The Failure of Soft Power to Destroy or Degrade the Islamic State

I wrote this analytical report for an assignment I had in 'PACS 605: Conflict Transformation and Peacebuilding' for Professor Nathan Funk Ph.D, at Conrad Grebel University College, University of Waterloo during the Winter 2015 term. The outline for this assignment was a 7-9 page retrospective assessment of a yet unresolved conflict, analyzed in the context of class themes.

My analysis is not meant to be exhaustive, but is the first of three parts on the topic of The Islamic State for research assignments I have this term: 1) An Analysis of Promoting Peace in a Realist Conflict: Non-Violent Attempts to Destroy & Degrade The Islamic State (IS) - [A retrospective assessment of an unresolved conflict for PACS 605: Conflict Transformation and Peacebuilding], 2) Investigating The Islamic State's Unprecedented Recruitment Efforts via Electronic and Social Media(s) - [Analyzing an emerging issue in the field of security studies for PACS 635 - Security Ontology: Issues And Institutions], 3) Formulating a peace-building strategy for conflict resolution in the retrospective assessment case study for PACS 605.

The use of soft power to destroy and degrade The Islamic State (IS/ISIS/ISIL) has failed to attain any measurable result. While the path to conflict cessation in Iraq and Syria might require the use of military force, the road to recovery and a lasting peace in the region ultimately demands the use of soft power and non-violent peacebuilding.

Please let me know what you think. All feedback is greatly appreciated.

-NK

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

An Analysis of Promoting Peace in a Realist Conflict:
Non-Violent Attempts to Destroy & Degrade The Islamic State (IS)

          Amidst the collapse of the Syrian regime of Bashar al-Assad, a militant extremist jihadist group has emerged, seizing control of a large territory encompassing parts of Syria and Iraq. The group in question is known to the majority of the world as ISIL/ISIS - or Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant or Islamic State of Iraq and Syria. Since their swift chain of military victories in 2013 and 2014, ISIL/ISIS has shortened their name to just the ‘Islamic State’ (IS). The brutal tactics of this Islamic extremist group embodies the Machiavellian principle that “it is much safer to be feared than loved, if one has to lack one of the two.”[1] The civilian death toll at the hands of IS has grown at an unprecedented rate, effectively “killing faster than statisticians can count.”[2] In 2014 alone IS was responsible for an estimated 21,000 to 47,000 deaths, civilian and combatant, continuing a trend of doubling year over year since 2012.[3]

          Although the military advance of IS across the Levant region have been nearly unimpeded, efforts have been launched to resolve the regional conflict outside the context of a military intervention. The UN has attempted to bring about conflict cessation through conflict mediators, regional forces such as Turkey, Saudi Arabia, and Jordan have used a mix of military and non-lethal support, and grassroots efforts have been deployed on a local level. This retrospective analysis of peace-promotion efforts will evaluate the attempts to bring about conflict cessation, without the use of overt hard power[4], in the context of IS aggression in the regions of Syria and Iraq. However, the historically inhospitable environments of Syria and Iraq, have and will, remain a substantial hindrance to cultural liberalization and the cessation of conflict.

The Rise of the Islamic State (IS)

          Known as the Syrian Uprising, the current conflict in Syria began in the spring of 2011 between pro-democracy protesters and the Syrian regime in the context of the Arab Spring.[5] The power vacuum left by U.S. forces and coalition troops after the withdrawal in neighbouring Iraq, in December 2011, enabled the influence of IS to proliferate in the ensuing chaos.[6] After the heavy military offensive IS launched in the summer of 2014, estimates suggest that the IS controlled territory in Iraq and Syria are roughly “equivalent to the size of neighbouring Jordan.”[7] IS has encountered hard power military resistance from three primary sources: Syrian Security Forces, the Iraqi Military, and the Kurdish Peshmerga. The Syrian Security Forces are engaged in a large-scale conflict nation wide and have not devoted full attention of force towards IS, leading to their capture of oil fields and large cities – such as the IS capital of al-Raqqa. The U.S.-backed and trained Iraqi military has largely crumbled under the advance of IS fighters, resulting in the capture of Mosul, an Iraqi city with the population of over 1 million residents.[8]

          Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi is the self-declared Caliph of the Islamic State, encompassing the duties of military command, spiritual leadership, as well its public face. Al-Baghdadi is an Iraqi-born Salafist Sunni Muslim with a claimed PhD. in Islamic Studies with alleged ties of descendancy to the Prophet Mohamed’s Quraysh tribe.[9] Although IS began as an autonomous al-Qaeda affiliated group, in February 2014 “al-Qaeda’s central leadership announced that it had severed ties with ISIS” due to their excessively brutal and unforgiving tactics to Muslims and non-Muslims alike.[10] IS has employed unprecedented recruiting tactics across multiple social media platforms, drawing fighters from the Middle East and Western Nations alike. 2014 was a whirlwind year for IS, putting their force size at “an estimated 20,000 to 31,500 fighters in Iraq and Syria,” with fiscal assets, gained from looting and extortion, estimated to be around the “$2 billion (USD)” mark.[11] [12]

Tracking Soft Power Efforts for Conflict Cessation

          On 21 April 2012, the United Nations adopted UN Security Council Resolution 2043.[13] UNSC Resolution 2043 was not directed towards IS, but rather at the Syrian conflict as a whole, “reaffirming [the UN’s] support to the Joint Special Envoy for the United Nations and the League of Arab States.”[14] However, citing an “increasing militarization on the ground and the clear lack of unity in the Security Council,” Annan relinquished his role amidst the continuance of open hostilities between Syrian Security Forces and the rebel groups.[15] Following the departure of Kofi Annan, Lakhdar Brahimi assumed the role as Joint Special Representative, but still encountered the fatal roadblocks experienced by Annan.[16] Matching the instability of the Syrian environment, Brahimi likewise relinquished his position in the summer of 2014, resulting in the appointment of the current Joint Special Representative, Staffan de Mistura, in July of 2014.[17] The three Joint Special Representatives have been largely unsuccessful at implementing conflict cessation in Syria, with Syrian Security Forces and IS both ignoring any attempts for diplomatic peace-building efforts.

          Descending a step in the scale of approach, outside the context of the UN an anti-IS coalition was formed by upwards of 62 nations: 21 of the 62 nations have provided lethal military assistance, while 13 of the 62 nations have provided, exclusively, humanitarian support totaling over $100 (USD) in the form of medical supplies, blankets, and foodstuffs.[18] The conflict in the IS-controlled regions of Iraq and Syria has prevented an effective deployment of aid workers, whether foreign or domestic. In the cases where journalists and western aid workers did operate in Iraq and/or Syria, they were kidnapped, held as hostages for ransom, and ultimately executed. IS is indiscriminate in their targeting, repeating this macabre process regardless of nationality, religious affiliation, or gender.[19] While IS continues to repel outside intervention, in some instances, they have provided aid and public works to the denizens of their controlled territory, especially in areas hit hard by the Syrian regime.[20]

          The path that IS took when coming to power increasingly solidified their foothold in local arenas. Mimicking the Syrian regime’s brutal response to peaceful demonstrators, IS likewise erased any potential opposition by targeting local civic clubs, opposing religious sects, and private and public education institutions. Citing an extremist interpretation for the strict adherence to Islamic tenets, specifically that of shirk or idolatry, IS has destroyed cultural treasures and historic artifacts in an indiscriminate fashion.[21] Civil society organizations and grassroots movements often rely on existing social and civic infrastructure as a foundation for advocacy or activism. The tactics employed by IS demolished the already fragile social and civic infrastructure in regions IS now controls. As a result, the presence of organic local resistance to IS is practically nonexistent. One of the lone outliers of the non-violent anti-IS approach is the story of Suad Nofel, a female Muslim schoolteacher in the Syrian city of Raqqa.[22] Armed with only a cardboard sign and steadfast determination, “Nofel made her way to ISIS’s headquarters every day for three months” during the summer of 2013.[23] Despite her determined ethic, Nofel conceded that “unfortunately not enough people have joined my effort in resisting and that’s why [IS] grew stronger.”[24]

The Impasse of Unrestrained Aggression

          Nonviolent peacebuilding efforts implicitly rely on good faith measures from all parties involved. Prior to IS seizing control, the Syrian regime was the sole coercive force in the Syrian regions. Syrian Security Forces have similarly acted with impunity, dwarfing the IS death toll with an estimated 200,000 dead, for all of Syria, as of December 2014.[25] The failure of the UN Joint Special Representatives was a direct result of the Syrian regime’s unwillingness to reduce their military mobilization. In the Iraqi and Syrian territories now controlled by IS, IS forces are, at this moment, the sole coercive force directly present in a local capacity. As such, IS has one of the key principles behind the concept of state sovereignty. The continued trend for the failure of conflict cessation exists due to IS’s continuance of using brutal and violent tactics as a default response to all levels of opposition, whether local, Muslim, or otherwise. Even in the Iraqi and Syrian diaspora when the unification of displaced refugees has taken place, host nations have viewed the peaceful grassroots mobilization as a security issue.[26] Compounding the struggle to regional peacebuilding is the immense regional strain that exists from the continued accommodation of Palestinian refugees.

