DOCSLIB.ORG

Cyberspace Operations in Support of Counterinsurgency Operations

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Cyberspace Operations in Support of Counterinsurgency Operations No. 95 APRIL 2013 Cybersecurity Operations in Support of Counterinsurgency Operations David W. Pendall Ronald Wilkes Timothy J. Robinson Cyberspace Operations in Support of Counterinsurgency Operations by David W. Pendall Ronald Wilkes Timothy J. Robinson The Institute of Land Warfare ASSOCIATION OF THE UNITED STATES ARMY AN INSTITUTE OF LAND WARFARE PAPER The purpose of the Institute of Land Warfare is to extend the educational work of AUSA by sponsoring scholarly publications, to include books, monographs and essays on key defense issues, as well as workshops and symposia. A work selected for publication as a Land Warfare Paper represents research by the author which, in the opinion of ILW’s editorial board, will contribute to a better understanding of a particular defense or national security issue. Publication as an Institute of Land Warfare Paper does not indicate that the Association of the United States Army agrees with everything in the paper but does suggest that the Association believes the paper will stimulate the thinking of AUSA members and others concerned about important defense issues. LAND WARFARE PAPER NO. 95, April 2013 Cybersecurity Operations in Support of Counterinsurgency Operations by David W. Pendall, Ronald Wilkes and Timothy J. Robinson Colonel David W. Pendall is an Army War College Fellow at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology’s Lincoln Laboratory Security Studies Program. In his previous assignment he was the Combined Joint Intelligence Officer for Regional Command–East/CJTF-1 in Afghanistan and concurrently the Intelligence Officer of the 1st Cavalry Division. He has served in key leader- ship positions within U.S. Army Europe, V Corps, Multinational Corps–Iraq, NATO/International Security Assistance Force, National Security Agency/Central Security Service and other tactical- level units. Pendall holds a B.A. from Ohio University, an M.S. from Central Michigan University and a Master’s in Military Art and Science in Theater Operations from the Army’s School of Advanced Military Studies. Lieutenant Colonel Ronald Wilkes, U.S. Army, is currently assigned to U.S. Strategic Command. He served previously with the Army Cyber Command, 1st Information Operations Command, 18th Military Police Brigade and the 3d Infantry Division. Wilkes holds a B.S. from Savannah State College, an M.A. from Webster University and an M.S. from George Mason University. Major Timothy J. Robinson, U.S. Marine Corps, is a Communication and Information Systems Officer stationed with Marine Forces Cyberspace Command. He has held numerous positions with the 9th Communication Battalion and served as an Operations Research Analyst at Marine Corps Logistics Command. Major Robinson holds a B.S. from Virginia Polytechnic and State University and an M.S. from the Naval Postgraduate School. This paper represents the opinions of the author and should not be taken to represent the views of the Department of the Army, the Department of Defense, the United States government, the Institute of Land Warfare or the Association of the United States Army or its members. © Copyright 2013 by The Association of the United States Army All rights reserved. Inquiries regarding this and future Land Warfare Papers should be directed to: AUSA’s Institute of Land Warfare, Attn: Director, ILW Programs, 2425 Wilson Boulevard, Arlington VA 22201, e-mail [email protected] or telephone (direct dial) 703-907-2627 or (toll free) 1-800-336-4570, ext. 2627. ii Contents Foreword ................................................................................................................................. v Introduction ............................................................................................................................. 1 Description of Cyberspace Operations .................................................................................... 1 Establishing Terms of Art and Science .................................................................................... 2 The Need for Agile Cyberspace Operations in the Afghanistan Theater of War ..................... 2 Cyberspace Operations in Support of Counterinsurgency and Stability Operations in Afghanistan ......................................................................................................................... 4 Recommendations for a Way Ahead ....................................................................................... 5 Conclusion ............................................................................................................................ 10 Endnotes ................................................................................................................................ 11 Glossary ................................................................................................................................ 