>Subject: Fw: British Counter Insurgency Strategy

>
>British Counter Insurgency Strategy=20
>from The Sovereign Nation, May/June 2000
>The following are extracts from a paper by the late Pat Mc Geown =
>entitled  "British Counter Insurgency Strategy". This paper was written =
>at the time of the Brooke talks in 1991. Much of Mc Geown's analysis has =
>proved prophetic in relation to how the British state went about =
>defeating the Provisionals. More importantly it is an aid to Republicans =
>today in learning from past mistakes and eliminating them from our =
>strategies.=20
>
>In essence Britain's counter-insurgency strategy, which at present dates =
>from the arrival of British forces, their generals and experts in 1969 =
>to the present day. It is best described as a political/military =
>strategy co-ordinating governmental, judicial, economic, social and =
>psychological agencies and dimensions, and aimed at containing, =
>isolating and destroying identifiable resistance.=20
>
>Let's remind ourselves of the five essential elements that compose the =
>substance of British counter-insurgency strategy in Ireland, not only at =
>the high points but on a day to day working basis: a. Identify the enemy =
>and its reasons for existence. b. Co-ordinate the resources and =
>personnel of all sections of the establishment against it. c. Contain =
>the enemy and wear it down tactically. d. Isolate and frustrate it is =
>every way, politically and militarily. e. Destroy it. This =
>sectionalising of the process should not be taken as meaning that each =
>is separate, or that one follows from the other in clear cut form as =
>there is much overlapping.. While the 'counter-insurgency' expert starts =
>by 'identifying', he is already 'co-ordinating' and so on, while he is =
>'containing and isolating' he is continually trying to identify new =
>faces and approaches etc. They are continuous processes only finished =
>when he has 'destroyed'.=20
> =20
>
> (a)...Identifying the enemy and it's reasons for existence..=20
>
> Right from the start British strategy had political and military =
>dimensions. . The Labour government of the day appeared to veer on the =
>side of appeasement of the rebellious nationalist population, buying =
>them off with reform in an attempt to control them again. They actively =
>encouraged the setting up of the SDLP (Social Democratic and Labour =
>Party), a Catholic middle class party set up around John Hume in an =
>effort to take politics off the street, where the constitutional =
>nationalists had little control, and back into the safe corridors of =
>power in Westminster and Stormont (Northern Ireland's local parliament). =
>
>
> By giving the SDLP their patronage they effectively chose the =
>nationalist leadership that they would deal with and they promoted them =
>in the media and press. These are age-old tactics of counter-insurgents =
>in the broadest sense. The Unionists saw the situation differently. They =
>saw all disorder as resulting from IRA conspiracies. The way to put them =
>down was by force and threat of force. The RUC (Royal Ulster =
>Constabulary), the armed militia that simply reflected and defended =
>political unionism, supported this view.=20
>
>The British Army at this juncture appear to have been content to just =
>fulfill the first role of counter-insurgency, identify your enemy and =
>the possible causes of discontent. Meetings held between senior British =
>army personnel and IRA leadership at local level were an integral part =
>of this process and also had the primary effect of keeping things quiet =
>without having to actually initiate major political reform that could =
>destabilize unionism. The IRA had of course their own agenda. But again =
>it was an old Brit psychological 'counter-insurgency' tactic 'making the =
>opposition feel important, by structuring them into an institution of =
>state' without handing them any real power. This was to be used again =
>with even greater effect in the 1975 IRA cease-fire period.=20
>
>. (b)...Coordinate all resources and personnel...=20
>
> A 'Joint Security Committee' had been established aimed at linking all =
>the machinery of the state and its forces together into a powerful 'War =
>Machine' capable of a co-ordinated and controlled politico/military =
>response. However, those who sat on it had differing priorities or =
>short-term objectives. The membership in early 1972 was the unionist =
>Prime Minister, two unionist Cabinet ministers. the British Army GOC, =
>the RUC Chief, and one British government representative. It's make-up =
>demonstrates a heavy imbalance towards unionist phobias and paranoia. It =
>was to cause much friction between Brit army counter insurgency experts =
>and the Stormont administration and local forces. As British military =
>'counter insurgency' experts like Brigadier Frank Kitson began to arrive =
>in the North carrying with them the experience of British =
>counter-insurgency campaigns in Malaya, Kenya, Muscat, Oman and Cyprus, =
>that tension would increase. Kitson at this time was at Oxford =
>University, writing the British Army's counter-insurgency' bible, "Low =
>Intensity Operations". He was undoubtedly brought to the North in 1970 =
>with the dual brief; to attempt to structure a 'counter insurgency' =
>response and to gain experience of what was a relatively new =
>'counter-insurgency' situation.=20
>
>There were things that could be done in the far off obscure ends of the =
>'Empire', which could not be done under the watchful eye of the mass =
>media, in a so-called liberal democratic society so close to Britain and =
>Western Europe. The 'counter-insurgency' strategy for Ireland in the =
>70's would require a degree of sophistication and subtlety that the =
>unionists were certainly showing themselves incapable of. It would have =
