Andrew Wakeling, Senior C-IED and Search Consultant at Optima Defence and Security, talks about identifying search lessons for the future
The Searchers S
earch provides the capability to locate specified targets using intelligence assessments, systematic procedures and appropriate detection techniques. At the foundation of all search is the concept of threat. A threat assessment is a function of the ground, the enemy capability, and the enemy intent: only by understanding these three elements can a response be constructed that will effectively counter the threat. Threat assessment is therefore key in any search-based operation, allowing commanders to allocate time and resources where they are likely to achieve best effect. As much as highlighting areas of ‘high-threat’, that require more advanced assets to be deployed, it is often as important that certain areas can justifiably be designated ‘low-threat’. By doing so, commanders can ensure that resources are deployed efficiently and that operational tempo and freedom of movement are not constrained by superfluous procedures. Traditionally, search has been categorised as ‘low-risk’ or ‘high-risk’, dependent on whether there is reason to believe that some kind of explosive device or booby trap is present. Assets would then be tasked accordingly, with specialist, advanced search teams, operating alone in those areas deemed ‘high-risk’. The threat of IEDs in Iraq and Afghanistan, and a lack of specialist operators at the tactical level, changed the boundaries between what was expected of the specialist EOD and search operators, as well as the non-specialist All-Arms soldier. Prior to recent military operations in Iraq and Afghanistan, C-IED (in particular search and IED disposal) was conducted by a small number of highly trained and highly specialist teams. Forces in Iraq encountered predominantly surface-laid IEDs of a relatively complex design and in a quantity that could, in general, be dealt with by specialist EOD personnel. However, Afghanistan presented a new challenge, with the adoption by insurgents of sub-surface IEDs, of a more rudimentary design, that would evolve in response to the techniques and equipment designed to detect them. As insurgents moved away from direct fire towards the IED as their preferred method of attack, the use of IEDs became a successfully employed tactic, resulting in a strategic effect on Coalition Forces’ freedom of manoeuvre. The situation led to frustrations for tactical commanders: even if an IED was located, the subsequent operation would often require tactical units to remain static in cordon positions for several hours whilst specialist assistance was tasked. The use of IEDs had effectively given rise to restrictions on the ability of units to break out from base locations and conduct essential patrolling as part of the stabilisation mission.
Shifting Trends
In order to adapt to the threat and regain freedom of manoeuvre, the capability to detect buried IEDs had to shift away from being the preserve of the specialist, towards the generalist. The
introduction of new basic route, search procedures in Iraq and Afghanistan, adapted from those employed by specialist teams, gave the All-Arms soldier the training and equipment required to identify those vulnerable points at which they were at greatest risk of attack, and then conduct dismounted search in order to allow safe passage for a convoy or patrol. The rapid procurement, distribution and training of new equipment, including handheld metal detectors, led the way for subsequent transition of equipment and procedures from the specialist to generalist user. The insurgent will continue to react to the way in which ground forces operate and attempt to find weakness in tactics, techniques and procedures. IEDs have been found in locations that would suggest specific targeting of personnel conducting C- IED procedures and new variations of IED have also been encountered that demonstrate an appreciation of the technologies deployed by troops. It is therefore essential that tactics are both robust and flexible to accommodate new threats. C-IED training, including elements of search has been added to the other mandatory annual training for Nato countries operating in Afghanistan, in acknowledgement of the fact that IEDs will likely be an enduring threat and that their own forces must be prepared to operate within it. The assessment of threat and the idea that in order to defeat the enemy one must be able to think like him are by no means new concepts, however the application of such techniques by individual soldiers on the ground allows identification of areas where they are likely to be targeted and, through subsequent search procedures, allows safer operations to be conducted in an IED threat environment. The provision of a basic level of search training to the generalist soldier also gives the commander an additional, offensive capability in order to disrupt and defeat the IED network itself. Large numbers of non-specialists on the ground have the potential to act as a widespread intelligence gathering asset, that is enhanced by providing these troops with sufficient knowledge to understand what it is they are looking for and some basic systematic procedures to increase their chances of finding it, whether it be on a person, in a building, in a vehicle or in an open area.
What Search Provides
Much of what basic search training teaches meshes efficiently with fundamental soldiering skills. For example, techniques such as ‘ground sign awareness’ extend upon the observational skills that would generally be expected. By giving the individual an understanding of what they are observing (flattening, transference etc.) they will be more likely to notice its presence in the future.
On current military operations, search is used not only for the location and subsequent denial of IEDs and their component parts, but also the gathering of evidence for prosecution, or
CBRNe South America 2012, 13-14 March, Rio De Janeiro, Brazil. More information on
www.icbrnevents.com 42 CBRNe WORLD February 2012
www.cbrneworld.com
CBRNeWORLD
Page 1 |
Page 2 |
Page 3 |
Page 4 |
Page 5 |
Page 6 |
Page 7 |
Page 8 |
Page 9 |
Page 10 |
Page 11 |
Page 12 |
Page 13 |
Page 14 |
Page 15 |
Page 16 |
Page 17 |
Page 18 |
Page 19 |
Page 20 |
Page 21 |
Page 22 |
Page 23 |
Page 24 |
Page 25 |
Page 26 |
Page 27 |
Page 28 |
Page 29 |
Page 30 |
Page 31 |
Page 32 |
Page 33 |
Page 34 |
Page 35 |
Page 36 |
Page 37 |
Page 38 |
Page 39 |
Page 40 |
Page 41 |
Page 42 |
Page 43 |
Page 44 |
Page 45 |
Page 46 |
Page 47 |
Page 48 |
Page 49 |
Page 50 |
Page 51 |
Page 52 |
Page 53 |
Page 54 |
Page 55 |
Page 56 |
Page 57 |
Page 58 |
Page 59 |
Page 60 |
Page 61 |
Page 62 |
Page 63 |
Page 64 |
Page 65 |
Page 66 |
Page 67 |
Page 68 |
Page 69 |
Page 70 |
Page 71 |
Page 72 |
Page 73 |
Page 74 |
Page 75 |
Page 76