The Fight Against IEDs

17 August 2010

By Judith Martin

The lethality of Improvised Explosive Devices was brought home to New Zealand earlier this month with the death of Lieutenant Timothy O’Donnell in Afghanistan.

The Defence Force has been aware of the escalation in use of this deadly device for some time, and a working group was established by the New Zealand Army in early 2009 to develop a Counter Improvised Explosive Devise (CIED) capability for all deployed forces, and to institutionalise CIED training within the Army and the wider NZDF. In the first of four CIED features, Army News looks here at the issues surrounding IEDs, and how the training is structured and implemented.

The improvised explosive device (IED) has now become the weapon of choice of insurgents in many parts of the world, says Land Component Commander Brigadier Dave Gawn.

“The IED has had a significant impact on tactical combat operations, and has the potential to have a strategic impact as well. Beyond its current importance, the IED is now an enduring feature of warfare and one that we must address right across our spectrum of training.

“While Counter IED (CIED) training has been a part of theatre specific pre-deployment training for some time and units have addressed it to varying degrees through their own training plans, we need to adopt a more consistent approach to CIED training throughout the land force, well before pre-deployment training. Our aim is to have all units and schools within the Army armed with the knowledge, skills and attitude required to make counter IED training an everyday part of collective and individual training.

“An important step towards this was the conduct of a NATO Counter IED Train the Trainers course in Waiouru. Our personnel have undertaken the course before overseas but this was the first time it has been run by NATO in NZ. The course will help give impetus to the conduct of CIED training by providing a bigger pool of trainers, all trained to a common standard. To aid the training to a common standard, we will produce a standard Training, Techniques and Procedures handbook which will provide the basis for generic, non-theatre specific CIED training across the Army.”

US Central Command estimates that in Afghanistan over 80% of casualties are caused by IEDs, and there has been an increase of over 140% in the use of IEDs in the ISAF Area of Responsibility since the beginning of this year.

“By its nature however it is not something for which you can engineer a single solution— we have to look at how we can minimise the effects of IEDs, how we can interdict them, and marginalise the strategic effect of what perpetrators are trying to achieve.

“In CIED operations, emphasis must be placed on the inextricable relationship between counter-insurgency operations (COIN) and the use of IEDs. We must focus on the people using IEDs, why they choose to and how they operate and act.

“Exploiting the growth in information technology, adversaries have spread bomb making techniques around the world. Adversaries have also used the same technology to learn and adapt, increasing their effectiveness while sharing information between theatres. We must be able to adapt and learn faster.

“The Army’s CIED training will address the three lines of operation commonly used by our defence partners. Firstly there is the training of the force—this is an area where the NZ Army can achieve the greatest impact. While this includes technical training for specialists, it is primarily focused on tactical training for every element of the land force that may deploy into an IED environment.

“Secondly we must look at defeating these devices themselves - how they are made, how we can defeat them and how we can exploit what we know about them to defeat further attacks and disrupt the IED system of those who produce them. Thirdly, we need to look at that IED system or network – what are all the functions within it, how do we detect and defeat them and ultimately prevent the device from being emplaced.”

Brigadier Gawn says tactical training has a very large role to play in fighting IED networks, and the technical aspect around the devices themselves is “just one part of it”.

“This training includes battle preparation, awareness of warnings and indicators, movement and patrolling, both in vehicles and on foot—these are all things that should be part of generic training. They need not be theatre specific—they are skills we should have and be able to adapt to any theatre or threat. A soldier’s training in their “5 and 25s”(the 5m and 25m areas to be searched when patrols halt) is vital, as is an intuitive awareness of the threat out there. Soldiers need an understanding and awareness of what the signs of a threat are.”

Things like vehicle preparation take on new importance. “In an IED threat environment the inside of a vehicle must be clear and all loose items properly secured, as anything loose inside could become a missile in the event of an explosion.”

The Army has established what are known as “petting zoos” where soldiers can examine a wide variety of IEDs and develop an understanding of how they are constructed and in what situation they are most likely to be used.

“The NATO course was an important step to building a larger core of trainers who in turn will help our soldiers see all aspects of CIED awareness as being a natural part of doing business. The New Zealand military has the ability to get ahead of the counter IED game because of its size, and consequent agility.”

