the revolution in intelligence affairs: the new role of intelligence in asymmetric conflict
TRANSCRIPT
-
8/6/2019 The Revolution in Intelligence Affairs: The New Role of Intelligence in Asymmetric Conflict
1/23
The Revolution in Intelligence Affairs:
The New Role of Intelligence in Asymmetric Conflict
Corey Velgersdyk
International Security Politics
Prof. Chris Ritter
April 27, 2011
-
8/6/2019 The Revolution in Intelligence Affairs: The New Role of Intelligence in Asymmetric Conflict
2/23
Velgersdyk 2
Intelligence has been an important feature of war since before the time of Alexander the
Great. On his vast campaign that established his empire, Alexander relied on a strategy of divide
and conquer, which is dependent on regional intelligence that provides an accurate strategic
picture complete with the strengths and weaknesses of adversaries. The Roman Empire included
several categories of reconnaissance troops that provided valuable tactical intelligence while on
the campaign.1
Today the United States has satellites, radars, and unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs) at its
disposal to collect intelligence. Images and other data collected by these platforms are
transmitted to a communications satellite which is then sent, possibly via a relay satellite, to a
ground station, all practically in real time.2
Similarly impressive, Special Operations Forces
(SOF) that identify enemy combatants can communicate with the command center to request an
airstrike, provide specific coordinates to a B-52 bomber using Global Positioning System, and
within 20 minutes of locating enemy forces precision-guided munitions will fall from the sky on
their precise location.3
The advent of these capabilities is now referred to as the Revolution in Military Affairs
(RMA), although this is a bit of a misnomer as there have been several periods in military history
referred to with this or another similar moniker. Many of these revolutions have had
significant implications for intelligence whether it is new reconnaissance platforms like airplanes
during World War I (WWI) or advances in communications like the radio during World War II
(WWII).New capabilities allowed for better and faster intelligence collection, which was crucial
given the changing nature of warfare following these revolutions. WWI saw the end of cavalry as
1Keegan, John. Intelligence in War. New York: Alfred A. Knopf, 2003. 7-9
2Ferris, John. "A New American Way of War? C4ISR, Intelligence and Information Operations in Operation Iraqi
Freedom: A Provisional Assessment." Intelligence and National Security18, no. 4 (2003): 155-174.3Chizek, Judy G. "Military Transformation: Intelligence, Surveillance and Reconnaissance." Congressional Research
Service. 21
-
8/6/2019 The Revolution in Intelligence Affairs: The New Role of Intelligence in Asymmetric Conflict
3/23
Velgersdyk 3
machine guns easily repelled their charges; WWII refined the mechanized warfare introduced in
WWI and as a result trench warfare became virtually obsolete.4
Much like how previous revolutions in military affairs changed the nature of conflict, the
current revolution in military affairs has transformed how wars are fought. Modern militaries
now rely on advanced C4ISR (command, control, communications, computers, information,
surveillance, and reconnaissance) systems to provide instantaneous information throughout the
battlespace as well as allow the complex coordination of various capabilities. The success of the
United States in this regard during the opening campaign Operation Iraqi Freedom demonstrates
the potency of the new technologies.
5
However, the U.S. military does not operate in a vacuum;
the enemies of the United States have adapted to fighting against a technologically advanced
adversary by using asymmetric tactics. As a result, it seems that modern conflicts consist of
either modern militaries with advanced C4ISR networks fighting fast limited wars or asymmetric
conflicts in which the weaker side uses tactics designed to limit the effectiveness of the advanced
C4ISR networks.6
The relationship between revolutions in military affairs and the nature of conflict was
explored by Thomas Hammes in his bookThe Sling and the Stone. New developments in society
and technology led to new forms of conflict divided into what he called generations of warfare.
The fourth generation of warfare, the one that is currently ongoing, is concerned with the
necessity of operating on the political will of the adversary directly.7
4O'Hanlon, Michael. "Can High Technology Bring U. S. Troops Home?." Foreign Policy113 (1999): 72-86.
http://www.jstor.org/stable/1149234.5Ferris, John. "A New American Way of War? C4ISR, Intelligence and Information Operations in Operation Iraqi
Freedom: A Provisional Assessment." 165-76Pirnie, Bruce R., and Edward O'Connell. Counterinsurgency in Iraq (20032006). Santa Monica, Cal.: RAND
Corporation, 2008. 5-97Hammes, Thomas X. The Sling and the Stone. 51-3
-
8/6/2019 The Revolution in Intelligence Affairs: The New Role of Intelligence in Asymmetric Conflict
4/23
Velgersdyk 4
This concept offers an explanation for why some modern conflicts are less
technologically-driven than wars during the middle of the 20th
century. Enemies of the United
States face an adversary that is highly advanced and capable of rapid power projection; facing
U.S. forces in a conventional manner, as Iraq tried to do during the First Gulf War, can spell
defeat in a manner of days or weeks. This leaves insufficient time for U.S. adversaries to operate
on the political will of the United States while exposing their own political bases to the United
States. An alternative is to resort to asymmetric tactics which drag out a conflict and present a
variety of new challenges for the United States to face, such as counterinsurgency (COIN),
nation-building, and regime maintenance.
