Main Article Content
Abstract
This study aimed to evaluate the effectiveness of the intelligence cycle within the Philippine Army and identify associated risks and flaws. Specifically, it sought to determine the components of the intelligence cycle used by the Philippine Army such planning and programming, execution, and review and assessment. Moreover, it also determined the extent of effectiveness of these intelligence cycle components, the weaknesses and operational risks are associated with the current Intelligence Cycle Process, potentially compromising its effectiveness in gathering accurate and timely intelligence, and strategies and measures can be proposed to enhance the effectiveness and resilience of the Intelligence Cycle. It employed descriptive research design and employ survey questionnaires with a 5-point Likert scale. The study was conducted in the Area of responsibility of 7th Infantry Division, randomly selected 80 intelligence personnel from various ranks and roles. Data collection was methodical, ensuring validity and reliability through expert validation and pilot testing. In addition, it employed descriptive statistics and run through SPSS. The findings revealed that the Philippine Army strongly integrates intelligence findings into its planning, execution, and assessment phases, with high levels of agreement found in areas such as intelligence-driven mission planning (mean = 3.90), monitoring and adjusting operations based on real-time intelligence (mean = 3.99), and systematic review processes for intelligence operations (mean = 3.91), highlighting the Army's robust application of the intelligence cycle. The intelligence cycle components were rated as very effective in all phases, with planning (mean = 3.97), execution (mean = 3.97), and review and assessment (mean = 3.97) all receiving high ratings. These findings demonstrate that intelligence-driven planning and operations significantly enhance operational goals and mission success. However, weaknesses were identified, including a lack of specialized personnel (mean = 3.84), inconsistent intelligence analysis methodologies (mean = 3.08), and weak inter-unit intelligence sharing (mean = 3.09). Operational risks such as limited funding (mean = 3.90), logistical constraints (mean = 3.38), and poor coordination with other agencies (mean = 3.78) were also noted, which compromise the cycle's effectiveness. To address these challenges, strategies such as modernizing training, improving resource mobilization, and establishing a feedback mechanism for knowledge sharing were proposed. These measures aim to improve the intelligence cycle's effectiveness, with expected outcomes including better readiness through specialized training, improved mission success via coordinated deployment, and enhanced resource availability through partnerships. The research found that the Philippine Army effectively incorporates intelligence into planning and execution, improving unit readiness, flexibility, and mission performance. The intelligence loop improves planning, resource allocation, and operational execution, and real-time updates help units exploit threats and opportunities. The cycle's precision and reactivity are limited by resource constraints such inadequate workers, equipment, and funds. To improve the intelligence cycle's efficacy and resilience, invest in training, tools, infrastructure, feedback loops, and coordination.
Article Details
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
References
Armed Forces of the Philippines. (2022). Army Transformation Roadmap: Civil-Military Operations Regiment & Multi-Sector Ad-visory Board Partnerships. Retrieved from https://army.mil.ph/
Asia Maritime Transparency Initiative. (2021). South China Sea Militarization in Per-spective: Philippines. [https://amti.csis.org/south-china-sea-militarization-perspective-philippines/]
Aslam, R., & Raza, A. (2020). Intelligence-driven operations in modern military frameworks: A study of effective practic-es. Defense Studies Journal, 36(3), 227–240.
Becker, A., & Lawrence, P. (2021). The role of methodology in intelligence analysis. In-ternational Intelligence Review, 29(4), 112-129.
Born, H., & Leigh, I. (2018). Oversight of Intelli-gence Agencies: A Comparative Hand-book. Geneva Centre for the Democratic Control of Armed Forces (DCAF).
Cabrera, O. A. (2018). The role of the Philip-pine Army in internal security: A histori-cal and strategic analysis. Journal of Southeast Asian Studies, 47(2), 337-363.
Clarke, R. A., & Knake, R. K. (2020). The fifth domain: Defending our country, our companies, and ourselves in the age of cyber threats. Penguin Press.
CNN Philippines. (2021). AFP Chief: Military has upper hand vs. terrorists despite re-cent attacks. [https://cnnphilippines.com/news/2021/6/25/Armed-Forces-of-the-Philippines-upper-hand-terrorists.html]
Cruz, R. M., & Magno, F. A. (2018). Intelligence transparency in southeast asia: challenges and prospects. Asian Journal of Political Science, 26(2), 123-140.
DiNardo, J., & Co-authors. (2021). Strategic military intelligence integration. Military Studies Quarterly, 32(4), 45-67
Earley, P. (2017). Intelligence gathering and analysis: A military perspective. Routledge.
Estrada, J. (2021). Civil-military operations and their impact on local stability and de-velopment: The Philippine Army's per-spective. Asia-Pacific Defense Review, 12(4), 95–108.
Fastabend, E. (2017). Southeast Asia: Security issues and challenges. Routledge.
Floyd, R. (2021). Military intelligence and mis-sion readiness: Enhancing effectiveness through adaptive cycle review. Military Review, 101(4), 57-63.
Garcia, A., & Torres, P. (2021). Workshops in civil-military operations. Asian Journal of Defense, 19(1), 56-74.
Garner, G. & McGlynn, P. (2018). Intelligence Analysis Fundamentals. CRC Press.
