Wednesday, November 15, 2017

Warning: “Gray Zone” challenges

As actors use less traditional actions to influence the operational environment, the ability to warn of threats is becoming increasingly complex. This is making the task of the intelligence community much more difficult in providing warning.

The Operational Environment is: “A composite of the conditions, circumstances and influences that affect the employment of military forces and bear on the decisions of commanders.”[i]

Warning[ii] is the result of specialized intelligence analytical tradecraft, applied to all sources of information, to provide expert insight in order to prevent or limit damage to one’s national interests.  It is subdivided into strategic warning (before the hostile act is initiated) and tactical warning (the hostile act has been initiated).  In order that pre-emptive measures can be taken, it is important that the speed of warning is within the adversary decision-cycle.

“Gray Zone challenges are defined as competitive interactions among and within state and non-state actors that fall between the war and peace duality.”[iii]  Therefore, Gray Zone challenges are activities that occur before initiation of major combat operations.

Some Gray Zone challenges will be calculated, incremental activity to achieve an objective by each individual action, by an overt sponsor, and is designed to fall beneath the threshold of acceptable retaliation, e.g. island building by China in the South China Sea to increase territorial claims.  However, the majority of Gray Zone challenges will be covert.  The purpose of the activity and the linkage of the activity to its sponsor will remain hidden.  Political agitation, terrorist incidents and/or criminal acts will be conducted to appear as unrelated activity to each other and the sponsor, e.g. Russian troops without insignia in Eastern Ukraine were described as local patriots.  These activities are designed by the adversary to achieve the maximum progress towards the political desired outcome before conflict.


“Hybrid Warfare incorporates a range of different modes of warfare including conventional capabilities, irregular tactics and formations, terrorism acts including indiscriminate violence and coercion, and criminal behaviour.”[iv]  This is the tactical warning problem.

Warning depends on correctly assessed intelligence from all-sources of information, including law enforcement.  An adversary usually wishes to achieve an element of surprise and Gray Zone activities support that objective.  Therefore, situational awareness and understanding of the Operational Environment and of potential adversaries (state and non-state) must be maintained to assess indications of change that could warn of signs of preparation, any change of intent for a hostile action, and the action itself.  But, care should be taken to detect a “fig-leaf[v]”, Denial[vi] and Deception[vii].

The already difficult task of warning for the Intelligence Community is becoming even harder.  It will need require concerted action in order to address this issue.




[i] NATO (AAP-6).
[ii] Warning is not complete until it has been conveyed to the policy-maker/commander and been understood by them as warning intelligence.
[iii] US Special Operations Command (SOCOM) White Paper “The Gray Zone” dated 09 September 2015
[iv] Frank Hoffman, Potomac Institute of Policy Studies “Conflict in the 21st Century: The Rise of Hybrid Wars” dated December 2007.
[v] A minor action that could be used as a justification for a larger action
[vi] Actions taken to prevent or impair intelligence collection.
[vii] Actions taken to influence an actor as to the wrong adversary course of action

No comments:

Post a Comment