1

NATO CAPABILITIES &

OPERATIONAL READINESS Post-ISAF

NATO UNCLASSIFIED

RESOURCES CONFERENCE @ Istanbul

October 2012

Patrick WOUTERS Brigadier General, BEL AF INTERNATIONAL MILITARY STAFF Plans and Policy Deputy Director

2

• The Security Environment ahead of us – Morphing nature of the Threat

– The POST-ISAF climate

• Scenarii & case studies for FUTURE OPS – Parameters & Military considerations

– The SCENARIO debate in favour versatile capabilities ?

– New Terms of the COERCION-equation

• Focus of OPERATIONAL Readiness ? – Future Alliance Military structures & Forces

• Features & challenges

• Future NCS & NFS HQs

• Outline Air C2

• Linkages J-ISR Architecture

• Conclusion & way ahead : the CONNECTED Forces Initiative

Morphing nature of the Threat

Virtual

Territorial Adapted from ACT input

SYMMETRIC

Front

Companies

Corrupt Members

of Legitimate Govt’s

Ideologically

opposing NGOs

Safe Havens

Religious

Recruitment,

Proselytizing,

Cyber / Internet

activists

Facilitators,

Smugglers

(Unregulated)

Financiers

(Suicide)

Training Camps

Media & Propaganda

Piracy, Narcotics,

Human Trafficking

BM+WMDs

Technical Expertise

Weapons Suppliers

IEDs Conventional

MILITARY Force

(an unknown combination of unknowns)

4

The POST – ISAF Climate

• Political & parliamentary climate deteriorated

– Economic austerity reflected in Defence budgets

• Military Establisments reconstituting

– Material fatigue • Partial recovery from AFG & PAK theatres

– Personnel levels & motivation • veteran battle stress & disorders

• Strategic re-alignments & unstable political allegiences

– US pivot to Asia-Pacific

– Resurgent RUSSIA

– Partners & partners • redefine security debitors vs creditors & concentrate on win-win sit’s

NATO UNCLASSIFIED

5

• similar to the project-triangle

• the defence-posture-triangle

Parameters of our future Defence Posture

NATO UNCLASSIFIED

TIME

QUALITY COST

PROJECT

SCOPE

READINESS

QUALITY QUANTITY

RESOURCES

REQUIRED

i.e. to protect against COERCION

COLLECTIVE DEFENCE

CRISIS RESPONSE OPERATIONS

6

Scenarii & case studies for FUTURE OPS Parameters & MILITARY considerations

• Classic Planning parameters categorise ...

– by NATO agreed Mission Types = 15

• High Intensity : CD – CT – PE – EOP

• Low Intensity : PK - CM – CP - ESE - SHA – DR AT - NEO – SCA - PM – PB

– by size (for NDPP use)

• Smaller Joint Ops - Major Joint Ops – MJO+

– through Generic Planning Situations

• aggregate MT defining End State – Objectives – Effects

– into Case Studies

• in context of GEOGRAPHICAL situations

• REAL (FUTURE) DIVIDING LINES

– NATO LEADING versus SUPPORTING

– NATO ‘ad hoc’ MISSIONS & TASKS

• CRISIS MANAGEMENT <> COMBAT <> POST-CONFLICT STAB & RECON

– LONG TERM & TERRITORIAL <> BRIEF & KINETIC <> REMOTE & VIRTUAL (sic)

• JOINT = yes, but ...

• LAND Heavy – MAR Heavy – AIR Heavy(i.e. NO-boots-on-the-ground) - CYBER – SPACE

NATO UNCLASSIFIED

High Intensity = Collective Defence Counter-Terrorism Peace Enforcement Extract OP Low Intensity = Peace Keeping Crisis Management Conflict Prevention Enforce Sanct Embargo Sp Hum Aid DisRelief Sp Implicit in NDPP = Anti-Terror Non-Combatant Extraction Ops Sp Civ Aid Peace Making Peace Building

7

SCENARIO debate should favour versatile (versus single use) capabilities

NATO UNCLASSIFIED

COLLECTIVE DEFENCE

CRISIS RESPONSE OPERATIONS

MOST DEMANDING SCENARIO

MOST LIKELY SCENARIO

High INTENSITY COMBAT CAPABILITIES

EXPEDITIONARY CAPABILITIES

EXCLUSIVE High INT CAPABILITIES (that cannot be used in CRO)

EXCLUSIVE CRO CAPABILITIES (that cannot be used for CD)

CAPABILITIES with BEST potential to be USED for the FULL range of future NATO OPS • in any scenario, forseable or not • that can concentrate effects, if & where required • that can MITIGATE the non-availability of other CAPABILITIES

ROLE of CAPABILITIES OWNED/OPERATED/FUNDED by NATO = ENABLE in the THEATRE

8

New Terms of the COERCION-equation

• The semantics of COERCION has changed – COLD WAR Deterrence was against a ‘HOSTILE TAKEOVER’

• Military action sought to ...

