Army War Games Provide Azimuth For DoD's Future Force
By Gerry J. Gilmore
American Forces Press Service
WASHINGTON, April 29, 2002 -- War gamers at Carlisle
Barracks, Pa., are testing the envisioned capabilities of
the U.S. military of tomorrow -- a quickly-deployable,
interoperable, high-tech force with global reach -- today.
The transformation of the U.S. Army is nothing less than
the biggest upheaval in doctrine and equipment since tanks
replaced horses, said Army Brig. Gen. Michael Vane, deputy
chief of staff for doctrine, U.S. Army Training and
Doctrine Command.
To achieve military transformation, Vane noted, "We have to
change our culture, we have to change our processes, adapt
to new technologies, and, in the middle of this, we have to
have an adaptive mindset.
"We're well on our way," he added.
Vane was one of several transformation experts who answered
reporters' questions April 24 as part of media day at the
Army's "Vigilant Warriors 2002" war games at Carlisle, the
third annual.
From April 21-26, a group of 500 U.S. and allied military
and civilian personnel, sequestered in rooms filled with
wall-mounted maps, telephones and computer terminals,
conducted "table-top" exercises at Carlisle. The war gamers
focused on using expected military capabilities of tomorrow
-- to include the Army's future Objective Force -- to
mitigate several global crisis scenarios set in the year
2020.
Lessons learned from this year's war games not only assist
the Army in development of its Objective Force envisioned
around the year 2020, Vane remarked, they also address
service interoperability capabilities espoused by DoD's
Joint Vision doctrine.
Why change the U.S. military? Vane rhetorically asked. The
world situation has changed greatly since the Cold War
ended a decade ago, he remarked, pointing to the absence of
a peer competitor – for now – that can militarily challenge
America.
However, Vane noted that the Sept. 11, 2001 terrorist
attacks on the United States have proved that asymmetrical
warfare can be waged against the United States and its
allies. The U.S. military must begin to transform itself
for the future now, he said, using available technology to
prepare for a mix of threats to national security, at home
and abroad.
Scenarios depicted in this year's Vigilant Warrior
exercises include cascading military-strategic crises in
the Far East, Indonesia, Latin America, the Balkans, the
Caspian Sea region, and homeland threats to the United
States, noted Bill Rittenhouse, TRADOC's director of war
games.
Rittenhouse noted that the war games provide military
planners the opportunity to obtain operational
understanding of the effects and capabilities of military
transformation.
However, the war-gaming process "goes beyond" addressing
and solving mock military-political emergencies, he
explained.
"It gets to the notion of strategic responsiveness across
the spectrum, as a part of this joint team," Rittenhouse
continued. "It gets to change within our process of change,
our institutions for that, our culture, our philosophy
toward war fighting."
Most importantly, Rittenhouse said, war-gaming helps U.S.
military planners to understand how emerging American
technology could be applied to military needs, as well as
technology available on the international marketplace.
This is, he added, "all for the purpose of providing an
Objective Force as a member of the joint-combined team that
has the ability to assure our allies, dissuade and deter
our adversaries and, when the time comes, to decisively
defeat" anticipated threats.
The 2002 exercises at Carlisle involved increased combined
arms or joint participation, Rittenhouse noted, as compared
to more Army-specific scenarios in previous years. It would
take several days to resolve this year's mock global
"hotspots" at Carlisle, he noted, that in real time would
last more than a year.
The Army is now working on its rapid-deployable Interim
Force, which consists of fast-deployed, medium-weight
infantry brigades equipped with the Stryker multiwheeled,
armored vehicle. The 38,000-pound Stryker can be airlifted
to global hotspots by C-130 transport planes. Units
equipped with the behemoth, 70-ton M-1 Abrams tank, which
must be shipped to theater, take much longer to deploy.
"The Interim Force is a bridging strategy. We want to find
out more about the leadership, the training, the
deployability, the organization of our Objective Force,"
Vane said. "Technology today only has so much capability,
but we know what technologies we want in the future, so
let's put a few (available technologies) out there in this
force that's full-spectrum capable.
"It's not only for war fighting, it's also a bridging
strategy to how we change," he added.
Rittenhouse said Army planners expect that brigades
equipped with Strykers could be deployed to world hotspots
within 96 hours, much faster than heavy armor units. It
took six months to deploy U.S. forces to the Mideast for
Operations Desert Shield and Storm, primarily because tank
units had to be transported by ship.
Digital communications partnered with unmanned aerial
reconnaissance sensors will enhance these units' ability to
instantaneously pinpoint the whereabouts of friendly and
enemy forces, Rittenhouse noted. When matured, the
capabilities of these units, now called Initial Brigade
Combat Teams, will be shared across the Army and
incorporated into the Objective Force of 2020, he said.
Some Carlisle war gamers portrayed administration
officials, Joint Task Force and combined command commanders
in chief, special operations commanders, and other military
and diplomatic officials.
