nato unclassified 2015 chiefs of transformation conference · 1. the 2015 cotc was held at the...

NATO UNCLASSIFIED

NATO UNCLASSIFIED

2015 Chiefs of Transformation Conference

Analysis Report

Prepared by:

Transformation Network Branch Headquarters Supreme Allied Commander Transformation

North Atlantic Treaty Organization

NATO UNCLASSIFIED

2 NATO UNCLASSIFIED

Executive Summary

The following 2015 Chiefs of Transformation Conference (COTC) summary report is presented as a record of the conduct, discussions and recommendations of the Conference. The implementation of takeaways from the event will be the prime focus of the COT network in the coming months.

The Conference remains the only venue where national Chiefs of Transformation (COTs) from the Alliance and Partners have the opportunity to interact and collaborate, not only with each other, but also with the senior leadership of Allied Command Transformation (ACT) and with other actors involved in innovation and transformation. Interest in the COTC continues to grow with over 420 registered participants from 50 different nations attending this year’s event. This increasing interest is indicative of the appetite amongst the nations to develop pragmatic, collaborative solutions to deal with mutual issues of concern. The stated aims of the Conference are to discuss transformational initiatives and ideas, exchange best practices and identify actionable areas of potential cooperation. The event also provides many networking opportunities that often reveal a much clearer picture of the issues that are most important to the nations, who remain the guardians of Transformation.

Opening the Conference with a recorded message NATO’s Deputy Secretary General outlined his near-term vision for the Alliance. He underlined that NATO currently faces the most complex and dangerous security situation in decades with simultaneous strategic challenges to the South and to the East. Noting the most recent attacks in Paris and California, along with an aggressive and revisionist Russia, he stressed that these challenges demand political unity, resolve and solidarity, as well as military readiness and responsiveness.

Many of the pre-Summit topics were discussed in detail throughout the event including the Resilience of the Alliance, Hybrid / Cyber warfare, Partnerships and Multinational Initiatives, Defence Capacity Building (DCB), and the ongoing implementation of the Readiness Action Plan (RAP). These discussions were all held in the context of recognising that NATO’s long-term transformation demands both financial and intellectual investment along with a requirement for strategic innovation to harness new ways of working to remain ahead of potential adversaries.

NATO UNCLASSIFIED

3 NATO UNCLASSIFIED

The morning of the second day saw a NATO Forum take place at HQ SACT which provided an opportunity for Alliance-only discussions primarily focused on the RAP. Noting the success of a similar session the previous year, this was followed by a private Round Table discussion period between the NATO COTs and the Supreme Allied Commander Transformation (SACT), General Denis Mercier. Concurrently, a Partner nation COTs Round Table (PRT) was conducted at the conference hotel which provided an opportunity for Partner transformational staffs to explore ways in which they might expand cooperation with NATO in areas such as Science & Technology (S&T), Modelling & Simulation (M&S) as well as increased participation in the NATO-accredited Centres of Excellence (COEs).

On completion of the Round Tables all participants reconvened at the hotel for the final afternoon of the conference. This included debriefs from the previous day’s five breakout sessions, summaries of the morning’s discussions at HQ SACT and at the hotel, and a final wrap-up and closing statement from General Mercier.

Key Takeaways:

To address hybrid threats NATO critically requires a strategy that includes improved analysis and a sharing of intelligence. The development of a NATO Counter-Hybrid Implementation Plan needs to be achieved alongside Partners and other non-NATO entities such as the EU.

NATO’s Cyber Capabilities require improvement through experimentation to increase the speed of bringing new capabilities to the field. Relationships need to be built with industry to explore the cyber challenge and exploit innovative technology to the Alliance’s benefit.

The continued need to work with our Partners to enhance interoperability utilizing the available tools while developing Individually Tailored Roadmaps was reiterated.

Greater emphasis is required on Multinational (MN) capability development including improved effort to enhance the synchronization of current MN initiatives.

NATO needs to build a shared understanding of resilience and the development of a framework for enhancing Nations’ and Partners’ resilience will be explored.

Gender is an important element of the Human Capital Focus Area - and is strongly supported by ACO and ACT Leadership.

The added value of developing flexible guidelines on the linkage between National and NATO exercises was agreed.

NATO Centres of Excellence are key stakeholders who continue to expand and play an ever-increasing role in Transformation. This connection will be strengthened to support ACT’s functional analysis of six Transformational Focus Areas.

In conclusion, General Mercier stated that COTC had clearly identified many opportunities for continued improvement looking towards and beyond the Warsaw Summit. These improvements will push forward the Alliance’s Transformation efforts and the necessary cultural change discussed during the conference. Transformation remains absolutely necessary although Transformation is not just done for the sake of Transforming - rather, what is important is the output which is the capacity of NATO Nations to face all current and future challenges.

NATO UNCLASSIFIED

4 NATO UNCLASSIFIED

Contents

Executive Summary ........................................................................................................ 2

Contents ......................................................................................................................... 4

Analysis Report.......................................................................................................... 5-19

Annexes:

A. Conference Agenda

B. Breakout Session 1: Interoperability with Partners.

C. Breakout Session 2: How to prioritize then synchronize across NATO’s multinational initiatives

and allow visibility with other capability development actors to address shortfalls?

D. Breakout Session 3: What is a nation’s role in improving the resilience of the Alliance?

E. Breakout Session 4: How the integration of a gender perspective, iaw UNSCR 1325

implementation, is crucial to ensuring the effectiveness of NATO-led training, exercises and

operations?

F. Breakout Session 5: Global Programming - Opportunities for Nations.

G. NATO Chiefs of Transformation Forum

H. Partner Chiefs of Transformation Round Table

NATO UNCLASSIFIED

5 NATO UNCLASSIFIED

Analysis Report

INTRODUCTION

1. The 2015 COTC was held at the Marriott Waterside Hotel in Norfolk, Virginia, from 08-10 December 2015. In preparation for the event, a COT workshop was hosted by the Turkish military authorities in Istanbul in early September to assist with the development of the Conference topics. 420 personnel (including over 70 Flag and General Officers and senior civilian equivalents) attended the 2015 COTC, representing 27 NATO member nations, 23 Partner nations, 16 NATO Centres of Excellence (COEs), staff from NATO HQ, HQ SACT, SHAPE, NATO Education and Training Facilities, NATO’s Science & Technology Organization, the European Union and European Defence Agency, and representatives from industry. The detailed Conference Agenda is provided at Annex A.

2. The Conference opened with a recorded message from Ambassador Alexander Vershbow, NATO’s Deputy Secretary General. This was followed by a plenary session consisting of two panel discussions: (1) The Road to Warsaw: Strategic Perspectives; and (2) The Changing Face of Warfare. The first panel was moderated by General Denis Mercier, Supreme Allied Commander Transformation (SACT), while the second panel was moderated by Lieutenant General Jeffrey Lofgren, Deputy Chief of Staff Capability Development (DCOS CD), HQ SACT. Each of the two panels was followed by a question and answer period.

3. Session II covered five breakout groups (highlighted below) that explored key topics identified by the nations, and ACT, during the COT planning workshop (summary reports from each of these discussions are provided at Annexes B to F):

a. Interoperability with Partners.

b. How to prioritize then synchronize across NATO’s multinational initiatives and allow visibility with other capability development actors to address shortfalls?

c. What is a nation’s role in improving the resilience of the Alliance?

d. How the integration of a gender perspective, iaw UNSCR 1325 implementation, is crucial to ensuring the effectiveness of NATO-led training, exercises and operations?

e. Global Programming - Opportunities for Nations.

4. The first day concluded with a number of bi-lateral meetings scheduled between Conference attendees, ACT leadership and the national COTs.

NATO UNCLASSIFIED

6 NATO UNCLASSIFIED

5. The second day saw a significant change to the schedule in comparison to previous years with the morning’s activities being split between HQ SACT and the Marriott hotel. Session III saw a NATO COT Forum take place at HQ SACT which allowed 160 attendees to take part in classified discussions mostly concerning the concepts and implementation of NATO’s Readiness Action Plan. On completion the NATO COTs were invited to join General Mercier for a private discussion at a closed Round Table session. Concurrently, during the morning at the hotel, the Partner COT Round Table (Session IV) was chaired by Major General Ali Çetinkaya, Deputy Chief of Staff Military Partnerships Directorate (DCOS MPD) with General Mirco Zuliani, Deputy Supreme Allied Commander Transformation (DSACT) in attendance. At the conclusion of the Partner COT Round table, the Partner COTs were invited for a private discussion with General Zuliani (Annexes G and H refer).

6. On completion of the morning’s events all participants reconvened at the Marriot hotel for lunch and the final conference sessions. In Session V, the outputs from each of the previous day’s breakout groups were presented. Thereafter, Lieutenant General Lofgren provided the combined audience with an unclassified debrief of the morning’s NATO COT Forum at HQ SACT. This was followed by Major General Çetinkaya who presented the outcomes from the morning’s Partner COT Round Table.

7. Finally, in closing the 2015 COTC, General Mercier summarized the previous two days’ discussions and underlined the following:

a. Addressing hybrid threats - a critical aspect of NATO’s strategy is the need for greater analysis and improved sharing of intelligence. A Counter-Hybrid Implementation Plan will require building flexible security networks with Allies, Partners and other non-NATO entities, including the EU.

b. The need to further address NATO’s Cyber Capabilities. Some of the clear outputs included the requirement to use experiments to more quickly bring capabilities to the field and 'de-risk' the effort. Discussions had further highlighted the importance of building relationships with industry to explore the Cyber challenges, and leverage potential technological breakthroughs. This will include developing Response Capability, Defence Capability, Information Assurance and Sharing, and Training.

c. The outputs from the five breakout sessions highlighted:

(1) The continued progress of working with our Partners and in light of their diverse needs and abilities continuing to adapt and align interoperability efforts such as the existing partnership tools and the Individually Tailored Roadmaps.

(2) In the area of Defence Planning, the requirement to work with Nations to define the benefits of Multinational vs. National Approaches to Capability Development. In support of this aim HQ SACT and NATO HQ’s International Staff Defence Investment division (IS/DI) personnel will host a Multinational Solutions Synchronization Workshop in Prague in May.

