real world. dimension • Where the information environment overlaps with the physical world. • Consists of targetable individuals, organizations, information systems, and the physical networks that connect them. • Significant characteristics include terrain, weather, civilian information infrastructure, media, populace, and third party organizations. 2-35. The technological advances in communications offer some unique considerations for insurgencies. For one, international communication is easier than it used to be. This allows insurgencies to communicate with organizations outside of their physical control. Connecting to diasporas or sympathetic groups could be vital to an insurgency. With the ability to communicate comes the ability to move resources and funding. Moreover, communications can be vital in importing weapons or other supplies to an insurgency. Global communications can be essential in increasing the military capabilities of an insurgency, significantly increasing the tempo of insurgent operations and their ability to change tactics. 2-36. At the operational and tactical level, communications allow for effective coordination of attacks. Organizations can communicate by cell phones, by the internet, or a number of other rapid means. This

3-24

Understanding an Operational Environment allows for coordinated large-scale attacks even by dispersed organizations. (For additional information on the information environment, see FM 3-13.) INFRASTRUCTURE 2-37. The infrastructure variable is composed of the facilities (buildings and equipment), personnel, and services needed for the functioning of a community or society. Societies have different infrastructure needs. For example, the expectation for hours of available electricity vary widely. Counterinsurgents try to access infrastructure needs to meet the expectation of the user, not their own expectations. 2-38. Infrastructure is also interrelated with other variables. For example, the development of a highway system will affect the ability of people to move and interact with others. Creating a society in which humans can easily move based on economic needs or simple desires greatly increases the variety of groups a person will meet. These interactions and new relationships can change how a person views the world and change that person’s values. A communications system, such as a cellular network, can have the same effect. These systems allow for communications outside of one’s areas and allow the transmission of new ideas and concepts. 2-39. Commanders and staffs conducting counterinsurgency operations must consider the relationship between infrastructure and the economic variable. An effective infrastructure can allow for the easy movement of people, goods, and ideas. Many businesses require infrastructure. While it is true that a local population may not expect 24 hours of electricity a day, a manufacturing plant may require it. Moreover, infrastructure such as schools can increase the human capital in an area and drive economic growth. 2-40. Infrastructure also has an effect on the military variable. Host-nation forces can use a good transportation system, but so can an insurgency. A road system provides a means of transportation for everyone, not simply the population and government. Moreover, infrastructure may be important for the population and the government’s role in maintaining civil control and security. An attack on the infrastructure may undermine the government’s legitimacy in an area. However, the opposite is also true. An attack on infrastructure may also undermine the insurgency if the population places blame on the insurgency and turns towards to government. PHYSICAL ENVIRONMENT 2-41. The physical environment includes the geography and man-made structures, as well as the climate and weather, in an area of operations. The physical environment affects the tactics and operations of both insurgents and counterinsurgents. Extreme conditions, such as in nations in higher elevations, can make insurgent movements difficult in the winter. The movement and the tactics of any military force will be affected by the physical environment of its area of operations. A physical environment will influence insurgency sanctuaries, the ability of an insurgency to hide resources, and the ability of an insurgency to mass forces. Understanding a physical environment is essential to understanding an insurgency. (See chapter 4 for further discussion on how a physical environment relates to an insurgency.) 2-42. A physical environment also relates to the other variables. A mountainous, landlocked country will have a difficult time building the infrastructure needed for large-scale international trade. Moreover, if the physical environment precludes the ability to easily produce an excess of food, it is difficult to divert much labor to other enterprises. This can hamper the development of a highly specialized economy. An increase in food production will often predate a major increase in industrial production. TIME 2-43. Time describes the timing and duration of activities, events, or conditions within an operational environment, as well as how various actors in an operational environment perceive the timing and duration. Time also has an interrelated relationship with other variables. For example, a multinational coalition may see its efforts in a counterinsurgency as limited by national objectives or by the public pressure. In other words, outside parties can always leave a counterinsurgency. On the other hand, for the host nation, the insurgents and the population in the struggle are less constrained by time than a multinational coalition. An

3-24

Chapter 2 insurgency may use the time variable to its advantage, while the time variable usually works against an external counterinsurgent. 2-44. Time can also play a role in the social variable. Ongoing conflicts tax societies. Populations can become less interested in the nuisance of a conflict and more interested in simple peace. As time passes, a population may be more interested in who is likely to win an insurgency than the motivation of either side of the conflict. Counterinsurgents may also see time as working for or against them. (See paragraphs 4-30 through 4-45 for more information on insurgent strategies.) THE MISSION VARIABLES AND CIVIL CONSIDERATIONS 2-45. Upon receipt of a mission, commanders filter information categorized by the operational variables into relevant information with respect to the mission. They use the mission variables, in combination with the operational variables, to refine their understanding of the situation and to visualize, describe, and direct operations. The mission variables are mission, enemy, terrain and weather, troops and support available, time available, and civil considerations. (See ADRP 5-0 for more information on the mission variables). Within the mission variables, civil considerations are of unique importance for counterinsurgency. Civil considerations are the influence of man-made infrastructure, civilian institutions, and activities of the civilian leaders, populations, and organizations within an area of operations on the conduct of military operations. Civil considerations comprise six characteristics, expressed in the memory aid ASCOPE: areas, structures, capabilities, organizations, people, and events. (See FM 2-01.3/MCRP 2-3A for information on the use of ASCOPE.) 2-46. The commanders’ refinement of information for their mission and their particular area of operations is essential. ASCOPE can play an important role in the identification of structures or events that will have an effect in a unit’s area of operations. As such, ASCOPE is an important tool for the unit in determining important civil considerations in an insurgency. Units within an insurgency use ASCOPE to identify and continually refine their understanding of the area of operations over time. Commanders and staffs consider ASCOPE from the perspective of the population, the insurgent, and the counterinsurgent. This is particularly important for counterinsurgency operations. (See JP 3-57, FM 3-57, MCWP 3-33.1, and ADRP 2-0 for detailed explanations of ASCOPE.)

3-24

Chapter 3 Culture 3-1. This chapter addresses culture and its role in a counterinsurgency operational environment. Culture forms the basis of how people interpret, understand, and respond to events and people around them. Cultural understanding is critical because who a society considers to be legitimate will often be determined by culture and norms. Additionally, counterinsurgency operations will likely be conducted as part of a multinational effort, and understanding the culture of allies and partners is equally critical. 3-2. Insurgents from a local area generally understand local culture, the perspectives of the population, and the population’s concerns and grievances much better than any foreign military forces understand them. Therefore, culturally, the insurgent may have an enormous advantage over a foreign military force. This may not be true if the insurgents are not from the local area. If a military force is to succeed in gaining support of the population, it must seek to understand the local people and their culture and incorporate the perspectives and concerns of the population in their plans and operations as well as, if not better than, the insurgents incorporate them. 3-3. There are many definitions of culture in use by the United States (U.S.) military. As a starting point, this publication understands culture is a web of meaning shared by members of a particular society or group within a society. UNDERSTANDING CULTURE 3-4. To be successful in interacting with the local population to gain information on the enemy, or to understand their requirements, military members must do more than learn a few basic facts or “do’s and do nots.” They must understand the way that their actions can change the situation for the local population (both positively and negatively) and the resulting perceptions of the population towards those actions. To be successful, commanders and staffs consider four fundamental aspects of culture when planning and executing military operations: * Culture influences how people view their world. * Culture is holistic. * Culture is learned and shared. * Culture is created by people and can and does change. 3-5. The way that a culture influences how people view their world is referred to as their worldview. Many people believe they view their world accurately, in a logical, rational, unbiased way. However, people filter what they see and experience according to their beliefs and worldview. Information and experiences that do not match what they believe to be true about the world are frequently rejected or distorted to fit the way they believe the world should work. More than any other factor, culture informs and influences that worldview. In other words, culture influences perceptions, understandings, and interpretations of events. Soldiers and Marines need to know that U.S. interpretations of events are often quite different from the perceptions of these events by other people in an area of operations. If Soldiers and Marines assume that the local population will perceive actions the way that they do, they are likely to misjudge their reactions. The U.S. military refers to this pattern of assuming others see events in the same way the U.S. does as mirror imaging. Mirror imaging is dangerous because it leads Soldiers and Marines into thinking that their assumptions about a problem and its solution are shared by the population and multinational partners, rather than employing perspective taking, and looking at the problem from the population’s perspective. 3-6. Holism is based on the principle that all socio-cultural aspects of human life are interconnected. While interacting with people in other cultures, Soldiers and Marines may be tempted to say their problems “are all about [fill in the blank: tribalism, corruption, lack of work ethic, and so on.].” In truth, very few

