BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE
The workshop on Technologies for Operations Other Than War (OOTW) was held at the National Defense University as the fourth in a series sponsored by the Center for Advanced Concepts and Technology (ACT) to explore advanced command relationships and technologies. Earlier workshops on command and control issues in peace operations identified the role of technology in OOTW as being a unique problem and a subject that needed to be examined in detail. The subject is particularly important as the frequency of OOTW missions is increasing and because the appropriate use of technology offers ways to improve effectiveness and safety for OOTW operators. Given the breadth of material discussed, it is clear that no single workshop could adequately air the issues associated with the potential of technology to improve the effectiveness of OOTW operations. This initial workshop's purpose was to identify the OOTW and technology broad issues, leaving it to subsequent ACT workshops to deal with the issues identified in depth.
The ultimate objective of ACT's work-shop series is to conceptualize and develop Mission Capability Packages (MCPs) that will support improved command and control for coalition operations, and other operations important to U.S. national security. These workshops bring together select groups of senior analysts and operators to explore linkages between the military operational and technical communities. The participants include the activity's sponsors, and representatives from The Joint Staff (TJS) and the Assistant Secretary of Defense for C3I, the Services, U.S. Commanders in Chief (CINCs), other selected U.S. Government agencies, and academic and private organizations with relevant expertise.
Evidence Based Research, Inc. acts as rapporteur for the discussions.
The first ACT workshop focused on identifying unique command and control requirements and essential functions of coalition peace operations. The second dealt with designing ideal command arrangements for peace operations involving a U.S. combined joint task force (CJTF), and the third expanded the perspective to include the experience of Western Hemisphere peace operators. While the first two workshops looked at the issues from the U.S.-only perspective, the third (with the benefit of an experienced and senior group of peace operators from seven other countries in the Western Hemisphere) validated previously-examined concepts and added new insights.
The workshops are conducted on a non-attribution basis and work toward consensus on major issues. Hence, the origin of particular ideas and the give-and-take of discussion and debate are not reported. The groups achieve a high level of candor, work together effectively on complex and difficult topics, and provide excellent inputs for MCP development.
ACT has the responsibility to develop concepts for MCPs. These are coherent, comprehensive approaches to a particular set of missions and levels of technology that enable the effective integration of the force structure, doctrine, command and control arrangements, and technologies required to accomplish the mission.
Figure 1 illustrates the MCP development process. Note the feedback required at each stage of development. In addition to facilitating the development of MCPs, ACT serves as the bridge between the technical and operating communities and creates venues for communication between the two groups. The resulting dialogue provides the operating community with a better understanding of the opportunities that technology can provide and the technology community with a better understanding of the needs of the operational community.
This paper describes how workshop participants, using the MCP concept, explored the unique requirements of OOTW technologies, examined the technologies available and under development, and developed insights about how OOTW and OOTW technologies impact war fighting effectiveness. It includes their novel interpretation of dual-use technology" and their discussion of priorities for high-pay-off technologies. This workshop was unusual in that the agenda included a number of presentations with limited time for discussions. Indeed, one of the most important insights from the effort is that the OOTW and technology communities have a great deal to discuss and few natural opportunities for dialogue. Hence, more round table discussions of this type, each focused on a selected issue and each structured to foster in-depth dialogue, will be required to adequately explore these rich subjects.
WHY OOTW?
OOTW includes peace operations, as well as a wide range of other non-traditional military operations. The U.S. Army's Field Manual 100-5 defines OOTW as consisting of "support to U.S., state, and local governments, disaster relief, nation assistance, drug interdiction, peacekeeping, support for insurgencies and counterinsurgencies, noncombatant evacuation, and peace enforcement." Peace operations, particularly those conducted under the auspices of the UN Charter, have become more common in the post-Cold War world.
Because of its training and culture, the U.S. military has been somewhat reluctant to engage in OOTW. Nevertheless, such operations are becoming more common, in many cases subsuming traditional military missions. There are many reasons for this increased involvement. Some nations and groups tend to avoid direct confrontation with the U.S. military, but they still find ways to challenge the U.S. directly or indirectly. In other cases, internal problems in foreign countries cause conditions that U.S. policymakers cannot ignore. These can include, for example, loss of government control and resulting internal violence (as in Rwanda) or concerns about the possible spill-over of ongoing hostilities (as in the former Yugoslavia). In such cases, OOTW is seen as a way to lessen the effects of war or prevent it altogether. Further, U.S. forces are increasingly being tasked to respond to other non-traditional military missions (such as disaster relief or restoration of democracy).
Given the trend towards military involvement in disaster relief, counterterrorism/counterinsurgency, and counternarcotics operations, most armed forces throughout the world conduct OOTW in one form or another. Figure 2 shows nations that have contributed to recent peace operations, and Figure 3 shows the locations of these operations.
These missions are typically poorly defined, complex, difficult, and dangerous. What started as a humanitarian mission in Somalia degraded into urban guerrilla war-fare. Idealistic expectations of what the UN forces could accomplish were frustrated by a power struggle among local tribal warlords. In such cases, unclear mission goals and guidance and a changing environment place great strains on the military forces involved. Worldwide weapons proliferation adds danger in many of these situations.
The workshop explored ways to improve OOTW effectiveness and safety through the application of technology. Technology is not a cure-all, but its innovative use can help to achieve better performance with lower risk of casualties.