(3) There is an accepted need to build a shared understanding of resilience in view of contemporary and future threats.

(4) A recognition that a gender perspective is an essential element of the Human Capital Focus Area as strongly supported by the ACO and ACT leadership.

(5) The added value of developing flexible guidelines on the linkage between National and NATO exercises.

d. The 24 NATO Centres of Excellence continue to expand and play an ever-increasing role in the Alliance’s Transformation. SACT FOGOs will strengthen this connection and will actively involve the COEs in the functional analysis of the six Focus Areas as they provide innovative concepts and ideas to design the future of NATO's Posture.

NATO UNCLASSIFIED

7 NATO UNCLASSIFIED

PLENARY SESSION AND PANEL DISCUSSIONS

8. The opening plenary sessions and related panel discussions provided a forum for the Deputy Secretary General and some of NATO’s foremost leaders to outline their visions for NATO.

Keynote Address

9. In his video address Ambassador Vershbow described the conference as an ideal opportunity to connect, exchange views and collaborate, and to influence the work of the Alliance. In particular he noted that from Afghanistan through the Middle East and across North Africa, that NATO is being confronted with a pattern of weak and failing states, radical terrorist movements, with growing violence and instability that has led to untold human suffering. The ongoing war in Syria and the rise of ISIL has prompted the largest flow of refugees since the Second World War, affecting many Allies. NATO Allies and many countries from the Middle East/North Africa region, are already taking part in the global coalition to degrade and destroy ISIL, however the threat of spill-over of the conflict, the spread of weapons of mass destruction, and an upsurge in terrorist attacks all represent threats that NATO must be ready to counter.

10. Addressing Russia’s renewed aggressive posture and rhetoric, he noted that the Kremlin has demonstrated that it does not share the Alliance’s vision of a Europe whole, free and at peace; it had effectively torn up the rule-book of the post-Cold War security system, and sought to return to a Europe based on spheres of influence and domination of big states over their neighbours. Russia’s hybrid strategy, a sophisticated model using political, diplomatic, economic, overt and subversive means, cyber-attacks, and large-scale no-notice military exercises, combined with a huge propaganda and disinformation campaign, provided particular concern. Furthermore, Russia’s intervention in Syria has further complicated the situation in the Middle East and, with its incursions into Turkish airspace, is potentially increasing tension. Its continued support of the Assad regime and targeting of moderate opposition forces can only prolong the conflict and increase the suffering of the Syrian people. Overall, the simultaneous strategic challenges to the South and East require a long-term response, and next year’s NATO Summit in Warsaw will be an important step towards the comprehensive, long-term military, political and institutional adaptation of the Alliance that not only build on, but go beyond, the decisions taken in Wales.

11. For military adaptation, NATO’s Readiness Action Plan is the foundation to be complemented by a new strategy to counter hybrid warfare which includes an ambition to coordinate in a coherent manner with the EU. Fundamental to any longer-term response will be credible deterrence and defence against all potential adversaries and threats, and it is recognized that some of NATO’s basic deterrence and defence instincts need to be refreshed while ensuring the capacity to reinforce, even in the most challenging scenarios, together with sufficiently robust forward presence to counter short-warning and hybrid attacks. Credible national forces remain NATO’s first line of defence. The Allies’

NATO UNCLASSIFIED

8 NATO UNCLASSIFIED

ability to deliver the high-end capabilities needed for national defence and reinforcement will underpin NATO’s deterrence posture and send a strong signal of resolve and solidarity.

12. Regarding political adaptation, the long-term implications of Russia’s foreign and defence policies as well as its nuclear strategy in the wake of Moscow’s aggression against Ukraine are currently being assessed. While any renewed partnership with Russia is a distant prospect, the question is not whether there will be a relationship but the kind of relationship. It remains in the interests of both sides to engage in a dialogue - at a minimum, to avoid misunderstandings and accidents when forces come into contact; to ensure that tensions are not needlessly heightened; and to seek to achieve greater transparency and predictability of military activities. In parallel, NATO will continue to support Russia’s beleaguered neighbours, especially Ukraine, Georgia and Moldova, whose sovereignty is being challenged.

13. Also the Alliance needs to step up cooperative security efforts in the South, as part of a comprehensive strategy to address instability there. By building the capacity of countries like Tunisia and Jordan, by helping Iraq and, in the future, Libya to become more stable, the Alliance’s security at home will be strengthened. This will require more resources to be devoted to defence capacity building and other partnership programmes with the view expressed that spending more now may save far more substantial costs of intervention later.

14. Finally, regarding institutional adaptation, Ambassador Vershbow stated that NATO HQ must be able to monitor, assess and react effectively to events, to enable the North Atlantic Council to respond as quickly as it was able to do during the Cold War. To be able to achieve this, NATO is addressing the requirement of speed in every dimension: to enable rapid decision-making, supported by better indicators and warnings and solid advance planning, and sufficient authority to military commanders to prepare the forces even while political deliberations are still underway.

15. In closing, the Deputy Secretary General noted that the challenge is now for the Alliance to deliver on all these strands of work. He stressed, however, that defence, security and liberty do not come for free and therefore NATO’s long-term transformation demands both financial as well as intellectual investment. Strategic innovation - the harnessing of new technologies and new ways of working together - was deemed to be essential to ensure that the Alliance always remains several steps ahead of its adversaries.

Panel 1 - The Road to Warsaw

16. The first panel discussion was introduced and moderated by General Mercier. In addition to SACT, the panel consisted of Mr Patrick Auroy (Assistant Secretary General for Defence Investment), Lieutenant General Mark Schissler (Deputy Chairman of the Military Committee), Lieutenant General Michel Yakovleff (Vice Chief of Staff SHAPE), Mr Jorge Domecq (Chief Executive of the European Defence Agency) and Mr Timo Koster (International Staff, Director Defence Policy and Capabilities).

NATO UNCLASSIFIED

9 NATO UNCLASSIFIED

17. In his opening remarks SACT detailed his transformational vision by underlining that NATO’s three core tasks remain entirely valid and collectively they enable the Alliance to address all threats, although the greatest challenge is to counter threats that attack NATO’s Centre of Gravity - Alliance Cohesion. Therefore NATO must define a posture that is both militarily and politically credible - this is the main output of Transformation, to build this posture for Now and the Future. Such a posture relies on a solid, modern recognition of NATO’s Capacity and SACT explained the six Transformational Focus Areas for ACT: Command and Control, Logistics and Sustainability, Collective Training and Exercises, Partnerships, Human Capital, and Capabilities.

18. Beyond the Warsaw Summit, General Mercier highlighted the need to get ahead of evolving trends and breakthroughs including more powerful weapons and technology as adversaries are already taking advantage of these via open networks. Greater partnering with industry would be required - improving NATO’s Capacity could not be achieved on its own. SACT noted that there are already 22 member nations of both NATO and the EU and these two organizations required greater synergy while maintaining their own uniqueness.

19. In his opening statement, Mr Koster stated that NATO was facing a large number of new security challenges with shrunken capabilities and limited resources and that there was a renewed need to achieve the 2% GDP defence spending pledge. He further highlighted that while the Alliance had chosen rapid reinforcement over permanent presence most exercises were still supply-driven rather than being based upon operational necessity or concepts. Mr Koster suggested that the A2AD strategy being developed by Russia could be viewed as a direct result of NATO’s decision to opt for a policy of rapid reinforcement, and perhaps NATO needs to re-calibrate to forward-basing in order to counter A2AD. He also raised the issue of “speed” which has many dimensions, particularly challenging when rapidly deploying forces - issues such as rapid decision-making, improved indicators and warnings, strategic lift (not just air) and the ability to seamlessly cross borders (without waiting three weeks for a diplomatic clearance) all need to be factored into the equation. Discussing deterrence, he stressed that credible deterrence against Russia, a ‘conventional’ threat, would require the full spectrum of Allies’ diplomatic, military and economic capabilities to be harnessed, whilst also suggesting that ISIL, a ‘non-conventional’ threat, may actually be un-deterrable.

NATO UNCLASSIFIED

10 NATO UNCLASSIFIED

20. Lieutenant General Yakovleff provided an operational perspective stating that NATO has continual change in its DNA and has already been changing and transforming for years. However, it was his opinion that the NATO Command Structure as the “engine of NATO” is currently too small to pull the “train of the NATO Force Structure" but unfortunately the Nations had very little appetite for a required overhaul. While change must continue in new specific areas such as the Readiness Action Plan, there is an overall need for a change of culture to allow NATO to improve its responsiveness including its decision making processes within the operational chain of command. He was concerned about the end of tactical overmatch that NATO has enjoyed for decades; as an example, NATO has previously enjoyed total and absolute air dominance, however that is changing and he questioned what measure of airpower NATO can apply without having first achieved air supremacy. In closing, he warned that NATO may need to "unlearn" some lessons learned and re-iterated the importance of Partners, not only for their capabilities, but for the political legitimacy.

21. Lieutenant General Schissler opened by re-stating that the world is unpredictable and that despite our best efforts to forecast, many unforeseen events (Arab Spring, the Tsunami, the rise of ISIL/Daesh) continue to occur. In particular, he emphasized that NATO can no longer rely upon its long-term strategic plans because the current pace of change often renders them out-of-date before they are finished. Adaptation remains important but the challenge is how to predict what is required to adapt rather than just reacting to the latest issue or threat. NATO is currently applying most efforts towards the East and South but nothing towards the North and West. He suggested that the Alliance needs a revised 360° approach with a renewed resilience to address unpredictable threats.

22. Assistant Secretary General Auroy reminded the audience of the inherent risks to transformation without the necessary investment. The environment today sees the globalization of all technology and information. Technical costs continue to drop and barriers to the availability of new technology reduce. He questioned whether the Alliance is truly aware of what is happening in the commercial / industrial world that directly impacts military forces. To succeed NATO must understand and integrate these technological innovations into its transformation and use “off the shelf” technologies to support these efforts as required. This will undoubtedly require thinking outside of standard defence industry companies.

