Joint Operating Concept (JOC) - GlobalSecurity.org

• Focus on addressing the underlying economic, political, cultural, or
security conditions that fuel the grievances of the population, rather than
on applying military power directly against the military and paramilitary
forces of adversaries. Both approaches are necessary, but the direct
application of military power is unlikely to be decisive.
• Disrupt, dislocate, and defeat adversaries by attacking them physically
and psychologically where they are most vulnerable and unsuspecting,
rather than attacking where they are strongest or in the manner they
expect.
• Empower, enable, support, or leverage IA and other partners to attack
adversaries militarily or confront them non-militarily, rather than relying
on direct and unilateral military confrontation by US joint forces.
• Take actions with or against third-party states or armed groups in order to
influence adversaries rather than taking actions to influence adversaries
directly.
• Attack 19 adversaries using a combination of conventional and
nonconventional methods and means rather than relying only on
conventional military forces. Nonconventional methods and means might
include clandestine or covert actions, operations in combination with
irregular forces, or the nonconventional use of conventional capabilities.
• Subvert the power and influence of adversaries over the relevant
populations by isolating them physically and psychologically from their
local and international support through the use of PSYOP, public
diplomacy, and public affairs activities; security operations; population
and resource control measures; and other means.
An indirect approach may include direct actions at the tactical level. For
example, a tactical operation, such as a conventional strike against a terrorist
training camp, may be viewed as a direct application of military power. This
same tactical operation may also be conducted as part of a broader indirect
operational or strategic level campaign. This mixture of direct and indirect
applications of military power at the various levels of warfare adds to the
complexity of IW.
An indirect approach does not mean that IW can be conducted without any
direct combat operations to kill or defeat an adversary. Some adversaries, such
as terrorists and insurgents fighting for a religious or tribal cause, may be so
committed that they simply cannot be persuaded or coerced into laying down
their arms; these individuals must be either killed or captured.
Protracted IW Campaigns. IW historically has required a prolonged and
persistent effort of at least a decade to achieve a political outcome. 20 The
19 For the purposes of the JOC the term "attack" is used to describe both lethal and non-lethal
means.
20 Sepp, Dr. Kalev I., “Best Practices in Counterinsurgency,” Military Review, 8-12, May-June
2005.
20