The revolution in military affairs that transformed intelligence into a component of the
integrated C4ISR network has now resulted in conflicts in which intelligence must play a vastly
different role. Satellite surveillance that provides target location information for precision-guided
munitions has little value in a COIN operation in the center of a city. Investigating the new role
of intelligence will benefit from briefly tracing the evolution of its role in the previous
generations of warfare; intelligence has generally become a more complicated endeavor over
time as intelligence requirements grew more complex with each subsequent generation of
warfare. Once the precise role of intelligence in the fourth generation of warfare is understood,
the missions necessary to fulfill this role can be examined and applied to the current conflict in
Iraq.
The First Three Generations of Warfare
The first generation of warfare was brought about by the advent of two key developments:
the invention of gunpowder, and reliable firearms to use it, and the creation of nation-states
capable of supporting massive conscripted armies. Both of these developments took hundreds of
-
8/6/2019 The Revolution in Intelligence Affairs: The New Role of Intelligence in Asymmetric Conflict
5/23
Velgersdyk 5
years to reach fruition. Gunpowder itself was not a new technology by the time of Napoleon, the
height of the first generation of warfare, but firearms capable of harnessing the power of
gunpowder consistently were fairly new. Nation-states required a host of developments including
the end of feudalism, increased wealth, and the advent of nationalism. Warfare of this generation
consisted of massing direct fire against the enemys forces in pitched battles.8
The role of intelligence in this generation was fairly simple. Commanders had two basic
intelligence requirements: the location of the enemy and the lie of the land. Scouts were the
primary means of fulfilling these requirements. Due to the constraints created by distance and the
lack of long range communication, little more could be expected of intelligence providers than
those two basic questions. Often times even these requirements were not met and golden
opportunities missed.9
Second generation warfare was brought about by the rapid industrialization of Europe
and North America. Industrialization led to an increase in wealth and the growth of industry
necessary to mass produce new weaponry, and the introduction of railways, telegraphs, and radio
that vastly improved the logistics capabilities of states. WWI epitomized second generation
warfare. Massive armies supplied by the industrial might of the states faced each other in the
trenches of Europe. Long range artillery, made possible by reconnaissance provided by aircraft
communicated through telegraphs, was massed against enemy positions instead of the direct fire
experienced in the previous generation of warfare.10
The role of intelligence expanded in this generation of warfare to include theater
awareness. It was no longer sufficient for commanders to know the location of enemy troops, in
fact, the cruel irony of trench warfare was knowing precisely where the enemy is without being
8Ibid. 16-8
9Keegan, John. Intelligence in War. 13-7
10Hammes, Thomas X. The Sling and the Stone. 18-22
-
8/6/2019 The Revolution in Intelligence Affairs: The New Role of Intelligence in Asymmetric Conflict
6/23
Velgersdyk 6
able to do much about it. Likewise, the battlefield was often readily apparent to the commanders.
Now commanders needed to know where the enemys railways, telegraph lines, and supplies
were located as well as the plans of the enemy so reinforcements and artillery could be directed
as needed. Intelligence services began accomplishing this last requirement through their nascent
signals intelligence (SIGINT) capabilities, which basically consisted of eavesdropping and
cryptology.11
Advances in communications equipment, aviation, armor, artillery, and motor transport
and the fully-fledged industrial societies capable of producing those capabilities in large numbers
led to the third generation of warfare which was embodied in WWII. The blitzkrieg tactics of
Nazi Germany were only possible because of these advances; the same is true of the large-scale
naval battles of the Pacific Theater and the amphibious assaults on Sicily and Normandy. Battles
during WWII were far more complex in terms of capabilities due to the combined-arms tactics in
which ground, air, and maritime forces fought jointly. The focus of the war shifted again with the
new generation of war; the industrial might of the state was the chief enabler of combined-arms
operations and thus became the focus of enemy operations. Strategic bombing of industrial and
population centers became widespread practices as both sides sought to undercut the others
capability to continue the fight.12
Once again the role of intelligence expanded. The earlier missions still needed to be
fulfilled; theater awareness was still crucial to winning battles. The Battle of Midway, a narrow
but critically important victory, was won in part by the ability of the United States to intercept
and decode Japanese transmissions which revealed the plan to seize Midway as a staging area for
11Kahn, David. "The Rise of Intelligence." Foreign Affairs 85, no. 5 (2006): 125-134.
