IPB considerations at the strategic level.

Soldiers at the tactical level rely on their superiors to conduct mission planning thoroughly and thoughtfully. They deploy trusting that their leaders are aware of the risks and have prepared for all possibilities. A crucial part of this planning is intelligence preparation of the battlefield (IPB). IPB conducted at all levels of combat should describe the terrain, weather, and threat conditions that exist in the area of operations (AO) and the associated area of interest (AOI). At the tactical level, details are important. How wide are the streets? What do building interiors look like? Who is shooting at me, with what, and from where? Logically, IPB at echelons above corps (EAC) and strategic levels needs to be broader in its scope, address a wider variety of topics, and investigate more potentialities. Details will still be important, but they are details of a different kind.

IPB at the strategic level in particular should describe what impediments exist to thwart the higher political and military objectives defined by our leadership. It is critical then that IPB first identify the complexities of the AO and AOI, delineate the most relevant factors in these areas, and describe how each factor exists and interacts with the others. Strategic IPB builds upon the foundations established at the tactical and operational levels, provides the overall contextual description of the operational area, and identifies those conduits that Intelligence "Reach" can support. Finally, it seeks to determine the identity and characteristics of each of the possible threats a strategic political or military objective may face and how each may have a compounding or canceling effect on the overall operation.

This article addresses the strategic level, where the questions asked and answered directly relate to what to do. Provided below are three of the most critical subject areas at the strategic level and some basic reasoning as to why they are important.

Population Analysis

Regardless of the type of operation, an AO/AOI contains a variety of population groups that can affect mission accomplishment. As a result, strategic planners must have a basic understanding of the cultural, political, and religious aspects of each of these population groups. Once those aspects are understood, then analysts can make a determination of the impact of each group. Will they help or hinder the operation? Particularly at the strategic level, the answer to this question means more than a simple parsing of the population into only three categories--the doctrinal friendly, neutral, and enemy. Rather, analysts should assess each group against its capabilities and interests and in the context of the current situation and ultimate objective. Armed with this information, planners and analysts can determine how we can actively influence each of the many population groups within the objective areas to contribute to mission success, or at a minimum, how to minimize their interference.

We can also use the information to assess and predict which groups would most likely impede mission objectives. A brief example will help make this clear. During World War II, the U.S. Navy acquired the help of the New York Mafia to help protect that city's port facilities. They initiated and tolerated the collaboration due to the Mafia's capability to provide the required protection and its willingness to portray the patriotism of its members. In this case, the U.S. Government had to overlook some of its biases against this criminal group in order to serve the greater good--the protection of our largest seaport from an Axis threat. (1)

At the strategic level, the intent of population analysis is to develop a good understanding of the culture and context of the operational area. This will ensure that by the time the information reaches the tactical level, it is consciously part of plans, force protection measures, rules of engagement, and all instructions to individual soldiers.

Threat Identification

Step three of the IPB process focuses on threat evaluation. At the strategic level, the onus will be on the intelligence organizations to identify the real and potential threats. In any given operation and location, there are often diverse population groups and other elements that may impact our ability to operate there. In a worst case, these population groups may pit two or more ethnic or religious groups against one another and fight in the midst of drought, disease, or economic collapse. Any demographic mix, especially if compounded by additional environmental threats, can threaten the ability to successfully complete our mission. IPB at the strategic level, therefore, needs to evaluate the big picture, the national or at least regional capabilities and limitations of each potential threat, and identify those most likely to threaten the mission. Once we have identified these strategic capabilities, limitations, and threats, the more focused IPB conducted at the tactical and operational levels can fill in the necessary details.

Media Analysis

All U.S. soldiers are aware of the media's impact on U.S. and world opinion during U.S. military operations in Vietnam and Somalia. There is no longer any doubt that the U.S. audience has the proven ability to force the withdrawal of troops from an area because of its intolerance for casualties and collateral damage. The U.S. citizenry is not alone in this regard. Depending on how one employs it, local media has the potential to be either a great stabilizing force or a debilitating factor on the local audience. For example, during U.S. operations in the Balkans and the Middle East, we quickly found that the locally controlled newspapers and television and radio stations had the power to make U.S. troops either heroes or villains. Because of this potential to impact ongoing mili tary operations, strategic planners must ensure they consistently relay the mission's objectives and methodology to the relevant domestic audiences. Accomplishing this requires an understanding of the culture, as discussed above, to en sure that animosity is not bred by accident. It also requires extensive investigation into who controls the media and how they propagate messages throughout a population. For instance, does the population draw most of its information and perceptions from locally owned newspapers or electronic media or do they rely on the international media such as CNN or AI-Jazeera satellite TV? Is there one person or a few in the locale that help mold these messages? What is the current theme to which the population adheres or listens, and, if necessary, how can we counter this theme?

Final Thoughts

There are many more considerations that analysts could and need to investigate during the conduct of strategic level IPB. The three identified above are among the most important and except for threat, there is little approved supporting doctrine. Therefore, the author hopes that the mention of these subject areas will at least spark some thought in the mind of the analyst conducting strategic level IPB.

Endnote 

(1.) For a more detailed account of this unlikely collaboration, see Carlo D'este, Bitter Victory: the Battle for Sicily 1943 (Glasgow, Scotland: William Collins Sons and co. Ltd. 1988).

Jamison Jo Medby is a Specialist in intelligence preparation of the battlefield, U.S. Army urban operations, and information warfare. She is currently working on a publication for RAND with Dr. Russell W. Glenn, "Street Smart: Intelligence Preparation of the Battlefield for Urban Operations." She holds a Bachelor's degree in International Economics, a Master's degree in Political Science, and is pursuing a Doctorate in. East Asian Languages and Cultures. She may be contacted via E-mail at [e-mail] and by phone at 310-393-0411, extension 6143.