"My own role is to try to put it all in a broad national
security framework," said Lawrence Pope, a retired U.S.
diplomat and ambassador who served in North Africa and the
Middle East.
The Army's Objective Force "will be a very sharp sword,
clearly," Pope continued, "and the sharper the sword, the
more precision is required in using it, I think."
Technology-enhanced reconnaissance and communications
capabilities will provide the future Army with information
dominance, he said, noting it will "have insight into the
opponent, which enables it to attack the opponent in a way
that we can't do now," he explained, "It will understand
the opponent's strengths and weaknesses better."
Pope emphasized that such enhanced U.S. military capability
"makes it even more important that you get the politics and
the national interest side of it right before it's used."
Army Maj. Gen. Jerry Boykin, commanding general of the
Special Warfare Center, Fort Bragg, N.C., worked the war
game as the special operations forces commander for the
American Joint Task Force in the Indonesian scenario that
involved a fictional U.N. action to separate warring
factions.
"The idea is to get them separated and then be able to
transition to a U.N. peacekeeping force," Boykin said. The
exercise is "very interesting," he noted, because the war
gamers interact with other services as well as the Army.
The Indonesia scenario is a joint operation involving all
the services. "The Marines have a fairly robust force
afloat. The Army is playing its Objective Force, and then
we have the Air Force and the Navy playing their future
technologies," Boykin said.
He said the war game scenarios test the future U.S.
military by asking questions. "Is our force multifunctional
enough to be able to operate in a high-intensity conflict,
which is more of what is being played in the Caspian
scenario, and the low intensity end of the spectrum, which
is what we're playing?" he asked.
"Is our force flexible enough to do that?" he continued.
"And if it's not, what are the additional requirements that
we need to build into our capabilities?"
Conceptually, the war games are proving "that we're on the
right track," Boykin said, noting that a lighter and more
deployable U.S. force is a key to success.
"We can get there quicker," he noted.
Boykin said U.S. airborne and air assault troops would come
in handy in his Indonesia scenario, as it is located in a
part of the world with few improved roads. He said robotics
and UAVs would be widely used for high-human-risk
surveillance, reconnaissance and intelligence-gathering
missions.
"If I can send a robot or a UAV to find the enemy, that's
far more preferable," he remarked.
Boykin noted more long-range air transport and fast sea
transport would be needed to move troops for his scenario.
"Unquestionably, the Navy and the Air Force have got to
have the assets and the resources to move the Army," he
said. "We've got to have that to be able to get to the
battle."
Another important element "is to make sure that we have the
compatible command and control communications systems that
in fact will allow us to integrate," Boykin said, noting
that U.S. forces today are moving away from the term
integration.
"We really want to see DoD build an interdependence into
its future concepts and structure," he continued. "So, it's
not just a matter that we integrate, it's that we are
dependent upon each other."
Other war gamers played the opposition, developing and
launching strategies and counterforces to stymie American
and allied military attempts to resolve crises.
Rick Sinnreich, opposing Red force commander facing Boykin,
noted that his task as part of Vigilant Warriors is to
disrupt U.S. and allied "Blue" forces that try to prevent
insurrection in a country in the region.
"Give me a threat that won't roll over, that tries to be
really nasty, and there's a problem," Sinnreich said.
Throughout the war games, the Army is trying "to make it as
difficult for themselves as they can, so that they have
some assurance: 'Boy, if it will work against that, it will
probably work,'" he added.
The Caspian Sea scenario involved competing regional
interests, and eventually war, over oil and natural gas,
said retired Marine Corps Col. Darrell Combs, an
infantryman by trade who portrayed the deputy opposition
force commander.
Combs said his forces seized territory near an important
pipeline. After diplomatic efforts failed to resolve the
situation, he noted, American troops were sent to the
region.
"There has been 30 days of pretty intensive combat, with
the Army's Objective Force being the key maneuver element
that's come against us," Combs said, adding, there'd been
some air combat, too.
Combs said his air force is unique in the Caspian scenario.
It's comprised entirely of unmanned aerial vehicles.
"We don't have pilots in our Air Force, except for
helicopters. We spent our money on (armed) UAVs … almost
1,000 of them," he explained. "We're using them as 'niche'
technology against the Army's Objective Force, which is a
very … capable force."
The Army's Objective Force in the Caspian Sea scenario is
very rapidly deployable and gets to the battlefield with a
lot of capabilities, especially in communications and
intelligence-gathering, he continued.
As part of early lessons learned in the scenario, Combs
noted, the joint community is going to have to weigh in to
provide adequate air transport capability to get the
Objective Force to the battlefield "so it can be fully
effective."
Army transformation efforts are headed in the right
direction, Vane said. As Army transformation continues, he
added, more attention needs to be paid to joint operations.
"We can't transform and come up with a new way to do
something without fitting in, and so we have to interweave
with the joint process," he concluded.
|