Saturday, January 02, 2016

Fort Polk, Disregarding OPSEC while Harping OPSEC

Street names deliberately changed, based on a true story

Every morning, at a certain time of the day, an event happens on most Army posts. Soldiers stationed at the majority of the Army units located on an Army Post conduct physical fitness (PT).

At Fort Riley, most of the infantry units are located on Custer Hill. Before PT, Custer Hill's roads are blocked off. The roads rounding "The Hill" are now available for soldiers to conduct different kinds of physical fitness. Mostly, it's running.

The civilians that worked on Custer Hill arrive later in the morning, after PT is over.

On Fort Polk, it's a different story. Part of their morning PT is conducted on "N 59th Ave. W" and on "N 58th Ave. West" This area is not sealed off. Incoming traffic arrive largely through Grand Avenue. Grand Avenue intersects both "N 59th Ave. W" and "N 58th Ave. W".

The result?


Increasing their own vulnerability

Traffic transiting Grand Avenue is stopped before "N 59th Ave. W". Traffic ends up getting backed up towards the West. Traffic coming from further inside Fort Polk headed west on Grand Avenue is stopped at "N 58th Ave. W". Traffic ends up getting backed up towards the east.

Right when you enter Grand Avenue, you'll see signs directing you not to take photographs. This is based on an actual experience; however, this experience will be altered in a way that the concept remains the same. Let's imagine a fictional scenario were somebody enters the base with a personal dashboard camera video recorder.

This guy enters the base, with the MPs at the gate not catching his use of this dashboard camera video recorder. He drives further and then gets stopped at the line of cars waiting for PT to end. Another MP, within the area, notices the dash cam. He goes up to this driver, and tells the driver that he has to fork over the video.

For his explanation, the MP informs the driver that he is violating OPSEC. By videotaping the runners, he was putting the soldiers at risk of harm. He was possibly putting their lives at risk. The MP informs the driver that by having a dashboard camera, he was going to get people "killed."

Although the MP thinks that he sounds like he knows what he's talking about, he is actually missing the point about OPSEC.

OPSEC in a nutshell

OPSEC is "Operations Security". A basic concept of operations security goes like this.

Let's say that you, during the winter, plan a trip to go to Florida. You live in Minnesota, and are tired of the excessive snow showers and snow cover. You want a change of pace. Your flight leaves early in the morning. You decide to load your luggage into your car the day before.

In order to impress security at the airport, you have colorless/see-through luggage. Your see-through garment bag has short sleeve collared shirts, with tropical scenes. Your see-through luggage also contains short pants, slippers, and other items that you would normally take to a tropical or semi tropical area.

You go on to social media and brag about your upcoming trip to Florida.

Prior to your even hopping into your car to drive to the airport, you provided information to complete strangers. They know that you're going somewhere with summerlike weather. A look at the content of your bags, sitting in your car in the late afternoon and evening, tells people that you're going somewhere where it's nice and warm.

If you do not have your settings on Facebook to "friends only" or "me only", total strangers can look at your Facebook account and know that you plan on going to Florida.

Now, how could you, in this example, apply OPSEC?

Use regular luggage instead of "see-through" luggage. Position your luggage in the room in your house nearest to the door. You can also simply set your privacy settings on your Facebook to "friends only". Better yet, no need to update your friends about your upcoming trip until you are safe at your destination.

The same concept applies in a military operation. If the unit is about to go on a major combat operation, one simply doesn't go on Facebook to talk about it. One doesn't talk about it to anybody without a need to know. One doesn't go on Facebook and say the things that one normally says when one's about to do something major.

Also, one doesn't just do things, externally, that hints to others that the unit is about to move out until it's time to roll out and it's needed.

In this scenario, those involved with the combat operation would scrutinize what they plan to do so as not to provide hints to onlookers on what's going to happen.

