Company Level Intelligence Led Operations

[Red Rat]

Woland,

I concur with how MikeF set about doing things. U tried to do it like that in Iraq as a company commander - but I suspect my attempt was somewhat messier then Mike's!

As a company commander in Iraq I looked for my Int NCO to do the following:

Provide in-depth detailed 'narrative' advice, by this I mean understand what story we had written in my patch in the previous 2 years and how it was playing out now. To do this he needed to know what we had done, the bad guys had done and the locals had done in the previous 2 years. Importantly he also needed to know what we hadn't done (but may have promised) as well.

Understand the environment in terms of the complex interaction and inter-relationships of key players; good, bad and neutral.

Allow me to bounce op ideas off him and be strong enough to influence my op design. I expected my int boys to work closely with influence ops.

Be opinionated. I did not want to know what had happened in the previous 24 hours in terms of a straight forward regurgitation of facts. I wanted to know why things had happened in the previous 24 hours, what that meant for us and what we should consider doing about it. I wanted analysis, assessment and recommendations - all clearly labelled as such.

Influence higher and laterally. I always took my J2 in to the main FOB with me to work bde and bn J2 in order to see what they could do for us and us for them. It also enabled me to influence things. J2 (British) continues to be very stovepiped and we have to break these down.

Hope this helps.

RR

[davidbfpo]

SWC invariably focus on "fixing" the enemy and intelligence, so where does evidence fit in to your company intelligence cell? I am mindful of the UK experience in Ulster, assuming it has been retained; but in Afghanistan the host nation retains the right to prosecute.

If evidence is sought, no required - who will handle that?

See Post 7 above, which I've copied here from another thread - as it is a topical illustration.

[Red Rat]

Continuity: If you do get the post you need to influence immediately the handover takeover process, from the commander's recce onwards. I am perenially disappointed as to how badly we are are handing over information and intelligence between ongoing and outgoing units. One source of continuity could be the Afghans that you are working with (try not to change all your systems overnight on the basis that the previous unit's were no good, the Afghans will have only just got used to the last lot...)

Working with Afghans: The afghans will probably know a great deal more then you do as to what is happening. Under 'Partnering' all operations are joint and we are supposed to be joined at the hip at all levels. You will need to consider how you are going to pool intelligence and make best use of each others capabilities.

Evidence: - That should be more G3 (operations) lead and much will be SOP with regards to (physical) evidence collection and use of warrants etc. I have a briefing tomorrow on the current state of the Afghan legal system so I should be better informed then (I sit opposite the Operational Law branch so have a direct line in if you have any queries here).

RR