http://www.jstor.org/stable/20032075.12
Hammes, Thomas X. The Sling and the Stone. 23-8
-
8/6/2019 The Revolution in Intelligence Affairs: The New Role of Intelligence in Asymmetric Conflict
7/23
Velgersdyk 7
attacks on Hawaii.13Nevertheless, the role of intelligence expanded to now include the
responsibility of locating strategic targets like factories, refineries, and even the site of
Germanys V-1 and V-2 program.14
The Fourth Generation of Warfare Political Terrain Mapping
The biggest transformation that led to the fourth generation of warfare was the
advancement of information technology. Information can be transmitted around the globe
virtually instantaneously. This has allowed a growth of the number of international actors besides
states as organizations can have their voices heard on a variety of media. Information is now
widely accessible, even to citizens of developing countries albeit less so than for citizens of
developed countries.15
One other factor has played a crucial role in the formulation of the fourth generation of
warfare: nuclear weapons. Nuclear weapons have effectively prevented developed countries
from fighting total wars like WWI and WWII because the potential costs are too high. As a result,
wars between developed countries have been of a much smaller scale and the focus is no longer
on destroying an adversarys industrial capacity.16 Rather these conflicts are fought to influence
the political willpower of the people. Hammes argues that it was this realization by Mao Zedong,
and the strategy that he developed following that realization, that led Mao and Chinese
Communist Party to victory during the Chinese Civil War.17
Simply put, conflict in the fourth
generation of warfare is about the imposition of political will on others, which heralds back to
13Keegan, John. Intelligence in War. 191-220
14Ibid. 275-85
15Hammes, Thomas X. The Sling and the Stone. 38-40
16Keegan, John. Intelligence in War. 295-6
17Hammes, Thomas X. The Sling and the Stone. 47-8
-
8/6/2019 The Revolution in Intelligence Affairs: The New Role of Intelligence in Asymmetric Conflict
8/23
Velgersdyk 8
Karl von Clausewitzs argument that war is used to achieve political ends.18
Ultimately, whether
these political ends are achieved through winning hearts and minds or by imposing a cost
deemed too high to resist, conflict in the fourth generation is focused on the political will of the
people.
This leads to the biggest evolution of the role of intelligence in warfare. In the previous
generations of warfare, intelligence was responsible for enabling operations that achieve the
objectives of the conflict. During the first generation this meant simply providing the location of
the enemy whereas the third generation required providing information about strategic targets
like industrial sites. If conflict in the fourth generation of warfare is concerned with the political
landscape of the people, then intelligence will need to map the political terrain of the conflict.
This is a fundamentally different mission than those seen in previous generations of warfare.
Moreover, the previous missions are still important requirements that need to be met. There are
several ways for intelligence to fulfill this new mission that will be considered here: intelligence
preparation of the battlespace (IPB), community intelligence, and human intelligence (HUMINT).
Intelligence Preparation of the Battlespace
IPB is an analytical framework for assessing the various important factors, such as terrain,
threat, area of operations (AO), and associated areas of interest (AOI). Although it is currently
limited by assumptions regarding the types of threats and likely AOs U.S. forces will encounter,
this analytical tool could be valuable when considering the political aspects of the battlespace.
IPB has four steps: define the battlespace, describe the battlespaces effects, evaluate the threat,
18von Clausewitz, Carl. What Is War? In On War, Michael Howard and Peter Paret 75-89. Princeton, NJ: Princeton
University Press, 1976.
-
8/6/2019 The Revolution in Intelligence Affairs: The New Role of Intelligence in Asymmetric Conflict
9/23
Velgersdyk 9
and develop enemy courses of action (COAs). Each of these steps is valuable for mapping the
political terrain of a conflict.19
The first step of IPB is defining the battlespace. This may sound like a simple task, but
actually can rapidly become a complicated endeavor. The point of this step is to identify specific
aspects of the AO that will influence the COAs available to commanders. Including politically
important features, such as infrastructure, religious centers, etc., as areas of interest to ensure that
they receive due consideration could prevent insensitivity and mitigate backlash against
operations.20
Describing the battlespaces effects, the second step of IPB, deals with features of the
battlespace that may influence the success of operations. In the typical understanding, this would
include information about the weather and terrain of the battlespace. While these are of course
important features of the battlespace to consider, operations in fourth generation conflicts should
also include population analysis. Basic statistical data as well as cultural intelligence and any
other aspects of the population that may influence success need to be considered. One
particularly beneficial inclusion to make would be perception analysis. Perception analysis
examines how actions will likely be interpreted by the local population, an important
consideration when trying to influence the populations political will.21
A dilemma does arise
from this consideration: the time-sensitivity of intelligence about enemy location and plans
encourages a fast and often overwhelming response, but this is likely to upset local populations
that have to endure these responses and bear the cost of collateral damage.