13 iii iv Foreword This paper provides a perspective on how best to use cyberspace operations in support of U.S. military operations in Afghanistan. The authors describe the nature of cyberspace opera- tions in general, discuss the need for enhanced cyberspace operations and express a viable way ahead for future cyberspace operations in Afghanistan. They posit that additional research and coordination should be conducted to better define and develop requirements for cyberspace capabilities, command and control of cyberspace operations and integration of activities in a manner that supports the International Security Assistance Force commander, the operations of regional commanders and related strategic shaping and global counter terrorism pursuit opera- tions. The lessons we learn now while fighting the counterinsurgency (COIN) fight will serve us in future conflicts. It has become apparent there is more work to be done in exploiting our adversaries’ use of cyberspace. Insurgents and members of their supporting cells have been captured on the battlefield with all imaginable types of digital media and Internet-capable devices. Insurgents and terrorist organizations all have an online presence that is becoming more sophisticated and useful to their operations. Thus, the authors argue that it is both clear and essential that efforts to counter our enemies in the Afghan COIN fight must evolve and become more effective. Our next adversary may be well funded and technologically literate, originate from a more educated society and may have developed a comprehensive cyber operations doctrine. This paper was designed to provoke additional thought about cyberspace operational relevance, suggest neces- sary change and enable future success in Afghanistan and future conflicts. Gordon R. Sullivan General, U.S. Army Retired President, Association of the United States Army 10 April 2013 v vi Cyberspace Operations in Support of Counterinsurgency Operations Introduction The United States has fought an innovative, ruthless and persistent enemy in Afghanistan for more than 11 years. In response to an evolving adversary, the U.S. military developed counterinsurgency (COIN) doctrine to create a framework for commanders to view their op- erational environment (OE) and provide new methods of applying all the capabilities at their disposal. Comprehensive COIN operations are the basis of International Security Assistance Force (ISAF) campaign planning and tactical operations. While COIN provides a comprehen- sive strategic framework to use in defeating an insurgency, it lacks any substantive analysis concerning the value of employing cyberspace operations. America’s enemies understand the power of technology. The entry cost to using digital communications is low while the reliability, quality and simplicity of service are generally high. Open-source intelligence indicates that insurgents use different technologies to commu- nicate, create operational plans, store institutional knowledge and develop strategy. The full extent of insurgents’ employment of their technological portfolio with respect to command and control, financing, recruiting, training, propaganda dissemination and knowledge management remains an unknown. These issues are of particular concern, as they indicate a level of sophis- tication that can enable and potentially enhance operations against coalition forces. Present insurgent and/or terrorist cyber-based activities are not fully understood at the operational and tactical levels. The purpose of this paper is to describe the nature of cyberspace operations in general, discuss the need for enhanced cyberspace operations in Afghanistan and express a viable framework for how future cyberspace operations could be more effectively conducted in Afghanistan. Description of Cyberspace Operations Cyberspace operations provide support to traditional military operations and, within some rare cases and specific opportunities, replace them. Technological solutions, either offensive or exploitive, assist intelligence and operational planners in targeting individual insurgents or in- surgent networks, operating within a larger social network wherein they gain support from the 1 cyber domain. By understanding the digital patterns of life established by insurgents and sup- porting organizations, U.S. forces can conceptually develop enemy communication models and better understand their operations and tactical processes. This information improves friendly situational awareness and adds context to existing knowledge bases. In some cases, cyberspace operations can replace physical military activities by support- ing, enabling, informing and influencing
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Highlights of Recent RAND Research on Counterinsurgency
    Highlights of Recent RAND Research on Counterinsurgency For more information, contact Shirley Ruhe, Director of Congressional Relations, at 703-413-1100, x5632 or [email protected], or Kurt Card, National Security Legislative Analyst, at 703-413-1100 x5259 or [email protected] As the leading research authority on counterinsurgency, the RAND Corporation has developed a wide selection of materials for policy makers. With multiple insurgencies operating in several theaters this research was developed to provide a historical, geographical, and functional understanding of past and present insurgencies and counterinsurgency operations. Social Science for Counterterrorism Putting the Pieces Together Darcy Noricks et al., 2009 This report from an interdisciplinary project to survey and integrate the scholarly social- science literature relevant to counterterrorism answers questions related to why some individuals become terrorists, how terrorists generate public support, how terrorist organizations make decisions, and why individuals disengage. A Stability Police Force for the United States Justification and Options for Creating U.S. Capabilities Terrence K. Kelly et al., 2009 Establishing security is the sine qua non of stability operations, since it is a prerequisite for reconstruction and development. Security requires a mix of military and police forces to deal with a range of threats from insurgents to criminal organizations. This research examines the creation of a high-end police force, which the authors call a Stability Police Force. 1 Underkill Scalable Capabilities for Military Operations amid Populations David C. Gompert et al., 2009 The battle for Gaza revealed an extremist strategy: hiding in cities and provoking attack to cause civilian deaths that can be blamed on the attacking forces.
