Recommended
More Related Content
Recently uploaded
Recently uploaded (20)
Featured
Featured (20)
William Hix
- 1. 1 Army G-3/5/7 UNCLASS/FOUO AMERICA’S ARMY: Globally Responsive, Regionally Engaged UNCLASSIFIED ARSTAF Day at the Pre-Command Course Army G-8 LTG James O. Barclay III 03 December 2013 MG William C. Hix Director, Strategy, Plans and Policy
- 2. 2 Army G-3/5/7 UNCLASS/FOUO AMERICA’S ARMY: Globally Responsive, Regionally Engaged Assure - Deter - Deny - Defeat China Dream Challenges
- 3. 3 Army G-3/5/7 UNCLASS/FOUO AMERICA’S ARMY: Globally Responsive, Regionally Engaged xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx A B C D European Migration Israel and Lebanon Foreign Fighter Flow Resurgent Russia DMoscow RANGE RINGS SA-22 SA-21 SA-20 ISKANDER (SS-26) ISKANDER (GLCM) CDCM LACM SNAP EXERCISE LATVIA BY RAIL (TIME/DIST) 0-24 24-48 xxxx UNCLASSIFIED//FOUO B C A xxxx xxxx EUROPEAN ENVIRONMENT CHALLENGES
- 4. 4 Army G-3/5/7 UNCLASS/FOUO AMERICA’S ARMY: Globally Responsive, Regionally Engaged • Problem 1: We require credible military capabilities to deter and, if necessary, defeat Russia; fundamental to assuring our friends and allies • Problem 2: Must also be prepared to fight and defeat state-sponsored hybrid adversaries with Russian/Chinese weapons • Vulnerabilities in problems 1 and 2 exist today, are urgent, and must be addressed to avoid tactical, operational, and political surprise • Problem 3: We must also retain COIN/irregular/train, advise, and assist skills gained over past decade + of war • Problem 4: We must also have a common recognition of the problems we face and the way forward Must be able to address all 4 problems, but are now out of position in doctrine, capabilities, training, and thinking for #1 & #2, exacerbated struggle with last #4 Problems to be solved DAMO-SSW//As of 24 JUN 2016 Source: RAND/Potomac Foundation
- 5. 5 Army G-3/5/7 UNCLASS/FOUO AMERICA’S ARMY: Globally Responsive, Regionally Engaged NATO Evolution Multiple Source DAMO-SSW/As of: 24 JUN 2016
- 6. 6 Army G-3/5/7 UNCLASS/FOUO AMERICA’S ARMY: Globally Responsive, Regionally Engaged COLD WAR NATO CURRENT NATO XXX XX XX XX X X X X X X X X X BGR CZE FSC CZE CZE CZE BGR FSC JTAC LTU EST SRB 1 91 BGR LTU JTAC HRV CS SVN SVN SVN SVN STB LVA STB CBT (-) FSC SVN JTAC SWE X XXX - Well Defined Threat - National-level Divisions Requirement for Common Doctrine and Interoperability - Less Defined and Numerous Threats - Smaller and specialized national capabilities IFOR/SFOR KFOR ISAF NATO Forces 2020: modern, tightly connected forces equipped, trained, exercised and commanded so that they can operate together and with partners in any environment. NATO Evolution Source: USAREUR DAMO-SSW/As of: 29 APR 2016
- 7. 7 Army G-3/5/7 UNCLASS/FOUO AMERICA’S ARMY: Globally Responsive, Regionally Engaged US Army Key Points on Interoperability • Interoperability order of priority to Army, Joint and Multinational • Enhances national and coalition readiness • Encompasses human, procedural and technical elements • Must prioritize multinational agreements • Will implement ABCA/NATO/other agreed upon multinational standards • Make an institutional priority • Design in early • Make a routine feature of all training • Technical interoperability is more than command information systems • US Army is adopting NATO definition for interoperability • Must move from mission-specific networks to gateway solutions • Must prioritize within and across warfighting functions • Must write for release whenever possible • Will achieve improvements based on incorporating lessons learned DAMO-SSC//As of 29 April 2016
- 8. 8 Army G-3/5/7 UNCLASS/FOUO AMERICA’S ARMY: Globally Responsive, Regionally Engaged Character of Combat Speed, Lethality, Violence *Source: RAND and The Potomac Foundation DAMO-SSW//As of 7 April 2016v4
- 9. 9 Army G-3/5/7 UNCLASS/FOUO AMERICA’S ARMY: Globally Responsive, Regionally Engaged Backup Slides
- 10. 10 Army G-3/5/7 UNCLASS/FOUO AMERICA’S ARMY: Globally Responsive, Regionally Engaged VJTF (L) 17 Nations EOD / CIED Key UK UK / Partner composite Partner Not Filled Armd Inf BG Armd Sqn Armd Inf Coy Armd Inf Coy Armd Engr Sqn Armd Inf BG Armd Sqn Armd Inf Coy Armd Inf Coy Engr Sqn Lt Inf BG Lt Inf Coy Lt Inf Coy Lt Inf Coy Engr Sqn Aviation (composite) Engr RHQ + Sp VJTF(L) Amph Engrs ISTAR BG Recce Sqn WLR CBRN Recce MI/CI Arty RHQ + Sp Gun Bty Gun Bty Gun Bty STA Signals ES CS Med Role 2E Field Hospital Media MP AD Bty Armd Coy CS Med Sqn CS Log CS Sqn GS Sqn Mech Inf Coy Light Inf Coy Mech Inf Coy Light Inf BG Light Inf Coy Mech Inf BG Mech Inf Coy Mech Inf Coy Mech Inf Coy EW HUMINT UAS PsyOps CIMIC Light Inf Coy CS Med EvacField Coy NSEs (including national log and 2nd line ES) Light Inf Coy MP VJTF(L) 17 nations + USA Source: British Army HQ DAMO-SSC/As of: 29 APR 2016 UNCLASSIFIED//FOUO UNCLASSIFIED//FOUO
Editor's Notes
- - We face a range of threats in a global environment —future armed conflict will be complex. - Threats and adversaries are becoming increasingly capable and elusive. - State and non-state actors employ traditional, unconventional, and hybrid strategies, often below the threshold of open conflict, that threaten U.S. security and vital interests, aided by the increasing momentum of human interaction, dense and weakly governed urban spaces, the proliferation of lethal weapon systems and Weapons of Mass Destruction. Rapid advances in mass media technology and the internet have made communication virtually real-time, but they can also spread false information to millions. Our enemies and adversaries will challenge the stability and security that is ensured by the United States, our allies and our partners. - The future environment looks to be even more complex, including changes to the international order, shifting balances of power, emerging great power competition, and technological advances. - Our army must prepare now to deal with the threats of the next 25 -30 years, even as we continue the constant engagement and current operations required to build and maintain partnerships/alliances and confront the more familiar threats of the recent past.
