Discourse of Action: Command, Control, Conflict and the Effects Based Approach
Abstract
An epigraph in a recent article in the Economist is illustrative: Problems, problems it opens, only to describe in depth the litany of problems that have developed following the Coalition intervention into Iraq: Patchy public services, continuing guerrilla attacks on coalition troops, widespread criminality, confusion over oil revenues and the financing of reconstruction, and still no sign of a homegrown government just some of the problems facing Iraq's interim leaders. The traditional military approach is incapable of accurately perceiving, or forecasting, the results of such a chosen strategy. It is an approach incapable of delivering what should ultimately appear to the decision maker the desired strategic end-states, or, effects , on selected political, military, economic, social and developmental systems. What has become clear in the months following the Coalition invasion of Iraq, is that there was little, if any, predetermined strategic course of action that recognized the complexity of modern conflict. There was also no attempt to mitigate potential post-traditional combat threats through the inclusion of non-military members in the operational decision making structure. This paper is suggestive. It will argue that the Effects Based approach provides conceptual affirmation that for successful future multinational operational crisis planning and execution, there must first be in place a holistic, and integrated, command and control structure (C2) that is capable of understanding the conflict environment as a complex system of systems. This structure will be composed both of military and nonmilitary organization (NMO) components.
Document Details
- Document Type
- Technical Report
- Publication Date
- Jun 01, 2004
- Accession Number
- ADA465621
Entities
People
- Robert Grossman-vermaas
Organizations
- Department of National Defence