19Medby, Jamison J., and Russell W. Glenn. Street Smart: Intelligence Preparation for the Battlefield for Urban
Operation. Santa Monica, Cal.: RAND Corporation, 2002. xvii - xix20
Ibid. 40-121
Ibid. 51-5
-
8/6/2019 The Revolution in Intelligence Affairs: The New Role of Intelligence in Asymmetric Conflict
10/23
Velgersdyk 10
The third step of IPB is to evaluate the threat. The normal analytical approach is to
examine known adversaries based on the assumption that its doctrine and tactics are known. This
can cause two problems. First, this approach engenders assumptions about the behavior of the
enemy because it forces categorization based on supposed doctrine and tactics, a dangerous habit
in any conflict but particularly treacherous when fighting in an asymmetric conflict. Second, in
asymmetric conflicts there is a good chance that enemies will remain unknown; evaluating only
the threats that doctrinal and tactical information can be provided for does little to help locate the
unknown threats of a region. Defining threats based instead on interests and capabilities not only
provides a means to try to find unknown enemies, but it also reinforces the concept of fourth
generation conflicts being fought to achieve political ends.22
The final step of the IPB is to develop enemy COAs. The reasoning behind this concept
is that creating a list of potential COAs and then proceeding to use collected intelligence to
disprove possible COAs is analytically more rigorous and less likely to succumb to the
confirmation bias of the analyst. An analyst that considers a single COA at a time will
subconsciously try to fit evidence to confirm that his hypothesis is accurate while disregarding
any evidence that contradicts the hypothesis. The practice of disproving hypotheses was
developed by Richards Heuer and is known as the analysis of competing hypotheses. The better
the analysis of enemy COAs, the better prepared U.S. forces will be to defend against the
potential threats.23
Community Intelligence
In the United Kingdom, authorities faced a severe lack of operable intelligence for
counter-terrorism. Highlighting the shortage of intelligence was the fact that many of the
22Ibid. 89-94
23Ibid. 123-6
-
8/6/2019 The Revolution in Intelligence Affairs: The New Role of Intelligence in Asymmetric Conflict
11/23
Velgersdyk 11
counter-terrorism cases it was pursuing were originating from neighborhoods that were not at all
expected of harboring terrorists; the lack of intelligence was not just at the tactical level
(individual cases) but permeated to a strategic level (sources of possible terrorists).24
A study of the issue made two conclusions about why counter-terrorism intelligence was
in such a poor state. First, police agencies efforts were not widespread enough to acquire a
complete picture of the situation that was being faced. Part of the cause of this behavior is that
police agencies are adept at using known intelligence sources, but are far less skilled at searching
out new sources of intelligence. Second, police agencies are over-reliant on professional (i.e.
criminally-connected) police informants. Like the first conclusion, this is partially due to the
expertise police agencies have in using known intelligence sources. There is also the association
of professional informants with higher credibility and better quality intelligence.25
The study proposed the solution of community intelligence. Community intelligence is a
strategy of engagement with local communities to utilize the groups or communities found in
the cities as information networks. These networks are inherently widespread and are much more
attuned to the nuances of the various communities in their local area, a skill that the police forces
lack. The police agencies seek out community leaders to make these connections. Two results
ideally occur. First, the entire computer becomes an intelligence network that feeds information,
not just about terrorism, to the police agency via the relationship developed with the community
leader. Second, information can be spread to the community from the police to counteract rumors
and misinformation.26
24Innes, Martin. "Policing Uncertainty: Countering Terror through Community Intelligence and Democratic
Policing."Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science 605 (2006): 222-241.
http://www.jstor.org/stable/25097806.25
Ibid. 23026
Ibid. 232
-
8/6/2019 The Revolution in Intelligence Affairs: The New Role of Intelligence in Asymmetric Conflict
12/23
Velgersdyk 12
Community intelligence is not limited to just counter-terrorism, but would have
applications in COIN and development missions as well. The nuanced intelligence that
communities could provide would potentially be incredibly valuable for three reasons. First, U.S.
forces do not have the intimate knowledge of the local area or the people and as a result
insurgents hiding within neighborhoods could for all pragmatic reasons be invisible to U.S.
forces. The community, assuming it does not wish to directly support the insurgents, will be far
more likely to notice strangers and strange behavior.