23. Finally, Mr Jorge Domecq provided his perspective as Chief Executive of the European Defence Agency stating the need for fairer European burden sharing while accepting that a greater role for EU Defence does not mean doing less with NATO. He stressed that more integrated planning between EU and NATO is required although the EU, as Europe's strategic authority, still needed to maintain a degree of freedom of action. Interoperability of forces and standardization of equipment, tactics and training with NATO are key. Increased expenditure is critical, however the more that is invested in defence, the more that duplication must be avoided. In closing, Mr Domecq suggested that the EU’s and NATO’s Defence Planning Processes must be better aligned in future.

NATO UNCLASSIFIED


Panel 2 - The Changing Face of Warfare

24. The second panel discussion was introduced and moderated by Lieutenant General Jeff Lofgren (ACT’s Deputy Chief of Staff for Capability Development). He was joined on stage by Lieutenant General Erhard Bühler (Head of the Bundeswehr Planning Directorate), Brigadier General Sami Kafawin, (Director of Joint Operations, Jordanian Armed Forces HQ), Brigadier James Stevenson (Deputy Commander NATO Special Operations Command) and Dr. Joseph E. Fergus (Chief Executive Officer of Communication Technologies Inc).

25. In opening the panel, Lieutenant General Lofgren noted that the Alliance is being challenged by hybrid threats in many different ways. NATO must learn to anticipate these while improving our ability to defend and counter such threats. Much work is already underway and an adaptive and integrated counter hybrid strategy is currently being put in place. The main tenets of this strategy are Prepare, Deter, and Defend: “Prepare” means putting capabilities and policies in place that enable NATO to engage hybrid threats, connecting hybrid events across the spectrum to understand their impact on the Alliance, and to revise the Training and Exercise programme to include hybrid; “Deter” includes building nations’ resilience and strategic awareness to enable targeted deterrence to be employed in a timely fashion; and “Defend” through cooperation and coordination with Allies and Partners to leveraging our own cyber capabilities and deny adversaries the freedom to act.

26. Lieutenant General Bühler then outlined Germany’s strategic foresight process including efforts to address the increased cyber threat. Collective defence was emphasized as providing a broad spectrum of military capabilities to respond to these threats. An overall increase in situational awareness was needed through improved C4I. Multinationality was seen as key enabler and is a key part of Germany’s defence strategy with multinational goals and targets addressing NATO targets and shortfalls. In this respect Germany will continue its close cooperation and integration relationships with its neighbours and to contribute to the Readiness Action Plan through the Framework Nation Concept.

NATO UNCLASSIFIED


27. The next speaker, Brigadier General Kafawin, observed that Jordan has and will continue to play a fundamental role in the region as one of NATO’s key working coalition Partners. He stressed that in the fight to counter extremism the most important war is in the hearts and minds of the people who seek peace. All countries in the area must come together to deal with current threats in the Middle East (e.g. Daesh). Jordan has a great desire to work with other Partners to increase regional safety and security and a collective effort will be made to discredit the terrorists and send a message to the people that global partnerships cannot be defeated.

28. Thereafter, Brigadier Stevenson provided his perspective from his position as Deputy Commander at NATO’s Special Forces (SOF) HQ at SHAPE. He reiterated that NATO needs to adjust to the new and innovative ways of how warfare is being waged; there is a fundamental change occurring in the way warfare is being conducted and NATO risks being completely out-manoeuvered. In particular NATO SOF is working to understand the threat and develop solutions prior to events occurring. He recommended that they are prepared to exploit opportunities and not just set directly against other SOF. Further, they should be used to enhance pre-crisis activities by supporting “steady state” efforts to counter threats such as Anti Access Area Denial (A2AD) tactics.

29. Finally Dr. Fergus, a leading expert in the cyber industry, gave a fascinating insight of the issue which is currently going through extraordinary change with major consequences to civilians, governments and militaries. By 2020 over seven billion smart devices will be interconnected with many acting “autonomously”. He welcomed that NATO’s leadership is realizing the impact of cyber on the changing face of warfare but that expansion has put the Alliance in a vulnerable position with regard to network-centric operations. Therefore NATO’s mission objectives for cyber must be clear including a strong deterrence capability which takes the fight to adversaries when required. It was recommended that Cyber is elevated to the same level of Component Command as other conventional warfare areas (sea, air, land, space) with a posture adopted that allows offensive response, although this will require the ability to attribute attack, along with an effective defence with the ability to detect, deter and exploit. Information sharing will be the key to NATO’s success and it was suggested that a “Cyber Pledge” is established for Allies and Partners with all members having a certain minimum level of cyber capability. In conclusion, he stressed that cyber awareness training is essential for all staff and not just IT personnel.

NATO UNCLASSIFIED


BREAKOUT SESSION SUMMARIES (Annexes B-F provide further detail)

30. Breakout Session 1 - Interoperability with Partners.

Table 1 - Interoperability with Partners (IP): Takeaways

IP-1 Plan Interoperability with Partners across all dimensions of transformation: Lessons Learned; Capability Development; Education, Training and Exercises; and Future Concepts.

IP-2 Develop more tailor-made tools - to sustain diverse relationships, like Individual Tailored Roadmaps.

IP-3 NATO provide an agile response to Partners’ interoperability needs.

IP-4 NATO provide a more comprehensive and longer term approach to interoperability with Partners.

IP-5 Match NATO interoperability Partners’ ambitions with resources.

IP-6 Coordination of bilateral support to Partners.

31. Breakout Session 2 - How to prioritize then synchronize across NATO’s multinational initiatives and allow visibility with other capability development actors to address shortfalls?

Table 2 - Multinational Initiatives (MNI): Takeaways

MNI-1 Common access to platforms/databases to share information across capabilities development organizations to avoid duplication and harmonize capability development.

MNI-2 Development of potential multinational targets.

MNI-3 A Multinational Solutions Synchronization Workshop will be held in Prague, in May 2016, to provide a basis for sharing information on multinational initiatives.

NATO UNCLASSIFIED


32. Breakout Session 3 - What is a nation’s role in improving the resilience of the Alliance?

Table 3 - Alliance Resilience (AR): Takeaways

AR-1 Essence of resilience: the ability to resist and to recover.

AR-2 Need to set minimal level of requirement to 'standardize' resilience across the Alliance and pledge to achieve it. Transparency of vulnerabilities and risks is needed in order to utilize the Alliance and EU tools and mechanisms to mitigate potential gaps and to achieve required level of resilience.

AR-3 Need for change 'in culture' through educating, understanding and sharing. Integrated exercises (military, industry, society, IOs, NGOs...) should build resilience and enhance physical, intellectual and psychological domains of the Alliance.

33. Breakout Session 4 - How the integration of a gender perspective, iaw UNSCR 1325 implementation, is crucial to ensuring the effectiveness of NATO-led training, exercises and operations?

Table 4 - Gender Perspective (GEN): Takeaways

GEN-1 Gender Mainstreaming in the learning cycle:

2016 POW for JALLC and relevant COEs’ lessons identified/ learned.

Integrate gender perspective into war fighting doctrine.

Annual Bi-SC report on the practical application of the gender perspective, with vignettes.

Ensure Education, Training, Exercises and Evaluation (ETEE) objectives drive practical application of gender integration.

Increase participation in senior leader seminars.

NATO UNCLASSIFIED


GEN-2 Formally include Gender Mainstreaming in the comprehensive approach, to include reporting.

GEN-3 Support the establishment and training of gender advisors at all levels and in all functions.

GEN-4 Integrate gender perspectives in Security Force Assistance and Defence Capacity Building.

34. Breakout Session 5 - Global Programming: Opportunities for Nations.

Table 5 - Global Programming (GP): Takeaways

GP-1 NATO and Partner Nations are interested in, and recognize, resources in order to support the High Visibility Exercise (HVEx) 2018 and the NATO Exercise Programme as a whole.

GP-2 Synergy between National Exercises and NATO Exercises contributes to interoperability and provides assurance throughout the Alliance and to Partners.

GP-3 Global Programming provides a structured approach to NATO Education and Training (E&T) driven by requirements and considered by Nations as a promising avenue.

GP-4 Develop clear but flexible guidelines on Exercise Linkage procedures between National and NATO exercises.

GP-5 More clarity on Education and Individual Training (E&IT) is required to delineate NATO responsibilities and national responsibilities.

GP-6 In order to better integrate NATO nations’ and Partner nations’ E&T opportunities into Global Programming, unmet specific NATO E&T requirements must be communicated.

NATO UNCLASSIFIED


NATO CHIEFS OF TRANSFORMATION FORUM

35. The NATO COT Forum was held in the new auditorium at HQ SACT allowing approximately 160 attendees to participate in two hours of dynamic discussions, up to classified level, between a panel consisting of General Mercier (SACT), Lieutenant General Bühler (Director Defence Plans and Policy

Germany), Lieutenant General Lofgren (ACT DCOS CAPDEV), Major General Väli (NATO HQ International Military Staff, Director Plans and Policy), and Brigadier General Watteeuw (ACT ACOS

Defence Planning) and a NATO audience including the NATO COTs and representatives from across

the NATO Command Structure and the NATO Centres of Excellence (COEs). The ensuing panel

discussion with questions from the audience was chaired by General Mercier, and the agenda covered the following topics:

a. Readiness Action Plan - introduced by a presentation from Col John Dalby (ACT Response Force Integrated Project Team Lead).

b. Framework Nations Concept (FNC) and its link to the build up of “Larger Formations” in the RAP - introduced by Lt Gen Bühler (COT DEU).

c. RAP Implementation progress and way ahead - introduced by Maj Gen Väli (IMS, Dir P&P).

d. An address by Col Been (Director Civil-Military Cooperation COE and current

Chairman of the NATO COE Directors)

Further detail on the NATO Forum is provided at Annex G.

Table 6 - NATO Forum: Takeaways

NF-1 RAP implementation is progressing well in some areas however there are several others that require addressing.

NF-2 NATO COTs are strongly encouraged to review their national contributions with a

view to either joining existing Multinational (MN) initiatives or commence actions

to address NATO’s priority capability shortfall areas.

