Is The US's COIN Doctrine Fighting The "Last War"? (Original Research)

One doesn't often find an academic critique of a US Army Field Manual but that is exactly what recent Mercyhurst graduate Brian Gabriel set out to do in his thesis, "Evaluating The Transferability Of Counterinsurgency Doctrine:  From The Cold War To Global Insurgency".

In this instance, Brian's target was FM 3-24, Counterinsurgency.  In general, Brian was seeking to explore the "transferability" of the US's new doctrine:  Would this doctrine work with respect to future conflicts in new geographical locations at any scale or was it designed, as new doctrines sometimes are, to win the "last war"? Brian was specifically trying to determine if "the new doctrine truly provides a framework to defeat insurgencies around the world regardless of the nature of the insurgency or if the doctrine’s utility is more limited."  

Brian does many of the usual things you would expect to see in a thesis such as this and does them well.  His literature review, for example, covers the history of US counterinsurgency doctrine, the genesis of the new doctrine and the critiques of that doctrine in a well-written and interesting way that contains enough detail without coming across as overwhelming. 

Brian then uses the precepts that underlie the manual and the criticisms of the manual as a jumping off point for his own analysis based on "a total of seven insurgencies, from Malaya to Somalia, and the approaches of counter-insurgent forces from three countries—Great Britain, France, and the United States.  In addition, the transferability of FM 3-24 was evaluated through the use of two methodologies, one theoretical and another providing real-world perspective."

Brian uses a nifty matrix to capture and display the results of his analysis.  I have included a reduced size version of the matrix with this post but it is really worth the effort to download the full thesis and walk through Brian's dissection not only of the FM but also of its critics.  

Ultimately Brian finds, "Despite the critiques of some counterinsurgency theorists, FM 3-24 has a high level of transferability.  The transferability of FM 3-24 is not limited by a change in the geopolitical environment, a shift in the motivations of insurgents, the presence of third-party counter-insurgents, nor other characteristics that differentiate insurgencies today from the twentieth century.  This means that the doctrine’s precepts—the balance of offensive, defensive, and stability operations, the importance of intelligence-driven operations, the necessity of training host nation security forces, etc—remain valid in a post-anti-colonial era.  This result, however, only applies to domestic insurgencies.  Serious questions emerge about the doctrine when it is applied to regional or global insurgencies."

If you are interested in counterinsurgency operations at all, it is worth a look.  You can download the full text here.

Intelligence Studies At US Universities: Who Does It? Who Does It Well? Where Is It Headed? (Dissertation)

One of the questions that seems to pop up with increasing frequency on the fora, blogs and email lists I frequent/subscribe to is "I am interested in a career in intelligence; where can I get a degree?"

William Spracher's recent dissertation, National Security Intelligence Professional Education:   A Map of U.S. Civilian University Programs and Competencies, not only answers this important question but also provides the first comprehensive snapshot of intelligence studies programs in the US.

NOTE:  The full text of the dissertation is embedded below or you can download the dissertation here.

Of particular interest to potential students will be Bill's descriptions of 14 of the most fully developed intel studies programs (beginning on page 136 with a handy summary chart on page 137) and the results of his survey of young intelligence professionals (beginning on page 76). 

Senior leaders within the intel community are probably going to be interested in the entire dissertation but I found the "crosswalk" of course offerings with ICD 610's intel core competencies (at Appendix C on page 235) to be particularly interesting.

Once caveat, though.  This dissertation, as useful as it is, is, in my opinion, just a snapshot of a quickly evolving target.  The dissertation was finalized in 2009 and I am sure that some of the info Bill uses was collected even earlier.  Bill recommends that the DNI stay on top of the trends in this field and, given the changes I have seen in just the last year or two, it is a recommendation with which I heartily concur.

National Security Intelligence Professional Education: A Map of U.S. Civilian University Programs and Com...

Sunday Funnies: American Football Explained (YouTube)

It never ceases to amaze most Americans that "football" means something entirely different to the rest of the world and that what most of us are going to do this evening is perceived as little more than a bizarre tribal ritual by the other 6.5 billion people on the planet.

This short story by Andy Griffith might help you to explain it to them:

Chinese, Russian, Turkish Hackers Almost Certainly Targeting, Penetrating US Energy Provider Networks (Project Grey Goose)

Jeff Carr, author of Inside Cyber Warfare and IntelFusion, along with Sanjay Goel at the State University of New York, Albany and other contributors, has recently completed another of the Grey Goose reports, this time on hacker attacks on the power grid, both domestically and internationally.

The report's key findings are chilling:

• "State and/or Non-state actors from the Peoples Republic of China, the Russian Federation/Commonwealth of Independent States, and Turkey are almost certainly targeting and penetrating the networks of energy providers and other critical infrastructures in the U.S., Brazil, the Russian Federation, and the European Union."

• "Network attacks against the bulk power grid will almost certainly escalate steadily in frequency and sophistication over the next 12 months due in part to international emphasis among the G20 nations on Smart Grid research, collaborative development projects and the rich environment that creates for acts of cyber espionage"

• "The appeal of network intrusions against the U.S. Grid is enhanced by two key factors:"

• "90% of the U.S. Department of Defense's most critical assets are entirely dependent on the bulk power grid."
• "Most Grid asset owners and operators have been historically resistant to report cyber attacks against their networks as well as make the necessary investments to upgrade and secure their networks."

Grey Goose reports are volunteer efforts to analyze various cyber threats through the use of open source information. Previous reports have analyzed the Russia-Georgia cyber war and the evolution of cyber warfare.

In the interest of full disclosure: Jeff kindly listed me as a "reviewer" in the recent report but my input was limited to a little light editing. I don't consider myself a cyber war expert. I do think, however, that Jeff's record and the records of his co-contributors' speak for themselves and believe that those interested in this area (and those who should be interested in this area) need to read this report carefully (whether you ultimately agree with its conclusions or not).