Printer Friendly

The intelligence analyst and unique environments. (Doctrine Corner).

Even before 11 September 2001, the end of the Cold War; the proliferation of regional, ethnic, and religious confrontations; and the increasing number of stability operations and support operations had forced a change in the way the Army's intelligence analysts conducted business. The tragedies in New York and Washington, the anthrax menace, and the still unknown threats posed by terrorist organizations have again changed the way the intelligence analyst must think. Today's threats and missions span all aspects of full-spectrum operations. Even worse, the analyst might face several of these threats simultaneously. This was not the case during the Cold War when the focus was on the Soviet Union and both nations faced the same threats and, for the most part, addressed them in the same manner.

The soldiers of the Gulf War understood Warsaw Pact doctrine well and the United States had, over the years, refined the analytical processes to address it. Today's analysts must seek innovative solutions to increasingly complex problems and threats. "The Doctrinal Corner" will serve as one means to identify potential solutions to these problems by providing intelligence professionals with the latest in emerging doctrine. Future issues of the Military Intelligence Professional Bulletin (MIPB) will focus on homeland defense, counterterrorist operations, intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance (ISR), and other topics. Its accomplishment, however, requires input from two sources. The Doctrine Division, U.S. Army Intelligence Center and Fort Huachuca (USAIC&FH), will provide the baseline or emerging doctrine and tactics, techniques, and procedures (TTP) for your review. You, the intelligence professional, must then respond by addressing, through your submission of articles to the MIPB, the effectiveness of this doctrine and identify new methods and TTP that may have merit. Together, through the MIPB medium, all will benefit.

For the analyst, the types of operations conducted since the Gulf War have followed no particular pattern; each operation offered its own unique challenge not only to the National Command Authority (NCA) but also to the analyst tasked with providing intelligence for the decision-makers. The unique environments could include any combination of mission and location ("unique" being both a physical environment and a "type" of operation for which there is a lack of current operational experience by U.S. military forces). Such operations and environments might include--

* Urban.

* Mountain.

* Littoral.

* Counterterrorist.

* Nuclear, biological, and chemical (NBC).

* Many others.

For the intelligence analyst, the order to prepare to deploy in support of an operation in a unique environment often presents the problem of "where to start?" Focused training opportunities such as the mission readiness exercises (MREs) that prepare our units for deployments to Bosnia and Kosovo may be missing. Instead, the intelligence analyst's experience may be more along conventional lines, such as force-on-force offensive and defensive operations. As well trained as he may be for the conventional battleground, he may find he is ill-prepared to cope with the threats identified on 11 September 2001. One example is preparing for operations in an urban environment in which, according to Marine General Charles C. Krulak, he may find the "three-block war," (1) an environment in which peacekeeping, humanitarian aid, and full-scale combat operations may occur simultaneously and within blocks of each other.

The physical environment may also offer unique challenges. For example, a study of the Fulda Gap might include its vegetation, elevation, and percent of slope datum, location of water sources, and others. Now overlay those physical elements with the population, layout, infrastructure, and cultural aspects of a major metropolitan area and you begin to see the challenge.

What was necessary was an analytical tool that allowed analysts to focus on the important elements of the target environment (mission, terrain, and threat). They must do so in a timely manner, and accomplish it while working within the four-step IPB process.

The result was development of the Analytical Framework and Analytical Worksheet (shown in Figures 1 and 2, respectively). The analytical framework and worksheet are interdependent, the framework providing a graphic aid showing both the critical elements and a process for reaching understanding of a situation. Note that the framework identifies this process through labeling each element as a "step." This step process will provide a logical methodology in identifying the critical details of the urban areas. Like the rest of the framework design, however, the user defines and modifies it as desired. Finally, the analytical worksheet serves as the data-recording element of the framework-worksheet combination and is be maintainable in both analog and digital formats.