Second, community intelligence provides a mechanism for communities to convey their
needs to U.S. forces. Meeting these needs would be an important reciprocal action to build up
trust with the community, which is necessary for strategic relationships to work, and would also
help win minds and hearts. As the strategic relationship deepens, the members of the
community will likely be more and more inclined share information and become invested in the
U.S. mission.
Third, it provides a way for U.S. forces to share information to community members
through the trusted channel of community leaders. This is beneficial because it can help
counteract the propaganda of the terrorist and insurgent groups. Preventing propaganda victories
for an insurgency or terrorist cell is just as critical as victories on the battlefield when the focus
of conflict is the political will of the people.27
Of course, for the community intelligence
arrangement to work, mutual trust must be established.28
Human Intelligence
27Jackson, Brian A. "Counterinsurgency Intelligence in a 'Long War': The British Experience in Northern
Ireland."Military Review(2007): 74-85.28
Innes, Martin. "Policing Uncertainty: Countering Terror through Community Intelligence and Democratic
Policing." 232-4
-
8/6/2019 The Revolution in Intelligence Affairs: The New Role of Intelligence in Asymmetric Conflict
13/23
Velgersdyk 13
HUMINT is nothing new to warfare; in fact, its the oldest form of intelligence there is
and has been around as long as there has been war and conflict.29Nevertheless, given the nature
of asymmetric conflicts, HUMINT offers the best potential of acquiring detailed intelligence
about the location and plans of the adversaries of the United States. Enemies are not operating
from base camps but rather from within the local population, severely reducing the effectiveness
of U.S. IMIGINT capabilities. Insurgents and terrorists quickly learned good signals tradecraft to
counter U.S. SIGINT or were captured.30
This does not play to the strengths of U.S. intelligence capabilities. U.S. intelligence for
most of the second half of the 20
th
century was designed to collect intelligence about the Soviet
Union. The difficulty of running HUMINT operations behind the Iron Curtain led the United
States to rely on its other intelligence arms, in particular SIGINT and IMIGINT. Moreover, what
HUMINT capabilities the United States does have were also focused on the Soviet Union;
HUMINT operators with expertise on the Middle East are a limited commodity.31
Currently the United States is taking steps to bolster its HUMINT capabilities. Military
units with intelligence training are being deployed with front-line troops and SOF have been
used to a great extent for reconnaissance and tactical intelligence collection. Once collected, this
intelligence is exploited, analyzed, and shared. The Defense Intelligence Agency (DIA) is
developing a HUMINT database to facilitate access to valuable HUMINT.32
Iraq
Before delving into the specifics of the asymmetric conflict taking place between the
United States and various insurgency groups, it is important to point out an analytical lapse that
29Keegan, John. Intelligence in War. 7
30Jones, Seth G. Counterinsurgency in Afghanistan. Santa Monica, Cal.: RAND Corporation, 2008. 99-100
31Lowenthal, Mark M. Intelligence: From Secrets to Policy. 4th ed. Washington, D.C.: CQ Press, 2009. 90-103
32Chizek, Judy G. "Military Transformation: Intelligence, Surveillance and Reconnaissance." 24-5
-
8/6/2019 The Revolution in Intelligence Affairs: The New Role of Intelligence in Asymmetric Conflict
14/23
Velgersdyk 14
appears to be plaguing much of the discussion about COIN, namely that COIN operations are on
the whole treated as being the same problem regardless of differences in population, conditions
before the insurgency, and the challenges that must be overcome. Overlooking differences like
these leads to false conclusions about what strategies and tactics will and will not work in COIN
operations. This is not to say that there are no important lessons to be learned from Vietnam that
can be applied to Iraq or Afghanistan, but it is analytically lazy to lump all three conflicts
together just because they involved fighting insurgencies.
A complete discussion of the role of intelligence in the COIN in Iraq goes far beyond the
scope of this paper, but two important aspects must be covered by intelligence when mapping the
political terrain of Iraq that would be a key enabler of successful COIN operations: population
groups by interests and the conditions before Operation: Iraqi Freedom began, namely repressive
state that brutally stomped out dissension. Lastly, how community intelligence can be a valuable
tool in the battle for the hearts and minds of the Iraqi people will be discussed.
Combatants
It is easy to simplify the conflict in Iraq by dividing combatants into two broad groups:
U.S. and allied forces and the insurgency. Doing so misses the complexity of the several
different groups that have different goals and interests that they pursue. If the fourth generation
of warfare is about acting on the political will of the adversary, then the United States
intelligence system needs to provide an accurate picture of the political motivations of all
combatant groups. This follows the model of IPB that has been expanded to include interest-
based threat evaluations based on population information.
