Counter-IED efforts are done primarily by military and law enforcement (led by intelligence efforts) with the assistance of the diplomatic and financial communities. It involves a comprehensive approach of countering the threat networks that employ improvised explosive devices (IEDs), defeating the devices themselves, and training others. Counter-IED, or C-IED, is usually part of a broader counter-terrorism, counter-insurgency, or law enforcement effort. Because IEDs are a subset of a number of forms of asymmetric warfare used by insurgents and terrorists, C-IED activities are principally against adversaries and not only against IEDs. C-IED treats the IED as a systemic problem and aims to defeat the IED threat networks themselves.
This IED threat network requires multiple actions and resources in order to stage an IED Event. The IED threat network may be either hierarchical or non-hierarchical but it will contain nodes such as personnel, resources and other actions that are linked. The importance of these nodes and the linkages between them will vary. Identifying the critical vulnerabilities within the IED threat network is an important C-IED activity.
Some IED threat networks may be part of large, international terrorist organizations and some may be state sponsored. Some may work completely independently, while others may extend from theater down to village level. This span of possibilities increases the complexity of military and law enforcement operations and requires a comprehensive approach to C-IED potentially involving close cooperation and coordination between the diplomatic, military, economic, and informational levers of power.
The complexity of the IED threat network is increased since mobile phones and the internet provide a low-cost and easily accessible medium for information sharing and the swift promulgation of tactical ideas and practices, thereby facilitating the efficient operation of these diverse systems. IED network members also have the ability to operate part-time and can blend back into the civilian population when their actions are completed. Such systems can be extremely resilient, invariably hard to target and are, therefore, survivable. Also, adversary targets can range from the specific such as host nation security force bases and recruiting events to the indiscriminate such as concentrations of people in public places. However, IEDs are not only found within the land environment; other targets may include maritime choke points and ships alongside, as well as aircraft in flight or on the ground.AJP-3.15(A) NATO Allied Joint Doctrine for Countering – Improvised Explosive Devices
The first organization to tackle IED's on a large scale was the Joint IED Defeat Organization or JIEDDO of the U.S. Department of Defense on 14 February 2006. NATO later adopted JIEDDO's tactics, techniques and procedures.
The C-IED approach used by NATO involves three mutually supporting and complementary pillars of activity which are: attack the network, defeat the device, and prepare the force. These are all underpinned by understanding and intelligence. (Counter-IED efforts can also be broken up into six key operational activities: predict, prevent, detect, neutralize, mitigate, and exploit.)
Countering Threat Networks (CTN) A growing danger to the international community consists of highly complex adversary networks with international span that employ criminal financing as well as terror attacks and other destructive capabilities. Effectively countering these dynamic and violent illicit networks requires the creation of an international and multi-functional framework to share information on these networks as well as collaborative multinational countermeasures. Attack the network (AtN) is the principal pillar requiring this joint, inter-agency and multinational approach. Attack the network operations are defined as actions, kinetic or non-kinetic, used to disrupt, destroy, or reduce an enemy's capacity to mount terror operations, specifically groups that use IEDs. It consists of largely offensive and proactive activities, driven by intelligence that may go beyond the theater of operations, designed to disrupt the networks of the adversary's IED threat network.
Counter-network operations usually focus on leadership targeting of an organization, which follows the logic that by catching the right hornet, the whole colony dies. What is often overlooked in this approach, however, is that if just a worker bee is killed, the nest is aggravated and a much bigger problem is created. While this concept provides a convenient metaphor to discuss possible targeting methodology, it seldom resembles the facts, because human networks are not directly analogous to a hornet's nest. In other words, not every situation can be resolved by a single kill or capture of the "queen". Activity is focused on the critical vulnerabilities of the IED threat network, for example, by denying the supply of components, finance, leaders, specialists and recruits and adversary exploitation and isolating the adversary from the local population. AtN/CTN seeks to 1) shape and influence IED networks, 2) disrupt their operations, and 3) undermine their financiers and supply chains.
Exploitation is a vital component of the attack the networks activity. Information gained provides a picture of adversary capabilities and intentions, perpetrator relationships and the technical construction of the device. This enables the prediction of forthcoming IED activity, informs the targeting process, and enables follow up activities to further disrupt the IED threat network. Intelligence gained from exploitation also feeds into the other C-IED pillars.
