[SOLUTION] Russian Cyber Strategy

RESEARCH PAPER TOPIC SELECTION Overview Following the guidance given in the syllabus, lesson packets, and this note, you will write and submit a 15-20 page (not including cover pages, bibliography, appendices, diagrams, figures, and other support material), double-spaced, 12 point Times New Roman font research paper for 45 percent of your grade on a subject approved by the instructor. Note: The syllabus says 20-25 pages, which is incorrect. You have latitude in choosing your topic, but the subject of the paper must be consistent with the themes of this course. See the attached lists for recommended topics and topics not recommended for this course. There is a document with guidance at the end of this assignment, but note that it says 1.5 spaced…your paper should be double-spaced. For your topic, you must choose a specific intelligence operation or covert operation (or a series of related operations) and assess its success and/or failure and the reasons for the success and/or failure. Note: IT MUST BE A SPECIFIC OPERATION. Do NOT pick something like “Russian Cyber Strategy”. For the purposes of this class, we define intelligence operations as all intelligence activities that are part of the conduct of policy. In other words, it is policy action conducted by the state through institutions that possess intelligence functions. More specifically, intelligence operations will define intelligence as action, more offensive, and less defensive. It includes political action, covert and clandestine operations, counterintelligence and counterespionage, influence and deception operations, counterterrorism, and related surreptitious activities performed by the state to pursue its conception of the national interest (See Lesson 1 for more details). For this assignment, you must: 1. Read and consider the readings and links provided. 2. Select a topic suitable for the class that you would like to know more about, that is researchable, and that can lead to the development of an effective research question and thesis. 3. Write a paragraph on it. NOT MORE THAN A PAGE. This particular assignment can be informal…but subsequent assignments are expected to be formal papers. 4. Provide a properly formatted reference list for preliminary sources. Here are some places and topics where you can consider (there are plenty more). However, keep in mind that not everything called an “operation” is an intelligence operation as defined in this class. Some of them are plain military actions. Click on the links below: With regard to success or failure, that can be determined based on the criteria that you determine most appropriate for the case. There are a number of ways to evaluate the cases. Consider the approaches mentioned in Meharg (2009), as well as the applicability of the national interest as discussed in Neuchterlein (2001). Please note that you do not have to state your evaluation criteria for the topic selection. However, you will have to consider it for the research design. This also applies to research methods. To achieve your goal you should develop a research question that can lead you to a suitable thesis. Make sure to review the documents posted in the other assignments. They will provide you further guidance. Here is a list of suggested topics: 1. The Nosenko/Golitsyn defector dilemma. 2. Operation OCTAVE FUSION 3. Operation Guardian Enable (https://defensesystems.com/articles/2011/03/30/afcea-industry-days-howell-guardian-enable.aspx) 4. British GHCQ Operations in WWII 5. Operation Able Archer 83/Soviet Operation RYAN. RYAN (???) (NATO exercise which nearly caused WWIII) 6. Operation Last Chance http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2074088/Last-chance-bid-famous-nazi-hunting-centre-round-surviving-war-criminals.html#ixzz1pltB5TJR 7. The Vitaly Yurchenko defection and redefection. 8. O.S.S. Operational Groups in WWII (http://usacac.army.mil/CAC2/MilitaryReview/Archives/English/MilitaryReview_20130831_art008.pdf) 9. Operation Blue Star and the Assassination of Indira Gandhi 10. Operation Jawbreaker (CIA First-in Team in Afghanistan after 9/11) 11. Intelligence factors leading up to the 1973 Arab-Israeli War 12. Operation Seat 12 (KGB Disinformation Operation against the Vatican) 13. Operation Field Manual 30-31B (KGB Disinformation operation designed to falsely Implicate the CIA in the assassination of Italian Prime Minister Aldo Moro 14. FSB Cyber and Disinformation Operations against Estonia (including Bronze Night) 15. Operation Praying Mantis (U.S. Naval Operation Against Iran) 16. Assassination of Fathi Shaqaqi (Mossad Operation in Malta) 17. BCCI, Bank of Credit and Commerce International, and its connection to Saudi Intelligence. 18. Northern Iraq Liaison Element (NILE) Joint CIA, Special Activities Group and JSOC team early entry into Iraq (Defeating Ansar al-Islam and capturing the chemical weapons facility at Sargat) 19. Soviet Use of Assassination and Kidnapping (https://www.cia.gov/library/center-for-the-study-of-intelligence/kent-csi/vol19no3/html/v19i3a01p_0001.htm) 20. The FBI, Counterproliferation and Weapons of Mass Destruction http://www.fbi.gov/about-us/investigate/terrorism/wmd 21. CIA Counterinsurgency operations in the Philippines (http://www.statecraft.org/chapter4.html) 22. Counter-insurgency operations in Iraq or Afghanistan and the Petraeus Doctrine http://www.fas.org/irp/doddir/army/fm3-24.pdf 23. Stasi operations in East Germany 24. SDECE, BRGE, ANSSI – French Intelligence organization operations 25. NSA Clandestine Surveillance Operations in Vietnam, the Philippines, Iraq, or Afghanistan, etc. 26. West German (historical) or modern German Intelligence organization operations. 27. The Romanian Securitate, and its historical operations. 28. Cuban Intelligence (DGI) operations against the United States. 29. The Soviet (KGB) or Russian (FSB) illegal Rezidentura program. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Resident_spy) 30. Operations in Pakistan’s Federated Autonomous Tribal Area 31. U.S./I.S.I. relations in Pakistan. 32. Narco-Terrorism in Afghanistan, along the Silk Road, or in Latin America. (A SPECIFIC operation). 33. Russian cyber operations against the Georgian Republic prior to and during the South Ossetia Campaign (http://smallwarsjournal.com/blog/journal/docs-temp/639-hollis.pdf) 34. Chinese Cyber Operations http://www.tripwire.com/state-of-security/top-security-stories/report-chinese-cyber-espionage-operations-expanding/ 35. Russian Cyber Operations https://www.us-cert.gov/sites/default/files/publications/JAR_16-20296A_GRIZZLY%20STEPPE-2016-1229.pdf and http://www.defenseone.com/technology/2014/04/why-ukraine-has-already-lost-cyberwar-too/83350/ Here is a list of topics which should NOT be chosen for this course. 1. Operation PBSUCCESS (The Arbenz overthrow in Guatemala) 2. Operation AJAX (the overthrow of Mohammed Mossadegh in Iran) 3. Operation OVERLORD and the associated deception operations (Invasion of Normandy, WWII), Operation FRANKTON (British WWII) 4. Operation FORTITUDE/BODYGUARD (D-Day deception operations) 5. Operation MINCEMEAT (Another deception operation connected to the Allied Invasion of Europe); Operation TORCH (Allied invasion of North Africa) 6. Operation ANTHROPOID (The Assassination of Reihardt Heydrich, Protector of Czechoslovakia) 7. Operation GRAND SLAM (The U-2 Program and the Francis Gary Powers shoot-down over the U.S.S.R.) 8. Operation WRATH OF GOD (The Israeli assassination operation against the murderers of the Olympic Athletes). 9. OPERATION DIAMOND (the Israeli Acquisition of the Soviet MIG-21 Fighter Jet) 10. Operation SPRING OF YOUTH (A sub-operation connected to WRATH OF GOD) 11. Operation DAMOCLES (Israeli operation against former Nazi scientists working in Egypt) 12. Operation MKULTRA, Project BLUEBIRD/MK ARTICHOKE, (CIA Mind control and drug experiments) 13. Operation MKCHAOS (CIA domestic spying program during the Vietnam War) 14. Operation NEPTUNE SPEAR (the capture/execution of Osama bin Laden) 15. Operation EAGLE CLAW (the failed Iran Hostage rescue mission) 16. The Canadian Caper (ARGO – U.S. Embassy personnel exfiltration operation in Iran) 17. Operation CONDOR (US Aid to Latin American Dictatorships) 18. Operation CYCLONE (U.S. Assistance to the Mujahedeen in Afghanistan) 19. Operation GOTHIC SERPENT/Code IRENE (Blackhawk Down in the popular parlance) 20. Operation AZOREAN (the Glomar Explorer’s raising of Soviet Submarine K-129) 21. Operation FUBELT (Track I, Track II, and the overthrow of Salvadore Allende in Chile) 22. Operation IVY BELLS (NSA program to tap Soviet Communication lines in the Sea of Ohotsk) 23. Operation FAST AND FURIOUS (The attempted infiltration of the Mexican Drug cartels through weapons sales.) 24. Operation JUST CAUSE (U.S. Invasion of Panama) 25. The Assassination of Mahmoud Al Mahbouh in Dubai 26. VENONA as a historical project (i.e. you could do David Greenglass or Klaus Fuchs but not VENONA per se). 27. Any cases we have done in class, for details, see below, Since we already cover the following topics in detail in class, they also are NOT suitable subjects for a term paper: 1. Operation ZAPATA (the Bay of Pigs Invasion) 2. The assassination of Patrice Lumumba 3. Operation GOLD (the Berlin Tunnel Operation) 4. Counter-Intelligence cases on Ames, Hansson or Philby 5. The Iran-Contra Affair (It is too complex for our time frame beyond the cursory look we give it) 6. The assassination of Ahmed Shah Masoud by Al Qaeda List of References Meharg, Sarah Jane. 2009. “Measuring Effectiveness in Complex Operations: What is Good Enough?” Prepared for the Canadian Defence & Foreign Affairs Institute, Calgary, AB. https://d3n8a8pro7vhmx.cloudfront.net/cdfai/pages/41/attachments/original/1413661732/Measuring_Effectiveness_in_Complex_Operations.pdf?1413661732 Nuechterlein, Donald E. 2001. “Defining U.S. National Interests: An Analytical Framework.” In America Recommitted: A Superpower Assesses Its Role in a Turbulent World, by Donald E. Neuchterlein. Lexington: University Press of Kentucky Second assignment Assignment Instructions RESEARCH PROPOSAL TEMPLATE This assignment seeks to help you properly focus and plan your work to minimize wasted effort or academic blunders. Use this template to complete your research proposal worth 10 percent of your grade. All written submissions must be readable and neat. Students must use a consistent format to include the following: • Typewritten in double-spaced, in a scholarly writing style, free from errors in spelling, punctuation, grammar, diction, and English usage. • Times New Roman 12-point font, • One inch margins (top, bottom, sides), • Use parenthetical citations and author-date references, not footnotes. Follow Chicago/Turabian Style Manuals’ parenthetical (or author-date) system – refer to the APUS On-Line Library for more information. • A total of five (5) pages. Please disregard any other instructions you may see regarding the length of the proposal for assignment #2. Your proposal for assignment #2 should NOT BE MORE THAN 7 PAGES. DUE: On Week Four, students will submit a research proposal including a research question, a thesis, and evaluation criteria. The proposal shall include six properly formatted sources, at least two of which must be peer-reviewed. Lastly, please name your proposal as follows: lastname.first.intl507.proposal.doc In addition to the template and the guidance provided below, I have attached an actual example of a sample research proposal completed for this course. Sample Research Proposal (see next page) RESEARCH PROPOSAL: WITH A TITLE BASED ON TOPIC Generic Student Smith INTL 507 – Intelligence Operations April 1, 201X Introduction – The topic must lend itself to the formulation of a research question about which reasonable people disagree. You must be able to develop a research question that does not have a yes/no or fact based answer. The question must also lead to the formulation of a causal explanation, not just a narrative. It should help you in the development of a suitable thesis. In your search for topics, make sure that you can research it based on the resources available. This includes the web, the APUS online library and any other resources at your disposal. It should be a topic that you can realistically research in seven weeks. Lastly, ensure