1 of 16

REPLICATING THE COMPLEX REALITY OF 21ST CENTURY CRISIS AND

COMBAT OPERATIONS

Systematically identifying the training needs of the 21st Century senior tactical and operational headquarters within a

multinational/coalition force structure and focusing future modeling and simulation efforts on identified shortfalls.

2 of 16

OUTLINE• Introduction

• Defining 21st Century Warfare Trends – Identifying the beast – Sources– Common threads

• Exercise Design – Where theory and reality meet (and clash?)– Basic exercise design concepts and framework– Injecting reality into exercises– “Too Hard” vs. “Not Possible”

• Finding Solutions to the “Not (yet) Possible” – The way ahead– Technological solutions– Non-technological solutions

• Conclusion & Questions

3 of 16

AUTHOR’S BACKGROUND• Commissioned as an Armor Officer in the US Army• Now a US Army FA57 – Simulations Operations Officer• Recent Assignments/Experience

– 2003-2004: Operations Officer, Korea Battle Simulation Centre– 2004-2006: G3/G5 Staff Officer, 101st Airborne Division

• G5 Plans/Exercise Officer; planned four divisional pre-Operations Iraqi Freedom• G5 Plans Officer (Iraq)

– Staff Officer, Provincial Reconstruction Team-Ninewa (Iraq)– Commandant, Forward Tactical Command Post (Iraq)

– 2006-2008: Political-Military Experimentation Officer (SACT)• Operations & Admin Officer, HQ ISAF Directorate of Afghan National Army Training

& Equipment Support (DATES) (Afghanistan)• Chief, Civil-Military Fusion Centre (Forward Team), HQ ISAF CJ9 Staff (Afghanistan)• Deputy Project Director, Civil-Military Fusion Centre, HQ SACT

4 of 16

21st CENTURY WARFARE TRENDSIdentifying the beast

PRIMARY SOURCES

• Books– The Sling and The Stone (2006)– The Beginner’s Guide to Nation-Building (2007) – The Pentagon’s New Map (2004)

• Papers & Periodicals– Land Warfare in the 21st Century (1993)– Environmental Scan (2006)– Afghanistan: Exploring the Dynamics of Sociopolitical Strife and the Persistence of the

Insurgency (2008)– Post-Modern Challenges for Modern Warriors (2007)– An Abrupt Climate Change Scenario and Its Implications for United States National Security

Strategy (2003)– Che Guevara and Guerrilla Warfare: Training for Today’s Nonlinear Battlefields (2001)– Conflict Between and Within States (2000)– New Paradigms for 21st Century Conflict (2007)– Irregular Warfare Leadership in the 21st Century (2007) – Cultural Awareness and Irregular Warfare: French Army Experience in Africa (2006) – Unrestricted Warfare (1999)

5 of 16

21st CENTURY WARFARE TRENDSIdentifying the beast

• Common threads:– Decline of “state vs. state” conflicts

• Can (and will still) happen, but less prevalent• May see a resurgence in special cases (e.g. separatist reintegration?)

– Limited resource competition• Current outlook (up to 2015) Basic resources = water, food, wealth• Future outlook (beyond 2030) Basic resources + energy, markets, habitat

– Expanding “radicalism” and/or “fundamentalism”• Religious theology• Political ideology • Economic practices (capitalism, protectionism, etc.)

• As exacerbated by:– Established state dissolution/break-up and reformation/reestablishment– Demographic trends/shifts

• Developed vs. underdeveloped world• Urban growth vs. rural decline

– Global environmental shifts (and/or global climate change)– Fringe-area overlap

• Creates an environment of brutal, violent and “Intimate Warfare”*

6 of 16

GENERIC EXERCISE DESIGN Where theory and reality meet (and clash?)

• Training Objectives• Training Audience• Replicated “Environment” & Scenario

– Physical Geography (Terrain)– Cultural Geography (People)– Time (tempo and scale)– External Influences

• Exercise Classification• Required Networks• Facilities

– Single Site– Multiple Sites (distributed)

• Resources Available• Method(s) and Model(s) to incorporate

7 of 16

GENERIC EXERCISE DESIGN Where theory and reality meet (and clash?)