The Kurds are primarily motivated by a desire for autonomy. Their loyalty belongs to
Kurdistan, a geo-cultural area with territory that spans Turkey, Syria, Iran, and Iraq, and not to
-
8/6/2019 The Revolution in Intelligence Affairs: The New Role of Intelligence in Asymmetric Conflict
15/23
Velgersdyk 15
Iraq. This has not prevented them from taking positions in the Iraqi government, although it
appears that this is motivated out of a desire to protect the autonomy they currently enjoy and out
of a politically astute decision that it is wise to be involved with the big game in town.
Nevertheless, the Kurds, or at least a subset of them, continue to participate in separatist
activities in Turkey meant to further the realization of their ultimate goal of the formation of
Kurdistan.33
Sunni Arab insurgents are fighting to oust the United States from Iraq and remove the
Iraqi government. The interests that motivate this desire vary and in some cases are difficult to
determine as there is no clear leadership or overarching organization for the Sunni insurgents.
Some insurgents have negotiated with the United States and Iraqi government and have disarmed
following fulfillment of some political demands, such as the dissolution of Shiite militias. Other
insurgents seem highly unlikely to ever negotiate or cease fighting. Important to note is that not
all Sunni Arabs support the insurgents and political participation has risen dramatically among
Sunni Arabs.34
Violent extremists only represent approximately 10% of the active fighters in Iraq, but
the scale of violence in their attacks gives them disproportionate influence and attention. Most
extremists appear to be motivated by sectarian discord and anti-West sentiments. Unlike the
Sunni Arab insurgents, the extremists do not appear to desire any kind of control or political
power in Iraq, not surprising given that large portions of these extremists are foreign fighters.
Using terrorist tactics such as suicide bombs, they attack crowded Shiite gatherings like
33Pirnie, Bruce R., and Edward O'Connell. Counterinsurgency in Iraq (20032006). 24-5
34Ibid. 25-8
-
8/6/2019 The Revolution in Intelligence Affairs: The New Role of Intelligence in Asymmetric Conflict
16/23
Velgersdyk 16
weddings, markets, and even mosques. Like the more intransigent insurgents, it is highly
unlikely that individuals in this group will negotiate or agree to cease fighting.35
There are two primary Shiite militia groups: the Supreme Council for Islamic Revolution
in Iraq (SCIRI) and the Mahdi Army. Smaller Shiite militias also exist; these groups are formed
out of security concerns caused by Sunni insurgents and extremists. SCIRI and the Mahdi Army
maintain an uneasy truce as both seek to further their own ends. SCIRI has become the chief
political party for Shiite Arabs and supports the Iraqi government. The Mahdi Army is Islamic
and opposed to the U.S. presence in Iraq and wants U.S. forces to withdraw although it too has a
presence in the government which provides funding and jobs for members of the Mahdi Army.
Small militias would likely be willing to disband if convinced of their safety. SCIRI works with
the United States. The Mahdi Armys interests place it in a position where negotiation and
cooperation are unlikely.36
The last groups to be discussed are the criminal organizations responsible for drugs,
smuggling, arms sales, and basically any illegal venture that bears a profit. These groups are
interested solely in making a profit. The ongoing conflict provides them with a variety of money-
making endeavors so it is in their best interest to continue to enable the various groups
mentioned above to continue fighting.37
If U.S. forces evaluate the threats represented by these various groups by doctrine and
tactics, most of these groups will be lumped together under the term insurgents. Doing so
would be a grave mistake. Some of these groups will be intractable and violent conflict will be
inevitable and continuous. Some of these groups, however, can be approached by appealing to
their interests and conflict can be avoided. The United States has already done this to an extent;
35Ibid. 28-30
36Ibid. 31-32
37Ibid. 32
-
8/6/2019 The Revolution in Intelligence Affairs: The New Role of Intelligence in Asymmetric Conflict
17/23
Velgersdyk 17
for example, the Kurds enjoyed a great deal of autonomy during the invasion of Iraq as their
militia, the PeshMerga, was recognized as a legitimate militia and the United States gained an
ally.38
Conditions Before Operation: Iraqi Freedom
Saddam Hussein imposed a Sunni Arab-dominated dictatorship that controlled every
aspect of society. His regime viciously stamped out revolts by both the Kurds and the Shiites.