>more to do with propaganda than physical show of strength. This is =
>reflected in the Brit understanding that right from the start they =
>needed to dictate how others saw the essence of the problem in the =
>North. Their first propaganda victory was in getting acceptance for the =
>explanation that the North's 'troubles' had sectarian roots and that =
>British soldiers were the 'peace-keepers'. This is not to say that =
>Kitson advocated a 'softly softly' approach, and his use of a curfew' on =
>the Falls Road in his first days here adequately demonstrates this. =
>Rather, what Kitson saw as important was that all the institutions of =
>state be co-ordinated to provide a disciplined and controlled =
>politico/military response.=20
>
>(c)...Contain the Enemy: Wear it down tactically.=20
>
> By 1972 nationalist Ireland was almost completely alienated from the =
>British and it was recognized that--as opposed to 'containing' the =
>situation, and allowing it to evolve towards a climate in which a =
>political settlement could be initiated to isolate the =
>'insurgents'--another cornerstone of 'counter insurgency' strategy, the =
>opposite was happening. Even with the mass internment arrests the IRA =
>had no shortage or recruits and apparently unlimited support and =
>sympathy within the nationalist community, while the possible =
>'appeasement nationalists' the SDLP had been forced almost completely =
>out of the system through which reform could be initiated. There was a =
>serious imbalance in the politio/military strategy towards the military =
>solution. Through the suspension of Stormont, the institution of direct =
>British government rule and the short-lived IRA truce the British =
>initiated a new political climate which would allow them to rebalance =
>their strategy towards bringing in the reformers (SDLP) and 'isolating' =
>the revolutionaries (IRA). Or at least ensure that the situation didn't =
>deteriorate further, beyond an 'acceptable level of violence.' The =
>climax of this phase of Brit 'counter insurgency' strategy would be the =
>attempted political settlement, and subsequent failure, of Sunningdale =
>in 1974.=20
>
>." As for Special laws and powers they were progressively introduced; =
>the Emergency Provisions Act, (a refined version of the Special Powers =
>Act),--reforms are often little more than refined versions of repressive =
>methods--the Prevention of Terrorism Act, and the introduction of =
>juryless Diplock courts. A further important tactic in use during this =
>phase, and with lasting effects, was the use of Brit =
>'counter-insurgency' operatives in the 26 Counties to attempt to isolate =
>Republicans and allow more pro-Brit elements in the government to have =
>their way. The planting of bombs in Dublin on the eve of a parliamentary =
>debate on special legislation was an example.=20
>
>The whole concept of psychological warfare was something that Kitson =
>pioneered and later went on to teach to all British officers during =
>training as 'psych-ops'. The full extent of 'psych-ops' is infinite and =
>revolutionary, in other words it is continually updated. However, we do =
>know the basic principles--'discredit, demoralize, and intimidate'--some =
>examples of their practical use have been made public in the revelations =
>of ex-British army personnel and agents. It ranges from the most basic =
>black propaganda to murder. Kitson accepted the Mao analysis of what =
>makes guerrillas/insurgents tick, when he wrote, "It is in men's minds =
>that wars of subversion have to be fought and decided.' Following on =
>this psychological state of the collective and individual insurgent's =
>mind becomes a target. As indeed does the hearts and minds of the people =
>who support and shelter them. One technique that became very much a =
>fixation with the Kitsonian 'counter insurgency' strategists and is =
>still in use today was the attempt to create a 'split' in Republican =
>ranks. The 'hawks' and 'doves' stories that continue to appear are an =
>important part of this process. As are the 'going political' stories and =
>their sensationalist 'touts and traitors' line. A brief look at the =
>background of the type of publications and journalists who produce such =
>drivel should demonstrate to anyone where their sympathies lie. A former =
>Brit member of the 'black propaganda unit; Colin Wallace, had much to =
>say about these types of stories and what their aim was. While there are =
>many other examples of how the technique worked in the early years, the =
>best years for a practical study of the battle of hearts and minds is =
>post 1976, when the processes of Normalization, Ulsterisation and =
>Criminalisation were introduced=20
>
>. (d) ...Isolate and frustrate the enemy in every politically and =
>militarily=20
>
>. For a range of tactical reasons, the British administration had =
>decided to enter into talks with the IRA in late 1974, early 1975. Not =
>least amongst those reasons was that a 'breathing space' would give them =
>time to prepare the ground for their new policies. They believed that =
>after an initial cooling off period the 'new RUC' could be made, if not =
>more acceptable to nationalists, then at least more apt when linked with =
>the UDR at military type patrolling and containment in nationalist =
>areas. Also, by using a 'police force' as the frontline defence against =
>insurgency it may be possible to de-politicize the situation and portray =
>it as something less than a war, a battle between 'police and criminal =
>gangs'. And a reduction in the level of actual British troops could be =
>portrayed as part of this cosmetic exercise.=20
>
>. ...Normalization.=20
>
>. If Ulsterisation was in essence a military strategy with political and =
