capability development plan - European Defence Agency - Europa

8
POTENTIAL TRENDS IN FUTURE MILITARY CAPABILITY
CHARACTERISTICS
INTRODUCTION
1. The objective of Strand B was to identify potential trends in future capability characteristics across
the ESDP missions, and military tasks associated with those missions. The future is not predictable as
the LTV made eminently clear. But it has been possible to gather information that provides an
understanding about the future, including the context of future operations. However, making sense of
this information is no simple matter. Trends are discernable but grasping their meaning and
consequences remains the challenge. This Report does not pretend to offer a roadmap for the next 15
years. It aspires only to be judged as a starting point, to indicate directions that are sensible to move
forward but which, in time, will require further development and reassessment.
BACKGROUND
2. Europe will remain one of the most important and stable regions on the planet. However, the global
context is sobering, with the central predictions of demography and economics foreshadowing a
Europe which, two decades hence, will be older, less pre-eminently prosperous, and surrounded by
regions (including Africa and the Middle East) which may struggle to cope with the consequences of
globalisation. Defence will need to contend with public finances under pressure from a growing
pension burden; a shrinking recruitment pool; and societies increasingly cautious about intervention
operations and the legitimacy issues associated with the use of force.
3. In order to focus upon the key future force and capability characteristics, it is necessary to
acknowledge that whilst the nature of military operations will not change, these characteristics will. To
that end, the conduct of future operations cannot be discussed without consideration of the political,
social, cultural and technical contexts. In this technology requires a special mention. Within the current
technological revolution, seeking competitive advantage through the exploitation of technology makes
common sense. However, if reliance on the benefits becomes simply faith in the power of machines,
incoherence and confusion will emerge. Strategic and conceptual thinking needs to converge with
technological advances to avoid being overwhelmed by it. It is with this perspective that the Strand B
results have been considered.
KEY TRENDS
4. The work conducted for Strand B highlights a series of key trends. Trends in areas concerning
science & technology, global strategic drivers and threats have already been circulated to pMS.
5. Overall. An overarching observation from the conclusions of the Strand B is that the need for
developed concepts, doctrine, procedures, training and architectures to generate the future new,
enhanced and interoperable capabilities is more dominant than the perceived requirement to acquire
hardware. The main potential trends in future capability development are summarised below.
6. Knowledge-based operations. The ability to plan, prepare and conduct knowledge-based operations
will be fundamental for the future to ensure that the EU is able to plan, execute and achieve the
required strategic objectives. In order to support decision-makers to achieve this, persistent
surveillance coverage must also be established where and when needed, day or night, as well as in
denied or contested locations. This must then be made available to all and every actor that requires it,
at all levels.
7. The aim must be to achieve wide-area, full spectrum awareness whilst being able to use the full
benefits of improved levels of precision and enhanced selectivity. Appropriate intelligence architectures
will be required, which can fully integrate operations from strategic to tactical level, whilst utilising a
greater reachback facility to support all aspects of the operation but particularly a robust early warning
capability.
8. Concepts. Throughout discussions, the need for consistent and appropriate concepts was repeated,
regardless of the capability area under consideration. It was considered that joint concepts must depict
how the force will operate in the future, addressing the role of the military across the full range of
missions. They need to be developed with multinational utility in mind and must be coherent with a
comprehensive, civil-military, inter-agency approach. They must be specific enough to enable
identification of capability development priorities, yet flexible enough to absorb new ideas as new
technology emerges, threats develop and strategic drivers evolve. Static concepts do not encourage
intellectual development and will be made irrelevant by flexible adversaries.
9. Persistent Intelligence. Future ISR capabilities should be developed with the overarching
intelligence needs in mind, rather than the platforms that carry the sensors or the medium that the
sensors operate in. In future, these ISR capabilities in theatre should be co-ordinated by the Joint
Commander to ensure he can substitute one capability for another to achieve the same effect, whilst
fully supporting his subordinate commanders. This will improve the ability to integrate data from all
sensors, including civilian ones and ensure timely intelligence is available to those who require it.
Network enabled architecture and the ability to conduct spectrum management will be essential.
10. Operations against irregular adversaries are often less a question of force size but more about the
‘fast beating the slow’. Furthermore, the diffusion of technology and the overall complexity of crisis
management operations in the information age will induce an increased operational tempo.
11. Comprehensive & co-ordinated actions. Strategic and operational integration, co-operation of
FUTURE TRENDS FROM THE CAPABILITY DEVELOPMENT PLAN