https://qalerts.app/?n=4700

Page 17

https://2009-2017.state.gov/documents/organization/119629.pdf

u/#q4700

The following (pgs 18-21) is the ENTIRE Q GAMEPLAN laid out plain as day without the rhetoric, propaganda, catchphrases, etc.

Consider this a direct message from Military Brass.

For anyone following the Great Awakening, this is the MOST IMPORTANT thing you can read that lends credence to Q as a military operation.

Enjoy.

---

Information

Information is the foundation for all other activities, and provides the linkages that allow discrete functional elements to cooperate as an integrated whole. The collection, formulation, storage and dissemination of information are crucial in shaping perceptions of the conflict by all stakeholders. In COIN, the information flow can be roughly divided into that information which we wish to assimilate in order to inform our approach; i.e. knowledge and that information which we wish to disseminate in order to influence populations. At the same time, as counterinsurgents we are also interested in impeding the information flow of insurgent groups; both their intelligence collection and their ability to influence.

• Knowledge: In COIN, decisions at all levels must be based on a detailed understanding and awareness of the environment. No COIN strategy can be better than the degree of understanding on which it is based. The information required to engender this understanding encompasses a far broader range of subjects than would normally fall under the auspices of military intelligence. In conventional warfare, decision makers mostly require intelligence about the enemy, but in COIN they primarily need intelligence about the population. COIN intelligence must therefore incorporate the spectrum of characteristics of a nation’s system of systems, including political, military, economic, sociocultural, infrastructural, informational and environmental knowledge.

At the strategic level, understanding is required of the population factors behind the insurgency, its stage of progression, the reforms required to address its causes, and the willingness and ability of the affected government to make those reforms and the implications of foreign intervention.

At the operational level, understanding is required of the strengths and vulnerabilities of the insurgent strategy, the strengths and weaknesses of the affected government and the requirements of the population. Continuous feedback on the degree of success of ongoing COIN efforts is also critical.

At the tactical level, understanding is required of the identity of active insurgents, their networks, logistics, capabilities and intent. It is also very useful to understand the views, concerns and sympathies of non-combatant civilians in order to influence them, gain additional intelligence and further isolate the insurgents. Almost all forms of intelligence collection have a role in COIN, but historically, intelligence gathered from human sources (including civilians, agents and captured/reconciled insurgents) has made the greatest contribution to success.

One of the most critical yet pervasive shortcomings that interagency operations face is the failure to manage and share knowledge. This is especially true during COIN, when a common base of understanding is key to effective collaboration.

• Influence: Effective COIN requires the shaping of opinions among several different population groups through messages and actions:

– Affected Nation: The fundamental influence aim in COIN is to build confidence in the government while diminishing the credibility and influence of the insurgents. All actions and messages should support this aim.

– U.S. Population: Where the United States is conducting a direct intervention in support of an affected nation, the costs involved (financial and human) will often be high and prolonged. Understanding and support in the U.S. will be key if the nation is to remain engaged long enough to achieve decisive effect.

– Neighboring Countries: Many insurgencies depend on safe havens in countries adjacent to the affected nation. Sanctuary may be giving willingly or may be beyond control of the government there. Even in non-democratic nations and ungoverned spaces, there may be merit in efforts to influence populations in these areas.

– Coalition Nations: Political resolve will rarely be consistently robust across a coalition. U.S. policy makers should be cognizant of the difficulties some coalition members will face in maintaining popular support for their participation.

– Diaspora Communities: As previously discussed, diaspora communities can play a significant role in supporting or opposing insurgencies. Positive influence here can pay dividends.

Clean separation of messages to these various populations is rarely possible and a high degree of coordination is required to allow messages to be tailored to different audiences without contradiction.

The influence strategy must cascade down from a set of strategic narratives from which all messages and actions should be derived. The narratives of the affected government and supporting nations will be different but complimentary. Messages and actions must address ideological, social, cultural, political, and religious motivations that influence or engender a sense of common interest and identity among the affected population and international stakeholders. They should also counter insurgents’ ideology in order to undermine their motivation and deny them popular support and sanctuary (both physical and virtual). In doing so, counterinsurgents should seek to expose the tensions in motivation (between different ideologies or between ideology and self-interest) that exist across insurgent networks.

To enhance the legitimacy of the affected government, messages aimed at their population should be closely coordinated with and ideally delivered by their own officials. Themes and messages should be simple and memorable, and must resonate with the population. This requires detailed understanding of the COIN environment which must be continually updated. Detailed target audience analysis is required for each separate population group and reliable measures of effectiveness must be sought to assess the success of messages and if necessary recalibrate them.

Messages are delivered partly through media operations, but more prolifically and often more credibly through the thousands of daily interactions between the population, the government and the security forces. Every action in COIN sends a message, which means that words and deeds must be synchronized. Messages cannot simply be spin, they must be grounded in truth and reflect a genuine willingness on the part of the affected government to undertake real reforms that address its people’s needs. Failure to honor promises is usually extremely counter-productive, so officials should be cautious in making promises, and should track any that are made, with the aim of meeting or exceeding the expectations of the population.

• The Information Contest: The flow of information (intelligence and influence) is as important to insurgents as it is to counterinsurgents. A COIN campaign should seek to limit the intelligence available to the insurgents through use of counterintelligence, deception and where possible their physical separation from the populace. Similarly, the ability of the insurgents to exert influence should be restricted by physical separation and by the pre-emption and timely countering of their messages.

Influence activities (actions and messages) can be proactive or reactive. Being proactive gives a significant influence advantage, since the first impression or report of an event that reaches a population will often receive the widest exposure and will subsequently be most resistant to alternative accounts. The insurgents that are most effective in this field design whole operations to support their influence themes. Successful COIN requires an approach to influence which is similarly proactive, entrepreneurial and prolific in ‘selling’ messages.

That said, the imperative to counter insurgent messages demands a reactive element to our influence activities. Speed is of the essence. The longer it takes for a rebuttal, denial or counter-message to be released, the less relevant and effective it will be. Cumulatively, whichever protagonist (insurgent or counterinsurgent) is fastest at processing the cycle of messaging will have a significant advantage in gaining influence. Some of the counterinsurgents’ delay in response will be derived from the need to investigate events and establish facts (a constraint from which insurgents are often exempt), though a holding response is generally preferable to silence. Less justifiable is the delay inherent in lengthy approvals processes.

The time sensitivity of reactive influence requires counterinsurgents to employ delegation of authority, universal understanding of the narrative and a degree of risk-tolerance throughout the command chain. This has strong parallels to the military concept of the OODA loop (Observe – Orient – Decide – Act) and the theory of the mission oriented approach.