Counterinsurgency

Insurgents and their motives

Each insurgency is unique, although there are often similarities among them. In all cases, insurgents aim is to force political change; any military action is secondary and subordinate, a means to an end. Counterinsurgent Commanders may face a confusing an shifting coalition of many kinds of opponents, some of whom may be at odds with one another, Examining the specific type of insurgency they face enables commanders and staff to build a more accurate picture of the insurgents and the thinking behind their overall approach. Such an examination identifies the following:
Root cause or causes of the insurgency
Extent to which the insurgency enjoys internal and external support
Basis on which insurgents appeal to the target population
Insurgents motivation and depth of commitment
Likely insurgents weapons and tactics
Operational environment in which insurgents seek to initiate and develop their campaign and strategy.

Follow me.......

reply to post by COINOP


That seemed like a bit of an out of the ordinary introduction. Are you writing a book on counter insurgency? Or perhaps reading one and transcribing it here? Anyway welcome to ATS.

Insurgent approaches

Counterinsurgents have to determine not only their opponents motivation but also the approach being used to advance the insurgency. This information is essential to developing effective programs that attack the insurgencys root cause. Analysis of the insurgents approach shapes counterinsurgents military options. Insurgent approaches include but are not limited to :
Conspiratorial
Military-focused
Urban
Protracted popular war
Identity-focused
Composite and coalition

reply to post by COINOP

Root cause or causes of the insurgency

Extent to which the insurgency enjoys internal and external support

Basis on which insurgents appeal to the target population

Insurgents motivation and depth of commitment

Likely insurgents weapons and tactics

Operational environment in which insurgents seek to initiate and develop their campaign and strategy.

All of this is very interesting, and the list does reflect the concerns of modern warfare in that it makes it clear that the primary concern, shared by all points on the list, is the context within which an insurgency operates.

The cultural context within which the enemy operates has always been a concern of wise field commanders, so nothing new there. But two from the list that are becoming very noteworthy are these...

"Basis on which insurgents appeal to the target population"

"Insurgents motivation and depth of commitment"

These are the ones to watch. A great deal of research is now going in to learning how to make those two things elements of the battlefield that can be systematically attacked like any other target. The context within which the enemy operates becomes a real time theater of battle where perception is the target.

Otherwise no, I don't really follow you. What are you getting at?

Conspiratorial

A conspiratorial approach involves a few leaders and a militant cadre or activist party seizing control of govt structures or exploiting a revolutionary action. In 1917, Lenin used this approach in carrying out the Bolshevik Revolution. Such insurgents remain secretive as long as possible. They emerge only when success can be achieved quickly. This approach usually involves creating a small, secretive, party or force. Insurgents who use this approach successfully may have to create security forces and generate mass support to maintain power, as the Bolsheviks did.

reply to post by COINOP


I have to admit that I think it is pretty strange that you have just popped up and started quoting from the U.S. Army Counterinsurgency Field Manual. Seeing as you don't plan on making a point, you might at least want to give credit where credit is due.

Urban

Organizations like the IRA certain Latin-American groups, and some Islamic groups have pursued an urban approach. This approach uses terrorist tactics in urban areas to accomplish the following:
Sow disorder
Incite secterian violence
Weaken the government
Intimidate the population
Kill gov and opposition leaders
Fix and intimidate police and military forces, limiting their ability to response to attacks
Create gov repression
Protracted urban terrorism waged by a small, independent cells requires little or no support. It is difficult to counter. When facing adequately run internal security forces, urban insurgencies typically assume a conspiratorial cellular structure recruited along lines of close association family, religious affiliation, political group or social group

Protracted popular approach

Protracted conflicts favor insurgents, and no approach makes better use of that assymetry than the protracted popular war. The Chinese Communist...used this approach to conquer china after WW2. The north viatnamese and Algerians adapted it to fit their respective situations. This approach is complex, few contemporary insurgents movements apply its full program, although many apply parts of it. It is, therefore, of more than just historical interest. Knowledge of it can be a powerful aid to understanding some insurgent movements.

This next part is very important...

reply to post by COINOP


Hi COINOP, and welcome to the Introductions Forum, a place to say hello to the ATS community.
Please review these links below, after which you are more than welcome to post an new intro thread if you wish.

The Introduction Forum is for introductions To tell something about you; not to start a thread about a topic.“Intro threads” that are really “topic threads” will be removed.
Please Review, Welcome to ATS, it’s time to introduce yourself.

IMPORTANT: Using Content From Other Websites on ATS

MOD NOTE: Posting work written by others

Try our Ask ATS with the search words of your choice.

Thread closed

Sauron
Super-Moderator