    [Show full text]
  • Counterinsurgency Operations
    The Basics of Counterinsurgency By R. Scott Moore1 Abstract The study examines the basic characteristics of insurgencies and counterinsurgency campaigns conducted over the past century, strip away many of the prevailing assumptions. Based on detailed analysis of nearly sixty counterinsurgency campaigns, successful and unsuccessful, as well as the lessons learned by American and Coalition forces in Afghanistan and Iraq since 2001, the conclusions offer a historically grounded framework for thinking about counterinsurgency. While every conflict exhibited its own unique causes and conditions requiring tailored solutions, as a whole the many counterinsurgency campaigns exhibited fundamental characteristics that remained constant. If there were no immutable laws or empirical formulas for counterinsurgency, there existed certain basic principles and traits that marked and will continue to mark successful, and unsuccessful, outcomes. Introduction Recent operations in Afghanistan and Iraq have forcibly highlighted the need to reexamine how we fight irregular conflicts, and especially insurgencies to find a strategy to address these emerging threats. Religious extremism, ethnic intolerance, and socio- economic imbalances have given birth to fanatical movements demanding radical change. Insurgencies, and the terrorism that accompanies them, pose complex challenges threatening political and social stability and defying military attempts to suppress or defeat them. Unfortunately, if the conceptual confusion emanating from the many debates over these conflicts is any indication, we seem to have forgotten the past while attempting to reinvent the future. The lack of an integrated and multi-dimensional approach to these new threats too often leads to confusion and disjointed responses and acrimonious debates not only over what needs to be done, but who- military or civilian- should do it.
    [Show full text]
  • The Strategic Paradox of Truly Autonomous Weapons
    The strategic paradox of autonomous weapons ZIPAR Policy Brief February 2018 Marko Kovic ZIPAR About ZIPAR The Zurich Institute of Public Aairs Research is devoted to identifying and addressing the major challenges for humankind in the short-term, in the medium- term, and in the long-term future. ZIPAR is an independent nonprot think tank based in Zurich, Switzerland. Recommended citation Marko Kovic (2018): The strategic paradox of autonomous weapons systems. ZIPAR Policy Brief. Zurich, Switzerland. Copyright This document is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial- NoDerivatives 4.0 International license. You can freely distribute this document and reference it in other works. For any questions about copyright, feel free to contact the author ([email protected]). 2 The strategic paradox of autonomous weapons ZIPAR Policy Brief Abstract Progress in articial intelligence makes the technology increasingly relevant to military applications. In particular, autonomous weapons could be of great military use: Autonomous weapons could achieve goals more ef- fectively and more eciently than humans or human-operated weapons. In this policy brief, the potential impact of implementing autonomous weapons on the behavior and decision-making of the military is discussed. The most probable positive impact, greater adherence to humanitarian law on the battleeld, is outweighed by the most probable negative impact, a disruption of the military chain of command and the security risks that follow from that disruption. This creates a strategic paradox: Even though autonomous weapons could help the military achieve goals more eectively and more eciently, autonomous weapons would strategically undermine the military by disrupting the chain of command and by creating a great security risk.
