Company Level Intelligence Led Operations

[William F. Owen]

the Brits call the O/I short course for company NCOs a "collator course" ; works well for them.

Excellent observation. In my day those guys stayed the hell away from HUMINT. In the early days of NI there were some spectacular disasters with people trying to "play spy" and getting innocent folks killed.

IMO, the Coy level Int bod should debriefed patrols, keep the logging and reporting up to date, handle the classified material, and brief the out going patrols - and you need at least 2 men at the company level to do it properly, especially if you have some sort of major drama going on.

[Tom Odom]

Excellent observation. In my day those guys stayed the hell away from HUMINT. In the early days of NI there were some spectacular disasters with people trying to "play spy" and getting innocent folks killed.

IMO, the Coy level Int bod should debriefed patrols, keep the logging and reporting up to date, handle the classified material, and brief the out going patrols - and you need at least 2 men at the company level to do it properly, especially if you have some sort of major drama going on.

Agreed. Just getting that process set in semi-permanent stone would be a step forward.

Best

Tom

[davidbfpo]

The post of Collator was my first venture into intelligence work in the UK police, in era of filing cards and typed briefing bulletins. Very crude on reflection.

Always found "selling" intelligence to colleagues hard, although it can be easier now. HUMINT was not a role we had, although far later in my career it was.

The best results as a collator came far later, nine years ago, when the post was at a smaller station, with about fifty officers. Even then the majority did not contribute to the intelligence picture.

Shortly after an excellent IT system arrived that enabled direct access to the data warehouse where much of the police information was held and the collator role evolved again. Plus analysts started to arrive and all manner of intelligence structures / systems.

I am an advocate of tactical intelligence as close as possible to the frontline officer, in person and providing help from IT systems. Company level I suspect in the military world.

davidbfpo

[Jedburgh]

Infantry, Mar-Apr 08: Suggestions for Creating a Company-Level Intel Cell

AKO Log-In Required

You’re a company commander, deployed in Iraq. You have plenty to do already, and now the boss is pushing you to start a company intel cell, a “fusion cell,” because his boss is pushing him to do so. And though you’d like to “organize for intelligence,” in David Kilcullen’s words, you don’t have a lot of options. Daily patrols, debriefs, and planning consume the time of your platoon leaders and your platoon sergeants. Your fire support officer (FSO) runs around like a maniac between meetings with sheiks and five projects designed to boost the local economy. You look at your training room … and shudder. Where do you begin?......

[William F. Owen]

You’re a company commander, deployed in Iraq. You have plenty to do already, and now the boss is pushing you to start a company intel cell, a “fusion cell,” because his boss is pushing him to do so. And though you’d like to “organize for intelligence,” in David Kilcullen’s words, you don’t have a lot of options. Daily patrols, debriefs, and planning consume the time of your platoon leaders and your platoon sergeants. Your fire support officer (FSO) runs around like a maniac between meetings with sheiks and five projects designed to boost the local economy. You look at your training room … and shudder. Where do you begin?......

I think there is a world of difference between "creating a Coy Int cell" from within the Coy or BG, and having an "Int Cell" (4-6 guys) attached to the company for the duration. I favour bolt-on I-cells with the relevant skills all close to the boil. How you create and sustain such teams is a huge issue.

Perhaps each Brigade could have an COIN Int-Company, that deploys sections down to the company locations, as and when required.

[Tom Odom]

I think there is a world of difference between "creating a Coy Int cell" from within the Coy or BG, and having an "Int Cell" (4-6 guys) attached to the company for the duration. I favour bolt-on I-cells with the relevant skills all close to the boil. How you create and sustain such teams is a huge issue.

Perhaps each Brigade could have an COIN Int-Company, that deploys sections down to the company locations, as and when required.

the units that do this (create an intel cell) report good results

The relevant CALL Newsletter 08-05 is up now on the CALL gateway for those with access.

Tom

[Steve Blair]

the units that do this (create an intel cell) report good results

The relevant CALL Newsletter 08-05 is up now on the CALL gateway for those with access.

Tom

I would tend to suspect (and it's a suspicion, mind) that "growing" a cell would be better than bolt on, if for no other reason than the home-grown cell would understand the unit's AO, operating procedures, and so on. Any element coming from outside would have that additional learning curve to deal with. But that's just me. It also squares to a degree with some of the experience from Vietnam and the Philippines where units grew their own intel sections (although they weren't always called that) and developed a more responsive system of intel collection and (just as importantly) dissemination within the unit. The further removed it become, the less responsive it became.