Gonzales, C. (2020). A closer look on the Phil-ippine Anti-Terror Law. Asia-Pacific Law & Policy Review, 6, 258-272.
Grana, G. & Windell, J. (2021). Crime and Intel-ligence Analysis: An Integrated Real-Time Approach. Routledge.
Grauer, S. (2017). Fake news, disinformation, and social media: A bibliography. Interna-tional Journal of Library Information and Archive Studies, 5(1), 1-10.
Green, L., & Johnson, R. (2021). Evaluating civ-il-military operations: the role of annual reviews in military effectiveness. Journal of Military Strategy, 13(1), 89-104.
Hatlebrekke, K. A. (2021). The Problem of Se-cret Intelligence. Edinburgh.
Hughes-Wilson, J. (2023). Military intelligence blunders. Kings Road Publishing.
Johnson, L., Smith, A., & Davis, M. (2020). The role of specialized skills in intelligence ef-fectiveness. Intelligence and National Se-curity, 35(4), 525-543. https://doi.org/10.1080/02684527.2019.1626709
Jones, S., & Wang, X. (2020). Financial con-straints and military intelligence: The cost of underfunding. Defense Analysis Quarterly, 14(2), 77-93.
Joya, M. D., & Mendoza, R. U. (2018). Secrecy and transparency in philippine intelli-gence agencies: implications for demo-cratic governance. Journal of Southeast Asian Studies, 49(1), 112-130.
Kristoffersen, F. & Hatlebrekke, K. (2022). Et-terretning: fra innsiden av Etterret-ningstjenesten, oppdragene, menneskene og faget. Gyldendal.
Lajeunesse, A. M. (2018). Countering disinfor-mation in a digital age. International Se-curity, 43(1), 7-48.
Lowry, C. (2020). The intelligence cycle: A framework for military decision making. Journal of Military Operations, 16(2), 45-59.
Martinez, G. P., & Santos, J. L. (2022). Evaluat-ing resource allocation through intelli-gence performance reviews in military operations. Defense Resource Manage-ment Journal, 14(3), 33-48.
Martinez, L. (2020). Combating misinfor-mation in intelligence agencies: Strategies and tools. Journal of Intelligence Studies, 28(3), 145-162.
Moen, R. (2020). Anbefalinger i politiets etter-retningsprodukter – et dilemma. Nordic Journal of Studies in Policing, 7(3), 176-198. https://doi.org/10.18261/issn.2703-7045-2020-03-02
Philippine Information Agency. (2021). Philip-pine Army joins relief ops in Cagayan. [https://pia.gov.ph/news/articles/1048249]
Philippine News Agency. (2021). PRRD gives P1-M cash aid to Lanao Sur fire victims. [https://www.pna.gov.ph/articles/1144861]
Ramos, S. (2021). Improving Operational Agili-ty through Knowledge Sharing in the Phil-ippine Army. Journal of Defense Studies, 15(1), 34-49.
Roberts, E. (2019). Enhancing the consistency and scope of performance reviews in mil-itary organizations. Military Leadership Review, 45(1), 74-89.
Salazar, M. (2022). The evolution of Philippine military intelligence in the context of counterinsurgency operations. Philippine Defense Review, 34(1), 45–59.
Santos, J., & Lim, A. (2020). Effective Intelli-gence Review and Assessment in Military Operations. Asian Journal of Military Studies, 22(4), 60-75.
Smith, A. R., Johnson, M. T., & Lee, K. (2023). Real-Time Intelligence and Its Impact on Military Operations. Defense Analysis Journal, 19(1), 10-28.
Smith, A., & Jones, R. (2020). Bureaucratic Inef-ficiencies in Intelligence Agencies: Causes and Remedies. Intelligence and National Security, 35(4), 403-420.
Smith, J., & Lopez, C. (2019). The cost of poor inter-agency coordination in intelligence operations. Journal of Intelligence and Security, 29(4), 131-145.
Stachel, R. (2016). Information sharing and intelligence failures: A critical analysis of bureaucratic obstacles. International Af-fairs, 92(2), 377-397.
Stenslie, S., Haugom, L. & Vaage, B. H. (2021). Introduction: An old activity in a new age. In Stenslie, S., Haugom, L. & Vaage, B. H. (Eds.). Intelligence Analysis in the Digital Age. Routledge.
Sumad-on, D. (2021). The Whole of Nation Ap-proach to End Local Communism: As As-sessment of Executive Order# 70. Availa-ble at SSRN 3825953.
Sutea, I. (2019). Tracking the Flow of Military Assets and Logistics for OSINT: The Case of the Syrian Civil War.
Taylor, K., & Robinson, D. (2019). Mission planning frameworks: Optimizing coor-dination and operational support across units. Journal of Defense Management, 16(1), 98-112.
Thompson, A. (2021). The challenges of inter-agency intelligence sharing. Security and Intelligence Review, 12(2), 77-93.
Wilkinson, L.A. (2011). Systems Theory. In: Goldstein, S., Naglieri, J.A. (eds) Encyclo-pedia of Child Behavior and Development. Springer, Boston, MA. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-0-387-79061-9_941
Ylönen, M. & Aven, T. (2023). A new perspec-tive for the integration of intelligence and risk management in a customs and bor-der control context. Journal of Risk Re-search, 26(4), 433-439. https://doi.org/10.1080/13669877.2023.217691