REVIEW - Royal Air Force Centre for Air Power Studies

108
necessary, particularly if we integrate
air operations in the way we must.
This can be difficult. Being joint is
always balanced by some sort of selfjustification
of why we are as we are
and maintaining our individuality and
independence. Striving for integration
acknowledges that other components
interplay with our own capabilities but
tends to ignore our historical baggage
– and demons. We need to better our
understanding of air, for instance that
Air Land Integration (ALI) is a subset
of integrated operations – and that it
is not just about integrating TICs and
CAS – but also about, ISR, battlespace
control, lift, spectrum management and
space. We also need to appreciate air
capabilities through the eyes of other
components and through the prism of
their requirements, particularly Land’s at
the moment – and not allow ourselves to
be skewed, doctrinally or otherwise, by
our close association with the USAF and
its particular relations or frissons with its
sister services (Pentagon politics).
Britain has a long history of coalition
and integrated operations, if we wished
to look deeper and to define them in
those terms. True that they might not
have always involved air, but there is
plenty of read-across and pull-through
for us novices (in our 90th year). Our
relationships with the other components
have waxed and waned, but they
have always been best when close
relationships have been established
– and – let’s be honest – when things
haven’t been going too well. We’ve
done it a number of times before, but
there is nothing like a real operational
Horlicks, such as Dieppe or Lebanon
2006 for getting us back to integrating
properly – something we would do well
to remember in our current operational
circumstances.
Note
1 Learning Large Lessons. The Evolving roles of
Ground Power and Air Power in the Post – Cold War
Era. David E Johnson - Rand 2007
Viewpoint