    [Show full text]
  • Applying Irregular Warfare Principles to Cyber Warfare
    Soldier from 3/187th Infantry, 101st Airborne Division, out of Fort Campbell, Kentucky, sets up SATCOM to communicate further with key rear elements as part of search and attack mission in area of Narizah, Afghanistan, July 23, 2002 (U.S. Army/Todd M. Roy) Applying Irregular Warfare Principles to Cyber Warfare By Frank C. Sanchez, Weilun Lin, and Kent Korunka he cyberspace threat exists in a cyberspace and cyberspace threats that and can foresee, rapidly respond to, realm that does not conform to are initiated by faceless, borderless, and and counter cyberspace threats, the T the physical limits of land, sea, sometimes nationless enemies. These U.S. military’s strategy and approach to air, and space. Unlike these traditional enemies manifest in a domain neither cyberspace must adapt and incorporate domains, cyberspace fosters an unpre- confined nor governed by the tradi- unconventional approaches and hybrid dictable threat that can adjust, morph, tional norms and rules of war, which warfare into its operational capability. and reproduce without a national the broader military has no experience Despite its importance, the Nation’s identity or face.1 The challenge of the undertaking. To ensure the United leaders, strategists, and military planners military is to posture its approach to States maintains cyberspace dominance struggle to understand how cyberspace operations (CO) fit into national security as an instrument of national policy. A Commander Frank C. Sanchez, USN, is an Action Officer on the Joint Staff J32, Intelligence, significant shortcoming is due to the Surveillance, and Reconnaissance Operations. Major Weilun Lin, USAF, is Chief of the Central and leaders’ lack of experience and basic South Asia Branch, Joint Cyberspace Center, U.S.
    [Show full text]
  • Counterinsurgency Law: New Directions in Asymmetric Warfare Edited by William A
    International Review of the Red Cross (2013), 95 (891/892), 763–767. Multinational operations and the law doi:10.1017/S1816383114000149 BOOK REVIEW Counterinsurgency Law: New Directions in Asymmetric Warfare Edited by William A. Banks* Book review by R. James Orr, Dean of the School of Criminal Justice and Social Sciences of Tiffin University. Dean Orr is a retired US Navy judge advocate specialising in international and operational law and served as deputy legal adviser to NATO Headquarters, Supreme Allied Commander Transformation from 2004 to 2008. As the active engagement of US and North Atlantic Treaty Organisation (NATO) troops in the conflict in Afghanistan winds down, the challenges of that conflict, and the legacy of challenges of the conflict in Iraq, continue to resonate in the policy discussions within governments and in academic literature. Throughout the first decade of the twenty-first century, legal literature has reflected an effort to adapt to what has often been characterised as a new era of conflict.1 Counterinsurgency Law: New Directions in Asymmetric Warfare, edited by Professor William Banks, is but one of the latest contributions to this literature. The second publication of collected essays produced under the aegis of Syracuse University’s Institute for National Security and Counter-Terrorism,2 the book provides a collection of well-researched and well-supported papers that serve the legal community. Both publications propose practical analytic approaches intended to help decision-makers and practitioners, as well as scholars, deal with an extremely * Published by Oxford University Press USA, 2013. The views expressed here are those of the book reviewer alone and not of the International Committee of the Red Cross.
    [Show full text]
  • How Organized Crime Appropriates Counterinsurgency Violence by Philip Luke Johnson
    PERSPECTIVES ON TERRORISM Volume 13, Issue 6 The Crime and State Terrorism Nexus: How Organized Crime Appropriates Counterinsurgency Violence by Philip Luke Johnson Abstract Studies on the connections between organized crime and terrorism tend to focus on non-state armed groups, and on the convergence of violent tactics. This article demonstrates that such a focus can overlook well- documented connections between state terrorism and organized crime. Particularly in post-Cold War Latin America, criminal groups recruit violence specialists from military and paramilitary units with histories of using indiscriminate violence and other forms of terrorism during counterinsurgency campaigns. Through this recruitment process, tactics of state terrorism are appropriated into the repertoires of criminal groups. This article demonstrates this process with a case study of the Zetas in Mexico, which was the first group in the country to actively recruit soldiers with counterinsurgency training. By doing so, the group caused a paradigm shift in criminal operations in the country, leading to the widespread adoption of terrorist tactics. This case study highlights the need for scholars of terrorism and organized crime to bring state terrorism back in, and to more thoroughly examine the points of contact between state and non-state terrorism. Keywords: Organized Crime, State Terrorism, Counterinsurgency, Terrorist Tactics, Mexico, Zetas Introduction In 2010, the bodies of 72 men and women were found on an isolated property in San Fernando, Mexico. All had been executed. The massacre was perpetrated by the Zetas, a criminal organization with a strong local presence and a reputation for using indiscriminate violence. This massacre provoked widespread outrage, as the victims were migrants from Central America, passing through the area on their way north.
