If you’ve made it this far, consider me impressed. METT-TC is not the coolest topic, but I hope that this series of articles accomplished one of the following for you:
1. You developed an introductory understanding of METT-TC and are starting to see how you could apply it.
2. If you were already familiar with METT-TC, this series either served as a good refresher or you picked up a few things that you hadn’t heard before.
3. You recognize that this is just an overview and only a part of a larger formal planning process. But now, when your favorite brovet influencer says “METT-TC dependent,” you can engage in that conversation.
Civil Considerations (METT-TC)
Let’s wrap this up. The last variable to cover is C, which stands for Civil Considerations and is sometimes improperly stated as Civilian Considerations.
The Marine Corps has yet to formally adopt the “C” of METT-TC and is still using METT-T as recent as 2023 publications. Factors within civil considerations are detailed in Marine Corps publications, yet the “C” is still left off the larger acronym. Meanwhile, the US Army has adopted “C” since 2001 and, as of 2022, has formally added one more variable, (I). We will touch on the newest addition as we wrap up this article.
ASCOPE: Areas | Structures | Capabilities | Organizations | People | Events
Within Civil Considerations, we have another acronym to dig into: ASCOPE. You will likely encounter ASCOPE in various military publications, online articles, and even longer-form YouTube videos anytime missions or operations among a civilian population are discussed. As with all the elements in METT-TC, the intel field will have the most robust understanding, so going straight to the source is always a good idea if you want to dig deeper into this topic. If you like saying “Hooah” ironically or unironically, check out the US Army’s ATP 2-01.3 Intelligence Preparation of the Operation Environment (IPOE). For the Marine Corps flavor (crayon), reference MCRP 2-10B.1 Intelligence Preparation of the Battlespace (IPB).
Here is my brief overview of each letter of ASCOPE through the lens of a former infantryman, not an intel analyst.
AREAS
Define the area and determine if smaller areas can be divided ethnically, politically, functionally, or by religion and how each population regards your unit. This can help dictate the amount or type of force that will be effective in each area and how your actions will impact that population’s perception of you – if at all.
STRUCTURES
Are there cultural sites that should be avoided? Are there buildings that serve as a symbol to the surrounding community? Do certain structures control the proliferation of information? Key structures for the population would be hospitals, schools, and religious sites. It would be wise to give those structures a wide berth if you are concerned about maintaining a good standing with the locals. Also, consider infrastructure such as bridges, dams, and power plants, as these structures are typically critical to a region’s economy.
CAPABILITIES
Per the US Army, you are assessing the civil capabilities that save life, sustain life, and enhance life (in this order). Save life would be the ability of your local first responders, how long their response time is, and where they must take you to receive a higher echelon of care if needed. Sustain life could be water and food sources in the area. Enhance life could be public access areas such as parks, community centers, etc. If you are seeking to gain favor with the local population, ensuring you know each of these capabilities so you can assist in keeping each functioning would be a smart move.
ORGANIZATIONS
What non-military groups are in this area of operations (AO)? What are their activities, capabilities, and limitations? Are they friendly to you? What is their influence on the local population? Ultimately, can any of these organizations affect your mission, and what is the likelihood that they may? If it isn’t immediately obvious, there is no need to spend extra time analyzing them. Let the intel nerds (respectfully) spend their time on that.
PEOPLE
These are key people inside and outside the AO who influence people inside the AO. It could be a politician, an influencer, a celebrity, or a religious leader. If you can identify these people and their disposition toward you, you may be able to leverage their influence on the rest of the population, or at least those they influence.
EVENTS
Are there any events occurring during the same time as your mission that may affect your mission? This could be everything from a voting day to a concert or sporting event. What are the times of these events, where are the events being held, and what are the main routes to and from these events?
I must stress that using ASCOPE to make a list is not the essence of what it seeks to accomplish. You are looking for elements within ASCOPE that may impact or influence your mission. You likely won’t have the time or resources to make a giant list and analyze each element. I realize this point can be a little confusing since you may ask how you are supposed to identify if certain factors are important to your mission without doing some research. This is the conundrum of ASCOPE, and I would argue that it is one of the first considerations to skip if time is not on your side. It is a heavy analytical task, but it will only help you build a clearer picture of your environment if you have the time.
PMESII: Political | Military | Economic | Social | Information | Infrastructure
ASCOPE can be used independently, but to take it to the next level, it can be put in a matrix with another acronym, PMESII. PMESII is typically used to describe Operational Environment variables and stands for Political, Military, Economic, Social, Information, Infrastructure.
When combining ASCOPE and PMESII into a matrix, it will look something like this:
Based on the MCCMOS Circular 3.2—Civil Preparation of the Battlefield, Figure 1-2 (p. 16).
I highly recommend watching the S2 Underground video on ASCOPE/PMESII for a far better treatment of this topic. The video is absolutely worth your time, and even if you don’t watch the whole thing, at least skip to the end, where this whole process is critically analyzed. Long story short, just because the US Military has written about this doesn’t mean it is a good or useful tool for you and your situation. This bit of doctrine was mostly built out in response to combatting insurgencies in urban areas, and it is entirely possible that you would be better served as a civilian by conducting an area study instead, which already answers most of the questions within Civil Considerations. As long as you don’t move to a new area, your area study will remain relevant for a long time.
Informational Considerations (METT-TC(I))
Now let’s briefly touch on (I), which stands for informational considerations. As of 2022, the US Army’s newest version of METT-TC is now METT-TC(I). Yes, the I is in parenthesis. From what I can gather, it is in parenthesis because it isn’t to be considered as a separate mission variable, but instead, it is a consideration you should apply as you work through METT-TC. Now that everyone has a recording device in their pocket, you cannot underestimate the impact of how information can be used against you via propaganda, social media, mainstream media outlets, etc. One interesting way I have heard this consideration summed up is as you work through each variable of METT-TC, you should think of how it would look to the general population if each phase of your mission were filmed and posted online (because it probably will be). The obvious conclusion would be to exercise stealth and low visibility and avoid being documented whenever possible. However, diversions, distractions, and feints should be strongly considered with this consideration in mind as they could potentially be even more effective if carried out correctly and amplified to a larger audience.
As far as I can find, the (I) of METT-TC receives most of its coverage in FM 5-0 Planning and Orders Production, and in my opinion, the publication does little to explain it. Examples of applying this consideration to each variable would be nice, but I have yet to come across any definitive source with that information. My understanding of (I) was furthered via Episode 33 of the Breaking Doctrine podcast. If you go so far as to listen to that episode or read the associated Army publications, I will leave it up to you to determine if the Army is currently explaining how to incorporate (I) into METT-TC effectively.
Admittedly, the “C” in METT-TC is not in my wheelhouse. During my time in the Marines, we treated Civil Considerations as an afterthought. It was common to hear a briefing that went something like, “There are no civilians in the area, so there are no civil considerations to brief.” I’m not saying this is good or bad, right or wrong, but that’s just the way it went. Your experience may vary.
As I stated at the beginning, I hope you, the reader, gleaned some valuable information from this article series, and as always, if you have any questions or would like to provide your two cents on the topic, shoot an email to [email protected].