What is presence patrolling?

[Bill Moore]

I can't believe that our guys are still asking this, and I suspect it because we have an Army that is indoctrinated versus familiar with doctrine. This gets to Ken's post on the blog under the NPS Thesis on IW, where he severly and rightfully scolds the micro managed training that produces leaders who don't understand the why of what their doing, or how to adapt, they simply follow a series of steps.

Why do we need to maintain a presence with presence patrols? Maybe to keep the enemy off guard, to provide a sense of security to the populace, to collect intelligence, to learn about the people you're there to work with and protect (learn what their complaints are, not simply rely on walk ins), and the list goes on and on. It should probably be mandatory training in leader training to write a paper on why presence patrols are important. Everyone would run to the doctrinal manuals and complain there isn't a book answer, then the answer from the instructor should be along the lines that doctrine is only a guide, you now have a problem where there is no book answer, figure it out. We have too many leaders who simply want to live in a base, push a patrol out to a specific point to conduct a specific task like an ambush or raid(that can be measured), then go back to base calling it a day and mission accomplished. This mind set has contaminated both conventional and special operations forces.

You won't necessarily know if you're presence patrols are successful, but in the day men capable of thinking independently (like many Americans who haven't been re-educated in military doctrinal schools) could get a good sense without MOP/MOE whether or not they were on the right or not. I know if the police maintain a consistent presence in an area with a high crime rate, the crime goes down. Yea, it's more dangerous for the officers but that is what they get paid for, and we get paid to fight our enemies, not focus solely on force protection. Fighting involves risk, we all know that. I would have been stuck with the information our S2 gave us if I didn't go out and run numerous presence patrols, which by the way greatly informed the S2. Never complained about, didn't bother looking for how to do it in a doctrinal manual, it was simply the right thing to do.

We still have a long ways to go to undue the damage of over indoctrinating our force.

[Ken White]

With an added quote from an AWG Sergeant Major; "All the other combat arms are science, infantry and SF are arts..."

That predicated on the fact that COIN operations are 'Infantry' like regardless of the branch or backgrounds of those involved; it is cued from Bill's point:

"We have too many leaders who simply want to live in a base, push a patrol out to a specific point to conduct a specific task like an ambush or raid (that can be measured), then go back to base calling it a day and mission accomplished. This mind set has contaminated both conventional and special operations forces."

Metrics and war simply do not mix...

Fire tables, tank gunnery, maintenance parameters, preflight checklists all have their place, I guess, however, in ground combat at the tactical level they and the mentality that drive them become impediments. Much I've heard from participants in both Iraq and Afghanistan leads me to believe impedimentia rules.

[William F. Owen]

The UK's concept of "Presence Patrolling" is ensure that the bad guys cannot do stuff, because you are not there to stop them. "Suppress the enemies freedom of action" - just like any patrolling!!

In Northern Ireland, it actually meant lying up in abandoned houses, or woods, sometimes for a couple of days, then suddenly moving into an area unexpectedly.
The object was to appear unexpectedly from an unexpected direction.

In more benign environments it's just showing the flag, and sending he message "don't f**k with us or else," combined with "You're safe because we're here."

All blinding common sense really.

[jcustis]

It may seem like blindingly common sense, but when we look at the COIN context, and throw in the paradigm of the combat outpost, as seen is post 86 of this thread: http://council.smallwarsjournal.com/...?t=5626&page=5, common sense isn't so easy to determine.

I think any discussion of presence patrolling needs to have a parallel discussion of the conditions (remember TASK - CONDITION - STANDARD?) to the patrol in question, or how else do you train to standard and evaluate it, and how else do we peel back the layer on this COP issue?

I admit that with the siting of COPs, there must be balance achieved by a rational application of METT-TS&L, but if we want to be able to "presence patrol" what is that balance? What does presence patrolling really give us if the BGs can enjoy freedom of maneuver when we are not there, in the ville (which seems to typically happen at night).

I get frustrated the same as the next guy when I see video of an attack taking place on a low-lying COP, but have had to step back and think but if that's where the people are, then there are some basic operational hazards to deal with in that approach...so be it. What I am more frustrated by are patrols that saunter out of the COP perimeter for a period of time, gain terrain and therefore some security for the locals, and then cede that same terrain when they conclude the patrol. They may be establishing a presence for X period of time, but how is that presence achieving what we are trying to do? More importantly, can there be more efficient and force-preserving ways to achieve the same thing?


You are right Wilf, a presence patrol is, in the end, basic and common sense, and doesn't need to fit into a doctrinal boilerplate. The problem is that presence patrol becomes a bumper sticker slapped on a lot of stuff, and Joe fails to understand the WHY behind why he does it. We definitely need to spend a lot of time lying up, but in a many of the clips I've seen, it doesn't look like our boys are doing that.

[slapout9]

IMO part of the problem is that in most Military patrols you want to detect the presence of the enemy but not reveal your presence until the time of the attack. COIN/Police patrolling is the exact opposite you want to be highly visible for the deterrent effect.....you will get caught so don't commit the crime. Problem is you become a great big target if you are facing a ruthless enemy as opposed to a run of the mill criminal.

[William F. Owen]

IMO part of the problem is that in most Military patrols you want to detect the presence of the enemy but not reveal your presence until the time of the attack. COIN/Police patrolling is the exact opposite you want to be highly visible for the deterrent effect.....you will get caught so don't commit the crime. Problem is you become a great big target if you are facing a ruthless enemy as opposed to a run of the mill criminal.

Got it in one Slap, me old'Mustang driver!

What you really want to do is switch seamlessly between the two, and keep everyone else guessing. Not that hard, once you know how.

[slapout9]

Got it in one Slap, me old'Mustang driver!

What you really want to do is switch seamlessly between the two, and keep everyone else guessing. Not that hard, once you know how.

Yep, it police world you would have a mix of uniformed and plain clothes police officers and then go have fun watching the bad guys try to figure it out

[William F. Owen]

You are right Wilf, a presence patrol is in the end basic and common sense, and doesn't need to fit into a doctrinal boilerplate. The problem is that presence patrol becomes a bumper sticker slapped on a lot of stuff, and Joe fails to understand the WHY behind why he does it. We definitely need to spend a lot of time lying up, but in a many of the clips I've seen, it doesn't look like our boys are doing that.

Common sense is not so common?

Back when I was serving, I came to the conclusion, and more so since, that a great deal of what is taught about patrolling in western armies not really thought through very well. There is a good deal of confusing process with outcomes.
If you are walking the streets to walk the streets, then something is wrong. Patrols have to have an objective and clear purpose. Joe should be taught that.
That's why there is a huge difference between hunting and just walking around the woods with a gun!