NF-3 FNC is progressing well based upon its principles of being aligned with the NATO Defence Planning Process (NDPP) and remaining complementary to both the

Smart Defence (SD) and Connected Force Initiative (CFI), open to Partners; and

based upon MN capability development.

NF-4 NATO COTS should consider Germany’s proposal regarding FNC and its link in the RAP to building of larger MN land formations.

NF-5 The NCS, through ACT’s FOGOs, will strengthen its connection with the NATO

COEs who will contribute to the functional analysis of the six Focus Areas.

NF-6 An investigation is required to determine how national and EU defence planning

can be better aligned with the NATO Defence Planning Process (NDPP).

NATO UNCLASSIFIED


PARTNER CHIEFS OF TRANSFORMATION ROUND TABLE

36. Major General Çetinkaya (DCOS MPD) chaired the Partner Round Table held at the Marriot Hotel (concurrently with the NATO Round Table at HQ SACT) with General Zuliani (DSACT) in attendance.

37. Partners discussed ACT’s results and findings on the Framework for Future Alliance Operations (FFAO) and the Partner specific implications of Long-Term Military Transformation (LTMT) and perspectives of the Partnership Strategy at NATO HQ, as well as Strategic Command (SC) level. A discussion of the effects of the Operational Capabilities Concept (OCC) regarding the transformation of Partner Nations’ armed forces concluded the first part.

38. Attendees continued their round table by a series of panel discussions ranging from Partner

Nation contributions to NATO-accredited COEs, the role and influence of NATO’s Science and

Technology Organization (S&TO) as well as NATO’s Modelling and Simulation (M&S) with regard to

Partner interoperability with NATO. The Partner Interoperability Advocacy Group (PIAG) expanded

on their contributions to Partner interoperability. Various SMEs set the stage for in-depth and frank

discussions and DCOS MPD will analyse and, where possible, take forward the Round Table observations and recommendations. Further detail on the Partner COT Round Table is provided at Annex H.

Table 7 - Partner Round Table: Takeaways

PRT-1 LTMT relevant to Partners and Allies.

PRT-2 NATO Partnership Strategy needs continuous adaptation in order to satisfy

NATO and Partners’ needs.

PRT-3 OCC supports transformation.

PRT-4 COEs provide a suitable venue to increase interoperability.

PRT-5 S&T and M&S supporting transformation by providing training, validation and experimentation tools.

PRT-6 PIAG provides Partners’ point of view on the evolvement of the Partnership

Toolbox.

NATO UNCLASSIFIED


CONCLUSION

39. The 2015 COTC again represented a unique opportunity for national COTs to connect with each other and with NATO, and to meet, exchange and influence those who are working in, or with, NATO. The conference clearly identified many opportunities for continued improvement, looking beyond the Warsaw Summit. These improvements will push forward Transformation efforts and the necessary cultural change discussed during this conference.

40. Some of the critical themes identified, as the Alliance continues to adapt enroute to the Warsaw Summit and beyond, included the need to transform NATO’s posture, the military credibility of which will depend on NATO's capacity. To support this transformation, General Mercier laid-out six Focus Areas that will drive ACT's work and outputs: Command and Control, Logistics and Sustainability, Collective Training and Exercises, Partnership, Human Capital and Capabilities.

41. The discussions on hybrid threats highlighted that the analysis and sharing of information and intelligence in order to have the right indicators across the spectrum of threats is a critical aspect of any strategy. For NATO, the ability to conduct such analyses requires the building of flexible security networks with Allies, Partners and other non-NATO entities, particularly the EU who is already working on the creation of an intelligence fusion cell. The work on strategic awareness will be critical as actions to quickly develop the Counter-Hybrid Implementation Plan commence.

42. There was a clear identification by many conference speakers and attendees for the need to further address the Alliance’s Cyber Capabilities. Cyber should be strongly considered as an operational domain. Moreover, experimentation can quickly bring capabilities to the field and 'de-risk' development. With regards to Cyber challenges and capability development, outreach and relationships with industry during concept, exploration and experimentation will enable the development of Response Capabilities, Defence Capability (big-data / cloud), Information Sharing, and Training.

43. The conference also highlighted the need to build a shared understanding amongst Allies and Partners on how to improve resilience from a conceptual, physical and psychological perspective. Because of the inherent interconnectedness across the civil and military sectors, NATO will also need to work alongside other entities (such as multinational corporations, industry and the EU) to determine what tools are available to collectively enhance our resilience.

44. During the Joint Force Training discussions, it was agreed on the added value of developing flexible guidelines on the linkage between National and NATO exercises continuing on the model of Trident Juncture 2015. It was further decided to provide guidance on exercises and individual training to delineate NATO and National responsibilities.

NATO UNCLASSIFIED


45. It was recognized that a greater visibility of efforts to align Multinational initiatives with Alliance capability priorities identified in NDPP will help to minimize duplication in capability development, under the Framework Nation Concept. In this regard ACT is planning, alongside NATO HQ’s Defence Investment staff, a Multinational Solutions Synchronization Workshop to be held in Prague, on 24-25 May 2016. The aim will be to share lessons and best practices across the various multinational initiatives to help align efforts with Alliance priorities while providing visibility to minimize duplication across the various actors in capability development.

46. Conference discussions further reiterated the importance of helping NATO’s Partners to strengthen their resilience, develop their defence capacities, and become more interoperable with NATO forces, with the overriding goal of enabling them to project stability in their own regions. Individually Tailored Roadmaps and the use of existing partnership tools to adapt and align interoperability efforts will further enhance these relationships.

47. ACO and ACT leadership strongly support the inclusion of a gender perspective into all aspects of NATO’s Security Force Assistance, the 2016 programmes of work of the Joint Analysis Lessons Learned Centre and relevant Centres of Excellence, Defence and related Security Capacity Building, and NATO’s contribution to a Comprehensive Approach.

48. The excellent contribution made by the 24 NATO accredited Centres of Excellence was highlighted, and their connection with ACT will be reinforced with their active involvement in the functional analysis of the SACT’s six focus areas.

49. In summary, the aims of 2015 COTC were successfully met and even surpassed by the excellent contributions of a wide-ranging, enthusiastic attendance. Opportunities for long term adaptation beyond the Warsaw Summit to enhance NATO’s defence posture were clearly identified. The insights provided from this conference have provided a wealth of initiatives to pursue in order to improve the Alliance’s capacity to deter and defend against current and future threats.

NATO UNCLASSIFIED

A-1 NATO UNCLASSIFIED

2015 COTC Annex A

CONFERENCE AGENDA

Headquarters Supreme Allied Commander Transformation

2015 Chiefs of Transformation Conference

“Strategic Innovation and Sustained Transformation”

8-10 December 2015 Venue: Norfolk Waterside Marriott Hotel. Dress code: Military Personnel: Service Dress. Civilian Personnel: Business Suit. Tuesday, 8 Dec 2015 pm Conference registration. 18.30 Panellists meetings. 19.00-21.00 Icebreaker. Hosted by General Denis Mercier. Wednesday, 9 Dec 2015 07.00 Conference Registration. Session I 08.00 Welcome and Administrative Remarks.

Assistant Chief of Staff Capability & Innovation (ACOS CEI): Brig Gen Henrik Sommer. 08.10 Keynote Address - Video. NATO Deputy Secretary General (DSG): Ambassador

Alexander Vershbow. 08.30 Panel 1 - “The Road to Warsaw: Strategic Perspectives”

Moderator - SACT, Gen Denis Mercier.

Supreme Allied Command Transformation (SACT): General Denis Mercier.

International Staff, Director Defence Policy & Capabilities: Mr Timo Koster.

Deputy Chief of the Military Committee (DCMC): Lt Gen Mark O. Schissler.

Vice Chief of Staff Supreme HQ Allied Powers Europe (VCOS SHAPE): Lt. Gen Michel Yakovleff.

Assistant Secretary General Defence Investment (ASG DI): Mr Patrick Auroy.

Chief Executive European Defence Agency: Mr Jorge Domecq. 10.00 Coffee break.

NATO UNCLASSIFIED


10.30 Panel 2 - “The Changing Face of Warfare”.

Moderator - DCOS Capability Development, Lt Gen Jeffrey Lofgren.

Deputy Chief of Staff Capability Development (DCOS CD): Lt Gen Jeffrey Lofgren.

Director Defence Plans and Policy Germany: Lt Gen Erhard Bühler.

Director Joint Operations, Jordanian Armed Forces Headquarters (Dir Joint Ops / JAFHQ): Brig Gen Sami Kafawin.

Deputy Commander, NATO Special Operations Command: Brig James Stevenson.

Chief Executive Officer Communication Technologies, Inc (CEO COMTek): Dr. Joseph E. Fergus.

12.00 Group picture - all Chiefs of Transformation (stairs in lobby). 12.15-13.30 Buffet lunch. Session II 13.30 Breakout Sessions x 5.

1. Interoperability with Partners. 2. How to prioritize then synchronize across NATO’s multinational initiatives and allow

visibility with other capability development actors to address shortfalls? 3. What is a nation’s role in improving the resilience of the Alliance? 4. How the integration of a gender perspective, in accordance with UNSCR 1325

implementation, is crucial to ensuring the effectiveness of NATO-led training, exercises and operations?

5. Global Programming - Opportunities for Nations. 15.00 Coffee break. 15.30 Breakout Sessions x 5 (Repeated).

1. Interoperability with Partners. 2. How to prioritize then synchronize across NATO’s multinational initiatives and allow

visibility with other capability development actors to address shortfalls? 3. What is a nation’s role in improving the resilience of the Alliance? 4. How the integration of a gender perspective, in accordance with UNSCR 1325

implementation, is crucial to ensuring the effectiveness of NATO-led training, exercises and operations?

5. Global Programming - Opportunities for Nations.

17.00 Opportunity for COT Bilateral / Multilateral Meetings. 18.00 “SACT hosted Senior Leader Discussion” (by invitation only for all national COTs

(NATO and Partners) or their designated representatives, Centre of Excellence directors, FOGOs and equivalent senior civilians.)

Thursday, 10 Dec 2015 08.00 NATO Chiefs of Transformation Forum / Round Table attendees transport

from Marriott Hotel to HQ SACT.