3-24

Chapter 3 counterinsurgency challenges boil down to one simple answer. Politics affects economics. Family structure affects job choices. Religion affects politics. Every aspect of culture affects every other aspect in some way, even if indirectly. By acknowledging these interconnections, military members can better assess how the local population might react to their presence and actions. For instance, when Soldiers and Marines are not thinking holistically, they may anticipate that closing down a local market will only have an impact on the local economy. However, after closing the market, it may be that the local reaction seems to be about religion or tribal concerns instead of economics. Even if Soldiers and Marines do not understand why, they should be aware that their actions will have unknown second and third order effects. By understanding that a marketplace is more than a place to exchange goods for money, and that economic conditions may affect tribal power, the status of religious leaders, and other social conditions, Soldiers and Marines can see a culture holistically. A holistic perspective helps military members understand the complex interconnectedness of a culture and avoid being surprised by local reactions to military decisions. 3-7. Culture is learned and shared. Children learn the appropriate way to act in a culture by observing other people; by being taught accepted values and ways of thinking about the world from their parents, teachers and others; and by practicing (sharing) what they have learned on a daily basis. This process of learning a new culture is called socialization. Culture can be learned at any age. Marines and Soldiers, for example, learn military culture by going through basic training or officer training in their late teens or early twenties. In fact, these initial training schools recognize their important role in socializing young men and women into core Marine and Army values. As a result, Marine Corps and Army basic training curriculums include not only classes on marksmanship, but also classes on ethics and core values. In counterinsurgency operations, understanding that culture is learned and shared can offer an important operational and tactical opportunity. Any Marine or Soldier can learn about the culture of the population simply by interacting with the local people. One of the more successful adaptations of the U.S. military in Iraq and Afghanistan occurred when service members realized they could learn a lot about the local culture quickly by talking to and observing their interpreters. Their enhanced understanding of the cultures of their areas of operations enabled them to better negotiate with leaders, to conduct operations that would be successful, and in a number of cases (such as the al Anbar Awakening), to gain the support and assistance of the population in fighting an insurgency. 3-8. One of the keys to success (and failure) in dealing with a population in a counterinsurgency operation is understanding that cultures are not static; they can and do change, often rapidly. During times of conflict, the usual methods for getting through the day may stop working for the local population, and they may try adopting new ideas or start highlighting traditional ways of doing things. Alternatively, they may switch rapidly among a range of possible behaviors. These changes can occur because of a number of factors were at play, but probably the greatest cause of this during conflict is a rapid decline in security. As security declines, the threat of attack, rape, and murder forces many changes in society. The rapid decline in the status and opportunities for women in these countries, therefore, was not merely due to centuries-old tribal beliefs, but to very real and pragmatic economic and social changes over time. As the cases of Iraq and Afghanistan illustrate, cultural practices and attitudes are frequently influenced by changes in very real physical conditions. Since the arrival of a large military, often accompanied by the destruction of physical property and the erosion of the local economy and security, is undoubtedly an enormous change for the local population, counterinsurgency planners need to recognize and plan for the impact that their operations will have upon the people and cultures in an area of operations. ASSESSING A CULTURAL SITUATION 3-9. Although it may seem that people around the world are extraordinarily different and have little in common, in reality all human groups interact with their world and each other in some basic, predictable patterns. The particular details of these patterns may vary. But the underlying patterns will not. Thus, all people use, manage, and interact with their environments. All groups have some kind of economy for exchanging goods and services. Every group has a social structure, with differing roles and status among members. Political behavior can be found in the smallest community. All people have some kind of belief system, whether based on religion, tradition, narratives, or history. By identifying these patterns wherever they deploy, Marines and Soldiers will be in a better position to assess the cultural situation and the influence of their operations upon the local population.

3-24

Culture 3-10. All cultures have a unique and interdependent connection with their physical surroundings. The physical environment (including climate, terrain, and resources) influences the people living in it by providing a range of possibilities within which they act. People shape their environment by the choices they make, creating a cultural landscape which reflects their social, cultural, economic, and political attitudes. A careful reading, or interpretation, of the cultural landscape can provide useful information about the people who create it, use it, and live in it. A military presence in an area of operations will affect a local population and its use of the physical environment. For example, Marines and Soldiers may inadvertently divert or impede access to resources, such as water or food, which in turn may cause real shortages or upset the balance of power by allowing greater access to these resources by one group and harming another. Counterinsurgency planners need to anticipate how their operations will impact local populations and their use of their environment and recognize that since use of the environment is cultural, these impacts may significantly differ from what might be expected in the U.S. 3-11. All cultures have specific systems for obtaining, producing, and distributing items people need to survive (for example, food, water, and shelter) or luxuries and material things. This system, which does not necessarily require money or a banking system, is called the economy of a culture. Frequently, insurgents use the informal economy to obtain funding and support for their activities. Another aspect of the economic system that is often overlooked is the concept of reciprocity, which is an exchange between people that creates a relationship. Although in Western cultures exchange usually involves the exchange of goods and services of equal monetary value, in other parts of the world exchange may be only partly about what people expect regarding goods and services and also partly about building working relationships. If Marines and Soldiers fail to see what the local people expect from the exchange, to include its impact on interpersonal relationships, it will be hard for them to understand or anticipate people’s behavior. 3-12. In all cultures, people hold differing positions of status and power, often closely related to their roles in a group. In the military, for example, one’s status and power is based on rank. Depending on a person’s rank, a person fills different roles in an organization. The way that a group distinguishes among its members according to their role, status, and power is reflected in its social structure. A person’s position in the social structure may depend on many factors, including age, gender, class, family name, tribal membership, ethnicity, religious identity, and even rank. In conflict environments, differing groups (for example, ethnic, religious, or tribal) may each vie for power, often looking to outside militaries to support them. In counterinsurgency operations, it is essential that military leaders understand which social groups have traditionally held power in an area of operations. Otherwise, they are likely to be drawn into power struggles among competing groups, and possibly even unwittingly end up aiding the insurgents. A concept central to one’s place in society is that of identity. Identity is a broad term used to describe how people conceive of themselves and how they are perceived by others. Identity shapes how people view themselves and the world. Understanding identity is complex because people have multiple identities. In times of conflict, people may choose to emphasize certain group identities such as nationality or religion, while at other times different identities, such as one’s profession or gender, may matter more. Social structure and identity are extremely important concepts for counterinsurgency planners and operators to understand, as they affect people’s allegiances and influence how groups and individuals will interpret and respond to U.S. actions. 3-13. In all cultures, people have a system that determines who leads the group and who makes decisions about its welfare. Although people in the U.S. use an electoral system to select their leaders, this is not the case in many other countries. In many places around the world, even when the official government is elected, the local population may not view that government as legitimate or effective. In fact, one of the primary motivations for people to support an insurgency is their sense that the official or formal government has failed to provide for their needs. Frequently, insurgents may be providing a “shadow government” which replaces and competes with the official government in certain parts of the country. Shadow governments are one example of informal leadership. In most areas of operations, Marines and Soldiers will find that communities or groups are influenced by a variety of leaders, most of whom are not part of the government. In some areas, religious leaders may have great influence. In others, people may look to tribal leaders or respected individuals within their ethnic group. Business leaders and warlords often have great power and influence too. To be successful in counterinsurgency operations, military members need to quickly and accurately identify the various community leaders and develop strategies to work with

3-24

Chapter 3 each of them in order to increase government legitimacy. Without support from the various power brokers in an area of operations, military action is unlikely to gain support from the local population. 3-14. Cultures are characterized by a shared set of beliefs, values, norms and symbols that unite a group. These beliefs may come from many sources, such as a person’s background, family, education, religion or history. Understanding the beliefs and values of a local population is critical for effective information operations. Failure to respect or understand the beliefs of a local population can result in serious hostility towards military intervention and attacks upon military personnel. Likewise, information operations that assume the foreign audience shares the same jokes, history, or values that Soldiers and Marines do frequently fail to deliver messages effectively. To gain an understanding of belief systems, counterinsurgents read and monitor information available through media or books, and counterinsurgents talk to people in the culture. Discussing history with local people can be a window into understanding the way that people in that area define a problem, who they believe caused it, and who they think the heroes and villains are. Stories, sayings and even poetry can reveal cultural narratives, the shared explanations of why the world is a certain way. Frequently, advertising appeals to people by using these narratives, as do effective information operations. Beliefs, however, are not perfectly shared or understood within a group. There is usually a range of acceptable thoughts and behaviors. This is called variation. For example, in reading about Islam, Soldiers and Marines may understand that Muslims are supposed to fast during Ramadan. However, when deployed they might observe seemingly faithful Muslims drinking and eating during Ramadan. Within U.S. culture, these internal mismatches and contradictions (variations) are often accepted without much comment. In a cross-cultural interaction, these contradictions can seem jarring or confusing. Often, working with others in a foreign culture requires the ability to suspend judgment. People often act and work in ways that may be difficult to accept or understand. However, by recognizing that all people share some fundamental patterns and seeking to understand and develop military plans and operations that build upon these patterns, commanders and staffs can effectively work to counter an insurgency within an area of operations. 3-15. Religion can be a powerful force in shaping beliefs. In many cultures religion and religious leaders have significant influence over local populations. Religious ideology can incite conflict, but religion can also be instrumental in stabilizing a culture by using universal religious concepts of justice, healing, and transformation. Because religion is often an integral part of the values set of a local culture, counterinsurgents conducting mission preparation and analysis examine the religion in an area of operations. Religion can also play an important role in creating peace and stability. Religion can create cultural instability, but in many cases it can alleviate problems in a society and be a unifying force. Many religions have messages and themes of pacifism and forgiveness. In many insurgencies, religious leaders have played an essential role in ending conflicts. The effect of a religion has to be understood within that religion and within that society. Counterinsurgents conducting a mission analysis may find that insurgents are using a radical interpretation of a religious text to incite violence. This can be countered by empowering indigenous religious leaders who promote a different interpretation. For example, radical Muslims may cite texts from the Quran that justify violence, but they may ignore the passages taught by more moderate Muslims that advocate compassion, peace, and human dignity. ORGANIZING TO UNDERSTAND CULTURE 3-16. There are three important methods for trying to understand the cultural element of a counterinsurgency. First, all counterinsurgents must make every effort to experience and understand the local culture, including by trying local food and learning local languages and customs. Second, commanders can organize their staffs in order to concentrate on cultural understanding and inject this understanding into their unit’s plans and operations. Third, commanders can rely on an outside capability to allow commanders and staffs to understand the culture. Two techniques that involve organization of staffs or outside capabilities are— * Green cell and cultural advisor. * Human terrain systems.