Now, back to our Fort Polk example

In reality, locals who come in from Leesville, LA, and the surrounding areas, on a daily basis would know that PT takes place at a certain time in the morning. How could they not know? If they do not transit Grand Avenue before PT starts, they will be stuck. This is the fact that they inform other people in their friends and family circle who need to access the base.

What do these people do when a new person comes in town saying that they have business to conduct on Fort Polk? The locals will tell them to get to the base before a certain time, or get stuck waiting until after PT.

Why? Well, they have soldiers conducting PT on "N 59th Ave. W" and "N 58th Ave. W". A large segment of the people living in Leesville and the surrounding area would know that PT takes place at a certain time in the morning. They would also know that there is a traffic backup, on Grand Avenue, in both directions.

Based on this, claiming that videotaping the backed up traffic violates the well-being of the runners, and their safety, would be as pointless as trying to continue to hide when the person looking for you can see you.

Our military appearance clinches us as being military or veterans within the community

The MP, in our example, could turn around and explain that recognizable faces, in the video, will put the soldiers at risk. There are people out there who would like to do harm to these soldiers. Well now, why even have the soldiers abide by military standards if they are concerned about them being recognized as being in the military?

It doesn't take that much to look at a group of people and to get a good idea of who is in the military, or who are veterans. Those currently in the military have a certain appearance about them. So, even without the help of the video, or a photo on Facebook, as soon as the service members leave the post without their uniforms, people in the community would still look at them and recognize them as being service members.

The community already knows about organized on-post PT

Now, here's a really big weakness in the flaw of Fort Polk's security plan in this example. It doesn't matter that the MP in our example is getting wrapped around the axle over someone's dashboard video camera. The knowledge is already out in town that there is a traffic backup during certain parts of the day.

It's only logical for locals to advice newcomers to go to Fort Polk extra early or they will have to wait till later in the morning.

That's enough information to let someone, with bad intent, know that if they wanted to commit harm, they have a bunch of cars in line, drivers unarmed, who are simply sitting and waiting for PT to clear. These people, waiting in line, become juicy targets for acts of violence involving firearms which could result in mass casualty.

The soldiers on the base, who have combat deployed, would have to notice this weakness. The leadership on the base, with the ability to change these physical fitness routes, have to know about these security weaknesses. Yet, they choose the easy or convenient way to do things.

This threat extends to any where there is a traffic backup at the entry, or within the base. This problem/issue repeats itself across busy military installations across the United States. Backed up traffic at the entrance is the most visible to the public.


 Unit commanders must mitigate exposed vehicle waiting lines

Terrorists, downrange, have persistently attacked waiting lines.

OPSEC, as misunderstood by the MP in the above example, simply doesn't represent reality. In order to establish the applicability of OPSEC to this scenario, leadership on the base has to figure out a way to remove the cause of traffic backup on Grand Avenue during the same times of the day during the weekdays.

In fact, Fort Polk leadership must take a comprehensive, big picture/map look at all of their traffic in different parts of the day. All military bases, with traffic congestion's based on poor planning, need to do this.

One major solution is to redirect the PT route so that it does not cut off Grand Avenue, or any other, traffic. There are plenty options, on the base, that could afford the soldiers the same value of physical fitness without creating vehicle waiting lines.

What if traffic were to flow smoothly instead of being backed up? The risk, that the advice to be given, not to enter the base at certain times a day, would be removed.

Consequently, less people will be made aware that there are vehicle traffic wait lines on Grand Avenue, or elsewhere in the post. No vehicle or wait lines on a regular basis reduces the chance that someone could come in and commit a crime against the waiting line. It would be hard to plan against something that does not happen at the same time or location, but happens randomly.

Another option available, to reduce the risk against the soldiers, is to provide different PT areas for smaller groups of units. This would spread PT activity throughout the base instead of concentrating it in local areas. Smaller crowds, smaller signature, less casualties should a terrorist attack happen. Designated, cordoned off areas, out of the way of main traffic, could offer an area, for street PT, that's safe.

No comments: