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
FAS
Article
Scaling Team Science is the Important Experiment We Need

X-Labs seek to expand on what FROs have shown is possible: the generation of foundational infrastructure for entire new fields of research science.

07.14.26 | 6 min read
read more
Government Capacity
Blog
An open letter to the new NYC PIT Crew

This is a tremendous opportunity to redefine what people expect from government, and in doing so, inspire cities across the country to raise their own ambitions. We are excited to see this initiative lead the way and look forward to cheering your success.

07.13.26 | 3 min read
read more
Government Capacity
Policy Memo
We Need a U.S. Permitting Corps: Executive and Legislative Recommendations

Despite significant political momentum behind reform efforts, limited attention has been paid to the federal workforce that will actually be responsible for interpreting and implementing new permitting regulations and better outcomes.

07.08.26 | 10 min read
read more
Environment
Press release
Amid Sweltering Weather, the Federation of American Scientists Releases Expert-Sourced “State and Local Heat Policy Agenda”

Nearly 150 organizations and government officials have endorsed the call to action and solutions for extreme heat, now public at HeatAgenda.US Washington, D.C. – July 7, 2026 – As millions of Americans continue to struggle to stay cool following one of the hottest Independence Day holidays on record, the Federation of American Scientists (FAS), one […]

07.07.26 | 3 min read
read more