3-24

Culture GREEN CELL AND CULTURAL ADVISOR 3-17. The purpose of a green cell is to consider the population in order to promote a better understanding of the environment and the problem. At a minimum, the green cell provides for the independent will of the population. Planning teams must develop an understanding of civilian aspects of the area of operations and the will of the population. There are many techniques to achieve this capability, and each unit may approach this differently based on resources and available qualified personnel. Two techniques of note are the green cell and cultural advisor. (See MCWP 5-1 for more information on green cells.) 3-18. A green cell is an ad hoc working group consisting of individuals with a diversity of education and experience capable of identifying and considering the perspective of the population, the host-nation government, and other stakeholders within an operational environment. Ideally, a green cell is composed of individuals with cultural expertise across all warfighting functions. If a whole-of-government approach is used, experts from other government agencies such as the Department of State should be included in the cell. The green cell cooperates closely with the other members of the planning staff so that cultural factors are considered throughout the range of military operations. The green cell also interfaces and coordinates with joint and interagency groups, drawing upon the collective knowledge and experience of the Department of State, nongovernmental organizations (NGOs), and foreign resources, such as provincial reconstruction teams. (See MCWP 5-1 for more information on green cell activities.) 3-19. The commander forms the green cell during the receipt of mission and problem framing planning steps to add to the commander’s and the operational planning team’s cultural understanding of an operational environment. In order to support the operational planning team, the green cell understands the operational planning team’s mission and tasks and is able to translate cultural information in a way that is relevant to the mission. 3-20. The cultural advisor is a concept developed and employed in Operation Enduring Freedom in Afghanistan. Cultural advisors are the principal subject matter experts on culture and planning related to their designated geographic region of expertise, serving as the cultural and language advisors to the commander. The cultural advisor is a special staff officer for the commander and a member of the planning staff. This person not only serves on the planning staff, but also deploys and serves as an ongoing advisor to senior leaders while they are in theater, if needed. The advantage of having a cultural advisor on staff is that this advisor can often help explain to the commander what the advisor sees on the ground in the area of operations. A foreign area officer or a civil affairs Soldier may be a good selection for a cultural advisor. Both can provide an understanding of the host nation and its specific regional, religious, and ethnic differences, and they may have foreign language skills. As a result, the commander can adjust operations in response to a culturally challenging environment. 3-21. Overall, there are many options to task-organize staffs to incorporate culture into planning. While a green cell creates expertise in one part of the staff, those concerns are also important for other staff sections. It is important for commanders to create staffs that are well integrated across the warfighting functions. One danger of creating a cultural cell within the staff is that it will relegate cultural concerns to one staff element and inhibit cultural concerns being integrated into the planning process. Commanders ensure that the staff integrates all operational and planning concerns, including cultural concerns. 3-22. Regardless of the particular planning configuration, commanders and planners find and use whatever cultural resources are available to the unit. Commanders and staffs incorporate culture into planning during the beginning of mission planning in order to understand an area of operations prior to developing any course of action. Success is recognized not by stand-alone briefs that describe the culture of an operational environment, but when all of the operational planning teams’ planning products reflect and have been informed by the cultural analysis that has been performed by subject matter experts. HUMAN TERRAIN SYSTEM 3-23. The human terrain system provides tactical to strategic level support to commanders. The human terrain system conducts field research and analysis of the local population to determine the civil considerations in order to help commanders better understand the operational environment from the population’s perspective and assess how actions will potentially impact and be perceived by the local population.

3-24

Chapter 3 3-24. A human terrain team typically consists of a team leader, one or two social scientists, and one research manager. When manning demands permit, human terrain team personnel are recruited and deployed to promote engagement with elements of the population that typically have restricted access. For example, in Afghanistan at least one woman is assigned per team to facilitate access to females within the local population. 3-25. Human terrain teams, part of the human terrain system, represent a capability that traditionally falls outside of military expertise. These teams are an additional enabler for commanders to gain situational understanding of their operational environments through the socio-cultural running estimate and are an important tool in the military decisionmaking process. (See FM 2-01.3/MCRP 2-3A for more information on human terrain teams.)

3-24

PART TWO Insurgencies Part two provides doctrine to help understand an insurgency. While the first part provides the context of an insurgency, the second part provides a discussion of an insurgency within that context. Chapter 4 provides information about insurgency prerequisites and fundamentals. It helps commanders and staffs understand why an insurgency may form and how and why it acts. Chapter 5 then provides a description of an insurgency’s threat characteristics. Chapter 4 Insurgency Prerequisites and Fundamentals 4-1. Several factors are important in analyzing any particular insurgency. Commanders and staffs must perform this analysis within an insurgency’s operational environment. Commanders and staffs consider when an insurgency could start or what the prerequisites are for a particular insurgency. Commanders and staffs also consider a particular insurgency’s strategy and its eight dynamics. This provides a means to analyze an insurgency. INTRASTATE WAR 4-2. One way commanders and staffs view insurgencies is in the context of intrastate conflict. An intrastate conflict is as war or conflict between a constituted government and its people or representative factions from the people. It is a war within a state versus a war between two or more nation states. Intrastate conflict directly relates to insurgencies. Other types of intrastate conflicts are insurgencies that differ only in the amount of popular support or the amount of governmental capacity. Commanders and staffs should not only consider an insurgency as an intrastate conflict. Insurgent movements may operate in multiple countries, as their desired end state may be regional, transnational, or global. The types of intrastate conflicts include rebellions (also referred to as insurrections), revolutions, civil wars, and coup d’états. 4-3. A rebellion (also known as an insurrection) may be fomented by a group that challenges state control. A rebellion is usually manifested by acts of violence when the state is unable or unwilling to address the group’s concerns. Another insurgency may use a rebellion if it can gain enough popular support to engage in large scale unrest or open conflict with the governing authority. Rebellions are forms of insurgency in which an organized group is leading the population, the causes of instability exist, and the movement enjoys some passive support among the population. Under most international laws it is a crime to incite, assist, or engage in violent actions against a constituted government. The Geneva Convention states that “Every government has a right to put down rebellion within its borders and to punish the insurgents in accordance with its penal laws.” (See the final record of the Diplomatic Conference of Geneva of 1949 vol. II section B, page 121 for more information on insurrections.) 4-4. A revolution is a popular insurgency with plans to overthrow a government and transform its society and government from one form of government to another. Revolutions generally evolve from a rebellion, but in revolutions popular support comes in the form of a fully mobilized population, which differs from simply passive or active support. A fully mobilized population is a part of a revolution and it is generally