NATO UNCLASSIFIED


Session III - NATO Chiefs of Transformation Forum / Round Table

08.30 NATO COT Forum in HQ SACT Auditorium w/ SACT. (Moderator: DCOS CD).

Readiness Action Plan (Col John Dalby, Response Force Integrated Project Team Lead).

o Lt Gen Erhard Bühler (COT DEU) report re Framework Nation Concept and link to the build up of “Larger Formations” in the RAP.

o Maj Gen Neeme Väli (Dir IMS-P&P).

Future of NDPP (Brig Gen Xavier Watteeuw, ACOS Defence Planning). o Enhancements in this cycle. o Responsiveness in Requirements Derivation. o Closer Links to Futures Work (long term direction of travel). o Alliance Strategy and Impact on NDPP.

10.30-11.00 Coffee Break. 11.05 Transport to Hotel (for those not attending NATO COT RT closed session). 11.00-12.00 NATO COT Round Table (SACLANT CR) - SACT with NATO COTs. 12.05 Transport to Hotel. 12.30-14.00 Buffet lunch at Marriott Hotel.

Session IV - Partner Chiefs of Transformation Round Table 08.30 Partner COT RT at Marriott Hotel. (Chair: DCOS Military Partnerships Directorate with

DSACT; Moderator: SENF Director). 08.30-10.00 Partner-focused briefs.

Partnership aspects of Framework for Future Alliance Operations. Col Griorgy Medina, HQ SACT SPP, STRAN.

NATO HQ Partnership Strategy. Mr. Ruben Diaz-Plaja, NATO HQ IS, PASP.

ACT Partnership Strategy. Mr. Jeffrey Reynolds, HQ SACT SPP, SIE.

Operational Capabilities Concept: Contribution to Partner Interoperability LTC Morten Mo, Bi-SC MPD COI, OCC.

10.00-10.30 Coffee Break. 10.30-12.30 Panels and Discussion.

Partners’ involvement in NATO COEs. LTC Andreas Kraft, HQ SACT CapDev, TNB

NATO S&T: NATO’s Strategic Enabler. MGen Albert Husinaux, STO, Chief Scientist

NATO M&S Enabling CFI. LTC John M. Ferrell, Deputy Director, M&S COE / Mr. San Jose Martin, HQ SACT CapDev, FUSOL

PIAG: Contributions to Partner Interoperability. RAdm Allan du Toit, NATO HQ IMS, PIAG

12.30-14.00 Buffet lunch at Hotel.

NATO UNCLASSIFIED


Session V - Breakout Session Outcomes

14.00 Breakout Outcomes and Questions. Presented by Breakout Leads.

Session VI - 2015 COTC Wrap-up 15.30 2015 COTC Wrap-up (DCOS MPD / DCOS CD).

SACT Closing Remarks.

NATO UNCLASSIFIED

B-1 NATO UNCLASSIFIED

2015 COTC Annex B

INTEROPERABILITY WITH PARTNERS (BREAKOUT SESSION 1)

(Chairman: MGen Ali Çetinkaya. Moderator: Capt(N) Boris Katicin)

Panel Members:

1. RAdm Emil Eftimov (IMS Director Cooperation and Regional Security Division) 2. Mr. Ruben Diaz-Plaja (IS, Political Affairs & Security Policy Division) 3. RAdm Allan du Toit (Director Partnership Interoperability Advocacy Group) 4. Mr. Dick Bedford (HQ SACT, Strategic Issues & Engagement Branch)

DISCUSSION

In 2014, at the Wales Summit, and against the backdrop of the end of ISAF, Allies endorsed the Partnership Interoperability Initiative (PII), a plan to “sustain, develop, diversify and enlarge the pool of partner forces and capabilities that are certified and ready to contribute to future NATO and NATO-led operations, and where applicable, the NRF”. The Initiative set out means in which NATO would deepen and enhance political and military dialogue and practical cooperation with those Partners committed to maintaining and deepening interoperability with NATO. One year since its release, and looking to the Warsaw Summit, the session sought to take stock and consider what has been achieved.

Both sessions were well attended, with frank and productive exchanges yielding consistent themes. Discussions included how Partners’ interoperability with NATO can be assessed and measured and what kind of “interoperability” is necessary. It questioned how NATO can provide a more tailored-approach to Partners and highlighted the opportunities the Warsaw Summit offers for the Partners.

The main concepts and rationale behind the initiative were outlined; the PII aims to enhance NATO’s

support to countries that have sent troops to serve alongside NATO forces, or who have made other significant contributions to its operations. The PII’s three strands of work, or “three layer cake”, were outlined as:

Interoperability Toolbox consisting the Planning and Review Process (PARP), Operational

Capabilities Concept (OOC), and the NATO Response Force (NRF). Interoperability Platform approved by NAC on an annual basis for Partners participating in

current NATO-led operations or NRF as well as PARP and OCC. It consists of a structured and regular dialogue on interoperability issues.

Enhanced Opportunities Partners granted by NAC for three years (subject to review and possible renewal) where the goal is to encourage and sustain partner offers and contributions.

The PII reinforces the OCC as a tool that fosters interoperability by providing Partners with greater access to NATO common standards and assessments, often referred to as the ‘gold standard’ for interoperability and readiness. In particular, the approach was described whereby NATO will continue to encourage all Partners to do more and provide practical means to support those who do through the Interoperability Platform. Finally, to engage more fully with those who wish to go even further,

Enhanced Opportunity Partner status may be granted by the NAC.

Since the PII’s introduction, progress has been encouraging in some areas with the Interoperability Platform being increasingly used for consultation and cooperation on a range of interoperability issues. A more pragmatic, tailored approach has been steadily progressing with the Enhanced Opportunity Partners with a slight increase in consultation at the Political level with each of the five Partners, although not yet as a group. Overall however, achieving high-level partnership dialogue remains a

challenge and NATO has more to achieve in this area to link our Partners into the Alliance agenda in

this era of renewed focus on defence and deterrence. It was further suggested that NATO undertake an Interoperability Platform mapping study to improve understanding on how Partners can use (NATO) interoperability to contribute to broader crisis management and to develop additional recommendations.

NATO UNCLASSIFIED

B-2 NATO UNCLASSIFIED

Individual Tailored Roadmaps (ITRs) were also discussed as a means to sustain some of the more diverse relationships while encouraging interoperability with Partners across all dimensions of Transformation. ACT SIE Branch has the lead for the ITR project where the criteria are still being developed with the first Partners to be announced in March 2016. The long term concept is to focus on more shared responsibility with the vision being that there will be precursor discussions and agreements already made prior to finalization of individual ITRs.

The bottom line, reiterated throughout both sessions, was the need for NATO and all its Partners to employ all available tools to foster a strong political connection while maintaining, and continually striving to improve, overall interoperability.

In summary, the key takeaways from both sessions included:

Interoperability must be planned with Partners across all dimensions of Transformation to

include Lessons Learned; Multinational Capability Development; Education, Training and

Exercises; and Future Concepts.

More tailor-made tools, such as Individual Tailored Roadmaps, need to be developed to sustain diverse relationships with Partners.

NATO should provide an improved agile response to Partners’ interoperability needs.

NATO should provide a more comprehensive and longer term approach to interoperability with Partners.

NATO interoperability and Partner ambitions must be matched with available resources

The coordination of bilateral support to Partners should be improved.

NATO UNCLASSIFIED

C-1 NATO UNCLASSIFIED

2015 COTC Annex C

HOW TO PRIORITIZE THEN SYNCHRONIZE ACROSS NATO’S MULTINATIONAL INITIATIVES AND ALLOW VISIBILITY WITH OTHER CAPABILITY DEVELOPMENT

ACTORS TO ADDRESS SHORTFALLS? (BREAKOUT SESSION 2)

(Chairman: BGen Xavier Watteeuw)

Panel Members:

1. Mr Ross Riddell (HQ SACT, Smart Defence Core Team) 2. Dr Velizar Shalamanov (NATO Communications & Information Agency) 3. Mr Peter Round (European Defence Agency) 4. Mr Joachim Hofbauer (IS, Defence Investment Division)

DISCUSSION

The aim of this session was to facilitate a discussion on how to prioritize and synchronize across NATO and partner multinational initiatives and allow visibility with other capability development actors to address shortfalls. Both sessions were well attended, with frank and productive exchanges yielding consistent themes.

Smart Defence (SD) has encouraged a cultural change in how the Allies view the business of capability development. It promotes a cooperative way of thinking about generating the modern defence capabilities that the Alliance needs for the future. In this renewed culture of cooperation, Allies have been encouraged to work together to develop, acquire, operate and maintain military capabilities to undertake the Alliance’s essential core tasks agreed in NATO’s Strategic Concept. SD has become a first consideration for delivering much-needed capabilities in a more cost-effective and efficient manner within the Alliance. The Pooling and Sharing (P&S) Initiative within the European Union was developed following the same spirit, focusing on the need to optimize the development and employment of the military capabilities required for operations. Since the beginning both organizations have committed to working together to share ideas, support each other’s initiatives, and avoid duplication while aligning priorities.

Recently ACT’s SD team has focussed its efforts towards addressing Alliance priorities. Numerous SD and other Multinational (MN) Approaches directly support Alliance Priority Shortfall areas, Wales Summit Defence Planning Priorities, and the Readiness Action Plan. The SD team currently coordinates activities across 92 Active Tier I and Tier 2 SD MN projects and monitors: +28 EU P&S MN projects, +17 DEU Framework Nation Concept (FNC) MN projects, + 4 ITA FNC MN projects. In addition 39 new Smart Defence proposals are under development that are in the process of being synchronized across all actors to eliminate duplication.

During the discussions the following points were raised: after several years of decreasing national military expenditures, and given recent changes in the security environment, some nations have now begun to increase defence spending. The Wales Summit saw a “defence pledge” where each country will spend 2% of GDP on defence. However, resources remain limited, therefore efforts must be made across the Alliance to avoid programme duplication.