He also embroiled Iraq into disastrous wars with Iran and NATO forces following an invasion of
Kuwait. Infrastructure suffered and the economy was distorted by massive subsidies for basic
essentials under his corrupt government. His regime was toppled following a rapid campaign by
the United States and its allies in which only sporadic resistance was offered.39
On the face of it, it seems reasonable of the United States and its allies to expect a warm
welcome, and for a brief window that was the case. Very quickly the situation deteriorated with
looting and riots although the insurgency did not begin in earnest until the fall of 2003.40
The
United States suffered a rude awakening about the situation of Iraq that was caused by missing
important aspects of Iraq that political terrain mapping might have avoided. Better intelligence
leads to better informed decision-making and a more realistic understanding of what to expect
during a conflict.
First, following the First Gulf War, Shiites in southern Iraq revolted with the
encouragement of the United States. Hussein ruthlessly put down the revolt, even going so far as
to cause an ecological disaster by draining the marshes between the Tigris and Euphrates Rivers.
The United States did nothing to prevent the brutal suppression of the revolt, and as a result
38Ibid. 22-25
39Ibid. 2-6
40Ibid. 9
-
8/6/2019 The Revolution in Intelligence Affairs: The New Role of Intelligence in Asymmetric Conflict
18/23
Velgersdyk 18
Shiite Arabs came to distrust the United States.41
This distrust now undermines U.S. efforts in
COIN and nation-building in Iraq. Analysis of the political interests of Shiite Arabs and
previous interaction with this group would likely have drawn attention to the mistrust Shiites
had for the United States.
Second, it seems that the United States greatly underestimated the difficulty of forming a
government that would be acceptable to Sunni Arabs, Shiite Arabs, and Kurds. It is possible that
part of this underestimation is the result of Husseins effective albeit brutal repression of
sectarian violence. Another possible cause is that the Kurds had relative autonomy in the
northwest Iraq and this dampened their efforts to revolt against Husseins regime. In any case, an
evaluation of the various actors in Iraq as determined by interests would have quickly indicated
that conflict between the groups was not only likely but would be difficult to resolve.
Community Intelligence in Iraq
In an article examining the British experience in Northern Ireland, Brian A. Jackson
extrapolates several lessons for COIN in Iraq. Two of these recommendations are joined under
the header of low-grade intelligence, that is intelligence that when aggregated provides an
accurate picture of the insurgency. The first is that every soldier should be a collector of
intelligence and the second is that U.S. forces should think people first, basically that the local
population can be an excellent source of intelligence. This approach makes troops more effective
as they gain familiarity with an area. It also allows locals the opportunity to become familiar
with the troops, which led to the realization by the troops,that the way a battalion behaved made
a big difference to its overall success. Toughness was acceptable; roughness was not. Asthe
41Ibid. 4
-
8/6/2019 The Revolution in Intelligence Affairs: The New Role of Intelligence in Asymmetric Conflict
19/23
Velgersdyk 19
relationship between the two developed over time, locals would provide intelligence that the
soldiers never would have had access to otherwise.42
Community intelligence mirrors this approach. As soldiers develop strategic relationships
with community leaders, they also become familiar with the community. Repeated exposure to a
community creates a baseline of experience that can foster similar realizations about the value of
respectable behavior like those British troops had in Northern Ireland. Moreover, it can result in
intelligence being collected that U.S. forces would never have had access to otherwise. Locals
know what is and what is not normal for the community. Likewise, they know who and who is
not from around the area; that can be significant intelligence considering most violent extremists
are foreign fighters.43
Community intelligence provides a source of intelligence that helps protect
not only U.S. troops but also the people of Iraq. Protecting Iraqi citizens from suicide bombers
and developing actual relationships will go far in winning hearts and minds.
Conclusion
The Revolution in Military Affairs has brought about the fourth generation of warfare in
which conflict is focused on the political will of the combatants. U.S. intelligence services have
always had to evolve with the new generations of warfare and the latest was no exception. In
order for U.S. intelligence services to enable U.S. forces to effectively fight its adversaries, they
must provide political terrain mapping that reveals the interests that the adversaries of the United
States. The COIN operation in Iraq demonstrates that failures to fully understand why
combatants are fighting can lead to wasted effort and costly mistakes. Intelligence preparation of
the battlespace, community intelligence, and a renewed HUMINT program are the new mission
42Jackson, Brian A. "Counterinsurgency Intelligence in a 'Long War': The British Experience in Northern Ireland." 77-
943
Innes, Martin. "Policing Uncertainty: Countering Terror through Community Intelligence and Democratic 229-34
and Pirnie, Bruce R., and Edward O'Connell. Counterinsurgency in Iraq (20032006).28
-
8/6/2019 The Revolution in Intelligence Affairs: The New Role of Intelligence in Asymmetric Conflict
20/23
Velgersdyk 20
of U.S. intelligence services meeting the intelligence requirements of a U.S. military involved in
fourth generation conflicts.