Practical procedures to encourage protection

On a windswept road snaking up through the Waiouru training area, two soldiers are searching for something that is proving frustratingly elusive.

And the soldiers themselves are also under intense scrutiny. While they keep their eyes glued to the culvert on which they are walking, a lone figure watches them intently from a nearby hill.

This is no game of hide and seek: it’s part of a practical lesson that may one day save not only the lives of the soldiers but also the personnel they command.

They are members of the New Zealand Army team attending the NATO Counter Improvised Explosive Devise Train the Trainer course held over 12 days in July. Watching them as they scan the road for any telltale sign of an improvised explosive devise (IED) is former United States Special Forces officer, Stephen, who is part of the four man CIED team. Two other members of the team are also former US Special Forces officers, and the fourth is a former British Army CIED technical officer.

The search for the partially buried wire that would lead them to where the IED is buried leads to naught, and after half an hour Stephen calls them over to discuss just where they went awry.

The search, even though unsuccessful, provides useful information and is the first of many practical exercises the men will undergo under the tutelage of the NATO team.

Stephen, a veteran of combat in Iraq, Afghanistan, El Salvador, Columbia, Honduras, Peru and Ecuador, travels the world teaching soldiers about counter IED techniques and principles. He and his team work mainly in Europe, and this is their first venture into the South Pacific.

The team’s visit to New Zealand stems from the CIED Working Group which is working to develop an integrated CIED capability for all deployed forces, and to institutionalise CIED thinking within the New Zealand Army and wider NZDF. The training package the team members deliver will allow a bigger pool of selected Army personnel to develop training techniques, incorporating the latest information available from Afghanistan and Iraq.

Stephen says he trains soldiers by looking at basic Force Protection principles. “It’s a matter of showing soldiers how to implement CIED protection principles into their pre-deployment training and mission sets. We’re not teaching them tactics, we are just reinforcing the principles of effective CIED measures.”

Tactics, techniques and procedures change frequently, he says, and the training undertaken by soldiers must keep up with change to be effective. “Insurgents observe what we Allied Forces do and counter those tactics accordingly. And if something isn’t working they come up with another type of threat.”

NATO CIED SE NOM ROLL T3

So simple to make: Afghanistan’s lethal device

Take a clothes peg, a bit of ingenuity and murderous intent, and you have a device that can kill – just ask Staff Sergeant Matt Dyson, of Trentham’s Trade Training School.

The ammunition technician was the first New Zealander to deploy to Khowst in Afghanistan where he worked in the US-run Combined Explosive Exploitation Cell (CEX-C). During his deployment he dealt with an incident involving a trip wire improvised explosive devise, the trigger for which was a plastic clothes peg. It exploded under the wheel of a passing vehicle, with horrific results.

Nowadays as part of the TTS Staff, SSGT Dyson devotes his time almost exclusively to teaching soldiers how IEDs work, how they are built, and how they are designed to achieve their aim. His work also goes towards training operators for the Defence Force’s Explosive Ordnance Squadron.

With other TTS personnel he has built an extensive range of IEDs, using, in the main, components that are readily available in any suburban shopping centre. In the classroom he teaches theoretical background, then applies it practically so students can see the construction.

“We get our students to build an IED so that they can see it from the terrorist’s point of view, and understand how that device would be deployed. Students need to think through the process of how they would deploy their device. This encourages them to think through the tactics, techniques and procedures enemy forces use, as well as the technical components used in putting an IED together.

“Our (Defence Force) personnel need an appreciation of what the adversary will be thinking about, for example, their target, and what they hope to achieve. We want them to think, “yes there is an IED there and it has to be dealt with, but why is it there? What is the adversary trying to achieve?”

The makeup of an IED is limited only by a bomb maker’s imagination and technical ability, and can range from a Molotov cocktail to an improvised nuclear device. A very simple IED can be just as lethal as something more complex. And they are easy to make; only basic electronic knowledge is needed modifying a cell phone or radio into a lethal device.

Although IEDs used in Afghanistan differ from region to region, the most popular in current use are radio or remote-controlled versions, with a washing machine touch-plate used as a transceiver.

“As more counter-measures are introduced tactics change. It is up to us to try to keep a step ahead.”

Image Gallery - Issue 412