• Thanks for stopping by. Logging in to a registered account will remove all generic ads. Please reach out with any questions or concerns.

Info Sharing Key to Fighting IED's

tomahawk6

Army.ca Legend
Inactive
Reaction score
66
Points
530
http://www.armytimes.com/news/2010/01/gns_afghanistan_ied_info_sharing_010710/

General: Info sharing key to fighting IEDs

By Jim Michaels - USA Today
Posted : Thursday Jan 7, 2010 7:08:48 EST
 
A reluctance by the U.S. military to share its latest technology and intelligence with allies in Afghanistan is hampering efforts to defeat deadly roadside bombs there, said the outgoing commander charged with defeating improvised explosive devices.

“We’re very timid and slow at changing our disclosure and information sharing,” said Thomas Metz, who retired last week as an Army lieutenant general after leading the Joint Improvised Explosive Device Defeat Organization. “The commanders in the field are coming back to Washington with a very clear message that we’ve got to figure out this information sharing” because it will help disrupt cells that make IEDs, he said.

The Pentagon has spent billions of dollars on efforts to defend against IEDs and attack the networks that build and finance them. The bombs kill more coalition forces than any other weapon used by insurgents in Iraq and Afghanistan.

The reluctance to share information is based on sensitivities about revealing sources or giving enemies insight into secret technologies, Metz said. Information on roadside bombs is often gleaned from secret drones and sensors. Some U.S. aircraft have equipment and cameras sensitive enough to detect ground that has been dug up for IEDs, for example.

“The bureaucrat back in Washington is concerned that somebody’s going to find out how they got the information,” Metz said. The solution is simple, he said: “You can separate how the information was obtained from what the information is.”

The problem is particularly acute in Afghanistan, where the United States is fighting alongside 42 allies. There are about 71,000 U.S. service members in Afghanistan, and 42,000 troops from NATO and individual countries.

“We continue to have a tremendous problem with the jammers because each nation builds its jammers a different way,” Metz said. “No one wants to open up their box and show how the electronics works.”

Jammers are used to interfere with the signals that insurgents use to trigger bombs electronically.

Metz and other military officials have said the most effective way to counter the roadside bombs is to attack the networks of people who build and support them.

That, too, requires sharing information.

“If you’ve got some information about the network, you don’t have to share how you got that information. But it would surely be nice if your allies and your coalition partners got that part of the information that they needed to be successful,” Metz said.

Insurgents in Afghanistan in recent years have been turning increasingly to roadside bombs and suicide attacks to target coalition forces. The number of IED attacks that killed or wounded coalition forces increased to 60 in December from 32 in December 2008. The total number of IEDs, including those that were found before they detonated, increased to 8,690 last year from 3,783 in 2008.
 
Interesting.
I would hope that information flows a bit easier among the 5 I nations - maybe a bit slower when it has to go trough NATO channels and worse still if a non-NATO country is involved. I'm not that familiar how it is in the military side (15+ years ago) but at least in the civilian side it is hard to overcome the cold war mentality and reluctance to let others know what capabilities you have. It happens even among agencies of the same nation until they a fully satisfied of the need to know of the other organization and even then it becomes a bargaining game or profile inflating contest.
There are some mechanisms to exchange data without compromising the source or technology, there is just a lac of knowledge and laziness to properly identify items for sharing and clean up the information.
Just my experience on the civilian side of things.

cheers,
Frank
 
Info sharing has always been an issue in the EOD world and thus there is special NATO center funded by some NATO countries including Canada to remedy this.  Any country that deposits info into the center can place caveats on when, where and what technical info can be released and to whom.

In 1991 and not long after the Iraqi surrender we encountered BLU 91s and 92s....an approach was made to the US in theater for the hazards and applicable wait time before render safe procedures could be applied.

US in theater response......pound salt.

One team one fight....sometimes.
 
Back
Top