that you are familiar with the methods needed to perform the research. You can visit the APUS Library study guide for the Intelligence Studies or National Security programs, or the one the INTL507 for topic ideas and research tools. You can also go here for some assistance in developing a topic. PROBLEM/RESEARCH QUESTION: Present a clear statement of the issue you will investigate. What is the specific research question that your study will address? What is the puzzle? A question that can help you find “problem” with your topic is “What is this an instance of?” This question intends to get you to the heart of the matter on a particular issue; something that is not always readily apparent. For assistance, you can visit the APUS library guide on how to develop a research question. SIGNIFICANCE OF THE STUDY – Delineate the significance of the problem, e.g., what knowledge will your research create, what gaps in our knowledge will it help fill, how the results may be applied to improve existing policy or procedures, etc. Why should we care? This is where you explain the “so what” of your work. THESIS STATEMENT: This is a concise articulation of your argument. It will lay out a basic roadmap of your paper. What do you propose as the answer to the research question? It must be logically connected to the research question. Here is an interesting link that can help you with this- https://explorable.com/how-to-write-a-hypothesis A NOTE ABOUT REVIEWED SOURCES: The issue of sources is significant for this class because a number of them are subject to significant criticism. This means that you should scrutinize your sources. You should start with books and peer review material (go to the following link for a quick overview of What does “peer-reviewed” mean?, or this one for some help on How do I find peer-reviewed journals or articles?). The APUS library can help you engage in effective Open Web Searching and Deep Web Searching. If you are not sure about the reliability of a source, there is a resource that can help you evaluate the sources you find. You can use the CRAAP test (see this library link for Evaluating Information – Applying the CRAAP Test)[‡]. Here is also a CRAAP Test Worksheet[§] to help you on that. Do not engage in a literature review for this assignment. That will be for the next assignment in week 6. In the meantime, you can visit the APUS guide for Writing a Literature Review. EVALUATION METHODS: In this section, you should discuss the methods or criteria that you intend to use to evaluate the case. As noted before, there are a number of ways to evaluate the cases. Consider the approaches mentioned in Meharg (2009), as well as the applicability to the national interest as discussed in Neuchterlein (2001). You can also use the criteria stated in Lesson 1: 1. What is the objective of the operation? Is there an overriding policy imperative or is it a mission to gain access to the adversary’s information? 2. What oversight or legal review occurred during the planning of the operation? Was this oversight useful? 3. Who or which organization is accountable for the operation? What turf issues arose prior to, or during the operation? 4. What resources were necessary to successfully carry out the operation? Were these resources available and were they placed in support of the operation? 5. What is the cost/benefit analysis of this operation? Weigh the risks of the operation, especially if/when the operation is exposed publicly. 6. In evaluating the operation, what objectives were achieved and what unintended consequences occurred? You can also visit the APUS guide on Research Methods. It will provide you more substantive information. Since most of you will use qualitative methods for this piece, you should visit the APUS guide on such methods. The library also provides tips and resources for Writing a Qualitative Research Report, including a Style Guides section. Lastly, look at the bibliography provided at the end of this assignment for useful sources. REFERENCES: List your references using Chicago Style Manual parenthetical author-date system (see APUS On-Line Library for more information). Make sure to use a hanging indent for references. Here are a few citation examples: (García Márquez 1988, 242–55) (Kelly 2010, 77) (Weinstein 2009, 440; Stolberg and Pear 2010) Here are some reference examples: García Márquez, Gabriel. 