    [Show full text]
  • 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
    FM 3-24 MCWP 3-33.5 INSURGENCIES AND COUNTERING INSURGENCIES MAY 2014 DISTRIBUTION RESTRICTION: Approved for public release; distribution is unlimited. HEADQUARTERS, DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY 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. DISTRUBUTION RESTRICTION: Approved for public release; distribution is unlimited. 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.
    [Show full text]
  • THE EVOLUTION of COUNTERINSURGENCY WARFARE: a HISTORICAL OVERVIEW Revista De Relaciones Internacionales, Estrategia Y Seguridad, Vol
    Revista de Relaciones Internacionales, Estrategia y Seguridad ISSN: 1909-3063 [email protected] Universidad Militar Nueva Granada Colombia Palma Morales, Oscar THE EVOLUTION OF COUNTERINSURGENCY WARFARE: A HISTORICAL OVERVIEW Revista de Relaciones Internacionales, Estrategia y Seguridad, vol. 6, núm. 2, julio-diciembre, 2011, pp. 195-220 Universidad Militar Nueva Granada Bogotá, Colombia Available in: http://www.redalyc.org/articulo.oa?id=92722562009 How to cite Complete issue Scientific Information System More information about this article Network of Scientific Journals from Latin America, the Caribbean, Spain and Portugal Journal's homepage in redalyc.org Non-profit academic project, developed under the open access initiative 195 rev.relac.int.estrateg.segur.6(2):195-220,2011 THE EVOL UTION OF COUNTERINSURGENCY W ARF ARE: A HISTORIC AL OVERVIEW *** Oscar Palma Morales ** ABSTRACT This paper makes a historical overview of the evolution of counterinsurgency in order to understand that this concept has not been rigid and static through the ages. It intends to explain why the understanding of counterinsurgency, its objectives and scope, the actors involved in its practice, and especially the legal and legitimate methods applied, are as they are conceived today. In essence, what began as the use of violence to destroy the insurgency along with its social base through all available means became a political enterprise to build state institutions in every region in a specific country. This, in order to erode the insurgency’s connection with communities while providing the services required for social and economic development. It also makes an observation of 08 de noviembre de 2011 21 de octubre de 2011 one of the future dilemmas of the debate on counterinsurgency.
    [Show full text]
  • Vol 30 Issue 3
    review from the editor's aerie Any dream of aerial conflict is merely the product of fertile imagination, a malady often encountered in younger men with insufficient service to recognize certain things as manifestly absurd. An anonymous Army spokesman (1911) as quoted in Air University Review. lanuary-February 1979, p. 47 One of the elder statesmen of the Air Foce recently agreed that the Air University Review is a book "written by old men for old men." That hurt! True, we have often been accused of prejudice against junior officers, women, and noncommissioned officers because of the scarcity of their articles in our pages. This is the 148th issue of the Review. Casual research in the tables of contents over this 30-year history reveals that the lead article spot is typically the stomping ground of the high and the mighty. Twice, Secretary of Defense Harold Brown has occupied the lead position, though not in his present capacity. An ambassador of the United States headed the line-up in our luly-August 1977 edition. A congressman was number one in March-April 1975. Former Secretaries of the Air Force have been the point man. also. Even a foreign ambassador to the United States supplied the lead in the September- October 1971 issue. Twenty-five four-star generals, fourteen doctors of philosophy, eight chiefs of staff, and one Air Marshal of the Royal Air Force have also led the parade. Only once in these 147 issues, however, has a junior officer made the front rank, and that was a captain in September- October 1975.