3-24

Chapter 4 seeking fundamental lasting change in a society’s political, economic, or social order. A significant distinction between a revolution and a counterinsurgency is a requirement of the host-nation military, government, and civil authorities to prepare, plan, and conduct counterrevolution, and not simply counterinsurgency. The main difference is the need to reintegrate the mobilized population and not only reintegrate members of the insurgency. Although a coup d’état can resemble a revolution in that it can quickly overthrow a government, this overthrow is generally done rapidly and secretly during a coup d’état versus a rapid fully mobilization of the population during a revolution. 4-5. Civil wars are condition-based conflicts beginning with an insurgency. Once the insurgency achieves certain characteristics of organization and resembles an alternate government, the conflict reaches the state of civil war. This is often characterized by performing tasks associated with a state and having a defined government. If the insurgency loses the ability to meet these criteria, the status or state of the insurgency is no longer that of a civil war. The insurgent movement may attempt to gain outside recognition by calling the conflict a civil war, as a civil war tends to afford international recognition and legal implications as a competing group and not an illegal movement. According to the Geneva Convention, the criteria of a civil war is “that the insurgents must have an organization purporting to have the characteristics of a State; that the insurgent civil authority must exercise de facto authority over persons within a determinate territory; that the armed forces must act under the direction of the organized civil authority and be prepared to observe the ordinary laws of war; that the insurgent civil authority must agree to be bound by the provisions of the Convention.” (See the final record of the Diplomatic Conference of Geneva of 1949 vol. II section B, page 121 for more information on civil wars.) 4-6. Recognized antigovernment elements in a civil war may be classified as belligerents and not insurgencies. A belligerent, though generally a sovereign state, can be a non-sovereign state if it is recognized by the international community (by two or more states or organizations like the United Nations), organized, and is providing services to the population within its controlled areas. In the case where antigovernment forces meet the criteria of a state during a civil war, they achieve sufficient international recognition, and they may achieve belligerent status rather than insurgent status. Although status may change, counterinsurgency operations, by government forces, generally remain the same at the theater through lower tactical levels. The difference between a group being classified as an insurgency or a belligerent can affect the overall status of U.S. involvement, as a belligerent has international recognition. 4-7. +A faction that employs a coup d’état seeks to overthrow the governing authority by a quick decisive action by an internal faction within the government. Usually, this is the military or part of the security apparatus. A coup d’état may or may not result in an insurgency, as part of society may reject the change. Moreover, it is possible for an active insurgency to use a coup d’état to seize control over a government. With a coup d’état, a small group can kill or remove a leader and the leadership’s supporters and assume control of a state. The main point of a coup d’état is that it is a means to change a regime by actors who are part of the government. 4-8. Intrastate conflicts present different challenges than interstate wars, since they often take place among the population and, therefore, human rights violations and sectarian violence are more likely. Secondly, intrastate conflicts can spread to adjacent countries that have governments or portions of the population that share beliefs or goals with one side or the other. 4-9. The nature of an intrastate conflict is a grievance between segments of a state’s population with its constituted government. There can be a single root cause or a variety of causes perceived as so severe that they impact the population’s social contract with its government. There are many likely contributors to intrastate conflicts, including perceived weak, illegitimate, corrupt, or overly oppressive governments, ethnic or racial tensions, religions conflicts, economic stresses, or a need for land reform. Often an intrastate conflict causes the formation and growth of insurgencies and other intrastate conflicts. Commanders and staffs must understand the nature of intrastate conflicts even if they are poorly defined. If a commander and staff misdiagnosis an intrastate conflict, they can fail to properly identify and address the root cause of instability and the nature of the threat.

3-24

Insurgency Prerequisites and Fundamentals INSURGENCY PREREQUISITES 4-10. The three prerequisites of an insurgency, opportunity, motive, and means, provide a framework for both planners and executers to plan for and prevent an insurgency. Planners and executers use the prerequisites for planning and execution of operations in environments where insurgencies are likely, such as a post-conflict environment. (See JP 3-24 for a further discussion of insurgency prerequisites.) OPPORTUNITY 4-11. Opportunity refers to the emergence of significant gaps in the ability of the state or its local allies to control its territory and population. States must have the capacity to detect the early stages of insurgent organization and mobilization. This requires the cooperation of a significant portion of the population or the establishment of an extensive program of domestic surveillance and intelligence activities. The state must also be capable of suppressing the insurgency in a way that deters other potential rebels while avoiding contributing to the insurgent narrative and provoking wider resistance. 4-12. For a land force, opportunity provides a means to evaluate the likelihood of an insurgency. For example, after a victory during a major combat operation, if the former government prevented insurgencies by an intelligence program, the commander and staff need to consider how likely and for how long an occupying force can prevent an insurgency without gaining the active support of the population or reestablishing intelligence programs. Understanding the opportunities for an insurgency in an area is essential for land forces. 4-13. At the tactical and operational level, understanding opportunities for an insurgency provides a means for commanders and staffs to analyze the local conditions and the likelihood of a successful insurgency developing. Commanders and staffs actively make assessments on both the support of the population and the intelligence capability and capacity of the local area. If the population is not supportive of the host nation and the host nation has no means to prevent an insurgency in a hostile population, there is an opportunity for an insurgency in that area. (For a further discussion on why a gap in state control might happen, see JP 3-24.) MOTIVE 4-14. A population that has grievances does not necessarily cause an insurgency. Grievances are necessary, but not sufficient, conditions for an insurgency. Poverty, unemployment, economic inequality, inadequate essential services, political marginalization, and repression are commonplace. These conditions exist in many places where an insurgency does not. It takes established or emerging leaders to build a compelling narrative that links grievances to a political agenda and mobilizes the population to support a violent social movement. The narrative explains who is to blame for grievances, how grievances will be addressed, and how the population and insurgency should work together to accomplish the goal. Ideology often provides a coherent set of ideas that provide a compelling framework for a narrative. Where opportunity and motive (grievances) intersect, individuals emerge to attempt to mobilize the population. When grievances mobilize a population, they are a root cause of an insurgency. (See JP 3-24 for a further discussion on motive.) 4-15. The root causes of an insurgency are real or perceived grievances that insurgents use to mobilize a population in support of an insurgency. Insurgents use these grievances to fuel an insurgency. Root causes are not static and can change over the course of an insurgency. As conditions change, insurgent leaders create different narratives to mobilize a population. The root causes that led to the insurgency in the first place may not be the same ones that are sustaining an ongoing insurgency. Commanders and staffs perform continued assessments and reassessments to determine what an insurgency is using as a root cause. 4-16. A root cause can be summarized as a broad perception of injustice linked to the government that insurgents use to mobilize a population. If counterinsurgents take actions such as building schools and roads, or creating jobs, but these actions do not address the perception of injustice, then they will not reduce support for insurgency. Phrased differently, deprivation that is not considered unjust is much less destabilizing than relative prosperity which is considered unjust. It is not the thought "I'm poor" that leads someone to attempt to overthrow or force a change in the government; it is "I'm poor, this is not fair, and

3-24

Chapter 4 the government is to blame." The solution to the latter thought is more complex than the solution to the former. 4-17. Identity, based on cultural, religious, or other cultural groupings, can create a strong root cause. In cases where groups are persecuted and underrepresented, the insurgents can use a narrative that uses this underrepresentation or persecution as a root cause against the government. In some cases, groups are concentrated in certain regions where the government exercises biased controls over those groups. This might be an effective root cause to use for an insurgency based on a nullification of government control. 4-18. Religion can also be an effective root cause. Religious-based movements create a perception that a certain type of religion should drive politics and groups should convert to that religion. Insurgents attempt to present their ideology as the true and only correct form of their religion. Insurgents can use religion as part of an identity based root cause if the government persecutes a certain religious group. However, insurgents can also use religion to create an ideology that everyone should be a part of, and governed by, a certain religion. In this case, a religious-based group could seek to overthrow its government and replace it with a religious based government. 4-19. The presence of a foreign force can be the root cause of an insurgency. The presence of foreign military forces can also be used as a means to mobilize popular support. The presence can come after a major combat operation that replaces a government. As such, any major combat operation should include planning for stability operations to prevent an insurgency. However, this could also be a root cause if there are Soldiers or Marines stationed in a host nation. Insurgents can use the perception that outsiders exploit the host nation or that the host-nation government excessively caters to foreigners as a root cause. 4-20. Land disputes concerning ownership, usage, and rights, especially to agrarian, mining, or other land based livelihoods or identities, can be used as a root cause. Land disputes often manifest themselves as an issue of income inequality. For example, landowners may have tenant farmers that pay the landowners’ rents. Insurgent groups can often use a narrative that exploits unequal land ownership as a root cause, and promises redistribution of land and land reform to the tenant farmers as an effective justification for the farmers to join the insurgency. 4-21. Corruption of the host-nation government can be a root cause. If institutional corruption is systemic, ongoing, and considered unfair, insurgents can use that as an effective narrative. For example, corruption in government development programs can cause resentment by the aggrieved group. Corruption can lead to loss of host-nation legitimacy and can undermine government control of an area. 4-22. Insurgents can use a gap between a population’s expectations and the government’s capability to meet those expectations as a root cause. The larger the gap, the greater the population’s perceived or real sense of deprivation. This allows for the development of a narrative in which the insurgents promise to close the gap. MEANS 4-23. It takes considerable resources to mount a violent challenge to the incumbent political authorities and the methods an insurgency uses to secure those means determines a great deal about its behavior. The leaders of a potential insurgency must assemble and organize personnel, funds, weapons, and systems of secure communications and logistics. The other prerequisites relate to the means. For example, recruiters can use existing social networks to find new recruits. (See JP 3-24 for a detailed discussion on means.) 4-24. Commanders’ and staffs’ planning efforts should consider how an insurgent movement resources itself. An insurgency will often depend on a local population for resourcing and recruitment. In these cases, insurgents base an insurgency on social relationships to include, but not limited to, villages, clans, tribes, ethnicities, or other groups. These groups will often freely give resources, but some coercion may be used. In the cases where resources are freely given, the insurgency may have legitimacy. However, the use of local resources also restricts an insurgency. For resources to be given freely, the insurgent is constrained by the social norms of the groups. Moreover, because an insurgency may be seen as aligned to a certain group, there is a certain amount of difficulty expanding the insurgency beyond its core group. 4-25. A local area’s insurgency and population could connect, through communications, with its diasporas and attain resources from around the world. If its diasporas relate to the struggle, they may freely give

