capability development plan - European Defence Agency - Europa

54
THREATS AND CHALLENGES DERIVING FROM
POTENTIAL ADVERSARIES
mission legitimacy by trying to make EU forces look partial.
17. Adversaries are likely to use child soldiers and other “non-ethical” means.
18. Adversaries may also try to take advantage of cultural differences and constraints (e.g. use women
for protecting privacy of housing).
19. Adversaries may use civilians or refugees to block or crowd port facilities, roads, and trails.
20. Adversaries may use toxic substances in concentration levels that are below detection levels of
fielded detectors to provoke long term health issues, which may lead to massive internal unrest and
social disruption.
21. Functional. Adversaries will conduct all types of information operations against the EU force in
order to gain and maintain the support of local population.
22. In a structured campaign dedicated to win hearts & minds of local population, adversaries may
provide humanitarian aid and assistance. However, they are as likely to intimidate their own local
populations. They may try to influence or to take benefit from NGOs and other IOs. By doing this,
adversaries will limit the EU force's ability to win public support to crisis management activities.
© EUFOR Tchad RCA
23. Adversaries will attempt to find and attack critical links, nodes and vulnerabilities in an EU system
of systems with the aim to level the playing field. They will try to interfere ISR capabilities that are
linked directly to fires (kinetic and/or non-kinetic), and tailored operational formations and manoeuvring
their units that are tasked to affect specific capabilities whose loss or degradation will significantly
reduce overall blue force effectiveness.
24. Adversaries’ ability to hide their activities among NGOs and local population will make CAS
missions more difficult to conduct (increased risk to collateral damage). CAS in urban environment will
be challenging.
25. (Weapons of Mass Effect) Adversaries may seek novel ways of inflicting massive casualties and
causing horrific damage. They may not be beyond using weapons of mass effect against their own
people to create the perception at home and abroad that the EU is employing such weapons against
civilians.
26. They may not see the use of chemical weapons as an escalation of the conflict. They may try to
use a variety of methods (UAVs, AC, food, water, persons and animals) to disseminate toxic, newly
engineered agents, highly infectious diseases, such as smallpox, etc.
27. Adversaries may use biological agents to target food and livestock (e.g. foot and mouth disease),
using infected persons, vectors (e.g. food, water) and animals to disrupt operations in sites and
facilities.
28. Adversaries may use gene-manipulated micro-organisms which cause disease in people, plants or
animals or cause deterioration of materiel and may seek to pollute the environment to hamper the
operations
29. Adversaries may use CBR substances to assassinate key decision-makers.
30. Adversaries may try to use CBRNE weapons and devices, and industrial and environmental
hazards with little restraint.
31. Adversaries may try to circumvent CBRN defence measures by provoking false alarms up to a time
when CBRN detectors are considered unreliable, and thus be switched off due to the loss of
confidence.
32. Adversaries may try to interfere with medical transportation chain, food and water supply chains
FUTURE TRENDS FROM THE CAPABILITY DEVELOPMENT PLAN