Issue Paper. Wargaming Homeland Security and Army Reserve Component Issues. By Professor Michael Pasquarett



Similar documents
In June 1998 the Joint Military Intelligence. Intelligence Education for Joint Warfighting A. DENIS CLIFT

Asset Management- Acquisitions

Overview Presented by: Boyd L. Summers

Report Documentation Page

ELECTRONIC HEALTH RECORDS. Fiscal Year 2013 Expenditure Plan Lacks Key Information Needed to Inform Future Funding Decisions

73rd MORSS CD Cover Page UNCLASSIFIED DISCLOSURE FORM CD Presentation

Pima Community College Planning Grant For Autonomous Intelligent Network of Systems (AINS) Science, Mathematics & Engineering Education Center

DCAA and the Small Business Innovative Research (SBIR) Program

RT 24 - Architecture, Modeling & Simulation, and Software Design


DEFENSE CONTRACT AUDIT AGENCY

Interagency National Security Knowledge and Skills in the Department of Defense

Using the Advancement Degree of Difficulty (AD 2 ) as an input to Risk Management

EAD Expected Annual Flood Damage Computation

AFRL-RX-WP-TP

THE MIMOSA OPEN SOLUTION COLLABORATIVE ENGINEERING AND IT ENVIRONMENTS WORKSHOP

FIRST IMPRESSION EXPERIMENT REPORT (FIER)

IISUP-. NAVAL SUPPLY SVSTE:MS COMMAND. Ready. Resourceful. Responsive!

An Application of an Iterative Approach to DoD Software Migration Planning

Army Environmental Policy and ISO 14001

GAO ELECTRONIC HEALTH RECORDS. DOD and VA Should Remove Barriers and Improve Efforts to Meet Their Common System Needs

COJUMA s. Legal Considerations for Defense Support to Civil Authorities. U.S. Southern Command Miami, Florida Draft

NAVSUP FLC NORFOLK PHILADELPHIA OFFICE

THE FLATWORLD SIMULATION CONTROL ARCHITECTURE (FSCA): A FRAMEWORK FOR SCALABLE IMMERSIVE VISUALIZATION SYSTEMS

Headquarters U.S. Air Force

CAPTURE-THE-FLAG: LEARNING COMPUTER SECURITY UNDER FIRE

Cancellation of Nongroup Health Insurance Policies

Guide to Using DoD PKI Certificates in Outlook 2000

An Oil-Free Thrust Foil Bearing Facility Design, Calibration, and Operation

Mr. Steve Mayer, PMP, P.E. McClellan Remediation Program Manger Air Force Real Property Agency. May 11, 2011

Military Health System Conference

Preventing and Defending Against Cyber Attacks November 2010

Cyber Security Training and Awareness Through Game Play

DEFENSE BUSINESS PRACTICE IMPLEMENTATION BOARD

Course Title: HSE-101 Introduction to Homeland Security Prerequisites: None Credit Hours: 3 lectures, 3 hours

Mobile Robot Knowledge Base

While interagency education and training have long been staples of the intelligence and

Integrated Force Method Solution to Indeterminate Structural Mechanics Problems

Graduate Level Credit for Resident EWS Students. Natasha McEachin CG 1

Marine Corps Civilian Law Enforcement: A Necessary Evil. Captain WA Carr Jr

GAO COMBATING TERRORISM. Observations on Options to Improve the Federal Response. Testimony

A GPS Digital Phased Array Antenna and Receiver

REPORT DOCUMENTATION PAGE *

TITLE: The Impact Of Prostate Cancer Treatment-Related Symptoms On Low-Income Latino Couples

Dr. Gary S. E. Lagerloef Earth and Space Research, 1910 Fairview Ave E

Obsolescence Considerations for Materials in the Lower Sub-Tiers of the Supply Chain

Advanced Micro Ring Resonator Filter Technology

Integrated Emergency Management:

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Preventing and Defending Against Cyber Attacks June 2011

Virginia National Guard. The Commonwealth s Guardian

I N S T I T U T E F O R D E FE N S E A N A L Y S E S NSD-5216

V: RECOMMENDATIONS TERRORIST ATTACKS ON U.S. FACILITIES IN BENGHAZI

Addressing the Real-World Challenges in the Development of Propulsion IVHM Technology Experiment (PITEX)

STATE OF MARYLAND Strategy for Homeland Security

Simulation of Air Flow Through a Test Chamber

Middle Class Economics: Cybersecurity Updated August 7, 2015

PROBLEM STATEMENT: Will reducing the ASD for Kadena AB F-15 C/Ds increase the CPFH for this Mission Design Series (MDS)?