    [Show full text]
  • U.S. Government Counterinsurgency Guide
    U.S. GOVERNMENT COUNTERINSURGENCY GUIDE January 2009 UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT INTERAGENCY COUNTERINSURGENCY INITIATIVE ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS The following departments and agencies contributed to the drafting of the U.S. Government Counterinsurgency Guide: Department of State Department of Defense U.S. Agency for International Development Department of Justice Department of The Treasury Department of Homeland Security Department of Agriculture Department of Transportation Office of the Director of National Intelligence The drafting of this Guide was led by the Bureau of Political-Military Affairs, Department of State. For their roles in the creation of the Guide, special thanks to: David Kilcullen Special Advisor for Counterinsurgency to the Secretary of State Lieutenant Colonel Matt Porter, UK Royal Marines Colonel (Ret.) Carlos Burgos, U.S. Army The Guide is available electronically at: www.state.gov/t/pm/ppa/pmppt Bureau of Political-Military Affairs Printed January 2009 U.S. GOVERNMENT COUNTERINSURGENCY GUIDE January 13, 2009 PREFACE In recent years the United States has engaged in prolonged counterinsurgency campaigns in Afghanistan and Iraq. It has supported many other friendly governments facing internal subversion around the globe. In so doing it has both relearned old lessons, and forged new methods and concepts for the stabilization of moderate, freedom-oriented governments. This Guide, the first of its kind in almost half a century, distills the best of contemporary thought, historical knowledge, and hard-won practice. It is the best kind of doctrinal work: intellectually rigorous, yet practical. Irregular warfare is far more varied than conventional conflict: hence the importance of an intellectual framework that is coherent enough to provide guidance, and flexible enough to adapt to circumstances.
    [Show full text]
  • Irregular Warfare
    IRREGULAR WARFARE Air Force Doctrine Document 3-2 15 March 2013 This document complements related discussion found in Joint Publications (JP) 3-22, Foreign Internal Defense; 3-24, Counterinsurgency Operations; and 3-26, Counterterrorism BY ORDER OF THE AIR FORCE DOCTRINE DOCUMENT 3-2 SECRETARY OF THE AIR FORCE 15 MARCH 2013 SUMMARY OF CHANGES This document is substantially revised and renumbered from 3-24 to 3-2. Its focus was shifted from a counterinsurgency-centric view to an overarching perspective of irregular warfare that encompasses the following key activities: stability operations, counterterrorism, counterinsurgency, foreign internal defense, and unconventional warfare. Irregular Warfare (IW) history and strategic context from the Airman’s perspective are presented in Chapter 1. A command and organization discussion, including responsibilities of the commander, Air Force forces and presentation of forces, is streamlined in Chapter 2. Chapter 3 encompasses strategy, planning, execution, and assessment considerations. This publication also includes a new appendix that clarifies the relationship between IW and traditional warfare in the context of phases of war. Supersedes: AFDD 3-24, 1 August 2007 OPR: LeMay Center/DDS Certified by: LeMay Center/DD (Col Todd C. Westhauser) Pages: 60 Accessibility: Available on the e-publishing website at www.e-publishing.af.mil for downloading Releasability: There are no releasability restrictions on this publication Approved by: Walter D. Givhan, Major General, USAF Commander, Curtis E. LeMay Center for Doctrine Development and Education FOREWORD Irregular warfare remains in the forefront of the Air Force’s warfighting focus. Airmen continue to plan and counter irregular and evolving threats as joint, multinational, and multi-agency campaigns, beginning with strategy development and concluding with the achievement of the desired end state.
    [Show full text]
  • Principles of Modern American Counterinsurgency: Evolution and Debate by Janine Davidson the Brookings Institution
    Principles of Modern American Counterinsurgency: Evolution and Debate By Janine Davidson The Brookings Institution Brookings Counterinsurgency and Pakistan Paper Series Insurgency and counterinsurgency are not new to Americans. People often forget that the American Revolution was an insurgency by colonists against the British crown. In South Carolina, Frances Marion, the so-called “Swamp Fox” who hid with his band of guerrillas in the woods and led raids against British troops, is considered an American hero. Likewise, during the American Civil War, southern “partisans” such as John Mosby, of Mosby’s Rangers, became infamous for their successful guerrilla tactics against Union soldiers.1 Americans have an even more extensive history as counter-insurgents –with a mixed record of success.2 Early American expansion led to a number of bloody engagements between the Army (and sometimes the Marines) and various Native American tribes in the Northwest Indian War (1785-1795), in the Creek and Seminole Wars that followed in the South, and in the many famous clashes with the Sioux, the Comanche, and others in the West throughout the 1800s. Many of the lessons learned through trial and error on the American frontier were handed down through word of mouth by soldiers who brought their personal experiences from one fight to the next. This nearly uninterrupted string of guerrilla and counter-guerrilla operations informed the U.S. military’s approach in later conflicts, including the guerrilla elements of the Civil War and its aftermath; the Mexican-American
    [Show full text]