- 3
- I want to focus very briefly on Interoperability and therefore lets take a moment to look at Tactical and Operational formations that we will be training in the years to come. We will likely be forming Combined Battle Groups or Task Forces, like we have seen in Afghanistan, and in ways that may be familiar to you from Kosovo. We see this as our future construct for Article V missions. So we are going after the tactical and operational interoperability issues from “Secure FM Radio nets” against a capable adversary in the Electronic Warfare spectrum. And we are learning a lot in our ALLIED SPIRIT and COMBINED RESOLVE exercises at the Joint Multinational Training Center in Grafenwoehr and Hohenfels. All of our brigade training rotations look like the diagram on the right. Also, we are working to build NATO interoperable command posts. We have some NATO BICES communication systems already in many of our formations and staff sections, but we are not there yet. So, as we continue to build training and connect forces, we have a large goal to connect training next year before the Warsaw Summit.
- I want to focus very briefly on Interoperability and therefore lets take a moment to look at Tactical and Operational formations that we will be training in the years to come. We will likely be forming Combined Battle Groups or Task Forces, like we have seen in Afghanistan, and in ways that may be familiar to you from Kosovo. We see this as our future construct for Article V missions. So we are going after the tactical and operational interoperability issues from “Secure FM Radio nets” against a capable adversary in the Electronic Warfare spectrum. And we are learning a lot in our ALLIED SPIRIT and COMBINED RESOLVE exercises at the Joint Multinational Training Center in Grafenwoehr and Hohenfels. All of our brigade training rotations look like the diagram on the right. Also, we are working to build NATO interoperable command posts. We have some NATO BICES communication systems already in many of our formations and staff sections, but we are not there yet. So, as we continue to build training and connect forces, we have a large goal to connect training next year before the Warsaw Summit.
- Captured on this slide are the Vice’s key points on interoperability along with additional MFI Themes we have identified. From the Vice: It should come as no surprise we believe that we have been directed to consider the human, procedural and technical elements of interoperability, and it is very important, that although you may be primarily focused on one of these domains, you consider the impacts your efforts and proposed solutions have on the other two. For example, those who are focused on technical elements, not only look at the technology needs, but try to understand how those technological solutions impact the human domain and the procedural requirements required to fully implement and support the new technology. The same types of considerations should be made by those focusing on human and procedural solutions as well. It is up to members of this community to look within their respective organizations to identify the best way for applying MFI as part of the key strategies, plans and other documents in a way that allows us to institutionalize MFI and support Army objectives. The Net Ready KPP has been mentioned as the interoperability KPP. Our team will be looking more closely at that KPP. However, as articulated in line number five, MFI is more that communications. There are also other, non-communications related MFI considerations that need to become a mandatory part of the acquisitions process as well. Number four speaks for itself. We understand that the CSA has also made similar comments. As mentioned before, while communication information systems are a critical piece of technical interoperability, it is not the only portion. Much as we are not going to wait until Joint and Interagency interoperability issues are solved before considering multinational issues, interoperability efforts should be, and are, ongoing across all Warfighting Functions. The US-UK framework and gaps will be used as a model going forward. The more we become interoperable with our partners, the more important it will become that we define things in the same way. While a fourth stack solution, one that requires a separate coalition secure network may be required currently, this should be considered as a temporary solution while we work towards a gateway solution that allows partners to utilize their national secure systems without creating an adding a fourth network. Additional MFI themes of interest are listed alongside the Vice’s key points. These themes emphasize what MFI should be and along with the Vice’s 8 points give us a more complete sounding board as we progress through the process of constructing strategic guidance, re-writing doctrine and issuing campaign plans. When taken as a whole these items should effectively answer the question of what we want to achieve with our allies using this refreshed approach to MFI.