The Urban Analytical Framework in Figure 1 reflects use of this methodology and process. We chose to discuss the urban environment because of its complex nature and the fact that since 1995 the larger Army contingencies have been in and around urban areas. The twelve elements identified on the framework resulted from lengthy discussions held at the Joint level. Participants included representatives of the British Army, the Israeli Defense Forces (IDF), and all U.S. Army Training and Doctrine Command (TRADOC) proponents under the guidance of the Combined Arms MOUT (military operations on urbanized terrain) Task Force. One should not, however, assume that these elements were the only ones identified. This framework focused on those elements deemed most critical to planners and analysts at the operational level. The division and brigade levels should develop additional frameworks and worksheets. Below brigade, the level of detail more accurately reflects elements identified by the OCOKA (observation and fields o f fire, concealment and cover, obstacles, key terrain, avenue of approach) factors.

We must emphasize that we intended the twelve elements only as a blueprint. The elements employed in any framework are user defined. The intelligence analyst should carefully choose the framework's elements in such a manner as to allow him to address an existing need. We should also note that work on the framework might begin in garrison, at the first indication that a unit will deploy, or even as part of contingency planning. Initial data sources may include the various readiness packages, National Imagery and Mapping Agency (NIMA) products, commercial publications, or other sources.

As seen in the framework, the first eight elements identify the physical attributes of the urban environment. These would seem to place more emphasis on the physical properties than on the remaining elements; however, we developed this sample framework specifically to support a study of Pristina, Kosovo. Other situations may call for the identification of different elements. Any element may develop additional frameworks at any time to show a higher resolution for that specific element as needed. This would hold true especially through a corps level exercise where the G2 wished to see the points of focus not only at corps but also at each division and brigade. By netting and linking the various frameworks to show the focus of the information collection and analytical efforts, we can accomplish this easily. Additional information on this process will be available in Chapter 5, ST 2-01.3-1. (Untitled).

In using the analytical framework and worksheet process, the analyst determines the details of the element identified on the framework and records the information on the worksheet where it is available for later analysis. When he has identified and recorded the details of all elements, the analyst has not only an initial framework portraying his environment but also has achieved focus on his efforts. Additionally, this provides both a tool and a methodology within the IPB process to accomplish the analysis mission. Other uses of these tools include--

* Providing the potential for rapid response to the commander's initial priority intelligence requirements (PIR).

* Serving as a ready-made briefing tool.

* Providing user-defined level of detail on any element or subelement under study.

* Identifying information gaps.

* Identifying patterns (pattern analysis).

* Assisting with visualization and understanding.

* Providing a graphic illustration of the urban operations critical elements.

More work is necessary to refine this process, and the author solicits input and recommendations from users. Additional research may be conducted at the Doctrine Website at http://usaic.hua.army.mil/DOCTRINE/dlbs.htm and at the MOUT Homepage, http://www.geocities.com/Pentagon/6453.

Endnotes

(1.) Remarks for The National Press Club on 10 October 1997.

Mr. Michael Ley is a doctrine writer and the Managing Editor, Military Intelligence Professional Bulletin (MIPB), in the Doctrine Division, U.S. Army Intelligence Center and Fort Huachuca. He served two tours in Vietnam as a Military Advisor, Military Assistance Command Vietnam (MACV) Team #62, and later served in a variety of electronic warfare, collection management, operational testing, and topographic positions. He retired from the U.S. Army in 1990. Readers may reach him via E-mail at michael.ley@hua.army.mil and by telephone at (520) 538-0979 or DSN 879-0979.
Figure 2. Sample Urban Analytical Worksheet.


Step 1. Lvorno River,
Key Terrain Lvorno Bridge,
 walled
 fortifications,
 Lvorno Venice
 Highway.






Step 2. City of Lvorno
General Urban
Description


Step 3. City of Lvorno
Zoned Areas
and Patterns




Step 4. City of Lvorno
LOC





Step 5. City of Lvorno
Urban Patterns

Step 6. City of Lvorno
Street Patterns


Step 7. City of Lvorno
Pattern Effects





Step 8. City of Lvorno
Structural
Types





Step 9. City of Lvorno
Mobility
Corridors and
Avenues of
Approach






Step 10. City of Lvorno
OCOKA
Factors

Step 11. City of Lvorno
Other
Significant
Characteristics



Step 12. City of Lvorno
The Threat









Step 1. The Lvorno River carries barge traffic;
Key Terrain the Lvorno Bridge is the only remaining
 standing bridge over the river for 34
 km in both directions. The 16th century
 city walls are 32 ft high by 35 ft wide
 and are comprised of stone with an earth
 filler. The wall encircles the city except
 two gated locations. The Lvorno-Venice high
 two-lane blacktop road, and above the city
 has been cut at the Tuscan River and
 Padiero Pass.