– DEFEAT & TAKE CONTROL of ALL Soviet <> NATO Centres of Gravity

– THREATEN Territorial Integrity ACROSS time & space

– Today’s deterrence should guard NATO from DISRUPTION

• A-SYMMETRIC or HYBRID action will seek to ...

– DISRUPT – DISORDER – CONFUSE – DISARRAY Centres of Gravity of CHOICE

– THREAT is limited in time & space

NATO UNCLASSIFIED

READINESS

QUALITY QUANTITY

RESOURCES

REQUIRED

Media

Cyberspace

Internet

Economy

Natural resources

& Finances

Societal

CoG

Populations (Territorial)

ENCLAVES of

CONTENTION

Cohesion of

9

Focus of OPERATIONAL Readiness ?

NATO UNCLASSIFIED

READINESS

QUALITY QUANTITY

RESOURCES

REQUIRED

Media

Cyberspace

Internet

Societal

CoG

Populations

(Territorial)

ENCLAVES of

CONTENTION

SOF (Few-boots-on-the-ground)

JISR+PGM Capability

Given that the THREAT is limited in time & space, OPERATIONAL READINESS should deter against & guard from COERCION by DISRUPTION !

That will inevitably involve MINIMAL reaction times, but CAPs limited in scope

Economy

Natural resources

& Finances

IMMEDIATE RESPONSE CAPs + CONCEPTS & PLANS

BMD+CBRN

Trained & certified NRF

10

Operational Readiness graduated i.f.o. breath of Coercive FACTOR

• need EARLY WARNING

– Strategic Analysis capacity

– Reliable & available SENSORS

• need EARLY CONSENSUS to ACT

– Build up ifo scope of threat

• TRAIN & CERTIFY

• GENERATE & DEPLOY

– Ability to ‘Quick-connect’

• POL with MIL

• NCS with NFS

• Allies with Partners

• MIL with CIV effects

• need EARLY use of LL to re-orient mission training

to adapt & reconfigure

to avoid mission creep

to re-focus exercise policy

READINESS HQs and Forces (*)

0-48 hrs Ops Liaison Recce

Team NRF

CJ-CBRND-TF

Stand Naval Forces

NATINADS

JTF HQ (L)

JTF HQ (AMPHIB) Graduated

Readiness

Forces

5 days NRF JFHQ

5-30

days

Immediate Response

Forces

0-60 days Response Force Pool NATO Deployable

Forces

0-90 days High Readiness Forces NDF Follow-On

Forces

91-180 d Forces of Lower

Readiness

NDF Follow-On

Forces

OpLevel C2

Response Force Pool

Immediate Response Forces

(*) Conceptual Framework on Alliance (CFAO) refers

11

1 Permanently assigned to NATO. High Readiness Force (M) HQ capable of commanding Maritime Operations at Expanded Task Force (ETF) and Major Joint Operations

2 Permanently assigned to NATO. 7 High Readiness Force (L) HQs (ARRC, NRDC-TU, NRDC-GENL, NRDC-IT, NRDC-SP, MNC NE, NDC-GR)

Operational Command (OPCOM) SACEUR

National Command until NAC approval of the Operation Plan (OPLAN) – Transfer of Authority as OPCOM SACEUR, SACEUR access for evaluation of exercises and training

Coordination

NCS NFS

Entity

ACT

JFTC JWC JALLC

Portugal Poland Norway

ACO

JFC BS JFC NP AIRCOM MARCOM CIS GP

D-AOC

CAOC DACCC

HRF(L)HQ2 STRIKFOR

NATO1

NAEW&C AGS

EURO CORPS

RRC-FR FR JFAC GE JFAC UK JFAC FRMARFOR UKMARFOR SPMARFOR ITMARFOR

D-AOC

Signals Battalion

Signals Battalion

Signals Battalion

CAOC

LANDCOM

Belgium The Netherlands Italy Turkey UK Germany

Germany Spain Italy

Portugal Germany/Italy See 2

Poland Germany Italy

DELIVERING NATO Command & Control NATO Command Structure and NATO Force Structure HQs

NATO UNCLASSIFIED

NCS Deployable

Connecting NATO 2020

Virtual

Territorial

(1) By default for 1st MJO / SJO, then NFS (2) Includes NATINAMDS, SNMG, SNMCMG

NCIRC, CCOMC and Depl CIS Modules including backbone of Fut Miss Network

(3) Supported for AIR Heavy Ops (4) Supported for MAR Heavy Ops (5) Policy & C2 arrangements TBD

Graduated Readiness Forces (LAND)

JFAC (3) JFC

JFMC (4)

(1)(2)

AIR Task

Force (3)

MAR Task

Force (4)

Special OPS Task

Force

NRF

Deployable

CIS / FMN

NSHQ

AWACS Counter

Intell

AGS BMDC2

SPACE(5)

ASC

JAC Molesworth

JEWCS

13

• NCS remains the C² backbone of the Alliance

– FULL spectrum capability (to include Art 5)