Operating Framework for Executing the Intelligence Cycle To execute the intelligence cycle, a model is required that it is able to treat the enemy or adversary as a system. Operational experience has shown that by using a model based on the generic core functions (find, fix, strike and exploit) will ensure key areas and points in the adversary system can be identified, enabling power or influence to be applied. Immediate effects can be organized to affect other parts of the system. For example, covertly observing an IED placement without attacking the placement team could lead to a subsequent operation to identify further elements of the IED threat network, for example a bomb maker or a cache. By the same process, observing the bomb maker may lead to identifying a supply chain for IED components used for a large number of teams, adding a much higher value to the outcome. The model used to describe this approach is called find, fix, finish, exploit and analyze or F3EA: Find. A systematic approach and long-term investment is required to allow understanding of a system to be built up. Enemy dispositions and hostile groups must be found and assessed before action can be taken against them. In combat, physical locations are most important, and must be analyzed alongside what the enemy is doing and why. In stability operations and counter-insurgency, find will involve examining the human terrain to find networks and systematically uncovering them. Network members will seek anonymity within the population. They will use it as cover, with or without, the population's consent. Fix. Once the target within the system has been found, it needs to be fixed in time and space. This generates a pattern of life analysis from which deductions and a plan can be formed. The target can be fixed either by physical force, or less intrusively by the use of collection assets such as intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance elements. This expands the understanding of the target to provide the commander with more options for the finish phase. Patience can lead to even greater operational gains. Finish. In some instances, the commander may want to strike the target to remove it from the system. Alternatively other methods may be more useful, for example to recruit or buy an element of the enemy's network. The aim of finish is to secure the intelligence required to continue the cycle. Detention plays an important part in this phase. Although detention is not without risks, and the taking of captured persons or prisoners of war absorbs combat power. However, it does separate the adversary from the population and protects it and the force. Detention also provides a fertile source of intelligence. Exploit. Exploit and analyze are the most important phases of the F3EA cycle, as they generate a more detailed understanding of the system or network in order to cue the most appropriate form of action. Exploit feeds the analysis process and exploitation activity may be coordinated by an exploitation planning board or other structure to ensure that opportunities are maximized. Agility and speed are essential, as are information management and information exchange which are underpinned by database continuity. Exploit includes, for example, tactical interrogation or examination of documents and materiel, or the technical exploitation of recovered improvised explosive device parts.
Activity Modelling and Identifying Critical Vulnerabilities Nodal activity modelling within an IED threat network is a useful means of understanding relationships and the networks within. Counter-IED efforts involve conducting specialized analysis to identify vulnerabilities, inter-dependencies, and cascading effects of the IED threat network Nodal Activity Model. These vulnerability assessments are the foundation of a risk-based implementation of protective programs designed to prevent, deter, and mitigate the risk of an IED attack.
Human Network Analysis and Targeting (HNAT)
HNAT is used to interdict, neutralize, and isolate threat networks. It primarily consists of advanced intelligence analytic procedures and techniques, such as Social Network Analysis (SNA), Link, Pattern, and Associative Analysis. It is enabled by tools such as network analysis software, target development, and nomination processes.
Further network analysis can be conducted using other models that look at the relationships between and within links and nodes. One of these is component analysis with 2 subsets: individual component analysis looking at the detail of each component part, and nodal component analysis looking at the relationship between nodes. Nodal component analysis has 2 further subsets functional analysis and nodal activity analysis. The former identifies and links the nodes in terms of their function, the latter then seeks to identify activities which take place within the functional node.
Center of Gravity Analysis Center of gravity analysis provides a model for systemically identifying critical vulnerabilities. There are four steps in analyzing the center of gravity of an IED threat network: Determine the critical capability, the absolutely essential function the system performs. The system might have several capabilities, but not all are critical in every situation. Identify the critical capability's source of power. Identify the critical requirements. Identify the critical requirements or components that are vulnerable to attack or disruption. These become targets to attack or are requirements for the IED system to protect.
Counter-threat Finance