12.07.2015 Views

On Point: the United States Army in Operation Iraqi ... - Boekje Pienter

On Point: the United States Army in Operation Iraqi ... - Boekje Pienter

On Point: the United States Army in Operation Iraqi ... - Boekje Pienter

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

Create successful ePaper yourself

Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.

e enough resources to establish a complete and function<strong>in</strong>g network of communications,sensors, and systems everywhere <strong>in</strong> <strong>the</strong> world. As OIF demonstrates, <strong>the</strong> network must be built,shaped, and <strong>the</strong>n maneuvered to ensure necessary connectivity and capability.Along with maneuver<strong>in</strong>g <strong>the</strong> net, OIF suggests that for fast-paced offensive operations,ground forces need to break free of terrestrial-based, l<strong>in</strong>e of sight (LOS) communications.The pace of operations, global reach, and noncontiguous battlespace of 21st-century militaryoperations demand that all except <strong>the</strong> lowest-level tactical voice communications be spacebased. This will require significant jo<strong>in</strong>t <strong>in</strong>vestment <strong>in</strong> military satellite capabilities to ensure<strong>the</strong> entire jo<strong>in</strong>t force has access with sufficient bandwidth to support networked systems.The OIF experience also suggests that networks do not have to provide a vast array offunctions to be effective. Clausewitz observed, “War is a very simple th<strong>in</strong>g, yet <strong>in</strong> war <strong>the</strong>simplest th<strong>in</strong>gs are very difficult.” In OIF, networks elim<strong>in</strong>ated some of <strong>the</strong> difficulty of do<strong>in</strong>gsimple th<strong>in</strong>gs. Commanders need to know where <strong>the</strong>ir forces are, where <strong>the</strong> enemy is, and howto coord<strong>in</strong>ate <strong>the</strong> actions of <strong>the</strong>ir subord<strong>in</strong>ates through pass<strong>in</strong>g messages, orders, and graphics.The most useful systems <strong>in</strong> OIF (C2PC, BFT, ADOCS, AFATDS, AMDWS, and MTS)provided <strong>the</strong> basic capabilities <strong>the</strong> force required.OIF’s TMD network and jo<strong>in</strong>t use of BFT and AMDWS re<strong>in</strong>force <strong>the</strong> value of jo<strong>in</strong>tdigitization <strong>in</strong>itiatives. Such <strong>in</strong>itiatives, and those designed to standardize networks, are vitalto achiev<strong>in</strong>g a true NCW capability. The <strong>Army</strong>’s Future Force research and development isalready headed <strong>in</strong> <strong>the</strong> direction of full and complete jo<strong>in</strong>t connectivity.Meanwhile, <strong>the</strong> challenges of <strong>in</strong>tegrat<strong>in</strong>g US armed forces with allies and coalition partnerscont<strong>in</strong>ue to grow. The provision of BFT and robust LNO teams to <strong>the</strong> 1st UK ArmouredDivision assisted <strong>in</strong> bridg<strong>in</strong>g <strong>the</strong> digital gap <strong>in</strong> OIF, but <strong>the</strong> grow<strong>in</strong>g post-Cold War disparity<strong>in</strong> technology between <strong>the</strong> US armed forces and allied forces is a fact. As <strong>the</strong> <strong>Army</strong> movestoward <strong>the</strong> Future Force and jo<strong>in</strong>t transformation proceeds, <strong>the</strong> gap is likely to grow wider.This is particularly likely <strong>in</strong> <strong>the</strong> area of networked battle command, where <strong>the</strong> US is <strong>in</strong>vest<strong>in</strong>gheavily. Some likely coalition partners are unlikely to catch up, and o<strong>the</strong>rs are <strong>in</strong>vest<strong>in</strong>g <strong>in</strong>battle command systems of <strong>the</strong>ir own that are not <strong>in</strong>teroperable with US systems. Solutions thatfacilitate <strong>in</strong>tegrat<strong>in</strong>g coalition operations will have to be found.OIF also suggests that simply w<strong>in</strong>n<strong>in</strong>g <strong>the</strong> fight for <strong>in</strong>formation will not be enough toensure victory. Early <strong>in</strong> OIF, <strong>the</strong> US employed operational fires (air, Tomahawks, ATACMS)to destroy much of Iraq’s strategic and operational communications <strong>in</strong>frastructure and toneutralize Iraq’s <strong>in</strong>tegrated air defense system. Yet, <strong>the</strong> defend<strong>in</strong>g <strong>Iraqi</strong> forces cont<strong>in</strong>ued tofight fiercely. Primarily us<strong>in</strong>g simple <strong>in</strong>structions, <strong>the</strong>y cont<strong>in</strong>ued to maneuver and cont<strong>in</strong>uedto fight. The lesson is that although <strong>the</strong> <strong>Iraqi</strong>s lost nearly every engagement, <strong>the</strong>y did not giveup simply because <strong>the</strong>y had lost <strong>the</strong> war for <strong>the</strong> networks.While not yet a truly netcentric force, <strong>the</strong> <strong>Army</strong> <strong>in</strong> OIF was clearly a net-enabled force, onethat was significantly more effective because of digitization efforts s<strong>in</strong>ce DESERT STORM.Additionally, <strong>the</strong> <strong>Army</strong>’s efforts toward jo<strong>in</strong>t battle command enhanced <strong>the</strong> jo<strong>in</strong>t forces’capabilities for net-enabled operational maneuver, fires, and protection. These <strong>in</strong>vestments <strong>in</strong>technology should be cont<strong>in</strong>ued. They must <strong>in</strong>clude education <strong>in</strong> doctr<strong>in</strong>e, organization, andleader development to assure that jo<strong>in</strong>t forces are truly able to wage netcentric warfare.418

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!