043 by stariya


									              Abstract and Outline


                   13th ICCRTS
              For the paper entitled:

    Networking the Global Maritime Partnership

        Topic 11. Multinational Endeavors
        Topic 2. Networks and Networking
          Topic 5. Organizational Issues

              Mr. George Galdorisi
     Dr. Stephanie Hszieh (Point of Contact)
             Mr. Terry McKearney

Space and Naval Warfare Systems Center San Diego
                 53560 Hull Street
         San Diego, California 92152-5001
                  (619) 553-4817
                                    Abstract for
                     Networking the Global Maritime Partnership

Few strategic concepts have spurred more discussion than the notion of the global maritime
partnership (originally called the 1000-ship Navy), a concept first introduced by then-U.S.
CNO, Admiral Michael Mullen, at the International Seapower Symposium in September 2005.

In the ensuing two-plus years this concept has been broadly discussed in the international
defense media and at conferences and symposia, including those sponsored by the CCRP.
Recently, at the September 2007 IFPA Fletcher Conference, Admiral Mullen, now Chairman of
the Joint Chiefs of Staff, took this idea even further, suggesting global security partnerships.

The C4ISR challenges to networking a global maritime partnership are not trivial and will not
succeed if the “power to the edge” concepts exposed by the CCRP are not addressed and if we
fail to understand the lessons learned from past networking and coalition partnering in the
maritime arena.

This paper will address that rich history and demonstrate how lessons learned from past
networking and coalition naval efforts can inform the global maritime partnership today. We
will share the results of a “beta-test” among the five AUSCANNZUKUS nations, currently
entering its seventh year, which provides one example of how to address these C4ISR
                                 Outline for
                 Networking the Global Maritime Partnership