• Training Objectives• Training Audience• Replicated “Environment” & Scenario

– Physical Geography (Terrain)– Cultural Geography (People)– Time (tempo and scale)– External Influences

• Exercise Classification• Required Networks• Facilities

– Single Site– Multiple Sites (distributed)

• Resources Available• Method(s) and Model(s)

WHAT is to be trained:- Current operation tracking- Decision-making processes- Planning processes- Staff coordination- Rehearsal

WHO is to be trained:- Commanders- Primary staff officers- Supporting staff- Multiple command echelons

WHO needs to be replicated:- RED and BLUE forces- GREEN and GREY forces- Local national actors/agents- International actors/agents

Always the first questions indesigning any exercise

● ●

8 of 16

GENERIC EXERCISE DESIGNWhere theory and reality meet (and clash?)

• Training Objectives• Training Audience

• Replicated “Environment” & Scenario– Physical Geography (Terrain)– Cultural Geography (People) – Time (tempo and scale)– External Influences

• Exercise Classification• Required Networks• Facilities

– Single Site– Multiple Sites (distributed)

• Resources Available• Method(s) and Model(s)

WHERE does the scenario occur:- Natural physical landforms- Urban Landscape

- Physical structures- Physical infrastructure

- Human-based cultural terrain- Political landscape(s)- Ethnic/Tribal landscape(s)

WHEN does the scenario occur:- Daylight / Night- Season and weather - Urban “rhythms”

• Traffic • Holidays• Work • Special events

- Day-to-day activity- Longer-term consequencesWHAT / WHO influence factors

or create events from the outside● ●

9 of 16

DRAFT OIF 05-06 TRAINING OBJECTIVES(US Army Division Headquarters)

Validate the operational capabilities of the division and its subordinate brigades during major combat operations (MCO) and stability operations/support operations (SOSO).

Validate the collaborative digital connectivity between higher echelon and subordinate units Integrate the full array of effects targeting into daily operations Integrate multiple intelligence assets and exploit and disseminate threat information Execute operations in open and complex terrain, in an environment consisting of

noncombatants, insurgents, and coalition security forces Execute multiple, distributed operations throughout the depth and breadth of the division’s

battlespace and across the full spectrum of operations Validate division and supported brigade sustainment by its attached support brigade Validate the functions of the divisional command posts and TTPs for their interaction with MNC-I,

Coalition Forces, Iraqi Security Forces, and subordinate brigades Refine the division’s battlefield organization and management, particularly in the separation,

integration, and cooperation with ISF organizations in regard to training / mentoring requirements and destruction of AIF associated with the security lines of operations

Refine processes and understanding of how to best integrate CMATT/CPATT, sustainment contractors, and other special enablers operations and activities into division operations

Define and refine clearance of fires/airspace/maneuver corridors with ISF that involve inter and cross faith (i.e. Sunni/Shia/Christian) engagements requiring MoD and MoI involvement and approval

Text in “BLUE” later dropped – “…too hard to replicate…”

10 of 16

GENERIC EXERCISE DESIGN Where theory and reality meet (and clash?)

• Training Objectives• Training Audience• Replicated “Environment” & Scenario

– Physical Geography (Terrain)– Cultural Geography (People)– Time (tempo and scale)– External Influences

• Exercise Classification• Required Networks• Facilities

– Single Site– Multiple Sites (distributed)

• Resources Available• Method(s) and Model(s)

UNCLASSIFIED vs. CLASSIFIED:- BOTH exist in the real world- Often multiple-classified

environments exist- Overclassification reduces

efficiency, situational awareness, and trust (internally/externally)

- Must replicate multiple networks with multiple classifications - Computer Networks (inc. NU)- Phone- VoIP- Radio / Satellite - Any Specialised systems

SOCIAL NETWORKSmust be replicated

● ●

11 of 16

● ●

GENERIC EXERCISE DESIGNWhere theory and reality meet (and clash?)