1988. Love in the Time of Cholera. Translated by Edith Grossman. London: Cape. Kelly, John D. 2010. “Seeing Red: Mao Fetishism, Pax Americana, and the Moral Economy of War.” In Anthropology and Global Counterinsurgency, edited by John D. Kelly, Beatrice Jauregui, Sean T. Mitchell, and Jeremy Walton, 67–83. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. Weinstein, Joshua I. 2009. “The Market in Plato’s Republic.” Classical Philology 104:439–58. Stolberg, Sheryl Gay, and Robert Pear. 2010. “Wary Centrists Posing Challenge in Health Care Vote.” New York Times, February 27. Accessed February 28, 2010. http://www.nytimes.com/2010/02/28/us/politics/28health.html. If you have a problem finding the proper format for references, you can go to https://www.library.georgetown.edu/tutorials/research-guides/turabian-paren-guide https://owl.english.purdue.edu/owl/section/2/ http://www.tntemple.edu/application/files/Seminary%20docs/Turabian_Tutor_8th_ed_TTU_5.15.14.pdf (This link only works if you copy and paste it into a new window in your browser.) This link will take you to complete Chicago Manual of Style via the APUS library: http://www.chicagomanualofstyle.org.ezproxy2.apus.edu/tools_citationguide.html List of References Bose, Ranjit. 2008. “Competitive Intelligence Process and Tools for Intelligence Analysis.” Industrial Management and Data Systems 108: 510-528. Cooper, Jeffrey R. 2005. Curing Analytic Pathologies: Pathways to Improved Intelligence Analysis. Center for the Study of Intelligence. https://www.cia.gov/library/center-for-the-study-of-intelligence/csi-publications/books-and-monographs/curing-analytic-pathologies-pathways-to-improved-intelligence-analysis-1/analytic_pathologies_report.pdf George, Alexander. 1979. “Case Studies and Theory Development: The Method of Structured, Focused Comparison,” in Diplomacy: New Approaches in History, Theory and Policy. Paul Gordon Lauren, Ed. NY: Free Press. —– and Andrew Bennett. 2005. Case Studies and Theory Development in the Social Sciences. Cambridge: MIT Press. Goertz, Gary. 2006. Social Science Concepts: A User’s Guide. Princeton: Princeton University Press. —– and James Mahoney, 2005. “Two-level Theories and Fuzzy Logic.” Sociological Methods & Research 33(4)(May): 497-538. —– 2006. “Concepts in Theories: Two-Level Theories” in Social Science Concepts: A User’s Guide. Gary Goertz, Ed. Princeton: Princeton University Press. Heuer, Richards J. Jr. 1999. Psychology of Intelligence Analysis. Center for the Study of Intelligence. https://www.cia.gov/library/center-for-the-study-of-intelligence/csi-publications/books-and-monographs/psychology-of-intelligence-analysis/PsychofIntelNew.pdf Honig, Arthur. 2007. “A New Direction for Theory-Building in Intelligence Studies.” International Journal of Intelligence and Counterintelligence: 699-716. Landon-Murray, Michael. 2011. “Social Science and Intelligence Analysis: The Role of Intelligence Education.” Journal of Applied Security Research: 491-528. Lijphart, Arend. 1971. “Comparative Politics and the Comparative Method.” The American Political Science Review 65(3)(Sep.): 682-693. Mahoney, James. 1999. “Nominal, Ordinal, and Narrative Appraisal in Macro-causal Analysis.” American Journal of Sociology 104: 154-96. —– and Dietrich Rueschemeyer. 2003. Comparative-Historical Analysis in the Social Sciences. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Marrin, Stephen. 2012. “Is Intelligence Analysis an Art or Science?” International Journal of Intelligence and CounterIntelligence: 529-545. Meharg, Sarah Jane. 2009. “Measuring Effectiveness in Complex Operations: What is Good Enough?” Prepared for the Canadian Defence & Foreign Affairs Institute, Calgary, AB. http://www.cdfai.org/PDF/Measuring%20Effectiveness%20in%20Complex%20Operations.pdf Moore, Will. 2001. Evaluating Theory in Political Science. Tallahassee: Florida State University. Nuechterlein, Donald E. 2001. “Defining U.S. National Interests: An Analytical Framework.” In America Recommitted: A Superpower Assesses Its Role in a Turbulent World, by Donald E. Neuchterlein. Lexington: University Press of Kentucky. Przeworski, Adam and Henry Teune. 