1. Paper introduction
      a. If we treat today’s challenges as brand new and without a historical context we
          have one eye blind.
      b. Today, there is a growing consensus (not just Admiral Mullen) that navies need
          to work together. In the modern age, “working together” means networking (Dr.
          David Alberts addressed this issue directly at the 7th ICCRTS when he noted “In
          today’s world, it is inconceivable that anything could be accomplished outside of
          coalition operations.”
      c. So…we want to network navies at sea
                i. Have we networked at sea before?
               ii. Have maritime coalitions worked at sea before?
              iii. The answer to both is yes!
      d. What have we learned from history?
      e. How can we apply it today?
2. Network Centric Warfare and the Global Maritime Partnership
      a. Information warfare is built on the capabilities of these information and
          communication technologies that allow for instantaneous communications and
          the ability for everyone on shore and at sea to share a common tactical picture.
                i. Alberts, Garstka, and Stein, Network Centric Warfare
               ii. Alberts, Garstka, Hayes, Signori, Understanding Information Age
      b. The Global Maritime Partnership (GMP) will leverage these new technological
          capabilities to build a maritime coalition to secure the global maritime commons.
                i. Rapidly established, ad hoc coalitions of naval forces that are able to
                   come together as needed to provide security in the maritime domain.
               ii. “The power to create a voluntary network of maritime forces is within our
                   grasp, we have the capability to seize on our inherent nature of
                   cooperation at sea and, together, overcome transnational actors who
                   threaten the very fabric of global safety and security.”
                           Admiral Michael Mullen
                           U.S. Navy Chief of Naval Operations
                           RUSI Future Maritime Warfare Conference
                           December 13, 2005
      c. Quick history of the GMP (It was known as the Thousand Ship Navy) from
          Admiral Mullen’s introduction of it at the 2005 International Seapower
          Symposium to the 2007 IFPA/Fletcher Conference where the newly christened
          Global Maritime Partnership was extended to include global security
3. The Global Maritime Partnership is in response to the changing global environment.
a. Globalization and the increasing need for the Global Maritime Partnership
       i. The world’s maritime fleets need to work together to guard against
          piracy, terrorism, and to respond to catastrophic maritime incidents
          (South East Asian tsunami), and other challenges to global maritime
          security. The global war on terror and the ever-increasing dependence of
          the world economy on the free flow of trade on the world’s oceans have
          increased the need for peace-loving nations to work together to provide
          maritime security. Add to that the growing need for multi-lateral
          responses to catastrophic disasters – Southeast Asian tsunami – has
          increased the need for cooperation among various navies.
      ii. Naval operations in this era will be marked by ad hoc naval coalitions that
          are often “pick up games” and “come as you are” events.
b. Challenges to the netted navy in a global world/ “power to the edge”
       i. The phenomenal advancement of computer technology that has made the
          netted navy possible has been a force multiplier for the US Navy.
          However, when it comes to working with other friendly navies, current
          network technology has often proved to be a hindrance. Professor Paul
          Mitchell has addressed this issue at CCRTS events and also in print:
               “Is there a place for small navies in network-centric warfare?
                  Will they be able to make any sort of contribution in multinational
                  naval operations of the future? Or will they be relegated to the
                  sidelines, undertaking the most menial of tasks, encouraged to
                  stay out of the way– or stay at home?…The “need for speed” in
                  network-centric operations places the whole notion of
                  multinational operations at risk.”
                                  Professor Paul Mitchell
                                  Director of Academics
                                  Canadian Forces College
                                  Naval War College Review – Spring 2003
      ii. Some of the problems that the US Navy has experienced in working with
          coalition forces in a networked environment.
               Issues
                      a. Incompatibility of network equipment. Different hardware
                          and software limit the ability to communicate efficiently.
                      b. Disparities in the level of networking. US Navy is highly
                          networked but has to work with navies like the (some
                          third-world navy with antiquated radio communications
                      c. Information assurance requirements sometimes get in the
                          way of being able to pass on important information to
                          coalition partners.
     iii. This issue has been addressed in CCRP publications and during previous
          CCRTS events, most notably, in Dr. David Alberts’ comments at a recent
                   ICCRTS where he noted, “We have been humbled by the magnitude of
                   the challenge of networking with coalition partners.”
4.   Learning from the past
       a. The challenges and issues facing coalition operations in a network centric
           warfare environment are not new. There have been many lessons over the two
           and a half millennia of coalition warfare and networking at sea that we can draw
           upon to help us understand where we are now and how not to let technological
           advances overtake our desire to interoperate.
                i. “Most think that bigger, faster, and more is best when talking about
                   providing technology to naval forces. But this is not always the case.
                   What matters is not how much you communicate, but rather getting the
                   right information to the right people at the right time.”
                           Professor Nicholas Rodger
                           Exeter University
                           Keynote Address
                           2007 Royal Australian Navy King Hall Naval History Conference
       b. Maritime coalitions have existed for at least two and a half millennia and navies