– Readiness of C² arrangements

– Linkages to NFS and National HQ

• New DEPLOYABILITY model

– In theatre Joint HQ (for LAND Heavy OPS) • directly in Sp of MIL-Strat

– Network enabled (static) HQ for Air and Mar Heavy OPS

• Ability to Face New Challenges

– CIV-MIL interaction

• SHAPE Comprehensive Crisis Ops Mngt Centre

• Part of a wider REFORM

– Resource Reform

• Manpower reductions – Cost of ownership concerns

• Review of Host Nations Support arrangements

– Agency and NATO HQ reform

• CIS synergies between static and deployable parts

becomes

14

Future NCS and NFS HQs (*)

• Cost-lie-where-they-fall – NFS Training & simulation

• Common funding for – certifying exercise

– deployment

– recovery

of NCS + NFS HQs

• NCS + NFS JFHQ – in Long Term Rotation Plan

• Readiness = 30 days – given that NRF takes first SJO

• Deployable – with advance C2 elm

• Training & certification – 6 months prior standby

– distributed learning & simulation

NATO UNCLASSIFIED (*) Conceptual Framework on Alliance (CFAO) refers

15

Deployable

AIR OPS Centre Static AIR

DEFENCE Centre

Deployable

AIR OPS Centre

Static AIR

DEFENCE Centre

Deployable

AIR OPS Centre

NCS CAOC UEDEM

NCS CAOC TORREJON

Deployable Air C² Centre DACCC POGGIO

Deployable

TAC C²

Deployable Sensors

(scalable)

Air Com RAMSTEIN

New NCS Outline Air C2

Peace Establishment JFACC

Strategy Combat

Plans

Combat

Operations

Intelligence,

Surveillance,

Reconnaissance

Combat Service

Support

Command Group

(Embedded) Air Ops Center

Crisis Establishment

JFAC Ramstein

JOA

(§)

15

Deployable

TAC C²

16

Linkage J-ISR Architecture

High Altitude Geo

Wide Area Coverage GMTI/SAR

AEW & C2

Full Motion Video

GROUND STATION JFAC

TAC RECCE/

TAC AIR

ANALYSIS

TARGETING

Battle

Damage

Assessment

SIGINT

HUMINT

Joint Ops Area

17

Way ahead : the CONNECTED Forces Initiative

• WHY Connect Forces (before an operation) ? – so they would be INTEROPERABLE during OPS

• WHO should be Connected ? – ALL actors in a JOA

• COMMAND & CONTROL

– NCS <> NFS <> National HQs <> IOs <> NGOs

• FRONTLINE Troops + SUPPORT ELEMENTS

– including THEATRE (STRAT-OPS-TAC) RESERVES

• CIVIL ACTORS + Private MIL Companies

• HOW should Forces be(come) CONNECTED ? – TRAINING (within ETEE) + DOCTRINE

– Special COMPONENTS • Bolstering NRF

• Enhancing SOF

– TECHNOLOGY (including CIS) + STANDARDS (C3B + CNAD)

OpLevel C2

Response Force Pool

Immediate Response Forces COST

FACTORS

18

CONCLUSIONS

• NATO’s ...

– ... HEADQUARTERS & AGENCIES are RE-FORMING

– ... COMMAND Structures are RE-CALIBRATING

– ... FORCES are RE-CONSTITUTING (post-conflict)

– ... PARTNERS are RE-DISCOVERING (interoperability needs)

• NATO’s C2 & OPERATIONAL READINESS should ...

– ... RE-APPRAISE their future operating environment

– ... RE-VIEW its hardware challenges (processor speed)

– ... RE-CONFIGURE its software

– ... RE-CONNECT NATO’s MAIN processors : i.e. the COMMAND & the FORCE Structure

19

Other than the ACRONYMS : AOR=Area of Responsibility C²=Command & Control CCOMC=Comprehensive Crisis & Ops Management Centre CoG=Centrres of Gravity CNAD=Conference of National Armament Directors C3B=Consultation,Command & Control Board DCM=Deployable Communication & Information system Modules FMN=Future Mission Network JISR=Joint Intelligence Surveillance & Reconnaissance JALLC=Joint Analysis & Lessons Learned Centre NCS= NATO COMMAND STRUCTURE NFS=NATO FORCE STRUCTURE NATINAMDS=NATO Air integrated Air & Missile Defence System NCIRC=NATO Computor Incident Responce Centre NRF=NATO Response Force SLA=Service Level Agreements SNMG = Standing NATO Maritime Group SNMCMG=Standing NATO Mine Counter Measures Group SOF=Special Ops Forces WMD=Weapons of mass Destruction

20

CFI ETEE Strands of Work

• Transparent Management process

– adaptable online tools for cost-effective & accessible training

• Enforce standards for validation & certification

• Large scale exercises for low + high intensity conflict

– maximise CoE – Partner Training & Edu centres

• Greater use of common doctrine – concepts – standards & procedures supporting interoperability

• Simulation to reduce running costs

NATO UNCLASSIFIED