1970. The Logic of Comparative Social Inquiry. NY: Wiley-Interscience. Svendsen, Adam. 2009. “Connecting Intelligence and Theory: Intelligence Liaison and International Relations.” Intelligence and National Security (24)(5)(October): 700-729. Turabian, Kate. 2007. A Manual for Writers of Research Papers, Theses, and Dissertations, 7th Ed. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. Yin, Robert K. 2009. Case Study Research: Design and Methods, 4th Ed. Thousand Oaks: Sage. [*] This is a website with DOC links from the University of Oregon’s Teaching and Learning Center. [†] Please note that “literature” is not the same as “literary.” In this context, the term relates to relevant works that have engaged in peer-reviewed analysis of the subject. It is not about works of fiction. [‡] Material provided by the CSU at Chico Library. [§] Handout provided by the Juniata College Library. • http://guides.library.cornell.edu/scholarlyjournals (1 KB) • 507.Research.Paper.Proposal.Template (1).docx (34 KB) Sample research • Running head: DTO’S INTELLIGENCE OPERATIONS 1 • Drug Trafficking Organizations’ Intelligence Operations Research Proposal • DTO’S INTELLIGENCE OPERATIONS 2 • Drug Trafficking Organizations’ Intelligence Operations Research Proposal • Over the last decade, drug trafficking organizations (DTOs; i.e. cartels) have grown increasingly violent, resourceful, and more difficult to combat. Many Mexican cities, to include tourist havens such as Acapulco, have become urban battlefields in the drug war between rival cartels and with state security forces. In the midst of this organized crime-fueled warzone, the various DTOs now control, large swaths of territory and have become for all intents and purposes the police, military, and government of their own independent narco-states. • The proposed topic of this research paper is to discuss the intelligence capabilities and operations of DTOs, and how it affects the counter-narcotics strategy of the US and its partner states. This case study will focus on Mexican DTOs, predominately the Los Zetas Cartel, and the specific challenges they present because of their increasing intelligence capabilities. To address this, the research will view DTOs not in the traditional manner as a transnational criminal organization or non-state actor but in the context of the aforementioned narco-state. The asymmetrical approach of this study should put into contrast how extensive and effective the DTOs’ intelligence networks are, and how they are comparable or even rival those of some true nation-states. • The information gap this study seeks to fill is examining the intelligence operations and capabilities of DTOs in the same or similar context as one might view an adversarial state, and how this affects the US and partner states’ abilities to combat these criminal organizations. There has been some academic research on how the cartels have begun aggressively recruiting multi-national special operations, security service, and police personnel for the purpose of not just protecting their organization but also being more regionally influential on both a business and political level. There has not, however, been much research outside of government publications and internal communications addressing the active and passive operational intelligence methods used by the cartels and their comparative capabilities to the states trying to combat them. This study will seek to fill this information gap by putting the intelligence capabilities and operations undertaken by DTOs in the context of the cartels being the equivalent to small, well-funded, states, and how this affects current counter-narcotics strategies. The intended thesis statement for the proposed study is: “The intelligence operational capabilities of drug trafficking