SD has generated thinking to provide new capabilities by encouraging Allies to work closer together to develop, operate, and maintain military capabilities. It is now better recognized that SD optimizes the employment of military capabilities however there is an urgent requirement to maintain a common picture across stakeholders to identify overlaps and capability gaps. The appetite for MN solutions is growing despite bureaucratic inertia hampering multinational cooperation in many areas. Nations do cooperate however there is a need to improve the level of integration and cooperation as currently only ~50% of national defence spending is going towards MN efforts. Efforts are being made to improve political commitment / top level guidance from national leaderships to back MN cooperation efforts and push these various programmes.

NATO UNCLASSIFIED

C-2 NATO UNCLASSIFIED

The EU and NATO have mandated that efforts are not duplicated and jointly monitor programmes to make sure they ultimately meet requirements. There is, however, an increased recognition that activities need to be synchronized. It was further noted that information sharing is a huge challenge therefore it needs to be determined what tools are required to share information. Moreover, those involved in MN programmes need to be able to share best practices better amongst all MN stakeholders.

Nations continue to have the opportunity to bring private industry into the capability development process and it was noted that it could be easier for nations to purchase complex systems when projects are multinational which will, of course, directly support interoperability. Opportunities for regional groupings to provide solutions to capability development were welcomed, while it was further agreed that, in some cases, MN approaches are making programmes move faster than independent efforts. It was however emphasized that NATO’s Defence Planning process (NDPP) provides the Alliance’s agreed common framework to frame problems and identify effective solutions and must be used for all MN programmes. Nevertheless other portals are being developed to increase cooperation and integration amongst the many stakeholders (intra and inter programme).

Finally the EDA representative reiterated the need for pooling and sharing and that any improvement in the EU’s capabilities can only bring collective benefit to the Alliance. This requires improved trust and security to support the efforts with an ability to securely share information. The leadership must believe that successful cooperation will bring capabilities to fruition - “everyone will get a good deal” while sharing the work load. To achieve this the EU and NATO’s procurement and funding cycles must be aligned. The bottom line is to trust your neighbour, and for the leadership not to be “precious” – aim for the result and not who or how it was achieved.

In summary, the key takeaways from both sessions included:

Common access to platforms / databases is required to share information across capabilities development organizations to avoid duplication and harmonize capability development.

Development of potential multinational targets in the NDPP.

A Multinational Solutions Synchronization Workshop will be held in Prague, 24-25 May 2016, to provide a basis for sharing information on multinational initiatives.

NATO UNCLASSIFIED

D-1 NATO UNCLASSIFIED

2015 COTC Annex D

WHAT IS A NATION’S ROLE IN IMPROVING THE RESILIENCE OF THE ALLIANCE? (BREAKOUT SESSION 3)

(Co-Chairmen: Lt Gen Wolfgang Wosolsobe and RAdm Pete Gumataotao)

Panel Members:

1. COL Koen De Clercq (HQ SACT, Strategic Plans & Policy Branch) 2. Mr. Lorenz Meyer-Minnemann (IS, Operations Division) 3. Mr. David Klain (Civilian Expert)

DISCUSSION

After 20 years of Out-of-Area Operations, contemporary security challenges close to Alliance territory have refocused attention on capabilities required to enhance Collective Defence. As Nations recognize that they will be the first responders, many are re-evaluating their own vulnerabilities and preparedness to effectively deter and defend against contemporary security threats. This overarching awareness provided the basis for the discussion on how nations can improve the resilience of the Alliance.

Both sessions were very well attended and provided frank and productive exchanges that yielded consistent themes. Each session was divided equally between presentation of key areas of resilience and open discussions, some of which are highlighted below.

The groups discussed the importance of resilience in countering contemporary security threats. The outcome being that no single nation, supranational entity or international organization has all the levers needed to counter these new threats alone. However, Nations provide elementary building block of the Alliance resilience, as it builds societies capacity to anticipate and resolve disruptive challenges to critical functions, and to prevail and fight through all types of direct and indirect attacks. Therefore, a resilient nation is one capable of weathering a crisis: continuity of government, continuity of essential services to the population and provision of civil support to military operations. Two critical vulnerabilities in national resilience ability were highlighted: Firstly, in an increasingly inter-connected and inter-dependant world, the increasing inability of Nations to support their military due to the loss of national ownership of strategic infrastructure; secondly, the significant decrease in, and even understanding of the requirement for, civil defence capabilities.

Discussions also centred on the interdependence of Nations’ resilience (governments + population + private sector), international organizations and corporations, Partners (whose stability is important for our security), and that of the Alliance. The groups agreed on the following Key Take Aways:

Essence of resilience. The ability to resist and to recover. The importance of resilience has been reinforced, not just because hybrid warfare changed the landscape of a modern conflict, but because contemporary threats are aimed at all aspects of nations’- thus all of them need to be able to prevent, resist and recover when or if hit.

Standardize resilience across the Alliance. Need to define baseline requirement for resilience across the Alliance and pledge to achieve it. After we ‘define’ the level of resilience Allies need to achieve, at least in the 3 critical areas for NATO, we can mobilize number of mechanisms to achieve it within the Alliance and also in cooperation with EU and Partners.

Educate, Understand and Share. The resilience of the Alliance is greater than the sum of its’ parts, therefore each Nation has a role to play by increasing their own resilience. This needs to be achieved on a common understanding not just of threats and vulnerabilities, but also of the available tools and mechanisms that can help strengthen nations. Building resilience is a long term, resource-hungry, process that should be driven by ‘cultural change’, one that becomes deeply rooted within the all levels of society. Net effect of these measures, amplified by integrated training and comprehensive education, will be to reduce the vulnerability of the Alliance as a whole, contribute towards the deterrent effect and will be manifested across the physical, intellectual conceptual and psychological domains.

NATO UNCLASSIFIED

E-1 NATO UNCLASSIFIED

2015 COTC Annex E

HOW THE INTEGRATION OF A GENDER PERSPECTIVE, IN ACCORDANCE WITH UNSCR 1325 IMPLEMENTATION, IS CRUCIAL TO ENSURING THE EFFECTIVENESS of

NATO-LED TRAINING, EXERCISES AND OPERATIONS? (BREAKOUT SESSION 4)

(Chairman: Lt Gen Phil Jones)

Panel Members:

1. Chief Cmd Sgt Jack Johnson, Jr (HQ SACT, Command Sergeant Enlisted Leader) 2. RAdm Jennifer J. Bennett (DG, CAN Armed Forces Strategic Response Team, Sexual Misconduct) 3. Maj Linda Johansson (Nordic Centre for Gender in Military Operations) 4. Ms Elizabeth (Beth) Owens Lape (Joint Staff J7/Joint and Coalition Warfighting)

DISCUSSION

In each session, Lt Gen Jones (COS ACT) welcomed his fellow panel members and introduced the aim being to achieve constructive, creative, imaginative thinking which builds upon the solid progress already achieved by “intrepid activists” in the area of the integration of a gender perspective into all NATO business. In particular, he stressed the need to maintain the momentum built with the adoption of the new resolution (UNSCR 2242) marking the 15th Anniversary of the launch of the landmark UNSCR 1325 (Women, Peace and Security), which explicitly recognizes some of the roadblocks that have stymied the women, peace and security agenda. COS underlined that this work is not based on political imperatives, or is even a major transformation theme, but because it’s a pragmatic requirement to enhance NATO’s tactical and operational capabilities.

Discussions focussed on two main areas: Leadership on Gender Perspective; and its practical integration into education and individual training, exercises, and operations. Each panellist provided various perspectives based upon their experiences either from a national viewpoint, frontline operations, exercises, academic research or gender based symposia. Points raised included the growing recognition that problem solving is improved by diverse perspectives, and that being limited to using only 50% of an available capacity was both wasteful and tactically and operationally senseless. A further perspective was that policy leaders often perceive that decisions regarding the integration of women into all occupations and trades are making it down to the tactical level, however this is not always true. This is not simply a military issue but includes women across all spheres of influence.

From research and lessons learned regarding women in leadership one of the key factors which holds true for any diverse or minority group, in women’s success is “seeing is believing”. A challenge is that leadership is often tied to position and rank which requires a longer time for women to develop legitimacy to gain respect in that leadership position. Canada’s women were excellent examples to other cultures when operating in multinational units and taking charge with no issues. This has helped influence other nations by providing examples for both military and civilians of having a higher number of women stepping up to leadership positions.

There was a clear recognition that the integration of a gender perspective into training, exercises and operations is a key element of the Human Capital Focus Area. The full integration of a gender perspective into our life-long learning, and into the entire range of military capabilities and capacities is required as it will allow NATO Allies and Partners to operate so much more effectively in all of NATO’s three core roles. A robust education and training programme has, together with specific resident and advanced distributed learning courses, been developed and the most recent milestone is the gender education and training package delivered by HQ SACT. Nevertheless all training needs key leader support and buy-in and should be formally included in NATO’s Programmes of Work and annually reported at a Bi-SC level. NATO’s Joint Task List does not yet include gender and this is a challenge. However, the inclusion of gender objectives in exercises is possible and EX TRJE 15 was a great example of an event that included a gender perspective which, by early accounts, was a great

NATO UNCLASSIFIED

E-2 NATO UNCLASSIFIED

advantage for the exercise. The formal Lessons Learned (LLs) from TRJE 15 will aid future exercise

planners.

The current challenge is how to implement a gender perspective throughout all activities – ‘one bite at a time’ was the suggested solution. The fundamental truth, according to the COS, is that there is much more to do if we are to fully liberate the potential that exists. This is the reason why achieving continuous momentum in the life-long cycle is vital.

In summary, the key takeaways and tangible actions that will be taken in the next few months are:

Implement Gender Mainstreaming in the learning cycle:

2016 POW for JALLC and relevant COEs’- lessons identified/learned (LI/LLs).

Integrate gender perspective war fighting doctrine.

Annual Bi-SC report on the practical application of the gender perspective, with vignettes.

Ensure Education, Training, Exercisies and Evaluation (ETEE) objectives drive practical application of gender integration.

Increase participation in senior leader seminars.

Formally include Gender Mainstreaming in the comprehensive approach, to include reporting.

Support the establishment and training of gender advisors at all levels and in all functions.

Integrate gender perspectives in Security Force Assistance and Defence Capacity Building.

