[QUOTE=William F. Owen;79589]
Quote Originally Posted by slapout9 View Post
Page 55 says under the single commander case, the commander may be a military "though this need not necessarily be the case."
The provincial intelligence officer, is (under the British System, either Special Branch, or the Security Services. It is not military).
Morever he goes on to stress, that where a military officer IS in Command, his right hand man "might be a police officer."
Additionally, both these diagrams refer to "Provincial" Command levels, not National. Page 110 actually uses the example of a Police inspector running the intelligence cell at the District level. This is all classic UK COIN/CRW.
Yes, the Army runs or may help run intelligence operations, especially rurally, to enable police operations. It is Aid to the civil power, not substitution for it


That the Army sets up the C2 for the committee system, does not mean you have soldiers running schools or doing anything non-military, apart from standard security tasks. The summary on Page 81 is pretty good.


Teaching school? Can't find it.
The Baby Milk thing reference someone else's work, not Kitson's, and is talking about co-option. In fact it merely means rewarding the behaviour your policy has sought to induce. EG: "You, the population, are responsible for helping keeping the peace."


1-Page 79 covers teaching,setting up clinics,construction,and agricultural. As for the rest of your comments it just proves my point that Kitson said the Army must be trained and prepared to do everything, if civilian assets are available great to use them but you can not depend on that because of the unknown or deteriorating situation you may face. Which is why he wrote the book in the first place to help prepare the Army for such situations.
2- The Baby Milk reference is Kitson, since he was using it to demonstrate a point about how one might co-opt the enemy by using non-violent means.
3-But his best suggestions are perhaps found in his conclusion chapter. On page 199 where the he recommends that priority be given to training armies in the use of persuasion on a large scale and providing the psychological Operations specialists and units required.
4-And then page 200 "Those who are not capable of developing these characteristics are inclined to retreat into their Military shells and try not to notice what is going on around them. They adopt the 'fit soldier with a rifle theory', and long for the days when they can get back to 'proper soldiering' by which they mean preparing for the next-or last-war,as opposed to fighting the current one"


As I said there is no CvC in this book. CvC's definition or "War as the use of violence to impose one's will" is not compatible with the modern low intensity conflicts where subversion (mental violence) is so prevalent.