• Training Objectives• Training Audience• Replicated “Environment” & Scenario

– Physical Geography (Terrain)– Cultural Geography (People)– Time (tempo and scale)– External Influences

• Exercise Classification• Required Networks• Facilities

– Single Site– Multiple Sites (distributed)

• Resources Available

• Method(s) and Model(s)

METHOD(S):- Event-driven structure- Entity/Agent-based structure- Free-play or scripted- Seminar or “Chalk Talk”- Computer Assisted Exercise

MODEL(S):- What BEST SUPPORTS the training objectives and training audience- Technology cannot outweigh

training benefit/objectives

LAST to determine

12 of 16

EXERCISE DIRECTOR

SENIOR CONTROLLER& EXERCISE CONTROL

HICONTECHNICALMGT

SITEMGT

OBSERVERS & EXPERIMENTORS

RED CELL BLUE CELL GREEN CELL GREY CELL

ACTIVE OPPOSITION- Traditional Enemy Army- Loyalists / Insurgents- Organized Criminal Groups

ACTIVE (LOYAL) ALLIES - National Army/Police- National Gvmt Agencies

ACTIVE TRUE NEUTRALS- Local Populace- Local Leaders (Political & Tribal)

TRAINERCELL

SIMULATIONCONTROL

MSEL CELL

TRAININGAUDIENCE

GENERIC EXERCISE ENVIRONMENT Where theory and reality meet (and clash?)

FRIENDLY FORCES- Semi-autonomous- Often called “LOCON”- Direct relationship to TA

13 of 16

GENERIC EXERCISE ENVIRONMENT Where theory and reality meet (and clash?)

RED CELL • Variable Scale “REDFOR” • “Active Hostile” (RED) to “Passive Hostile” (PINK) • Converse applies • Happens per Exercise Director order - or - Semi-Autonomous function

GREY CELL • Variable Scale “GREYFOR” • “True Neutral” to “Leaning Friendly/Hostile” • GREY can (over time) turn BLUE or GREEN • GREY can (over time) turn PINK or RED • Converse applies • Happens per Exercise Director order - or - semi-autonomous function • Include semi-autonomous IO/GO/NGO play as UNCLAS inputs into exercise

BLUE CELL & GREEN CELL • Semi-autonomous play • Direct input to Training Audience • Account for multi-level classification • Remote location • National-level influences ?

EXERCISE ENVIRONMENT

14 of 16

RESTATED:

► Not all RED entities are equal

► Not all GREY entities are equal

► Account for human characteristics of:• Individuals/Entities• Organisations• Population clusters/centres

► Time matters• Rhythms (esp. URBAN rhythms)• Tempo and Duration

► “Actions-over-Time” matter(adding “consequence modeling”)

SOLVING THE “NOT (YET) POSSIBLE” The way ahead

• Technological Solutions– Multiple and changeable sides with

tailorable parameters– Key actors / agents interjection– Interactive infrastructures and systems

• Sewer / Trash • Electricity• Water • Traffic

– Social Network development and integration– Time factors:

• Urban “rhythms”• Longer-term consequences

• Non-technological Solutions– Social Network(s) incorporated into scenario

and environment– More detail into who needs to be replicated– Involve external (unclassified) input into

exercise play

15 of 16

CONCLUSION• 21st Century Warfare Trends

– “Intimate Warfare” concept– Human

• Exercise Design– What works well– What does not work well– Areas needing improvement

• Solving the Not (Yet) Possible– Three areas requiring research focus and development

– Changeable perception attributes– Urban centre infrastructure effects and interdepenencies– Time – rhythms and consequences

16 of 16

QUESTIONS

OF-4/LTC Brandon Herl (USA A)brandon.herl@act.nato.int (NATO UNCLAS at ACT)NCN +60 555-4244Commercial (USA): 757-747-4244