>psychological dimensions, Normalization was essentially the political, =
>social and economic prong. Its central plank was to convince people that =
>normality or peace was returning and that there was no need for war. The =
>'terrorists' were the only ones who didn't want peace. If they could =
>turn the nationalist community against the insurgents, or make them =
>think they had turned them, they could isolate the insurgent. Thousands =
>of millions of pounds were pumped in during this period to give the =
>impression of growing prosperity and fairness. New housing went up =
>wholesale particularly in nationalist areas. Estates (housing projects =
>in American parlance. facilitator note.) were specifically designed by =
>'counter insurgency' specialists, so that they could be easily sealed =
>off in the event of an incident. Factories and industry appeared to be =
>booming, again with particular direction towards nationalist areas. =
>Leisure centres (community centres) grew up out of nowhere. Everywhere =
>things appeared to be getting better. "If only the terrorists would stop =
>all could be rosy"..."and anyway, the terrorists were being =
>defeated"..."They were less effective than they had been, the arrest and =
>conviction rates were up and the nationalist community were informing on =
>them". These were all common propaganda lines of the day and statistics =
>were produced to back up their image. The opportunist use by Brit =
>propaganda units of an incident involving IRA volunteers when three =
>children were killed and the subsequent 'gut-reaction' peace movement, =
>to give the impression that the nationalist community were rejecting the =
>IRA is another example of the tactic of psychological warfare in action. =
>This period also saw the increased and more refined co- ordination of =
>all sections of state control, (control in the ideological sense as much =
>as physical). Business leaders met with Generals and RUC chiefs, NIO =
>(Northern Ireland Office, the official British government department =
>charged with administering Northern Ireland. facilitator) officials met =
>with church leaders at a local level, and with press and media people on =
>a regular basis to ensure that their line and explanations were carried. =
>While within the state forces, the fight against insurgents became more =
>refined. Targeting of individual Republicans as opposed to the community =
>became the order of the day. The policy of normalization is an ongoing =
>one so it would be wrong to attempt to judge its real success or failure =
>yet. But what is clear, is that primarily the reason that it has not =
>brought the Brits the success they planned for is because of their =
>inability to get an internal political settlement. Without that the =
>facade of normality doesn't hold up internally or internationally.=20
>
>...Criminalisation..=20
>
>. This was to become the most controversial and least secure part of the =
>'counter-insurgency' strategy. It began with the announcement in 1975 =
>that no one arrested after March 1976 would be entitled to political =
>status in the prisons, but its scope went far wider that prison policy. =
>The Brit propaganda line through which they hoped to influence 'hearts =
>and minds' here and abroad was that things were returning to normal; =
>those who continued to resist were going against the better interests of =
>the community, therefore they should be treated as common criminals. As =
>it was essentially a 'law and order problem', the way to deal with them =
>was investigation, arrest, conviction, and sentencing to a normal prison =
>with no privileges under the due process of law. And anyway, they were =
>'Mafia-like led by Godfathers only interested in personal gain.' What =
>the psychologically oriented propaganda line hid was special laws, =
>special 'no-jury' courts, presided over by unionist judges who happily =
>accepted co-ordination into the war machine, and ignored torture and =
>ill-treatment as a way of getting convictions which are usually the =
>result of community co-operation in a normal society.=20
>
>Over 80 percent of people convicted in this period were imprisoned on =
>the basis of 'self-incriminating' statements signed under physical =
>pressure and threat in purpose-built interrogation centres. The onus of =
>proof of guilt, normal principle of law, was shifted so that the accused =
>had to prove they were innocent. Essentially, in Kitson's own words, the =
>law became "...just another weapon in the government's arsenal..." which =
>"...becomes little more than a propaganda cover for the disposal of =
>unwanted members of the public." Resistance to criminalisation, =
>particularly within the prisons, and ultimately with the hunger strike =
>deaths of 1981 effectively limited the success of this policy. However, =
>it did play an important role in 'counter insurgency' strategy during =
>the late '70's.=20
>
>(e)...Destroy the Enemy...=20
>
> Present Brit counter insurgency strategy centres around the =
>Hillsborough Treaty, aimed at nationalists and the Brooke talks aimed at =
>unionists. It is based on a 'balancing act', an attempt to balance all =
>anti-revolutionary forces in Ireland, be they British oriented, or =
>'constitutional nationalist', in a unified structure of sorts which can =
>then be co-ordinated into the British counter insurgency forces and used =
>to isolate and crush Republican opposition. The Hillsborough Treaty was =
>


__________________________________

KOMINFORM
P.O. Box 66
00841 Helsinki - Finland
+358-40-7177941, fax +358-9-7591081
e-mail [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.kominf.pp.fi

___________________________________

[EMAIL PROTECTED]

Subscribe/unsubscribe messages
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
___________________________________


Reply via email to