          Regardless of the theological legitimacy of IS’s claims to Islamic principles, they themselves are determined to endeavour by any and all means to both hold and increase their influence across the Levant. In the discourse that is regional conflict in the Middle East, the language IS has chosen is unrestrained violence. The attempts to counter IS influence in the region, whether that is by completely eradicating IS or just alleviating the suffering of those under IS control, have been met by fierce and immediate IS opposition. In this Realist, ‘might makes right’ landscape constructed by IS, peacebuilding tactics are not able to take hold, let alone flourish. Denizens of IS controlled regions have largely resulted to capitulation as a method of self-preservation when engaging with IS. Empowerment of local populations appears to be unattainable when just the act of survival is a daily struggle. The result of is an emboldened IS that does not envision an impending defeat, making the thought of negotiation highly improbable.

The Failure of Soft Power

          The use of soft power to combat the influence and advance of IS in Syria and Iraq has been met with increased barbarity and continued bloodshed. Relief efforts and non-lethal assistance have been delivered to the denizens of IS controlled territories in Syria and Iraq. However, the use of diplomacy, nonviolent peacebuilding, and humanitarian aid is a currency which IS refuses to trade in. The history of the violent totalitarian regimes have fostered the brutal environment in which IS now prospers. While popular uprisings, diplomatic measures, and cultural appeals perhaps worked, at least in part, with the previous regimes in attempts to liberalize or build peace, IS repeatedly greets these approaches with unrestrained violence – from summary executions to beheadings. The case study of IS represents the extreme end of a violent spectrum, resulting in the failure of soft power to bring about conflict cessation or even degrade IS control.

          The use of non-violent peace-building and soft power methods certainly has limits in this application, but they must not be forgotten. While conflict cessation or the reduction of IS control cannot be achieved by soft power or nonviolent methods of peacebuilding, the key to a lasting calm beyond the reign of IS certainly lies in these approaches. The absence of long-term conflict resolution approaches in Iraq, which bolstered the region’s instability after the American withdrawal in December 2011, is what created the environment in which IS proliferated. To make sure the continued pattern of short-sighted realism does not embark upon a successive cycle after the eventual defeat of IS, the methods previously forsaken must be applied.

Endnotes

1. P. 66, Machiavelli 1998
2. Schwartzstein 2014
3. Russia Today 2015
4. Hard Power is the use of economic sanctions or coercive military force from a top-down governmental approach. Ananian 2010
5. Rodgers, et al. 2014
6. The Associated Press 2011
7. VICE News 2014
8. United Nations Assistance Mission for Iraq (UNAMI) Human Rights Office 2014
9. BBC News 2014
10. Mendelsohn 2014
11. Yeginsu 2014
12. Chulov 2014
13. UN Security Council Resolution 2043, Syria 2012
14. Ibid.
15. Annan 2012
16. UN News Centre 2014
17. UN Secretary General 2014
18. Wordsworth 2014
19. Referring to the cases of non-combatants: aid workers David Haines (British), Alan Henning (British), Peter Kassig (American) and Kayla Mueller (American), journalists James Foley (American), Steven Sotloff (American), Haruna Yukawa (Japanese), and Kenji Goto (Japanese).
20. Croucher 2015
21. Arango 2014
22. Taleb 2014
23. Ibid.
24. Ibid.
25. Taylor 2014
26. Montoya 2015


To see the full bibliography, follow this link:

Breaking Video Footage of the Israeli Air Strike in Syria

New footage has emerged from Syria, apparently showing the effects of an Israeli air strike that was conducted in the early hours of Sunday May 5th. This marks the second Israeli air strike in Syria in almost as many days, and is the third overall since the start of the Syrian Uprising.