NATO UNCLASSIFIED

F-1 NATO UNCLASSIFIED

2015 COTC Annex F

GLOBAL PROGRAMMING - OPPORTUNITIES FOR NATIONS (BREAKOUT SESSION 5)

(Moderator: BGen Dzintars Roga)

Panel Members:

1. VAdm Javier Gonzalez-Huix (DCOS Joint Force Training) 2. CAPT Berend Burwitz (HQ SACT, Hd Education Training Exercises & Evaluation Plans & Policy

Branch) 3. COL Darrin Denny (HQ SACT, Hd Training & Exercise Branch) 4. COL (ret) Roman Dufek (Multinational Logistics Coordination Centre (MLCC)) 5. COL Mikael Johnsson (HQ SACT, SO Training & Exercise Branch)

DISCUSSION

General Roga opened both iterations of the breakout session with a brief overview of the topic and the rules of engagement for the breakout session. VAdm Gonzalez-Huix also provided opening comments noting that Global Programming is much more than just Training and Exercises, the Connected Forces initiative (CFI) is aimed at Interoperability and Coordination and these opportunities are not just for Members and Partners to work with NATO, but also opportunities for NATO Members to work better directly with Partners.

Opening statements were followed by an “establishment” view of the topic in four power point briefs

(Global Programming, NATO Exercise Programme, Multinational Logistics Coordination Centre (MLCC) and Partners Perspectives) provided by the panellists. The aim of this session was to provide

an update concerning the implementation of Global Programming within NATO and highlight the Education and Training (E&T) opportunities for Nations, including the benefits of becoming engaged in

E&T governance. The session also shared initial Lessons Learned (LLs) from Ex Trident Juncture 15

(TRJE 15) and explored future implications. Both iterations were well attended with consistent and productive discussions yielding very similar themes.

The key issues identified were:

NATO Exercise Programme. NATO and Partner Nations are interested in and recognize resources required in order to support the NATO Exercise Programme as a whole. The exercise programme was the major focus for the majority of the discussion in both sessions with several key themes developing. The primary concern is the need to balance the size and scope of each exercise against available resources. Currently there is an increased appetite to insert everything into every exercise driven at the MC level. With the 2012 restructure, NCS power is now limited; it is designed to be lean. Exercises have ramped up significantly but with the limited structure and power there is only so much we can do. At the NCS level, it is the ability, or inability, of some staffs to do the exercise with current resources (manpower and budget). Lack of personnel on staffs and Subject Matter Experts (SMEs) restrict our capacity. Centres of Excellence (COEs) were highlighted as one potential resource to compensate for the various shortfalls in SMEs. Requirements to incorporate items such as cyber, gender, the southern flank, CIS, Medical, Logistics etc have stretched JFT and training establishments to their capacity. The training establishment can integrate anything the Alliance wants into an exercise. However, it requires Commanders’ support for the early identification of training requirements, money, time and the functional expertise to plan and execute the event.

Exercise Quality / Synergy with National Exercises. How to improve the quality of exercises was another key theme. The panel noted the Strategic Exercise programme was directed by the nations and JWC releases an excellent product for a Joint Force HQ staff level of training. It was further identified that the NCS responsibility is to the Joint exercise programme to improve interoperability. The need to balance the amount of complexity and the outcome, with the size of the exercise are key factors and relies on SACEUR guidance to ensure the right objectives in terms of “what do we need to

NATO UNCLASSIFIED

F-2 NATO UNCLASSIFIED

achieve from the exercise?” This led to a discussion regarding the synergy between National Exercises and NATO Exercises and the responsibilities of Nations in the exercise programme. The panel noted that there are synergies and efficiencies but not everything can be in each exercise. The need was agreed to develop clear but flexible guidelines on exercise linkage procedures between National and NATO exercises and that synergy between National and NAOT exercises contributes to interoperability and provides assurance throughout the Alliance and to Partners.

Ex Trident Juncture 2015. TRJE 15 LLs were the last key discussion regarding the exercise programme. Attendees from both sessions were interested in the process and when these LL would be available. It was advised that the process began with post exercise discussions to be followed by a first

impressions report. The standard LL process in NATO, initiated by Joint Force Command Brunssum (JFCBS), will continue for several months with the final product in time to support next TRJE planning.

A first observation has been that NATO chose too large and complex an exercise for its first large scale joint live exercise. ACOS JETE participated in an initial observations VTC and the panel expects the initial LLs report from JFCBS in early 2016.

Global Programming / NATO and National Responsibilities. The Global Programming construct was well received by both sessions with participants agreeing it provides a structured approach to NATO Education and Training (E&T) driven by requirements and considered by Nations as a promising avenue. There was discussion on the delineation between NATO and National responsibilities in the area of Education and Individual Training (E&IT). Many felt there was a need for more clarity on E&IT requirements and responsibilities in order to delineate NATO responsibilities and national responsibilities. COEs were identified as key providers of E&IT in terms of both actual courseware and COEs’ participation as Department Heads for several disciplines within the Global Programming Structure.

Partner Participation / EU Cooperation. Partner participants identified the need for NATO to communicate Alliance training shortfalls in order to better integrate NATO nations’ and Partner nations’ E&T opportunities. Partner participation in exercises was also discussed with the panel emphasizing that it is still achieved on a case-by-case basis for Partner participation in NATO exercises, especially Art 5 exercises. Increased cooperation with the EU was identified as desirable and the panel informed the session that last year ACT received approval to invite EU members who are non-NATO to participate in Education and Training events and the EU received formal permission to attend this conference as well as other ETEE events. Three specific examples of improved cooperation last year were the approval for EUMS members to attend our courses at NSO, TRJE 15 certification of EU participation and EU receiving a formal invitation to attend the annual NATO Training Synchronisation Conference.

NATO UNCLASSIFIED

G-1 NATO UNCLASSIFIED

2015 COTC Annex G

NATO CHIEFS OF TRANSFORMATION FORUM

1. For the first time a NATO COT Forum was held in HQ SACT’s new auditorium which allowed 160 NATO attendees from across the NATO Command Structure (NCS) and the COEs to participate. Introduced by Brigadier General Sommer (ACT ACOS Capability Engineering and Innovation) the

onstage panel consisted of General Mercier (SACT), Lieutenant General Bühler (Director Defence

Plans and Policy Germany), Lieutenant General Lofgren (ACT DCOS CAPDEV), Major General Väli (IMS Director Plans and Policy), and Brigadier General Watteeuw (ACT ACOS Defence Planning). The forum and location provided the opportunity to discuss primarily, at a classified level, NATO’s Readiness Action Plan therefore, due to the overall classification level of this report, the analysis of these discussions and takeaways will remain limited here.

2. The session commenced with a classified briefing on NATO’s Readiness Action Plan provided by Col John Dalby (ACT’s Response Force Integrated Project Team Leader) which covered the detailed implementation of measures agreed in 2012 with the ratification of MC 0586/1. In summary, those areas that have progressed well to date were highlighted while the requirements that nations are yet to provide were re-emphasized.

3. Col Dalby was followed by Lt Gen Bühler (COT DEU) who provided a detailed briefing regarding the Framework Nation Concept (FNC), as established by PO(2014)0308, and its link to the implementation of the RAP. He reminded the audience of the FNC principles: being based on the

NATO Defence Planning Process (NDPP); each cluster is under the responsibility of a Framework

Nation; this work should be complementary to both Smart Defence and the Connected Force Initiative; it should be open to Partners; and it should be based upon Multinational (MN) capability development. Having highlighted the clusters within the four groupings which have been successfully commenced, he continued to explain Germany’s more recent proposal to link the FNC closer to the RAP’s implementation by the standing up of larger formations (in the Land domain) which will initially lead to future MN Corps containing MN divisional elements. In summary, with nations’ support, the intention is to progress this proposal in line with the next cycles of the NDPP.

4. On completion of Lt Gen Bühler’s presentation, Maj Gen Väli (IMS, Director Plans and Policy) provided the IMS perspective on the RAP’s implementation and reiterated the points briefed earlier regarding the need for concrete actions by nations to ensure quantifiable progress continues as agreed

at the Wales Summit. Moreover, he encouraged strongly the COTs to review their national

contributions with the intent to either join existing MN initiatives or commence actions to address the priority capability shortfall areas identified in the most recent NDPP cycle.

5. Prior to the open forum question and answer and discussion period, Col Roel Been (Director

Civil-Military Cooperation COE and current Chairman of the COE Directors) addressed the audience

on behalf of the COEs with their approximately 1200 staff. He reiterated that, while COEs remain outside of the NCS and thus are not subject to direct tasking, they are enthusiastic productive NATO entities whose sponsoring nations have directed to align their programmes of work with NATO. At his previous day’s meeting with SACT, it had been agreed that, as NATO’s strategic lead for coordination

with COEs, ACT’s FOGOs would strengthen this connection including actively involving the COEs in

the functional analysis of ACT’s six Focus Areas.

6. On completion of the presentations and address from the COE Chairman of Directors, General Mercier moderated a dynamic question and answer session with a range of points raised by several audience members. Issues ranged from detailed queries regarding RAP measures and Germany’s proposal to create larger MN formations, the NDPP and the way ahead to possibly link national and EU with the NATO process, and the COE’s greater involvement in MN capability and development initiatives.

NATO UNCLASSIFIED

G-2 NATO UNCLASSIFIED

7. SACT closed the forum expressing his thanks to all speakers for the quality of the information provided and to the audience for their lively engagement. On completion of a refreshment break, and as had been successfully introduced at the 2014 COTC, the NATO COTs were then given a closed private audience with SACT. Given the nature of this engagement, and the original intent that the topics should remain private, no record of the discussion is provided under this cover.

NATO UNCLASSIFIED

H-1 NATO UNCLASSIFIED

2015 COTC Annex H

PARTNER CHIEFS OF TRANSFORMATION ROUND TABLE

1. The Partner Chiefs of Transformation Round Table was chaired by Major General Ali Çetinkaya, Deputy Chief of Staff Military Partnerships Directorate (DCOS MPD), and attended by General Mirco Zuliani, Deputy Supreme Allied Commander Transformation (DSACT). As with the NATO Chiefs of Transformation Forum / Round Table, the COT Partner Round Table aims to be a synergistic event, which focuses on identifying and addressing issues that are important for Partner nations and their transformational cooperation with NATO.