3-24

Insurgency Prerequisites and Fundamentals financial aid to an insurgency. In such cases, commanders and staffs need to determine possible means to undermine this support. For example, the use of counter threat finance may prevent this funding. On the other hand, resourcing can be local. Insurgencies can have access to black markets or other resources that they can use to buy weapons. In these cases, stopping these transactions may be an effective means of blocking insurgent resources. 4-26. An insurgency with state sponsorship has important advantages and disadvantages. State sponsorship can offer resources, sanctuary, and training. These are important advantages for any insurgency because they offer an insurgent group the ability to organize and become tactically and operationally more effective. On the other hand, state sponsorship can undermine the support of the local population. An insurgency that depends on outside state support can be perceived as artificial and may not have deep support from the local population. While recruits may join an insurgency by increased resources, recruits attracted because of the possibility of wealth may be less effective. However, if an insurgency uses outside support to build a political base before starting military operations, insurgents mitigate these risks. For the counterinsurgent, understanding the nature of state support allows the commander and staff to undermine that support before an insurgency begins. 4-27. A group that already has resourcing could potentially become an insurgency. Groups tied to black markets, such as those selling drugs, may seek to resist or nullify the government’s ability to stop their activities. While they may exploit the population and create a root cause, the protection of their resources is the essential reason for the development of their insurgency. The means for an insurgency can play an interrelated role with the motive and opportunity. 4-28. When commanders and staffs desire an additional method of analysis other than opportunity, motive, and means, the prerequisites of an insurgency can be represented as a vulnerable population, leadership for direction, and a lack of government control. A population is vulnerable if the people have real or perceived grievances that insurgents can exploit. Moreover, there must be an insurgent leadership element that can direct the frustrations of a vulnerable population. The insurgency must act on real or perceived lack of governmental control, which can allow insurgents to operate with little or no interference from security forces or other agencies. This means that the government is not providing for the people. This may refer to inadequate services or an overly harsh and repressive government. When all three exist in an area, an insurgency can operate with increased freedom of movement, gain the support of the people, and become entrenched over time. INSURGENCY FUNDAMENTALS 4-29. Few insurgencies fit neatly into a rigid classification. However, insurgencies do have common characteristics that can provide a basis for building a more accurate picture of an insurgency and help commanders understand the situation. The fundamentals of insurgencies help commanders and staffs analyze insurgent strategies, objectives, and tactics. Each fundamental is important independently, but analyzing the interactions and relationships between the fundamentals as a whole is the key to understanding an insurgency. The two insurgency fundamentals are— * Insurgent strategies. * Dynamics of insurgency. INSURGENT STRATEGIES 4-30. An insurgency’s strategy is determined by its own ends, ways, and means. There are a range of ends an insurgency might seek, to include replacing the state, separating from the state, changing the policy of the state, nullifying state control in an area of a state, and securing a place in a state’s political system. These basic ends will influence the ways an insurgency uses. However, that influence is not deterministic, and the way an insurgency fights is also influenced by its resourcing. In addition, the relationships between an insurgency’s ends, ways, and means is also influenced by numerous important variables. Those variables include but are not limited to— * How an insurgency gains legitimacy and controls a population. * Whether the insurgency is political centric, violence centric, or economic centric. * The relationship of the insurgency to the economy.

3-24

Chapter 4 * Organization. * Sense of time. * Adaptability. Insurgent Legitimacy and Control 4-31. How an insurgency gains legitimacy and controls a population within a society helps determine strategic behavior. Some insurgencies have a clear political message and bring that message to their society. Others may try to use economic black markets and the wealth that comes from them to make their population dependent on the insurgency. Others may try to use coercion to control their society. Most will use a combination of many different methods. However, how an insurgency controls the local population or tries to gain legitimacy helps determine that insurgency’s strategic behavior. Political, Economic, and Violence-Centered Insurgencies 4-32. +All insurgencies have a political aim which may be to change their society or simply to protect a black market. While all insurgencies involve violence, politics, and economics, some insurgencies are focused on politics, some are focused on violence, and some are focused on economics. This can change over time. Many insurgencies develop well defined political goals which shape their strategy and an infrastructure to promote and refine them. In these insurgencies, the role of violence is probably secondary to the role of building political support. In this case an insurgency’s aims are more likely to be changing policy, fighting into the state’s political system, or replacing the state. Violence is likely to be more organized as the political support grows for an insurgency. Other insurgencies are focused on violence, lacking the ability or incentive to build a political infrastructure and gain wide political support. These types of +insurgencies are more likely to develop networked organizations with connections to criminal organizations or other insurgent groups with similar interests. Finally, an insurgency may be focused on economics. These insurgencies are likely to want simply to stop state interferences with their activities. As such, these insurgencies may limit the use of violence, unless the state attempts to interfere with their economic base, whether in the legitimate economy or in black or gray markets. The Relationship of an Insurgency to the Economy 4-33. Commanders and staffs must understand the relationship of the insurgency to the economy to understand an insurgency’s strategic behavior. An insurgency could have little dependence on the local economy and receive all its support from the outside. Insurgents could also gain resources from the formal economy in which they operate and sustain themselves through kidnapping or theft. An insurgency could also maintain an economic base on the black market, or it could control a war economy. In all cases, an insurgency’s relationship with the economy will affect its behavior. For example, if it is dependent on outside support, the aims of its outside support will influence the insurgency’s behavior. Moreover, outside support influences tactical and operational behavior. An insurgency that does not depend on the local population is more likely to use violence against the population. (See paragraphs 2-25 through 2-31 for more information the economic variable.) Insurgent Organizational Structure 4-34. The organization of an insurgency is also important. Insurgent organizations can be conceptualized along a continuum from a formal and hierarchical structure to a networked structure. This structure affects organization because it affects control over actions and the scale of tactical actions. Without a hierarchical structure, it is difficult to control individuals or groups within an insurgency. This leads to attacks that can affect the legitimacy of an insurgency. Moreover, while a networked organization may use terrorist tactics, it is also difficult for a networked insurgency to mass combat power. It is also difficult to negotiate a settlement with a networked insurgency because no single person or small group is in charge. A networked insurgency changes the dynamics of individuals in an insurgency, as no one is likely to be essential to the continuation of a networked insurgency. A hierarchical insurgency may be easier to penetrate than a networked insurgency, as a few individuals may be essential to the insurgency and control the actions of members of the insurgency. (See paragraphs 4-88 through 4-103 for more information on a networked insurgency.)

3-24

Insurgency Prerequisites and Fundamentals Sense of Time 4-35. An insurgents’ sense of time will also affect their actions. If insurgents feel time is on their side, they are more likely to adopt a lower risk approach and avoid becoming decisively engaged. If they perceive time as being against them, that will push them towards higher risk activities. Commanders and staffs must determine an insurgency’s perception of time to determine its behavior. (See paragraphs 2-43 through 2-44 for more information on the time variable.) Adaptability 4-36. Adaptability is also an essential element to understanding an insurgency’s strategic behavior. Adaptability determines how well, how often, and how the insurgency adapts tactically, operationally, and strategically. This can be directly linked to the organization of an insurgency. A networked insurgency may be highly adaptable at the operational and tactical level, but not at the strategic level. On the other hand, the reverse may be true for a hierarchal insurgency. 4-37. An insurgency's strategy is not static, and it can shift. Counterinsurgents must recognize and respond to shifts in strategy. As the operational environment changes, it can affect an insurgency’s resourcing, the ways an insurgency attempts to achieve its ends, and its calculation of what its ends should be. In a networked insurgency, different elements of the insurgency may evolve differently than other elements of the insurgency. An insurgency is not static, and it continues to evolve as conditions evolve. Insurgent Approaches 4-38. An insurgency might take several approaches to achieve its objectives. In many insurgencies, different elements of the same insurgency or related insurgencies will have different strategic calculations. Commanders and staffs must understand an insurgency’s approach to develop effective programs that attack the root causes of that insurgency. Commanders and staffs combine their understanding of the insurgent’s ways to accomplish its ends, with the insurgent’s means to pursue those ends, to provide the most probable and dangerous course of action for all insurgencies operating in an area of operation. This provides an understanding of the insurgency’s approach. 4-39. Commanders and staffs must understand the insurgent’s ends to understand the insurgent’s decisionmaking process, capabilities, future actions, current tactics, method of command and control, recruiting, propaganda, and use of the local population. Examining the ends of an insurgency and the insurgents’ attempts to achieve those ends through various ways, including combat actions, propaganda, and subversion, enable counterinsurgents to undermine the enemy’s decisionmaking process. The insurgents’ strategic ends may be overt and publicly championed or covert. Insurgent operations may have immediate consequences or delayed effects aligned with long-term objectives. For example, car bombings among a local population may seem counterproductive because they incite immediate anger against the bombings and their perpetrators. However, a sustained campaign of massive violence can have two long-term results, it can— * Weaken popular support for the government, which has failed to protect the people. * Make the population susceptible to insurgent intimidation. Whatever the insurgent’s ends, approaching the problem from the perspectives of the insurgent and the population can provide counterinsurgents the means to interdict the threat on a number of levels. 4-40. Counterinsurgents are likely to face insurgents who use several different approaches to achieve their ends. Some common approaches at the tactical level and operational level are the urban (terrorist), military focused, protracted, and subversive approaches. The urban (terrorist) and military focused are considered basic approaches and the protracted and subversive are considered advanced approaches. Basic approaches refer to the insurgent capabilities needed to achieve long-term strategic objectives. Basic approaches do not mean insurgents are not efficient in tactics or other skills, but overall they lack the means to pursue a more advanced approach towards achieving their goals. In contrast, advanced approaches probably have political wings that govern the militant side of the movement and are focused on longer-term political goals. 4-41. Insurgents may use different approaches at different times, applying tactics that take advantage of circumstances. Insurgents may also combine a number of methods that include tactics drawn from any or