While any perceived Israeli aggression in the region would usually entail major backlash from Arab countries, such has not been the case during the ongoing Syrian crisis. Although, Egypt and the Arab League have condemned this latest venture. Furthermore, these increased strikes would explain why Israel has repeatedly violated Lebanese airspace over the past few days.

All indications suggest that Hezbollah in Lebanon is not seeking any of Assad's chemical or biological weapons. However, Reuters is reporting that Hezbollah is actively seeking conventional weapons systems. Here is where the recent air strikes enter the frame.


The Israeli air strike targeted a shipment bound for Hezbollah, in the outskirts of Damascus. An American intelligence official told the New York Times that the "shipment consisted of Iranian-made Fateh-110s." An upgraded replacement for the aging supply of Soviet made Scuds in the Middle east, the Fateh-110's are a formidable new ground-to-ground missile weapons system. Intelligence reports suggest that if armed with the Fateh-110's, Hezbollah would be able to strike practically anywhere in Israel from Southern Lebanon.

In light of the recent chemical weapons developments, these air strikes by Israel on Syrian regime assets are currently the best, and really only, possible option in lieu of a direct intervention from the West. In my March interview with Dr. Joshua Landis, he speculated that "the [U.S.] military is also investigating whether Chem Weapons can be destroyed by bombing alone."

Interestingly, since Israel deems the threat of the Fateh-110's to be deserving of a direct strike, where does that leave the Syrian people? Assad has already demonstrated his readiness to use Scud missiles in civilian areas. Clearly, steps should be taken to prevent Assad from using the feared Fateh-110 on his own people.

Here's another angle of the massive fireball in Damascus.


Iran has already condemned Israel's actions and "urged countries in the region to stand against the assault."

An Interview with Dr. Joshua Landis: Syria, Assad, and Chemical Weapons

Recent news regarding the Syrian Uprising has once again caught the attention of global media outlets and international diplomats alike. The possible use of chemical weapons being reported in Syria is cause for great alarm. The U.S. has so far declared a firm stance of non-intervention, but with one exception - the use of chemical weapons in Syria. This game changing shift in tactics by the Assad regime is forcing U.S. foreign policy to confront the very real likelihood of intervening in Syria.

Dr. Joshua Landis of The University of Oklahoma

In the wake of these new developments, I contacted an expert on all-things Syria, Director of the Center for Middle East Studies, University of Oklahoma Professor, Dr. Joshua Landis. His blog covering Syrian politics, 'Syria Comment' is widely read by officials in Washington, Europe and Syria. Dr. Landis travels frequently to Washington DC to consult with government agencies and speak at think tanks, like the Woodrow Wilson Institute, Brookings Institute, USIP, Middle East Institute, and Council on Foreign Relations.  He makes regular appearances  as an expert analyst on PBS News Hour, the Charlie Rose Show, al-Jazeera, Frontline, NPR, France 24 and BBC radio. Dr. Landis is frequently published in journals like Foreign Policy, Middle East Policy, and Time Magazine. (Information Courtesy of his OU Faculty Page)

As a current student at OU and an active member in the academic community in Norman, I have had the pleasure of meeting Dr. Landis on multiple occasions. I have sought his counsel on Middle East Politics - like the writing I did covering the  escalation of the Syrian Uprising in early 2012 and previously with my NATO Project. He graciously accepted my request for an interview on these recent developments as well as answering some general questions I had. In our discussion, Dr. Landis provided very illuminating commentary and insight.

U.S. President Barack Obama

What I drew from Dr. Landis is that President Barack Obama is cautiously dancing the U.S. intervention threshold with Bashar Al-Assad as his dance partner. Many thought that the Assad regime would crumble in rapid form, but such is far from the case. Clearly the Assad Regime is willing to burn Syria to the ground as long as the scorched result is still under its control.  So far Assad's strategy of brutal crackdown and responses has proven effective against a fractured and loosely affiliated opposition. Since the inclusion of the Al-Nusra Front in the conflict, rebel victories have begun to tally up and regime air-craft have become vulnerable. This is why Damascus started to use short range Scud ballistic missiles to strike resistance targets - they are considerably cheaper than a multi-million dollar aircraft. Seemingly without hesitation, Assad is prepared to further escalate the brute force being used in the conflict. But along the way President Obama has made forceful threats to Damascus that Assad has included into his calculus. The maneuvering by Assad aims to get as close to the American prohibitions of conduct, without actually crossing the red line.

