Intra-Military Communication : The Exchange of Information between the Dutch Provincial Reconstruction Team and the PSYOPS Support Element in Uruzgan, Afghanistan

Keywords
Loading...
Thumbnail Image
Issue Date
2010-10
Language
en
Journal Title
Journal ISSN
Volume Title
Publisher
Abstract
During the last four years two of the most important military actors that focus on the mind-set of the population during a counterinsurgency campaign, were deployed in Afghanistan as part of the Dutch Task Force Uruzgan. The Provincial Reconstruction Team and the PSYOPS Support Element each had to work on winning the hearts and minds of the Afghan population. However, the exchange of information between the two units did not function as efficient as it should be. Individual actions were not coordinated and too little information was shared. This thesis will therefore try to find an answer to the question how the exchange of information between the PRT and PSE can be improved. It will start by presenting an introduction on counter-insurgency and the importance of clear and well-functioning lines of communication between military units. In order to raise situational awareness, these actors need to communicate as much as possible on relevant and critical topics like security and safety issues in general, but also on their individual activities. Next their mutual relations and their activities related to the exchange and management of information will be discussed together with the structures of the two units and their place in the organization of the Task Force Uruzgan, the concept of a PRT and PSE, their tasks and goals. An instrument for analysis, based on various military and non-military models on information and intelligence management will be used to assess the exchange of information between March 2009 and March 2010. The model contains nine phases: the construction of an information goal, the formulation of an information need, the collection of information, the organization of information, the storage of information, a production phase, a distribution phase and a phase in which the information is used. This last phase is connected to the first one through a feedback loop (the ninth phase) which essentially makes it a cycle. Although I have always been aware of the fact that the model I created would not be as easily applicable as I liked, another major outcome more or less divided the information management process into two individual (but connected) cycles: a staff cycle and a tactical cycle. Through various interviews with PRT and PSE representatives I was able to identify the actual information flows within both the PSE and PRT. The interviews provided me with the information to schematically visualize these flows of information and investigate their effectiveness and efficiency accordingly. Five areas were then identified that hamper the process of information exchange: interpersonal relations, a need-to-know mentality, a lack of feedback, the use of private databases and capacity problems. In order to solve these problems, or at least reduce their risk of affecting the exchange of information negatively, a couple of recommendations were formulated. A decentralized organizational structure can eventually confront the problem of suboptimal information sharing. Working in clusters, according to the network centric warfare theory, along vertical lines in a flatter hierarchy together with the right infostructure could lead to an improved battlespace awareness. Therefore I suggest to invest in a solid information infrastructure. Every team, every single member for that matter, needs to have access to a shared information database. Not only to improve his own awareness, but also to contribute to the alertness of others by contributing to it. It simply cannot be that information sharing gets hampered by a lack of collators or other technical deficiencies. Together with the introduction of a network centric mind-set and the construction of clusters of related actors this could improve the discontinuity of informal networking. At the same time future colleagues need to be familiar with each other‘s activities. As I suggested, this should be done by introducing each other‘s field of work in combined exercises during the preparation phase. By introducing a feedback loop, the process as a whole, can be constantly monitored.
Description
Citation
Supervisor
Faculty
Faculteit der Managementwetenschappen