-
8/6/2019 The Revolution in Intelligence Affairs: The New Role of Intelligence in Asymmetric Conflict
21/23
Velgersdyk 21
Bibliography
Allen, Colin, Wendell Wallach, David Axe, William O. Waddell, and Alex Roland."Robots at
War." Wilson Quarterly 33, no. 2 (2009): 6-9.
Barger, Deborah G. Toward a Revolution in Intelligence Affairs. Santa Monica, Cal.: RAND
Corporation, 2005.
Chizek, Judy G. "Military Transformation: Intelligence, Surveillance and Reconnaissance."
Congressional Research Service.
Conboy, Kenneth, and Dale Andrade. Spies and Commandos: How America Lost the SecretWar
in North Vietnam. Lawrence,K
ans.: University Press ofK
ansas, 2000.
Echevarria II, Antulio J. "War, Politics, and RMA The Legacy of Clausewitz."Joint Force
Quarterly (1996): 76-80.
Ferris, John. "A New American Way of War? C4ISR, Intelligence and Information Operations in
Operation Iraqi Freedom: A Provisional Assessment." Intelligence and National
Security 18, no. 4 (2003): 155-174.
http://ics.leeds.ac.uk/papers/pmt/exhibits/2089/Ferris.pdf.
Hammes, Thomas X. The Sling and the Stone. St. Paul, Minn.: Zenith Press, 2006.
Innes, Martin. "Policing Uncertainty: Countering Terror through Community Intelligence and
Democratic Policing."Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social
Science 605 (2006): 222-241. http://www.jstor.org/stable/25097806.
Jackson, Brian A. "Counterinsurgency Intelligence in a 'Long War': The British Experience in
Northern Ireland."Military Review(2007): 74-85.
Joint C4ISR Decision Support Center."Swarming: Network Enabled C4ISR."
http://www.iwar.org.uk/rma/resources/swarming/swarming-c4isr.pdf.
-
8/6/2019 The Revolution in Intelligence Affairs: The New Role of Intelligence in Asymmetric Conflict
22/23
Velgersdyk 22
Joint Chiefs of Staff."Joint Vision 2010." http://www.au.af.mil/au/awc/awcgate/dod/jv2010.pdf.
--- ---. "Joint Vision 2020."
http://www.fs.fed.us/fire/doctrine/genesis_and_evolution/source_materials/joint_vision_2
020.pdf.
Jones, Seth G. Counterinsurgency in Afghanistan. Santa Monica, Cal.: RAND Corporation, 2008.
Kahn, David. "The Rise of Intelligence."Foreign Affairs 85, no. 5 (2006): 125-134.
http://www.jstor.org/stable/20032075.
Keegan, John. Intelligence in War. New York: Alfred A. Knopf, 2003.
Larson, Eric V., Derek Eaton, Brian Nichiporuk, and Thomas S. Szayna. "Assessing Irregular
Warfare a Framework for Intelligence Analysis." RAND Corporation.
Lowenthal, Mark M. Intelligence: From Secrets to Policy. 4th ed. Washington, D.C.: CQ Press,
2009.
Medby, Jamison J., and Russell W. Glenn. Street Smart: Intelligence Preparation for the
Battlefield for Urban Operation. Santa Monica, Cal.: RAND Corporation, 2002.
O'Hanlon, Michael. "Can High Technology Bring U. S. Troops Home?."Foreign Policy 113
(1999): 72-86. http://www.jstor.org/stable/1149234.
Pillar, Paul R. "Intelligence, Policy, and the War in Iraq."Foreign Affairs 85, no. 2 (2006): 15-27.
http://www.jstor.org/stable/20031908.
Pirnie, Bruce R., and Edward O'Connell. Counterinsurgency in Iraq (20032006). Santa Monica,
Cal.: RAND Corporation, 2008.
Sims, Jennifer E., and Burton Gerber, eds. Transforming U.S. Intelligence. Washington, D.c.:
Georgetown University Press, 2005.
Singer, P.W. "ROBOTS AT WAR: The New Battlefield." Wilson Quarterly (2009): 30-48.
-
8/6/2019 The Revolution in Intelligence Affairs: The New Role of Intelligence in Asymmetric Conflict
23/23
Velgersdyk 23
Steele, Robert D. "The New Craft of Intelligence: Achieving Asymmetric Advantage in the Face
of Nontraditional Threats." Strategic Studies Institute.
Sullivan, Patricia L. "War Aims and War Outcomes: Why Powerful States Lose Limited
Wars." The Journal of Conflict Resolution 51, no. 3 (2007): 496-524.
von Clausewitz, Carl. What Is War? In On War, Michael Howard and Peter Paret 75-89.
Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1976.