2. The Round Table included 43 Partner representatives from the Partnership for Peace (PfP) and Mediterranean Dialogue (MD) frameworks, and Partners across the Globe (PatG). It comprised two sessions: Partner focused briefs on selected, innovation related topics, followed by panel-style, moderated discussions on a broad variety of matters:

LONG-TERM MILITARY TRANSFORMATION

3. Col Grigory Medina, from ACT’s Strategic Plans and Policy Directorate, briefed on the partnership aspects of the Framework for Future Alliance Operations (FFAO) and how the Strategic Foresight Analysis (SFA) and FFAO provides a shared perspective of the common challenges and opportunities within the future security environment.

4. To face the challenges NATO needs to understand the plausible aspects of the future. When we look at the main crisis today, the main cause was a strategic surprise, but there were early warnings and indicators that we could understand before the crisis happened. This is an open, transparent, collaborative process that includes NATO members, Partners, and COEs, academia and industry. We don’t need to have everyone involved at all stages, but everyone will have a chance to input.

5. The complex security environment requires adaptability not just for NATO but for every organization and cooperation framework. In order to react and prepare the Alliance to face instability situations we need to share information. At the nation’s level, we need common resiliency, we need to uphold, support the global resilience - which includes our resilience and our Partners’ resilience.

NATO HQ PARTNERSHIP STRATEGY

6. Mr Ruben Diaz-Plaja, from IS Political Affairs and Security Policy Division, shared some thoughts on how Partnership Strategy has evolved over time and the need for continuous adaptation in order to satisfy NATO and Partner needs - and current and future security requirements - and also raised some reflection questions.

7. The overall strategy is NATO wide - our strategies towards Partners hasn’t changed in 20 years, we keep on working with our Partners to strengthen security in the Alliance and with our Partners through active engagements (because security conflicts go beyond our borders). Our partnerships have evolved and shifted as NATO’s focus has evolved and shifted driven by an environment full of multiple crises, multiple Partners, and limited resources requiring more focus and concrete and tailor made efforts.

8. For these tailor made efforts which align with NATO and Partner ambitions there are some critical questions that need to be answered, such as: What do we want in partnerships and want to accomplish with Partners? How to do more with Partners, in a more tailored-way, and how do we weave it all together in one package? What capabilities and tools do we really need? How do we integrate some Partners into the changes we are seeing through adaptation? Looking to the challenges from South - how can we step up efforts with Partners? What is the level of ambition for allies and Partners? Do we have what it takes and can we do more? Looking to the East - how can we support democratic efforts and more resilient states? How can we ensure that there is no slippage? Do we have what it takes? In the Maritime domain - how do we help Partners in maritime warfare? Can we think of more joint training and evaluation? Preparing for future crisis response - what kind of

NATO UNCLASSIFIED


interoperability do we need? Many Partners use our interoperable tools to be better Partners in the UN and NATO - how do we help Partners be more effective with these tools in the future?

9. Defence Capacity Building and Partnership Interoperability Initiative are designed to help Partners as “security providers” both nationally and as part of any future operation or crisis management task.

ACT PARTNERSHIP STRATEGY

10. Mr Jeffrey Reynolds, from ACT’s Strategic Plans and Policy Directorate, shared some key messages on ACT’s Partnership Strategy.

11. Unilateral action will not be successful in the long term - cooperation and success require a broad range of Partners and support. We should not only consider the 41 Partners of today, but also an entire community in which we act. We need to grow partnerships through interoperability in terms of doctrine, training, culture and languages.

12. Partnership is a key focus area for SACT - it transcends all areas. Core pillar of the Alliance. We have to work together in cross-functional teams, connecting Partners to the right stakeholders in order to deliver the right activity to a specific cooperation area.

13. Individually Tailored Roadmaps (ITR) will enhance interoperability and align processes. Oversight, cooperation, and be able to be agile as required – the ITR will try to harmonize individual plans with Partners and allies in order to be more responsive and adaptive with better planning for long-term needs. Our work in partnership needs to be more effective, coherent, effective, and more tailored.

OPERATIONAL CAPABILITIES CONCEPT: CONTRIBUTION TO PARTNER INTEROPERABILITY

14. LTC Morten Mo, from Bi-SC MPD Coordination and Integration Division, briefed on how the Operational Capabilities Concept (OCC) supports the Alliance’s core tasks by being a flexible tool to support the transformation of units and forces to NATO levels and standards as required.

15. The OCC programme supports the Alliance’s strategic core task of co-operative security as well as crisis management, providing interoperable and operational capable declared partner forces and units that are available for operations, exercises and the NRF. This brings tangible benefits to NATO military forces and operational planners to put together tailored force packages for NATO-led non-article 5 crisis response operations. At the moment, the OCC pool of forces includes 98 units (about 13,500 personnel).

16. A typical OCC process takes about four years for one unit; thereafter a unit should be evaluated every three years. Initially, the critical task is to build a sufficient national pool of evaluators; as in NATO, the majority of evaluations are conducted by the nations themselves with NATO monitors present. With increased experience of the evaluation system, provisions for faster track can speed up the process considerably. For mature participants, the time consuming task is to implement remedial actions that are identified through the evaluations.

17. Furthermore, OCC is designed to support transformation of forces in partner nations. The tools of OCC are available to participating nations; they can be employed beyond the units that are declared to OCC and can support non-NATO standards if desired. Employed on a wider scale, OCC represents a valuable tool in support of transformation. Evaluations can serve to gauge starting point, measure progress and verify success. Successful use of the OCC tools may require wider analysis of evaluation results across multiple units. Several partner countries have employed OCC as means to support transformation.

PARTNERS’ INVOLVEMENT IN NATO COEs

18. LTC Andreas Kraft, from ACT’s Capability Development directorate Transformation Network Branch, briefed how the Centres of Excellence could provide a suitable venue to increase

interoperability and that Partners should strive to exploit the opportunities they provided.

NATO UNCLASSIFIED


19. A COE is a nationally or multi-nationally sponsored entity, which offers recognized expertise and experience to the benefit of the Alliance, especially in support of transformation by acting over the pillars of Education and Training; Analysis and Lessons Learned; Concept Development and Experimentation; Doctrine Development and Standards.

20. A COE brings no extra cost to NATO and, although is not part of the NATO Command Structure, develop their activity in accordance with NATO procedures, doctrines and standards. COEs have proven to be a successful and enduring model for strong multinational solutions and the relationship with Partners are supported and encouraged.

NATO SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY: NATO’S STRATEGIC ENABLER

21. MGen Albert Husniaux, NATO’s Chief Scientist, discussed how Science and Technology (S&T)

could be seen as a natural and efficient domain of cooperation and dialogue with Partners.

22. NATO S&T includes programmes and activities that Nations, NATO bodies and Partners elect to perform in the trusted NATO framework. This concept of a trusted collaborative framework should not be under emphasized. One of the keys to innovation is the generation of new ideas, and an open trusted network facilitates the exchange of ideas and generates results that cannot be replicated in isolation.

23. The NATO S&T Organization (STO) has a strong role to play in this endeavour. STO is a knowledge network that enables innovation through the Centre for Maritime Research and Experimentation & S&T framework drawing from 4,400 research scientists. It provides a forum where NATO and Partners can gain knowledge useful to feed the concept development before moving into academia/industry.

24. There is a close relation between STO and COEs since they can both be part of the

problems/ideas. Partnerships play a key role in the STO, the cooperation is based on flexible formats and a targeted approach and Partners are hosting meetings as well as holding leadership in several activities.

NATO MODELLING AND SIMULATION ENABLING CONNECTED FORCES INITIATIVE

25. LTC John Ferrell from the Modelling and Simulation (M&S) COE discussed his view on M&S

support to military transformation, being applicable on several areas such as capability development, procurement process, training, mission rehearsal and support to operations.

26. Capability development - focuses on future and foster continuous improvement, M&S used to aide and assist the decision making process during capability development and utilize synthetic environments to test new capabilities; Education and training - key enabler for Education through computer based training, games, providing a way for people learn and to better educate themselves, supporting training from the individual to strategic levels; Mission rehearsal - while in theatre M&S could be used to compare and decide on courses of action; Support to operations - by having access to (virtual) capability even before the force generation process.

27. The M&S aim, to better prepare NATO forces for future exercises and operations, provides an opportunity for intensified cooperation with Partners by utilizing the technological breakthroughs that are made both in the civil and military theatres of operations.

28. The vision for M&S is to exploit it across NATO and its Partners to enhance both operational and cost effectiveness, supported by the Connected Forces Initiative, that aims to enhance the high level of interconnectivity and interoperability that Allied and Partner-forces have achieved in operations.

PARTNERSHIP INTEROPERABILITY ADVOCACY GROUP: CONTRIBUTIONS TO PARTNER INTEROPERABILITY

29. RAdm Allan du Toit, from the Partnership Interoperability Advocacy Group (PIAG), discussed the added value of PIAG to NATO by providing the Partners’ point of view on several interoperability related issues.

NATO UNCLASSIFIED


30. PIAG is an informal group which represents the interests of the seven non-NATO-nations (Australia, Austria, Finland, Ireland, New Zealand, Sweden and Switzerland) by advocating for interoperability between NATO and Partners. PIAG works in a transparent and inclusive manner, within an agreed set of policies and procedures, to enable partner consultation. Its mission is to enhance effective military interoperability with NATO, adapted to the needs and levels of ambition of the individual members of the group, building upon existing modalities and decision making processes in NATO.

31. It strives to deliver a Partner view for NATO, with NATO deciding on a case-by-case basis how

it can benefit from PIAG insights and input. NATO uses PIAG-products (think tank papers and initiatives) and calls on PIAG to assist in the development of alliance procedures and strategies. A good example is the “kick-starts” for the development of interoperability focused concepts like the “Individually Tailored Roadmap”.

nato unclassified 2015 chiefs of transformation conference · 1. the 2015 cotc was held at the...

Documents