“Adding Economic Analysis to Intelligence Preparation of the ...
File Format: PDF/Adobe Acrobat - View
James Renwick Manship, Sr. a Major in the Civil Air. Patrol, Mount Vernon Composite Squadron Drug Demand Reduction Officer generously lent his support. ...
handle.dtic.mil/100.2/ADA494837 - Similar -
by RC Infrastructure
James Renwick Manship, Sr. a Major in the Civil Air. Patrol, Mount Vernon Composite Squadron Drug Demand Reduction Officer generously lent his support. ...
handle.dtic.mil/100.2/ADA494837 - Similar -
by RC Infrastructure
“Adding Economic Analysis to Intelligence Preparation of the Battlefield”
Clay D. Murray, Jr.
Second Lieutenant, Military Intelligence
US Army Reserve
07 March 2008
Today, more than ever, economic analysis must be accounted for in Intelligence Preparation of the Battlefield (IPB). Army intelligence analysts already account for terrain and weather effects on the battlefield, but analysts do not account for what is truly the linchpin in all of our fights around the world; economics. Throughout history, economic factors have been the tinder that feeds the flames of war. Economics is the social science that studies the production, distribution, and consumption of goods and services. The term economics comes from the Greek word for oikos (house) and nomos (custom or law), hence "rules of the house(hold)." 1 Another definition is the study of trying to meet unlimited needs with limited resources.
(...continued)
An army “fights on its stomach,” and throughout the ages, removing the capability of the land and population to sustain a war effort is part of the strategy for victory.
Yet as Jefferson wrote in his "Declaration of Causes and Necessity of Taking up Arms" on the 6th of July in 1775, “We have counted the cost of this contest ...the arms we have been compelled by our enemies to assume we will, in defiance of every hazard, with unabating firmness and perseverance, employ for the preservation of our liberties; being with one mind resolved to die freemen rather than to live slaves.”
If we are viewed as enemies of a people rather than liberators, might they too fight to the death?
Extrapolating for a world wide application that our War for Independence strategy of General Washington involved “skirmishing” - attack and retreat, attack the enemy’s supply lines both on land and at sea with his “Washington Cruisers”, and lay in wait for the time when forces can be massed to defeat the superior forces of the enemy. And of course, the delay providing ammunition in the “psychological war” in the minds of the people and their elected servants who
do not like to bear the costs of war.
Let us recall further American History and Economics, both for the causes in the initiation of the War Between the States and in the military prosecution of it. That war has been described as the first in the modern era of warfare. Tariff issues and methods of production (slavery on the farms vs. child labor in northern factories) were subordinate issues to the economic competition or“economic warfare” between two regions, one agricultural and one industrial.
The War came and the initial strategy included the “Anaconda Plan” of constricting the South and its economy with a blockade of its ports. That had limited effectiveness, so later the commander in chief directed the “scorched earth” policy of war with Sheridan in the Shenandoah, and Sherman with his “March to the Sea” in Georgia. While effective in achieving victory, animosities were created that have spanned decades over a century.
Then the Reconstruction Period was basically an economic recovery program in a conquered territory, creating other successes and failures for future leaders to resolve.
Then look at World War I that left the German economy prostrate which served as a tinder box for the animosity that grew into the Third Reich and the flames of World War II. Learning from our post-WWI economic failure, the Marshall Plan in Europe, and McArthur’s work in Japan were very successful Reconstruction periods that have reshaped the modern world for the betterment of all mankind.
The lesson for America to be gained today in our efforts to expand Liberty around the world is that destruction of an adversary’s ability to wage war must then in our victory be reconstructed in a manner that will reshape the world for the future betterment of man. Our reconstruction efforts must be based on Liberty and Free Market Economics so the will and energies of the people are unleashed and encouraged to rebuild their nation into a new form that fosters Freedom and Liberty for all of its citizens.
When that is the result, America and the entire world win.
Acknowledgments:
Special recognition for this article goes to my wife, Laura. She has supported my effort with many great and provocative ideas. James Renwick Manship, Sr. a Major in the Civil Air Patrol, Mount Vernon Composite Squadron Drug Demand Reduction Officer generously lent his support. Mr. Manship applied his background in economics and history as well as his experience as an officer in the US Navy to this paper.
Additionally, each member of the US Army MilitaryIntelligence Center (USAIC), Cadre has guided and mentored me in this endeavor; namely, Captain Tyler Hernandez, Captain Thomas Pike, Mr. David McElroy, Mr. William Buppert and Mr. Mark Domenic. Lastly, but certainly not least, I want to acknowledge the ideas and interest given by my counterparts from the USAIC Basic Officer Leaders Course; specifically, Second Lieutenants Ronald VanValkenburg, David Kay and Brandon Eliason. We talked often and in great detail about this idea and each one of them have greatly contributed to the development of this economic analysis idea. To each one of them, I am very grateful and in their debt.
