Operations Other Than War (OOTW):The Technological Dimension

Executive Summary

The "Operations Other Than War (OOTW): The Technological Dimension" Workshop was held at the National Defense University as the fourth in a series exploring advanced command relationships and technologies. This topic was selected because earlier workshops that explored command and control issues in peace operations had consistently highlighted the important role of technology in OOTW. This emerged as a qualitatively different problem from command and control in peace operations and a subject that needed to be examined in detail.

The workshop sought insights into the process of determining what technologies are required for OOTW. The group also examined the complexities of introducing relevant technologies and discussed general and specific OOTW technologies and devices.

This workshop was a departure from its predecessors in that the agenda was rich in presentations, with relatively little time available for detailed discussions.

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. policy makers 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).

WORKSHOP FINDINGS

  • One of the most important findings was that OOTW operations and the research and development communities have much to discuss and relatively few opportunities for dialogue.

  • The requirements process presently lacks structure. The efforts of different agencies overlap and duplicate each other. The operational community is, for reasons both structural and cultural, not active in the requirements process.

  • Application of technology to OOTW is often neither simple nor straightforward; it can be influenced by diverse factors, such as public opinion and the environment.

  • Systems that work in deserts may be use- less in jungles, forests, or urban centers. Tools that are safe in open areas may have unacceptable consequences in crowded areas. Where the immediate threat is low, technologies that work slowly or require detailed preparation are useful, but they can- not help in urgent situations.

  • Technological solutions to OOTW problems bring with them numerous implications. These implications include legal, doctrinal, rules of engagement-related, and training questions, as well as concerns about combat readiness for warfighting and what may be shared with coalition partners.

  • The workshop identified several technologies that are needed today, including: mine clearing, counter-sniper and counter-mortar capabilities, language interpretation, and improved training capabilities. The latter two were deemed particularly significant in light of the trend towards coalition operations.

  • Logistics and training would benefit greatly from adoption of existing concepts and systems, such as "just in time" inventory control and virtual reality.

  • These missions are typically poorly defined, complex, difficult, and dangerous.

  • Technology is not a cure-all, but its innovative use can help to achieve better performance with lower risk of casualties.

  • The military participants were unanimous in their view that any technology considered for OOTW must have "dual use" capability; that is, it must add value to war fighting capability as well as OOTW.

    Technological solutions to three key problems dominated the discussions. First, technologies are needed that create time and space and thereby create opportunities for alternative courses of action and prevent inadvertent escalation of dangerous situations. Second, systems that help control the level of violence are potentially desirable. Finally, technologies that help fill the gap between inaction and use of deadly force often enhance the likelihood of mission accomplishment and are valuable in OOTW. Many proponents also stressed technologies that will minimize casualties among both U.S. forces and civilian populations.

    The workshop concluded that technologies for OOTW could best be developed in the context of Mission Capabilities Packages (MCP).

    Given the above finding regarding the need for increased dialogue between the operational and technical communities, more workshops and discussions, perhaps focused more narrowly, should be held to facilitate communication between these two groups. Topics suggested for later review include:

    The workshop also concluded that future meetings should be scheduled for two days to allow more time for discussion and that bringing law enforcement and other civilian agencies likely to be present into the workshop atmosphere could be important.

    NEXT CHAPTER | Table of Contents |