3-24

Chapter 4 all of the other approaches. In addition, different insurgent forces using different approaches may form loose coalitions when it serves their interests; however, these same coalitions may fight among themselves, even while engaging counterinsurgents. A single area of operations may have multiple competing entities, each seeking to maximize its survivability and influence, and this situation may be duplicated several times across a joint operations area. This may further complicate understanding both the insurgency and the counterinsurgent operations necessary for success. 4-42. The urban (terrorist) approach is an approach in which insurgents attack government and symbolic targets (for example an important religious building) to cause government forces to overreact against the population. The insurgents want the government’s repressive measures to enrage the people so that they rise up and overthrow the government. Although this type of method may develop popular support against a government that is particularly brutal or corrupt, it may only result in shallow support for the insurgency. The population may only see the insurgency positively because of the brutal response, not because they identify with the insurgency. 4-43. An insurgency uses the military-focused approach to achieve its policy goals by military success. In this approach, insurgents’ efforts focus on causing the government to lose legitimacy by military success and inspiring a population to join the insurgents against the government. The most important idea behind a military focused method is that it does not require building political support among the population. Instead, military success and action will gain the support of a population. 4-44. A protracted approach is an advanced approach based on Mao Tse-Tung’s theory of protracted popular war. It attempts to lengthen the conflict as much as necessary to assemble the resources and forces necessary for success and to wear down the counterinsurgent forces and their political leadership. The protracted war method is based upon three distinct phases: latent and incipient, guerrilla warfare, and war of movement. Each phase builds upon the previous phase and continues activities from all or some of the previous phases. The protracted method requires both a political wing and a military wing. 4-45. The subversive approach is another advanced approach. A subversive approach attempts to subvert the government from within by using its political arm to become a legitimate political party and enter the government. Subversive activities may occur as part of other ways, particularly the protracted war approach. DYNAMICS OF INSURGENCY 4-46. Commanders and staffs must understand the nature of an insurgency when conducting a counterinsurgency. This requires understanding insurgent strategy. However, to understand an insurgent’s strategy, commanders and staffs must understand insurgency dynamics. The dynamics of insurgency is a framework for understanding an insurgency. 4-47. An operational environment may have multiple insurgent groups. These groups may be pursuing a wide variety of goals and interests. As such, these groups may be collaborating, fighting each other, or acting neutral towards each other. When commanders and staffs analyze an insurgency, they consider each group and provide a different analysis for each group based on the eight dynamics of insurgency. 4-48. Eight dynamics or some combinations of these dynamics are common to most successful insurgencies. These dynamics provide a framework for planners to analyze insurgencies. Each of these dynamics can contribute to the strength of an insurgency, but each can also be used to find fracture points and weak points in an insurgency. Fracture points are points of internal division within the insurgency. A weak point is an underlying weakness, such as access to resources, of the insurgency. The eight dynamics are— * Leadership. * Ideology. * Objectives. * Environment and geography. * External support. * Internal support.

3-24

Insurgency Prerequisites and Fundamentals * Phasing and timing. * Organizational and operational patterns. First Dynamic—Leadership 4-49. A group committing random violence is not an insurgency. In an insurgency, there is a political rationale behind the violence. An insurgency requires leadership to provide vision, direction, guidance, coordination, and organizational coherence. Leadership is required to mobilize the population by using a root cause. Leadership is needed organize tasks to undermine the legitimacy of the host nation and to establish legitimacy or acquiescence to their movement. The ability of insurgent leaders to organize and their willingness to distribute power across their organization is vital to the long-term success of their movement. Organizations dependent on key charismatic personalities to provide cohesion and motivation for their movement are vulnerable to disruptions if those leaders are co-opted or killed. 4-50. The political leadership can be the same as its military leadership. However, sometimes this is not the case and there is well-defined political leadership. When an insurgency has well-defined political leadership, that leadership is called the political cadre. The political cadre may participate in the political system or it may be clandestine and illegal. In either case, counterinsurgents define the political cadre of an insurgency when there are insurgent leaders who are mainly involved in the political struggle and not the armed struggle. 4-51. The political cadre are the force behind the ideology of an insurgency. They are actively engaged in the struggle to accomplish insurgent goals. They may also work within a political party to work within the political system and provide some legitimacy for the insurgency to the population. The cadre is active in spreading the ideology of the insurgency, if the insurgency has an ideology. Modern noncommunist insurgencies rarely, if ever, use the term cadre; however, these movements usually include a group that performs similar functions. In a movement based on religious extremism, religious leaders can play a role similar to political cadre. 4-52. The leadership of an insurgency is composed of leaders from the political cadre, guerrillas, and auxiliaries. These may or may not be the same individuals. Moreover, they may work closely together or operate in a decentralized manner, depending on their need for security or other operational concerns. Insurgent leaders usually exercise leadership through force of personality, the power of revolutionary ideas, and personal charisma. In some insurgencies, they may hold their position through religious, clan, or tribal authority. These leaders may include supporting members, much like command and staff in a regular military. These supporting members may include advisors, logistics and administration personnel, spokespersons, and those leading operations. Insurgent leaders may attain positions within the government and work to undermine the government. 4-53. Poor leadership can undermine an insurgency. Insurgent leaders who undermine their own legitimacy with the population, for example, will significantly hamper the success of their insurgency. An analysis of insurgent leadership provides information on how effective its leaders are in mobilizing the population and effectively using resources to undermine the host nation. Second Dynamic—Ideology 4-54. The insurgents must have a problem that justifies their actions in relation to the population’s grievances and explains what is wrong with the status quo. Insurgents use a narrative to connect a population’s grievances with its actions and demands. When an insurgency uses a narrative to mobilize a population, these grievances become root causes. An essential part of the ability of an insurgency to mobilize a population is an insurgency’s ideology. An ideology is the integrated assertions, theories, and aims that constitute a sociopolitical program. Not all insurgencies are ideological, but an ideology provides an insurgency with a message of change that is normally coherent and logical, based upon the insurgency’s underlying assumptions. 4-55. Ideology is a factor that unifies the many divergent interests and goals among the insurgency’s members and the general population. As a common set of interrelated beliefs, values, and norms, ideology is used to influence the behavior of individuals within the group. It explains how the world works. Ideology

3-24

Chapter 4 can serve as a rallying call for all members of the population to join a struggle. Commanders and staffs answer several questions when analyzing insurgent ideology: * What is the problem the insurgents will fix, and how will they fix it? * Are there any ideological divisions within the insurgency or the population? * Is the ideology supported by outside groups? * What propaganda are the insurgents using to propagate their ideology? Third Dynamic—Objectives 4-56. Insurgencies can have strategic, operational, and tactical objectives. Tactical objectives most directly translate to actions. For example, a tactical goal of destroying a logistics convoy directly translates into an attack against a logistics convoy. However, these actions are normally performed to achieve an operational objective. In the example of the attack on the convoy, the operational objective might be to prevent logistic support of host-nation forces. When insurgents achieve various operational goals, they can achieve the strategic end state of their insurgency. 4-57. A strategic objective is the movement’s overall political goal or desired end state. An insurgency will seek to— * Force significant political, economic, or religious change. * Overthrow the existing social order and reallocate power. * Generate resistance to outside occupiers or change within a society. * Nullify government control in an area. * Cause a region to secede. 4-58. An insurgency’s strategic objectives will influence the type of insurgency that develops, and its ideology will influence an insurgency’s end state. For example, an insurgency focused on resistance against outside occupiers or change in a society may unify many different groups based on that shared end state. The strategic end state of the insurgency may be as simple as resistance to occupation or a conservative insurgency’s general resistance to change in a society. Groups that seek to nullify government control may have an objective of protecting criminal activities and black markets. These groups may be non-ideological, but they will still need to mobilize the population to nullify governmental control. On the other hand, groups that wish to force significant change in a society or overthrow an existing social order are likely to be ideologically driven. There is a connection between an insurgency’s strategic goal and an insurgency’s ideology. Fourth Dynamic—Environment and Geography 4-59. The environment and geography affect insurgent actions. Insurgencies may form their base in urban environments, rural environments, or in a combination of both. Insurgents located in rural areas can enjoy the relative safety of remote terrain or safe heavens, such as jungles or mountains. These geographical conditions make it possible for them to form larger units and conduct larger-scale operations. However, there are some disadvantages to a rural based insurgency. Communications and supply lines are longer and slower. Insurgents can be isolated from the population, and an insurgency can be destroyed with a decisive military operation. 4-60. Urban insurgencies tend to operate within ethnic ghettos or enclaves of sympathetic supporters. Operating in urban settings requires a high degree of compartmentalization, which makes it difficult for groups to train and organize for larger-scale operations. Urban insurgencies often operate in small cells. However, an urban setting does allow an insurgency to work within large population groups. The opportunity for mobilization of the population is therefore higher than in a rural insurgency. Historically, urban insurgencies have been easier to destroy than rural insurgencies. The lack of isolation is an advantage for counterinsurgents because they can apply constant pressure on the urban population to undermine the insurgency. 4-61. Other factors of the area of operations may affect an insurgency. Tribal, religious, and social factors have relationships with insurgencies. The physical environment also effects insurgent movement and