organizations rivals that of many developing nations, particularly the ones in • DTO’S INTELLIGENCE OPERATIONS 3 • which they occupy, and presents the same strategic challenges to combat for the US and partner nations as any traditional adversarial state”. Outlined below is how the intelligence operations undertaken by the cartels can be equated to that of an intelligence or security service of a small yet well-funded rogue state; similar models have been used in the recent past in non-academic forums to examine the capabilities and do a comparative study of politically influential terrorist non-state actors such as Hezbollah, Hamas and the Islamic State. • The different intelligence operation elements to be examined in greater detail and equated to the capabilities of the United States Intelligence Community (IC) are HUMINT (Human- source Intelligence), SIGINT (Signals Intelligence), CYBINT (Cyber Intelligence), Counterintelligence, and covert action. Under the category of HUMINT, traditional trains of thought associated with organized crime such as corruption, blackmail and torture will be replaced with terminology such as recruitment, elicitation and exploitation of assets. Electronic surveillance and collection methods remain largely unchanged by comparison, but the study will show the level of sophistication and unrestricted capabilities of the DTOs that sometimes surpasses those of many developing states. CYBINT is important because it is one of the collection disciplines where a DTO can much more easily be on a level playing field as a technologically advanced state and not have to invest a great deal of resources to do so; also the use of social media for exploitation of OSINT (Open-Source Intelligence) as well as recruitment of new members and HUMINT assets will be discussed in the study. The utilization of intelligence collection operations by DTOs is largely for the purpose of Counterintelligence to protect their business and organization, particularly its senior members, from rival criminal organizations and state security services; this portion of the study will highlight how the cartels specifically aim to undermine US and partner nations’ intelligence operations against them. Finally, many of the more brutal, violent and divisive tactics, techniques and procedures (TTPs) employed by the cartels will be put into context as it could be equated to covert action (propaganda/information warfare, political and economic manipulation, and paramilitary activities), and how it is integral to the protection strategy of DTOs. • In conclusion, this study will discuss the various intelligence-related TTPs of Mexican drug trafficking organizations, predominately the Los Zetas Cartel, and how their capabilities present a unique challenge to current counter-narcotics strategy. The research will serve to fill an information gap that currently exists on the subject by putting the capabilities and operational • DTO’S INTELLIGENCE OPERATIONS 4 • framework utilized by the cartels into a similar context that one would use in assessing an adversarial state as opposed to a non-state actor. This will be done by putting criminal activities such as bribery, blackmail, torture, and assassinations into intelligence field-craft terminology like recruitment, elicitation, coercion, and covert action, as well as comparing the employment of discipline like CYBINT and SIGINT by the DTOs. This should adequately demonstrate the relative comparison between the employment and proficiencies of DTOs in intelligence operations as one might find in a minor state will vast resources, and the challenges this presents to the US and cooperative partners in the current counter-narcotics strategies. • DTO’S INTELLIGENCE OPERATIONS • 5 • References • Burton, Fred. 2006. “Mexico’s Cartel Wars: The Threat beyond the U.S. Border.” Stratfor. Last modified October 26, 2006. https://www.stratfor.com/analysis/mexicos-cartel-wars- threat-beyond-us-border. • Campbell, Lisa J. 2010. “Los Zetas: Operational Assessment.” Small Wars & Insurgencies 21, no. 1 (March 2010): 