Syrian President Bashar Al-Assad

The Assad regime's recent chemical attack on rebel positions is evidence of this notion for two reasons. As Dr. Landis stated in our interview, "there is no agreed upon definition of how to define Chemical Weapons or what a real "use" is or how many need to be killed before the US intervenes," this ambiguity reflects the on the ground reality of the attack site. Intelligence reports are suggesting that it was not conventional chemical weapons, like poison gases or nerve agents, that were used, but more along the lines of a 'caustic weapon' which just used  chemical exposure, most likely to chlorine, to generate casualties in the affected area. [Link Here] So while Assad has certainly come into contact with President Obama's red line, with this witty maneuvering, he has yet to actually cross the line.

Dr. Landis and I agreed that it appears as if the American general public is either apprehensive or indifferent to the atrocities taking place in Syria. He equated this to "what one might call 'Middle East nation building fatigue'" and cited the report from last fall that "says 75,000 troops might be needed to seize Syria chemical arms." [Link Here] Dr. Landis said this was most likely a scare report meant to deter U.S. intervention. However, I see it as a realistic assessment by the Pentagon because it is better to go in over-prepared, than to go into a country and half-ass something as important and critical as chemical weapons recovery and neutralization. The estimate may be high, but this is more than likely an over estimation so that if this number is reduced, the Pentagon still has their desired sufficient troop commitment.

I concluded our interview with an inquiry regarding the future. I did not ask about the outcome of the raging battle taking place in Syria, but how history will look back on the inaction of the global community. Dr. Landis offered a quite poignant and pointed response, one which made me look at the Syrian Uprising from a slightly different perspective. His response was,

"This is certainly a failure of humans to sort out their affairs in a peaceful way. It is also a failure of world powers to solve the domestic problems of countries that slip into civil war. But it is important to remember that many countries have gone through civil wars on the road to nation building. The US did and American governments killed over 750,000 of their own people. Most Americans would probably say today that they are glad that Great Britain or other World Powers at the time did not intervene. In short, we don't know how Syrians will look back on this period in their history after 100 years."

Throughout this entire conflict, one thing certainly remains true: the following weeks, months, and possibly years are daunting for the people of Syria, with an estimated 80,000 already dead and millions estimated to be displaced.

Here is the full transcript from the interview:

Nolan Kraszkiewicz: Over a year ago, in January 2012, you quite rightly predicted that Bashar Al-Assad was likely to hold power well into 2013. Many who have covered the Syrian Uprising were either quick to claim Bashar al-Assad's fall was imminent or are somewhat surprised that he has managed to remain in power this far into the conflict. Why do you think so many were so quick to come such an erroneous conclusion?

Operation Fallen Void: Covert Action Assassination of Bashar Al-Assad

NOTICE AND DISCLAIMER

The content of this report is pure speculation. This assignment was a project for an intelligence course with the outline of proposing a covert action for an issue facing the world today. Any of the governmental agencies, military assets, or intelligence organizations mentioned are in no way affiliated with this report. The author of this report has no intention to cause harm to any of the targets mentioned, has no intention to become involved in the uprising in Syria, and has no intention of aiding or influencing any parties involved in the conflict. The findings, outlines, and recommendations in this report are pure fiction and should be treated and regarded as such.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

Syria has been in a state of turmoil for the past two years. The Syrian rebels, known as the Free Syrian Army (FSA), have led an uprising aimed at removing president Bashar al-Assad from power. The ongoing conflict has resulted in the deaths of over 70,000 Syrians. [Link Here] The internal strife in Syria has threatened the security of Turkey, which shares an expansive mutual border with Syria. As a result, diplomatic relations between the two, once allied, countries has rapidly deteriorated. This constant state of upheaval also threatens the security of Israel and Lebanon, both of which have had a long and complicated history with Syria as well. The consensus of the western world is that Bashar al-Assad has lost all legitimacy as a ruler, expecting his demise and ouster to be forthcoming. However, two major veto-power players in the UN, Russia and China, have been virulently opposed to any call for Assad to step down – or let alone condemnation. The Syrian regime is a valuable business, economic, and defense partner with Russian and Chinese interests. So even amidst that atrocities being perpetrated at the direction of Assad, he has essentially been given a free pass.