3-24

Insurgency Prerequisites and Fundamentals planning. Commanders and staffs must understand the connections between a physical environment and its effect on an insurgency. (See chapter 2 for more information on a physical environment.) Fifth Dynamic—External Support 4-62. Historically, insurgencies are less likely to succeed without some form of external support. This support can be in the form of— * Moral support. * Political support. * Resources, such as money, weapons, food, advisors, training, and foreign fighters. * Sanctuary, such as secure training sites, operational bases over a border, or protection from extradition. 4-63. Governments providing support to an insurgency normally share interests or a common ideology with the insurgency. Ethnic enclaves or diasporas in third-party countries can provide significant support, even if a country’s government is not actively supporting an insurgency. For example, global diasporas can provide significant resources for an insurgency, even if no government is providing active support. (See FM 3-05, chapter 2, for more information on unconventional warfare.) 4-64. +However, with external support comes a degree of dependency on that support. Limiting access to external support is a possible means of influencing or changing the actions of an insurgency. Limiting external support provides one means to affect an insurgency indirectly. External support can help to shape an insurgency and the outcome of an insurgency. In the case of the insurgency in Sri Lanka, external support was essential to the success of the Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam. Large diasporas provided the Liberation Tigers of Tamil sanctuary and resources. This allowed them to gain dominance over other insurgent groups and to wage a long and bloody insurgency against the government of Sri Lanka.

3-24

Chapter 4 External Support for the Tamil Tigers Eleven years of discrimination by the Sinhala majority against the Tamil minority reached a breaking point in Sri Lanka during the Black July riots of 1983. Soon after, the Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam emerged as the most capable Tamil insurgent group, prepared to wage a campaign of violence and terror against the Sri Lankan state and non-Tamil civilians. The operational environment was complex, with insurgents fighting insurgents while also fighting the government, as occurred with Sunni and Shia groups in Iraq. At various stages of the conflict, the Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam fought against the Sri Lankan state but also against other antigovernment insurgent groups. The most prominent of these groups was the Janatha Vimukthi Permuna, a Marxist-Leninist group that blended violence and left-wing politics before laying down its arms in the mid to late 1990s. This case illustrates the importance of non-state actors in an operational environment. While the Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam was indeed a non-state actor in its own right, the group relied on its global diaspora for a range of support activities. Following the ethnic riots of 1983, thousands of Tamil refugees fled overseas to India, Australia, Canada, and the United Kingdom. This sowed the seeds for the Tamil diaspora and the transnational nature of the Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam’s insurgency. The global diaspora was a major part of the organization’s fundraising and propaganda network. Furthermore, the transnational diaspora network provided funding and weaponry to sustain the Tigers for most of the group’s existence. In addition to enjoying the largesse of a well-organized and entrepreneurial diaspora, the insurgents relied on co-ethnics in India for sanctuary, which was essential in the group’s early years. Since the Tamils effectively controlled the Jaffna peninsula in the northeast of the country, the Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam had a home base from which it could train, plan, and execute attacks against the military. Furthermore, across the Palk Straits in Tamil Nadu, India, the Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam was able to rely on the support—both active and passive—of thousands of ethnic Tamils who sympathized with the group. The Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam took advantage of the benefits of globalization, developing a truly global network of contacts abroad, and soon engaged in weapons procurement activities throughout East and Southeast Asia, in Afghanistan, Pakistan, Ukraine, the Balkans, Lebanon, and other well-known arms markets. At various points throughout the insurgency, the Tigers collaborated with other terrorists groups as diverse as the Revolutionary Armed Forces Colombia, the African National Congress in South Africa, Moro Islamic Liberation Front, Hezb-i- Islami Gulbuddin in Afghanistan, the Japanese Red Army, and the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine. In 1996, the insurgents acquired U.S. Stinger-class missiles from the Kurdistan Worker’s Party and used these weapons two years later to shoot down a Sri Lankan civilian Lionair jet. Over time, the Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam distinguished itself as perhaps the most lethal insurgent force in modern history. By the mid-late 1990s, the group boasted a navy, an air force, and an elite suicide commando unit used to assassinate several heads of state and numerous counterinsurgency force commanders. As a pioneer of suicide techniques, the Tamil Tigers devoted significant resources to two operational wings that functioned as suicide strike teams, the Black Tigers and the Sea Tigers. A “no-holds barred” approach to the conflict led the counterinsurgency force and the insurgents to routinely and systematically slaughter each other, while also destroying Sri Lanka’s infrastructure and displacing much of its civilian population.

3-24

Insurgency Prerequisites and Fundamentals Sixth Dynamic—Internal Support 4-65. Internal support is any support provided from within the borders of the state where the insurgency is active. An insurgency must have some internal support, even if it is limited. The level and type of support varies by insurgency and area. Counterinsurgents must understand the specific nature of the support to address and counter the relationship between the population and insurgents. This support may be either willing or based on coercion. 4-66. A large populated area or region where insurgents can operate represents many different communities that provide varying levels of support for different reasons. There are two types of internal support: active and passive. Passive support is critical for successful insurgent operations. It provides freedom of movement for members of the insurgency to reside, train, plan, and conduct operations in an area without resistance from the local community. Passive supporters do not report insurgents to local counterinsurgent forces out of sympathy for the cause, antigovernment sentiment, reluctance to get involved due to peer pressure, threats of violence, or the benefits that the insurgency provides. 4-67. Active supporters provide open sympathy to the insurgency, participate in insurgent operations, and find new recruits. Active supporters are usually central to the insurgency’s propaganda efforts. They may provide material, intelligence, or assistance as requested or demanded by insurgents. Active support, like passive support, may be volunteered or coerced. 4-68. When analyzing the type and amount of support an insurgency has, possible indicators are: * Reduction in local medical supplies or personnel absent from clinics and hospitals. * Increased black market activities and extortion for resources. * Increased theft or purchase of food and gas. * New presence of bodyguards. * New areas in which the local police are growing reluctant to patrol or conduct operations. * New or increased interaction with local civilian leaders by insurgents. * Intelligence confirming the presence of insurgents in areas where people gather and communicate. * Increased assassinations of those opposing insurgents or for symbolic value to frighten locals. * A drop in the number of walk-ins and tips due to fear of retribution. * A rise in the reluctance of local civilians to be seen talking with counterinsurgent forces. * An increase in the absence of local reconstruction crews, police, and military or a decrease in their willingness to be associated with counterinsurgent forces or to leave their families. * Suspension of local government or community meeting and events. 4-69. There is a relationship between internal and external support. Insurgents must have significant strength in at least one of these dynamics (internal or external support) or they will not be able to meet their tangible support needs. Both of these dynamics must be controlled and reduced in order for the counterinsurgent to prevail; just eliminating internal support is not enough to defeat an insurgency with robust external support (and vice versa). Seventh Dynamic—Phasing and Timing 4-70. Successful insurgencies often progress through three phases (latent and incipient, guerrilla warfare, and war of movement). Not all insurgencies progress through all three phases, and progression through all three phases is not a requirement for success. Insurgent success can occur in any phase. In addition, insurgencies can revert to an earlier phase and resume development when favorable conditions return. 4-71. Movement from one phase to another phase does not end the operational and tactical activities of earlier phases; it incorporates them. Therefore, it is difficult to determine when an insurgency moves from one phase to another. In addition, a single insurgency may be in different phases in different parts of the country. Advanced insurgencies can rapidly shift, split, combine, or reorganize; they are dynamic and adaptive.

3-24

Chapter 4 4-72. The first phase is latent and incipient. During this phase, activities include the emergence of insurgent leadership, creation of initial organizational infrastructure, training, acquisition of resources, and political actions, such as organizing protests. A group that eventually becomes members of an insurgency may simply be a legitimate political group at this stage. Governmental actions and changes in society can transform political groups into insurgencies. 4-73. The second phase is guerrilla warfare. In this phase, successful insurgents use small-unit tactics to attack security forces while continuing ongoing political efforts. Their goal is to undermine the government’s legitimacy and replace the government’s legitimacy with the population seeing the insurgency as legitimate. In this stage, insurgencies may begin performing limited governmental functions for the population in areas they control. 4-74. The third phase is war of movement. During this phase, an insurgency may be trying to overthrow a government or trying to force the withdrawal of an occupying power. For success, an insurgency does not necessarily need to transform into a conventional military, but it must position itself to defeat the government or occupying power. However, this phase may not be needed. In some cases, all an insurgency must do is create a continual problem that cannot be solved and wear down the patience of the counterinsurgents. This is especially true when the counterinsurgents are directed by an outside power. This phase is characterized by increased military capability, popular support, logistics capacity, and territorial control. 4-75. Many successful insurgencies go through a process similar to these three phases, but this is not a uniform rule. Some insurgencies, for example, form rapidly and displace a government quickly. Figure 4-1 provides a model for understanding the possible evolution of insurgencies. This model provides a simplification of reality in order to understand and analyze a phenomena. A phase-like evolution of an insurgency tends to create a strong political and military organization with deep roots in a society. Such organizations are difficult to undermine. However, historically the most likely outcome of an insurgency is its rapid defeat. These insurgencies demonstrate little phasing beyond the beginning of violence followed by the quick defeat of the insurgency. (See figure 4-1.)

3-24

Insurgency Prerequisites and Fundamentals Figure 4-1. Conflict resolution model Eighth Dynamic—Organizational and Operational Patterns 4-76. Each insurgency’s organization is unique. The specific type and level of organization is an indicator of the insurgents’ strategy and capabilities. Understanding an insurgency’s organizational and operational patterns helps counterinsurgents predict the enemy’s tactics, techniques, and procedures, understand their capabilities, and identify potential targets. 4-77. Insurgents may be organized into networks and require certain elements, characteristics, bonds, and conditions to operate and survive. A network is a series of direct and indirect ties from one entity to a collection of entities. There may be a central point of communication or influence (critical node) that provides a critical vulnerability for targeting against the network. Insurgent networking extends the range and variety of both insurgent military and political actions. Networks of communications, people, and activities exist in all populations and have a measureable impact on the organized governance of a population and, consequently, military operations. These networks tend to heal, adapt, and learn rapidly. They may be a combination of insurgent, criminal, regular, or irregular forces, and foreign government sanctioned forces. These networks exist within a population. Existing within a population enhances their

3-24

Chapter 4 capabilities to sow disorder, survive, and protract the struggle, presenting particularly difficult problems for counterinsurgency forces. (See paragraphs 4-88 to 4-103 for more information on networked insurgencies.) Organizational Elements 4-78. The basic organizational elements of an insurgency are the movement’s leadership, guerrillas, auxiliary forces, and underground elements. While there are almost certainly members of the insurgency who perform multiple functions, grouping an insurgency into these groups provides a model of understanding how an insurgency functions. However, commanders and staffs must avoid the trap of mirror imaging an insurgency against U.S. organizational structure. These groupings help the commander understand groups that are involved in the various functions of an insurgency, but commanders and staffs need to realize that insurgencies normally do not have fixed organizational structures. (See figure 4-2.) Figure 4-2. Organizational elements of an insurgency Leadership 4-79. An essential element of any insurgency is its leadership and its leadership structure. This can vary greatly and is dependent on whether the insurgency is a networked insurgency or a hierarchical insurgency. However, because of its importance, it is covered under the first dynamic. Guerilla Units 4-80. Guerrillas are used for a wide range military purposes, but their primary purpose is to achieve a political end. For example, attacks on host-nation forces may undermine host-nation legitimacy among a population and create insurgent safe heavens. Guerrilla units can conduct small-unit tactical operations and can mass for larger operations. Ambushes against convoys are examples of small-unit tactics an insurgent group may use. These tactics have the advantage of preventing an insurgent group from becoming decisively engaged. As an insurgency gains military power, guerilla units increase their ability to conduct large scale attacks. During the final insurgency stage, war of movement, guerilla units can perform actions meant to destroy the host-nation military force. This can be a decisive action for an insurgency. If successful, a war of movement can overthrow the government or allow the insurgency to reach other political goals. However, if the insurgency begins a war of movement too soon, the insurgency can deplete its military power and undermine its political power. Auxiliary Forces 4-81. Auxiliary forces are the insurgency’s support elements. Anyone involved in an insurgency can perform logistic functions, and insurgents are probably involved in both logistics and combat. Creating this division, however, groups certain essential functions of an insurgency in a single category.

3-24

Insurgency Prerequisites and Fundamentals 4-82. The auxiliary includes cells and external elements. Cells include logistics, intelligence, counterintelligence, propaganda, population control, and recruiting elements. These are elements that perform tasks directly connected to an insurgency. External elements provide support for an insurgency, but they are not directly part of the insurgency. For example, external elements may include drug smugglers or external support from another state. 4-83. Women can play an essential role in the auxiliary force. Insurgencies generally require a robust system of financing and supply. In many cases, a woman will have greater freedom of movement in a society than a man who is actively engaging government forces. For example, a wife, niece, or daughter of an insurgent might be able to send a message or make financial transitions much easier than the actual insurgent. 4-84. Auxiliary forces also include economic support systems to fund the insurgency’s military and political operations. Economic support systems include— * Fund raising and terrorist finance networks. * Pillaging, looting, extorting, and enslaving a population. * Business operations that include both direct control, joint ventures, and taxation of enterprises in these industries: Illicit trade in commodities and natural resources (such as oil, timber, and diamonds).  Criminal trafficking in narcotics, humans, and arms.  Sanctions busting.  Legal business enterprises (such as oil, shipping, motor transport, and hotels).  Banking and finance operations.  Underground 4-85. Underground cells conduct clandestine combatant and logistics operations in areas controlled by government forces. Combat operations can include sabotage, assassinations, and small arms attacks. Logistic operations can include maintaining safe houses, controlling hostages, moving weapons, and providing communications. Underground cells include intelligence cells, logistic cells, and combatant cells. 4-86. The underground element includes those elements of the insurgency that conduct covert or clandestine activities, especially in counterinsurgent occupied areas. Movement leaders may exist within the underground if they are attempting to keep their affiliation or identity a secret. Insurgencies with effective undergrounds tend to be more compartmentalized, secretive, vetted, trained, and indoctrinated than insurgencies without them. For example, the underground can carry out terrorist acts, if desired, while the insurgency has plausible deniability for these acts. The underground may remain in an area after counterinsurgency clearing operations to gather information, intimidate civilians, attack members of the security forces or government, emplace improvised explosive devices, or perform sniper operations. The underground can be a major part of an insurgency. Its effectiveness (or ineffectiveness) provides counterinsurgent analysts with indicators of the skill, advancement, and strategy of the insurgency. An advanced insurgency with an effective underground is capable of operations and tactics that differ from those of a basic insurgency, with a less capable underground. The underground tends to be the most difficult element to recruit and train; therefore, its size tends to fluctuate with time and capability. 4-87. Underground cells seek to be self-contained; they often have their own leadership, combatants, and auxiliary forces. However, the underground can also use members of the auxiliary to provide materials, intelligence, counterintelligence, and early warning. The auxiliary may also pass messages, propaganda, and disinformation. This use allows the underground to conduct operations in areas where the regular auxiliary is present, but the underground does not have a widespread presence. Networked Insurgencies 4-88. While some insurgencies are hierarchical, it is also likely that an insurgency will be deeply networked into a society. While auxiliary, guerrillas, leadership, and underground elements are a means of viewing the basic functions of an insurgency, many insurgencies in the modern era are learning and adapting networks. An insurgency’s members will often have connections to various resourcing means,

3-24

Chapter 4 such as the black markets or diasporas. Moreover, there are normally connections to various parts of a society. Many insurgencies, especially modern insurgencies, have members that perform basic functions but are also networked organizations that are interwoven with their societies. While it is possible for a hierarchical style insurgency to exist, a networked structure is more likely today because of modern communications. 4-89. Networked insurgencies will have many connections to their operational environment. Networked insurgencies are not monolithic, and decisions are made by different elements within the insurgency. Some parts of the insurgency may be willing to negotiate, while other parts may decide to keep fighting. In a networked insurgency, the different elements of an insurgency may have overlapping functions and connections to other similar insurgencies. A networked insurgency adds to the complexity of an area of operations because they are not acting as a unified force and because of their complex set of connections to the rest of society and each other. (See figure 4-3 for an example of a networked insurgency.) Figure 4-3. Networked insurgencies 4-90. For an insurgency, a network is not just a description of who is in the insurgent organization; it is a picture of the population, how it is put together and how members interact with one another. For example, a tribal society already has affiliated social, economic, and military networks easily adapted to warfighting. The ways in which insurgents works within a tribal network is an expression of inherent cultural and social customs. In this example, the social dynamic that sustains ongoing fighting is best understood when considered in tribal terms—in particular, from the perspective of a traditionally networked society. It is the traditional tribal network that offers insurgents a ready-made social infrastructure from which to draw. 4-91. The full functioning of a network depends on how well, and in what ways, its members are personally known and connected to one another. Strong personal ties, often ones that rest on friendship and bonding experiences, ensure high degrees of trust and loyalty. To function well, networks may require higher degrees of interpersonal trust than do other approaches to organization, like hierarchies. Kinship ties are often a fundamental aspect of many terrorist, criminal, and gang organizations. Insurgents often form a