           have communicated at sea for at least that long.
                i. Greco-Persian War (499 BC – 449 BC)
                        In 479 BC the Coalition of Greeks (Hellenes) under the command
                           of a Spartan general destroyed a fleet of Persian ships in the
                           Aegean Sea
                        The Greek fleets combined ships from various Greek city states
                        The Persian fleet consisted of ships from its own territories and
                           captured Greek territories, Egypt, Syria, and Phoenicia
               ii. Battle of Actium (31 BC)
                        Battle between the fleets of Mark Antony and Octavius for the
                           control of the Roman empire
                        Mark Antony’s fleet included Egyptian warships under the
                           command of Queen Cleopatra
              iii. Mongol invasions of Japan (1274 & 1281)
                        Mongol fleet consisting of Mongol, Chinese, and Korean troops
                           attempted to invade Japan
                        Both attempts ended in disaster as typhoons destroyed the
                           invading fleets
              iv. Campaign of Lepanto (1571)
                        Christian fleet defeated the Turkish fleet and stopped further
                           Turkish incursions into the Mediterranean
                        The Christian fleet was composed of ships from Spain, Venice,
                           Genoa, Savoy, Malta, and the Papal fleet
               v. Battle of Trafalgar (1805)
                        Combined Fleet of French and Spanish ships were defeated by the
                           English fleet lead by Admiral Nelson.
              vi. World War I (1914 – 1918)
                        Imperial Japanese Navy ships fought along with allied ships in the
                           Mediterranean against German U-boats
             vii. World War II
                  American, British, Dutch, and Australian coalition in the Pacific
                   in the early part of World War II.
                W.G. Winslow, Fleet that Gods Forgot: The U.S. Asiatic Fleet in
                   World War II
                H.P. Willmott, Empires in the Balance: Japanese and Allied
                   Pacific Strategies to April 1942.
c. Over time, the need to communicate at sea has morphed to the need to network at
   sea. Networking at sea has been going on for well over a century.
        i. “The basic notion of networking is not new. Networks have existed ever
           since the first human communities emerged in mankind’s dim
           prehistory…What is different today is the speed, precision, capacity and
           reach of the most advanced networks. That is truly unprecedented – so
           much so that they are transforming civilization.”
                           Dr. Loren Thompson
                           Networking the Navy:
                           A Model for Modern Warfare
       ii. Defining networking at sea
                The ability for commanders to have a jointly-held tactical picture
                The ability to coordinate operations in a manner that leverages the
                   individual capabilities each coalition partner brings to the force
      iii. First Sea Lord Admiral John Fisher (1904) [Norman Friedman, “Netting
           and Navies: Achieving a Balance,” paper presented at the 2006 Royal
           Australian Navy Seapower Conference, Sydney, Australia.]
                Early originator of networks at sea
                Developed two Admiralty War Rooms to track local and global
                   shipping to combat piracy
                Information from embassies and scouts was fed into the war
                   rooms to provide information on attacks on commercial shipping
                Admiral Fisher used this common operating picture provided by
                   war rooms to direct a battle-cruiser to counter these attacks
      iv. World War II (1939 – 1945)
                British convoys and US aircraft formed a successful intelligence
                   based network to defeat German U-boat attacks
       v. Cold War [Loren Thompson, Networking the Navy: A Model for Modern
           Warfare (Arlington, VA: Lexington Institute, 2003).]
                (1950s) Networking of Sound Surveillance Systems (SOSUS)
                   with ASW aircraft to combat Soviet submarines
                (1990) The U.S. Navy’s Copernicus C4I initiative incorporated
                   information technologies to provide a common tactical picture
d. History is replete with examples where the introduction of new technology has
   actually hindered effective communication and networking because the
   ramifications of that technology were not fully understood and that technology
   was not thoughtfully introduced:
        i. The telegraph
       ii. The wireless
e. One way to ensure that the global maritime partnership can be networked is to
   understand the technology being introduced and to develop this technology in
   concert with likely coalition partners. This is good theory, but are there lessons
           learned and best practices the CCRP can draw on, especially in the introduction
           of C4ISR technologies?
5. We have “beta-tested” and will share one methodology for networking navies more
   effectively. This “beta-test” among the five AUSCANNZUKUS nations, currently
   entering its seventh year, provides one example of how to address these C4ISR
       a. Development of TTCP to meet the needs of coalition communications
                i. AG-1
                        The preliminary results from this three-year effort, a project
                          entitled “Network-Centric Maritime Warfare Study” have been
                          briefed at various conferences and symposia, including CCRTS.
               ii. AG – 6
                        The preliminary results from this follow-on three-year effort, a
                          project entitled, “FORCEnet and Coalition Implications” have
                          been briefed at various conferences and symposia, including
              iii. We will tie together these two studies and demonstrate the benefits of
                   undertaking multinational analysis and modeling and simulation at the
                   laboratory level in order to enhance the ability of nationally-developed
                   technologies to be compatible when a global maritime partnership
                   operates at sea.
6. Conclusions: Our conclusions will stem from the completed analysis and modeling and
   simulation and will be offered as one model for international cooperation in the C4ISR
   arena and one way to more-effectively deliver “power to the edge.”

To top