Step 2. The city of Lvorno had a pre-war population
General Urban of 55,600. It is located on the Tuscan
Description Plateau and lies on the banks of the Lvorno
 River.

Step 3. The city of Lvorno is of the "A" pattern,
Zoned Areas with dense, random construction intermixed
and Patterns with "C" pattern close residential areas.
 Two "E" industrial areas are apparent
 while the city is ringed by a single "F"
 pattern medieval wall.

Step 4. Table 5-2 depicts the most important LOGs
LOC identifiable in the image. These include
 the Lvorno Bridge, the two primary access
 streets leading to the Lvorno Bridge, the
 Lvorno River, and the Lvorno Venice
 highway.

Step 5. Figure 5-4 depicts a city of the segment or
Urban Patterns pie-slice pattern.

Step 6. Figure 5- depicts a city employing
Street Patterns a combination of radial-ring and
 irregular patterns.

Step 7. Figure 5-7 depicts a funnel-pattern effect
Pattern Effects that may oncentrate or canalize forces
 without immediate fanning. This effect
 will occur primarily because of the
 impact of the old city walls in limiting
 access to the city core.

Step 8. Key structure includes an old city wall,
Structural constructed primarily of stone and earth,
Types the heavily damaged Ansaldo truck works
 at the upper center of the image and the
 OTO weapons works at the center right of
 the image. Both industrial complexes are
 heavily damaged.

Step 9. Heavy damage to the city's infrastructure
Mobility has left large amounts of rubble and
Corridors and unknown resulting mobility corridors.
Avenues of Intact structures may include all six
Approach of the mobility corridors. Primary AAs
 are restricted by the Old Wall but
 include the four gates (north, south,
 east, and west) with the south gate
 being restricted by the narrow
 confines of Lvorno Bridge.

Step 10. Locational dependent but applying
OCOKA to all OCOKA factors.
Factors

Step 11. The city is 90 percent Catholic with two
Other primary churches: Palacio del Carmen and
Significant Avendia Santa Maria. The Chapel del San
Characteristics Marcos lies just outside the city at the
 Fabrique Marceau clothing works which is
 believed to be 70 percent damaged.

Step 12. Elements of the 2nd Reggio di Calabria
The Threat Regiment are defending Lvorno. Key
 locations include blockhouses on both
 side of the Lvorno Bridge, checkpoints
 at each gate, light anti-tank weapons
 along the Old Wall's boundaries, and the
 regiment's headquarters and assembly area
 believed to be the Pedro del Sforza Park
 and Sports Complex.
COPYRIGHT 2002 U.S. Army Intelligence Center and School
No portion of this article can be reproduced without the express written permission from the copyright holder.
Copyright 2002 Gale, Cengage Learning. All rights reserved.

Article Details
Printer friendly Cite/link Email Feedback
Author:Ley, Michael P.
Publication:Military Intelligence Professional Bulletin
Geographic Code:1USA
Date:Jan 1, 2002
Words:2038
Previous Article:Army intelligence master plan.
Next Article:Analysis the Prophet way. (TSM Notes).
Topics:


Related Articles
Analysis and control Team--The New Force Multiplier.
Transforming the Army for the Next Century--The Future Is Here Today!
Intelligence Transformation: Beyond Paradigm Shifts, Changes in Ethos.
Doctrine for the Initial Brigade Combat Team.
The Soldier of the 21st Century.
Educating MI professionals to meet the challenges of changing geopolitical realities and modern asymmetric warfare.
Intelligence support for military operations.
Do "steady state" PIRs work in stability operations and support operations? Answering the commander's intelligence and decisionmaking needs.
USAIC&FH observations, insights, and lessons learned (OIL) process.
USAIC&FH Geospatial Intelligence enterprise initiatives.

Terms of use | Privacy policy | Copyright © 2021 Farlex, Inc. | Feedback | For webmasters |