The formation of the MI battalion in a U.S. Army heavy division brought a Military Intelligence commander of the same rank as the G2 into existence. The existence of two Military Intelligence lieutenant colonels in a heavy division has caused a number of problems that have not been adequately addressed by doctrine. None of the other battlefield operating systems have a battalion commander and staff officer of the same rank whose responsibilities are so intertwined. This paper examines whether a heavy division still requires a G2 and a MI battalion commander. Doctrinal guidance concerning the roles and functions of the G2 and MI battalion commander is vague and contradictory. This paper shows the disconnects and often confusing definitions used. The terms intelligence system and intelligence architecture which are often used synonymously and incorrectly in Military Intelligence Field Manuals are discussed and defined. This paper examines four options in structure and roles for the G2 and MI battalion commander. The obvious question is whether or not one individual can manage the intelligence system and should he be either a commander or a staff officer. Should MI create a Division Intelligence Coordinator (DIVINT) position modeled along the Fire Support Coordinator (FSCOORD) position in DIVARTY? Or with the increase in technology and connectivity, does the heavy division still require an MI battalion? Can the G2 manage the intelligence system with the assets assigned to the brigades? If both are still required, what is the best structure and accompanying roles and functions? Other than the current structure, a final alternative is to modify the current structure to leverage the MI battalion commander and to clearly define the roles and functions of the G2 and MI battalion commander. The four options are evaluated on the basis of better intelligence, practicality, training and unity of command and purpose. The paper concludes by determining that the heavy division does require a G2 and MI battalion commander but their roles should be modified for a more effective intelligence architecture and intelligence system. These new roles and functions along with structural changes are discussed.

ADA 366320 Approved for public release; Distribution is unlimited. The opinions and conclusions expressed herein are those of the student-authors and do not necessarily represent the views of the U.S. Army Command and General Staff College or any other governmental agency. (References to these studies should include the foregoing statement.)