The U.S. has actively pursued every diplomatic channel for bringing about conflict cessation in Syria, but to no avail. The U.S. has approached the UN, the Arab League, and NATO entities, but no collective action has been firmly implemented. The public nature of the conflict, as well as the brazen nature of Assad’s response has removed any doubt as to the dire situation facing the future of Syria. Human rights organizations and foreign journalists have documented the constant deterioration of civility expanding throughout Syria. While not officially intervening with boots on the ground in Syria, the U.S. and other regional allies have facilitated support for the FSA. The stagnation of progress to bringing about a peaceful cessation of conflict in Syria is only expanding. Thus the urgency and severity of this conflict demand that there be a military action aimed at ending the brutal crackdown of the Assad regime.

Mission Directive:

The U.S. would provide logistical and strategical support to a limited amount of the resistance elements within the FSA for the explicit purpose of facilitating the targeted assassination of Syrian President Bashar al-Assad. The Assad regime has so far weathered numerous losses in the form of defections and fatalities. However, Assad has been able to retain crucial elements of the Syrian Security Forces. This is due to a unique position that Assad has by virtue of an ethnic identity – being a member of the Alawite minority. Furthermore, the personality cult that surrounds Assad’s brand of authoritarian rule is a remnant of his Father’s, Hafez al-Assad, reign over Syria.

By eliminating Bashar al-Assad from the picture multiple goals could be achieved. Without Assad at the helm, the command structure of the Syrian regime would crumble. This would bring about the swift cessation of government directed attacks against civilian targets. Riding the wave of the Arab Spring, the lack of a head of state in Syria would usher in the much anticipated transfer and restructuring of executive power. Russian and Chinese interests in Syria are centered on the relationship they had with Assad. With him then gone, Russian and Chinese resistance to a regime change would be effectively eliminated. Also, Iran enters the geopolitical implications of Syria. The recent actions of Bashar al-Assad and the repressive rule of the Assad family in Syria has fomented ire and disdain in the Syrian population. With the oppressive figure of Assad gone, the public would be free of that directed threat. The years of pent up angst would manifest itself in opposition to former Syrian allies. This would include Hezbollah, Russia, and Iran. The power vacuum left in the wake of this upheaval would be more favorable to U.S. interests – or at the very least, western aligned interests.

Methodology and Tactics:

The Free Syrian Army (FSA) Logo

The assassination of Bashar al-Assad could easily be achieved by targeted sorties of the Syrian Presidential Palace in Damascus. However, this would be blatantly obvious and remove the plausible deniability of the U.S. So instead the U.S. would utilize opposition elements of the Free Syrian Army to execute the mission. The CIA will provide lethal aid to resistance groups. This can be achieved by outsourcing delivery of goods to Turkey, Jordan, and Saudi Arabia. This initial step is the base of the overall approach. The better armed the FSA is, the more effective they will be when combatting government security forces. Also, this blanket approach with escalate the conflict, forcing the Assad regime to focus more on internal affairs.

The main component of the covert action consists of two sub-parts. First is the deployment of U.S. Special Forces to southern Turkey to train the FSA elements selected for carrying out the targeted assassination mission(s) aimed at Bashar al-Assad. The second is the enlistment of intelligence and intelligence collection assets. These are needed to fully grasp the security challenges posed by targeting Assad. A wide array of SIGINT assets will be utilized in the Syrian theater. And to a lesser extent, the utilization of HUMINT assets that can be gleaned from Jordanian, Saudi, or Turkish intelligence counterparts. This will provide details as to the location and vulnerabilities of Assad.

For the training of the FSA to carry out a directed assassination, two specialized pieces of the U.S. Army will be needed. The CIA will locate and stage a training area in southern Turkey – with the assistance of the Turkish government. Delta Force will be primarily responsible for the training of the FSA elements with the 101st Airborne Division providing security and general assistance at the camp. The training will have to take place at an accelerated rate, but given the fact that the FSA is comprised of a large number of Syrian Security Forces defectors, the training can be adapted and tailored to incorporate what formal military training they have. The use of these two U.S. Army elements will make the integration of the U.S. Army Intelligence and Security Command (INSCOM) easier. In addition, the National Security Agency (NSA), National Reconnaissance Office (NRO), and the National Geospatial-Intelligence Agency (NGA) will all be utilized to provide solid, actionable intelligence to the FSA.