55-80. • http://www.tandfonline.com.ezproxy1.apus.edu/doi/abs/10.1080/09592310903561429#a HR0cDovL3d3dy50YW5kZm9ubGluZS5jb20uZXpwcm94eTEuYXB1cy5lZHUvZG9pL 3BkZi8xMC4xMDgwLzA5NTkyMzEwOTAzNTYxNDI5QEBAMA==. • DEA. 2009. Assessment of “Los Zetas” Evolution and Expansion (2001-2009). Drug Enforcement Administration, 2009. http://nsarchive.gwu.edu/NSAEBB/NSAEBB499/DOCUMENT08-20090700ca.PDF. • DEA. 2010. Los Zetas Fact Sheet. Drug Enforcement Administration, 2010. http://nsarchive.gwu.edu/NSAEBB/NSAEBB499/DOCUMENT11-20100200ca.PDF. • DIA. 2005. Los Zetas Using Kaibiles to Train New Members. Defense Intelligence Agency, 2005. http://nsarchive.gwu.edu/NSAEBB/NSAEBB499/DOCUMENT03-20051107.PDF. • DOS. 2010. Narcotics Affairs Section Mexico Monthly Report for March 2010. US Embassy, Mexico | Department of State, 2010. http://nsarchive.gwu.edu/NSAEBB/NSAEBB499/DOCUMENT16-20100416.PDF. • DOS. 2010. Civilian Law Enforcement Outmatched by the Cartels; the Public Frustrated in the Search for Solutions. US Consulate, Monterrey | Department of State, 2010. http://nsarchive.gwu.edu/NSAEBB/NSAEBB499/DOCUMENT18-20100521.PDF. • FBI. 2005. Los Zetas: An Emerging Threat to the United States. Federal Bureau of Investigation, 2005. http://nsarchive.gwu.edu/NSAEBB/NSAEBB499/DOCUMENT02-20050715.pdf. • FBI. 2005. Los Zetas; ITAR – Violent Gangs. Federal Bureau of Investigation, 2005. http://nsarchive.gwu.edu/NSAEBB/NSAEBB499/DOCUMENT01-20050422.PDF. • Nagle, Luz E. 2010. “Corruption of Politicians, Law Enforcement, and the Judiciary in Mexico and Complicity across the Border.” Small Wars & Insurgencies 21, no. 1 (March 2010): 95-122. http://www.tandfonline.com.ezproxy1.apus.edu/doi/abs/10.1080/09592310903561544#a HR0cDovL3d3dy50YW5kZm9ubGluZS5jb20uZXpwcm94eTEuYXB1cy5lZHUvZG9pL 3BkZi8xMC4xMDgwLzA5NTkyMzEwOTAzNTYxNTQ0QEBAMA==. • Olson, Eric L., David A. Shirk, and Andrew Selee. 2010. Shared Responsibility: U.S.-Mexico Policy for Confronting Organized Crime. Mexico Institute – Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars & Trans-Border Institute University of San Diego, 2010. • DTO’S INTELLIGENCE OPERATIONS 6 • http://catcher.sandiego.edu/items/peacestudies/Shared%20Responsibility– Olson,%20Shirk,%20Selee.pdf#page=74. • Sullivan, John P., and Adam Elkus. 2008. “State of Siege: Mexico’s Criminal Insurgency.” Small Wars Journal. Last modified 2008. http://www.smallwarsjournal.com. • Turbiville Jr., Graham H. 2010. “Firefights, Raids, and Assassinations: Tactical Forms of Cartel Violence and Their Underpinnings.” Small Wars & Insurgencies 21, no. 1 (March 2010): 123-144. http://www.tandfonline.com.ezproxy1.apus.edu/doi/abs/10.1080/09592310903561577#a HR0cDovL3d3dy50YW5kZm9ubGluZS5jb20uZXpwcm94eTEuYXB1cy5lZHUvZG9pL 3BkZi8xMC4xMDgwLzA5NTkyMzEwOTAzNTYxNTc3QEBAMA==. • Vavich, Nicholas P. 2013. “Mexican Cartels: Threat and Response.” Master’s thesis, US Army War College, 2013. • “Viewing Mexican Cartel Corruption with a Counterintelligence Lens.” Stratfor. Last modified July 22, 2015. https://www.stratfor.com/analysis/viewing-mexican-cartel-corruption- counterintelligence-lens. • Womer, Sarah, and Robert J. Bunker. 2010. “Sureños Gangs and Mexican Cartel Use of Social Networking Sites.” Small Wars & Insurgencies 21, no. 1 (March 2010): 81-94. http://www.tandfonline.com.ezproxy1.apus.edu/doi/abs/10.1080/09592310903561486#a HR0cDovL3d3dy50YW5kZm9ubGluZS5jb20uZXpwcm94eTEuYXB1cy5lZHUvZG9pL 3BkZi8xMC4xMDgwLzA5NTkyMzEwOTAzNTYxNDg2QEBAMA==. • Zarriello, Emma, and David H. Gray. 2014. “The War against Public Enemy Number One: U.S. Miscalculations in Mexico’s War on Drugs.” Global Security Studies 5, no. 3: 1-11. International Security & Counter Terrorism Reference Center, EBSCOhost Third assignment In this assignment, you will add the literature review to you previous assignment. It should come after the purpose statement but before the evaluation methods section. You should undertake a comprehensive review of the literature on you

Order this solution Russian Cyber Strategy on our client site: gpafix.com

Don't use plagiarized sources. Get Your Custom Essay on
[SOLUTION] Russian Cyber Strategy
Just from $10/page
Order Essay