FAS

Joint Chiefs Urge “Due Diligence” in Targeting the Enemy

11.15.16 | 2 min read | Text by Steven Aftergood

The proper selection and validation of enemy targets in war is a critical function for military planners and intelligence analysts. Errors can result in horrific civilian casualties and may also be strategically counterproductive.

“In extreme cases, failure to exercise due diligence in target development can result in outcomes that have negative strategic repercussions for the United States and its allies,” a newly disclosed Pentagon manual on targeting acknowledges (in bold type).

Procedures for correctly identifying and approving targets are described in the manual. See Target Development Standards, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Instruction 3370.01B, 230 pages, 6 May 2016 (Unclassified, For Official Use Only).

A target is “an entity or object that performs a function for the adversary considered for possible engagement or other action,” the manual explains.

“Targets fall into one of five target types: facility, individual, virtual, equipment, or organization.”

“Examples include POL [petroleum, oil or lubricant] or PWR [electric power] sites (facilities), the chief accountant of a terrorist group (individual), a Web site (virtual), mobile radar (equipment), or a motorized infantry brigade (organization).”

“A terrorist network is the adversary, not a target. A front company (an entity) that ships lethal aid (a function) for the terrorist network (the adversary) would be a target.”

“Collateral effects are unintentional or incidental adverse consequences of target engagement. Such effects are not unlawful so long as it is not excessive in light of the overall military advantage anticipated from the engagement.”

“While all targets are entities, not all entities in the battlespace are valid targets. To be validated as a target, the function of the entity must be tied to commander’s objectives (operationally relevant) and meet Law of War (LOW) requirements,” the manual notes.

The manual applies to the Department of Defense and the military services. It does not govern lethal operations by the Central Intelligence Agency.

publications
See all publications
Emerging Technology
Blog
International Collaboration to Strengthen Domestic Critical Minerals Efforts

As Congress considers broader packages to advance critical minerals production and supply chain resilience, science diplomacy vehicles must be part of that conversation, not as an afterthought, but as an intentional and foundational pillar of any strategy.

07.24.26 | 5 min read
read more
Emerging Technology
Policy Statement
Endorsement of the Strategic Technology and Resilient Alliances Act

“Structured partnerships with our allies on critical minerals innovation can ensure that the best science and the best talent are working together towards shared security and economic prosperity.”

07.24.26 | 1 min read
read more
Emerging Technology
Policy Statement
Pass S.3306/H.R.2985 – Modernizing Government Technology Reform Act

This is a bipartisan, commonsense measure to reauthorize the Technology Modernization Fund (TMF) before it expires in September 2026.

07.23.26 | 1 min read
read more
Emerging Technology
New Jersey, Virginia Can Lead the Nation By Building ‘AI Resilience Cohorts’ to Develop Early-Career, State Talent Pipelines

Many states are introducing AI policies and task forces, but lack the “AI-native” personnel to build and maintain initiatives. To address this in the short term, states should establish AI Resilience Cohorts to embed early-career technologists in key offices to support state AI initiatives. Right now, Virginia and New Jersey have the opportunity to take […]

07.22.26 | 7 min read
read more