Work-Centered Approach to Insurgency Campaign Analysis

Paper I-029

Dennis K. Leedom, Ph.D.Evidence Based Research, Inc.

David F. Noble, Ph.D.Evidence Based Research, Inc.

Robert G. Eggleston, Ph.D.Air Force Research Laboratory, AFRL/HEC

2Analysts’ Needs and Analytic Strategy

• Incrementally build understanding in a “top down” and “bottom up” manner simultaneously, so as to construct and maintain a feasible story regarding an insurgency campaign’s lines of operation and tactical actions

• Stories are epistemologically framed by a work control structure that coherently connects an insurgency’s intent with its capabilities and provides a cause/effect context for explaining observed and predicted events and conditions

• Incorporate multiple perspectives, so as appreciate the breadth and complexity of the operational and tactical problem space impacted by the insurgency campaign

• Construct situational meaning of observed events and conditions as a function of their negotiated placement within an overall story –i.e., understanding is autopoietic in nature

• Treat beliefs as nonpersistent, situation-dependent propositions, not static, universal truths –i.e., beliefs will change in relation to the emergent and opportunistic strategies and tactics of the insurgency movement

Analytic strategy:

• Reduce disorder

Two basic needs of the analysts:(ambiguity and equivocality) to provide a

coherent explanation of a complex and evolving situation• Instantiate beliefs to a workable level of certainty

BRACKETED EVENTSAND CONDITIONS

IMPOSEDORDER

3Epistemological Structure

Organizati

Operational Focus & Desired Endstate

Ecological Purpose

onal Elements

Work System Capacities

Dedicated Resources

Actions & Effects

Targeted Objects, Events& Conditions

Influence Pathways

INTENT

CAPABILITY

ACTION

STORY LINE

4Constructed Story Lines

Organizational Elements

Work System Capacities

Dedicated Resources

Actions & Effects

Targeted Objects, Events& Conditions

Operational Focus & Desired Endstate

INTENT

ACTION

Influence Pathways

Ecological Purpose

CAPABILITY

ObservableTriplet

5Hypothesis Instantiation

Influence Pathways

Operational Focus & Desired Endstate

Ecological Purpose

Time

Observable TripletTargeted object, event, conditionAction taken by insurgencyDedicated resource executing the action

Primary intended effectSecondary effect or unintended consequence

5.0 High3.5 Moderate Supportive2.0 Slight Evidence1.0 Neutral0.5 Slight0.3 Moderate Contradictive0.2 High Evidence

Evidence RatioBAYESIAN BELIEF STRENGTHS

6Dynamic Evidence Strengths

Item Evidence Ratio Date Current Likelihood2-Jan-02 20.0%

1 0.2 15-Jun-03 4.8%2 0.3 25-Oct-03 1.5%3 1 8-Mar-04 1.5%4 5 10-Nov-04 7.0%5 5 20-Feb-05 27.3%6 7 30-May-05 72.4%7 5 10-Jun-05 92.9%8 6 18-Sep-05 98.7%9 6 14-Feb-06 99.8%

BELIEF STRENGTH

0%10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%

100%

2-Jan

-022-M

ay-02

2-Sep-0

22-J

an-03

2-May-0

32-S

ep-03

2-Jan

-042-M

ay-04

2-Sep-0

42-J

an-05

2-May-0

52-S

ep-05

2-Jan

-06

Date

Stre

ngth

BELIEF STRENGTH

0%10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%

100%

2-Jan

-022-M

ay-02

2-Sep-0

22-J

an-03

2-May-0

32-S

ep-03

2-Jan

-042-M

ay-04

2-Sep-0

42-J

an-05

2-May-0

52-S

ep-05

2-Jan

-06

Date

Stre

ngth

Bayesian analysis maintains evidentiary strength of each influence pathway based on

stream of supportive and contradictory evidence

( ) priorevidenceprior

evidencepriorposterior ESRATIOES

RATIOESES

−+⋅

⋅=

1

7Assessment of Campaign Progress

J F M A M J J A S O N D J F M A M J J A S O N DInfluencePathway 1

DesiredEndstate

J F M A M J J A S O N D J F M A M J J A S O N DInfluencePathway 2

J F M A M J J A S O N D J F M A M J J A S O N DInfluencePathway 3

DesiredEndstate

MilestoneNon-threateningSignificant ProgressCritical Point

Key Event(Triad)

Key Event(Triad)

Key Event(Triad)

Key Event(Triad)

Key Event(Triad)

Key Event(Triad)

Key Event(Triad)

Key Event(Triad)

Goals of theInsurgency

Story lines are constructed around hypothesized lines of operation. Triads are graphically displayed along a temporal scale and compared with key progress milestones to define the history and current state of the insurgency campaign.

Present Time

8Neural Network Influences

Influence Pathways

Operational Focus & Desired Endstate

Ecological Purpose

Organizational Elements

Work System Capacities

J F M A M J J A S O N D J F M A M J J A S O N D

Key Event(Triad)

Key Event(Triad)

Key Event(Triad)

MAINEFFECT

2nd-OrderConsequence Negative

Consequence

TIME

9

XYZResistanceMovement

XYZ PowerStructure

NationalGovernment

WesternImperialism

Corporations& Schools

MultinationalIntervention

MajorityPopulation A

MinorityPopulation B

MinorityPopulation C

ParliamentarySystem

Population CDiaspora

SupportingCountry Orange

ResistanceMilitia

InternalSecurity

Health & SocialServices

EconomicReconstruction

Family & MartyrSupport

Training &Indoctrination

ForeignRelations

PoliticalCoalition

Media &Propaganda

CentralPolitburo

ExecutiveCouncil

MilitaryApparatus

XYZResistanceMovement

Operational Focus & System Influence Pathways

Organizational Work System Capabilities

Cause/Effect Connections ?

Fictitious Case Study – Network of Hypotheses

10

Social ConditionGov’t Unpopularity

Insurgent-LedProtest March

IED Attacks TargetWestern Interests

Reconstruction &Social Services

Time

Stream ofObservable

Events

Fictitious Case Study – Observable Events

11

XYZResistanceMovement

XYZ PowerStructure

NationalGovernment

WesternImperialism

Corporations& Schools

MultinationalIntervention

MajorityPopulation A

MinorityPopulation B

MinorityPopulation C

ParliamentarySystem

Population CDiaspora

SupportingCountry Orange

ResistanceMilitia

InternalSecurity

Health & SocialServices

EconomicReconstruction

Family & MartyrSupport

Training &Indoctrination

ForeignRelations

PoliticalCoalition

Media &Propaganda

CentralPolitburo

ExecutiveCouncil

MilitaryApparatus

XYZResistance

Organization

Social ConditionGov’t Unpopularity

Insurgent-LedProtest March

IED Attacks TargetWestern Interests

Reconstruction &Social Services

3.0 0.7 1.8 2.0 0.5 1.5 1.5 3.0 1.8 1.3

Fictitious Case Study – Evidence Ratios

12

System Influence Pathways(Lines of Operation)

OperationalProgressTowardDesired

End State

OperationalPlanner

Stable Govt / PeaceMinor ProtestsMajor DissensionSporadic ViolenceDeclining Govt ControlWarring FactionsCivil WarAnarchy

Phases ofInsurgencyCampaign

Corporations& Schools

ParliamentarySystem

MinorityPopulation B

Supporting Country Orange

Population CDiaspora

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

Areas ofDiplomacy and

Stability OperationsAttention

Fictitious Case Study – Updated Belief Strengths