Military Police


Military Police contains information about military police functions in maneuver and mobility support, area security, law and order, internment/resettlement, and police intelligence operations.

Issue link:

Contents of this Issue


Page 67 of 75

66 MILITARY POLICE and risk tolerances. Protection program principles are - ible enough to meet antiterrorism and physical security requirements for emerging threats and hazards. Ensuring that the physical security response elements are integrated with assessment and communications is important in guar- anteeing that the forces are ready, trained, equipped, and capable as required by Antiterrorism Standard 13. Closely coupled with steady-state or baseline physical security measures are RAM and FPCONs—two of the larg- est and most visible areas of crossover between antiterror- ism and physical security in antiterrorism program imple- mentation. 6 RAM and FPCONs, which are integrated with Antiterrorism Standard 13, are developed during the plan- ning and execution phase of the antiterrorism program. RAM change the defensive signature of the organization, and they are conducted at installations and standalone fa- cilities. RAM supplement physical security measures; they are not intended to replace effective and prudent physical security planning. Commanders and leaders are required to mitigate vulnerabilities, and compensatory measures are primary elements of the physical security system; RAM sup- port this system. When possible, RAM should particularly emphasize any measure or effect that increases the physical security of the activity. Planning physical security measures such as RAM should include a deliberate time, place, and purpose in order to achieve the desired results. The random- ness in RAM should be targeted toward terrorists or their supporters' ability to discern our operational posture, not statistical randomness. The end state should complicate the planning and execution cycle of an adversary engaged in hos- tile surveillance or action against Army missions or assets. Properly planned and executed RAM supporting a physical security program specifcally tailored to the existing threats are a powerful tool to increase risks for our adversaries. Additionally, if RAM are coordinated and integrated with other physical security activities (Crime Prevention Through Environmental Design) or with intelligence and awareness activities such as the Army iWATCH program, our probabil- ity for success in defeating terrorists rises signifcantly. Graduated FPCON activities also build upon the physi- cal security capabilities resident in cohesive Army organiza- tions and activities. A large number of FPCON measures, especially those within FPCON C and higher, are physical security measures intended to support the detection of, as- sessment of, delay or denial of, and response to terrorist ac- tivities or attacks. The FPCON system benefts from, and is built upon, physical security activities beginning in FPCON Normal. The physical security activities, being designed for a wider spectrum of threats (including criminals and foreign intelligence actors), provide the backbone from which pro- cedural and physical FPCON measures are implemented. Without the physical security baseline from the Army physi- cal security program and support from other APP elements, antiterrorism efforts would be insuffcient for protection against terrorist attacks. Conclusion Physical security measures, RAM, and FPCONs are a result of deliberate mission- and threat-focused planning. As each environment is different (as in the case of stand- alone facilities that have characteristics limiting physical security, RAM, and FPCON employment), there is always a requirement for integrated, synchronized solutions and the creative application of doctrine. The environment requires dynamic antiterrorism and physical security planning and integration. Army organizations have strength and resil- ience in physical security and antiterrorism working groups, which should be leveraged to develop and maintain capabili- ties for deterring and defeating terrorists and their support- ers. Physical security measures and RAM should change as activities cycle through higher FPCONs, always ready for immediate action and implementation. By developing and embracing the natural relationship between the antiterror- ism and physical security programs, Army commanders, leaders, and staff at all levels can meet protective require- ments no matter the threat. Endnotes: 1 Army Regulation 525-2, The , 8 December 2014, lists the APP elements as antiterrorism, com- puter network defense, continuity of operations, critical infra- structure risk management, emergency management, fre and emergency services, health protection, high-risk personnel, in- formation assurance, law enforcement, operations security, and physical security. The enabling functions are intelligence, coun- terintelligence, and security engineering services. 2 Joint Publication (JP) 2-0, Joint Intelligence, 22 October 2013. 3 JP 1-02, Dictionary of Military and , 8 November 2010. 4 DODI 2000.16, DOD (AT) Standards, 2 Oc- tober 2006. 5 AR 525-2, , 8 December 2014. 6 In DODI 2000.16, RAM are covered under Antiterrorism Standard 14 and FPCONs are covered under Standard 22. Mr. Owczarzak is a contract senior analyst with the Antiterror- Branch, Offce of the Provost Marshal General. He holds Illinois University, Carbondale, Illinois, and a degree in security Webster University. He has been a defense force and installation offcer in deployed and garrison organizations. Colonel Vanderlinden analyst with the Branch, Offce of the Provost Marshal General. He holds a bachelor's degree in jus- tice Northern Michigan University, Marquette, Michigan, University, East Lansing, Michigan, and strategic studies the U.S. War College. He is also a graduate of the Federal

Articles in this issue

Archives of this issue

view archives of Military Police - SPRING 2016