An Overview of Romanian Command and Control Systems

UNITY OF COMMAND FOR HOMELAND SECURITY: TITLE 32, TITLE 10, OR A COMBINATION

Hearing before the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence. Homeland Security and Intelligence: Next Steps in Evolving the Mission

PREPARED FOR: U.S. Army Medical Research and Materiel Command Fort Detrick, Maryland

John Mathieson US Air Force (WR ALC) Systems & Software Technology Conference Salt Lake City, Utah 19 May 2011

4. TITLE AND SUBTITLE 5a. CONTRACT NUMBER FA C AUTHOR(S) 5d. PROJECT NUMBER

v. 03/03/2015 Page ii

Espionage and Intelligence. Debra A. Miller, Book Editor

DEPARMTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY AUTHORIZATION BILL FOR FY 2008 AND FY 2009 SECTION-BY-SECTION

E X A D A T A NEW EXPLOSIVES ACCIDENT DATABASE

NATIONAL DEFENSE UNIVERSITY NATIONAL WAR COLLEGE

CERT Virtual Flow Collection and Analysis

STATEMENT BY DAVID DEVRIES PRINCIPAL DEPUTY DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE CHIEF INFORMATION OFFICER BEFORE THE

Subject: National Preparedness

Department of Defense INSTRUCTION. 1. PURPOSE. This Instruction, in accordance with the authority in DoD Directive (Reference (a)):

National Guard Interaction with State Defense Forces

SECTION-BY-SECTION. Section 1. Short Title. The short title of the bill is the Cybersecurity Act of 2012.

Software Security Engineering: A Guide for Project Managers

FUNDING FOR DEFENSE, MILITARY OPERATIONS, HOMELAND SECURITY, AND RELATED ACTIVITIES SINCE

DOD DIRECTIVE CLIMATE CHANGE ADAPTATION AND RESILIENCE

A Limited Objective Experiment on Wireless Peer-To-Peer Collaborative Networking

INSPECTOR GENERAL DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE 4800 MARK CENTER DRIVE ALEXANDRIA, VIRGINIA

FUNDING FOR DEFENSE, HOMELAND SECURITY AND COMBATING TERRORISM SINCE 9-11: WHERE HAS ALL THE MONEY GONE?

FACT SHEET. General Information about the Defense Contract Management Agency

Microstructural Evaluation of KM4 and SR3 Samples Subjected to Various Heat Treatments

Transcription:

Issue Paper Center for Strategic Leadership, U.S. Army War College May 2003 Volume 04-03 Wargaming Homeland Security and Army Reserve Component Issues By Professor Michael Pasquarett Background The President of the United States directed that the first priority of our national security policy is to defend the homeland from terrorist attacks. In response, Congress established the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) to consolidate homeland security and civil support under a single organization and the Department of Defense (DoD) established Northern Command (NORTHCOM) to consolidate under a single command homeland defense and civil support. As a result, within DoD, both Active and Reserve Component forces face a growing list of what seems like ever-expanding missions. NORTHCOM, DoD s principle agent to focus on these missions faces many challenges especially regarding the expanded roles expected of reserve component forces. As a result of this new national priority the challenge for the Reserve Components (RC) is two-fold. The same units directed to wage the ever-increasing and extensive overseas commitments to fight the war on terrorism may also be directed to simultaneously protect critical infrastructure and provide response to domestic incidents. Due to these conflicting and complementary priorities, discussions now abound concerning the proper organization and mission alignment of both the Army National Guard and the Army Reserve. This paper documents issues identified with the current missions and structures of the Army Reserve Components and of Northern Command s (NORTHCOM) homeland security missions through the prism of two senior service college war games: the U.S. Army War College s Strategic Crisis Exercise (SCE), and the Joint Land, Aerospace and Sea Simulation (JLASS) Exercise 1. In September 2002, as part of the preparation to more accurately portray the Army Reserve Component and associated NORTHCOM homeland security issues within these exercises, the USAWC conducted a workshop entitled Portraying the Army Reserve Components in Army War Games and Exercises. This workshop brought together high-level and senior service college war gamers and members of the Army Guard and Army Reserve leadership to examine how the Reserve Component is portrayed in Army war games and exercises and to ensure that exercises correctly present Reserve Component roles and missions 2. Although the result of this workshop led to many improvements the portrayal of Reserve Component forces remains a continuing effort in order to maintain 1 JLASS is a joint military exercise involving students attending the U.S. Army War College, the U.S. Naval War College, the Air War College, the Marine War College and the Industrial College of the Armed Forces (ICAF). 2 An Issue Paper concerning the workshop entitled Portraying the Army Reserve Components in Army War Games and Exercises was published and may be accessed at http://www.carlisle.army.mil/usacsl/index.asp. CSL 1

Report Documentation Page Form Approved OMB No. 0704-0188 Public reporting burden for the collection of information is estimated to average 1 hour per response, including the time for reviewing instructions, searching existing data sources, gathering and maintaining the data needed, and completing and reviewing the collection of information. Send comments regarding this burden estimate or any other aspect of this collection of information, including suggestions for reducing this burden, to Washington Headquarters Services, Directorate for Information Operations and Reports, 1215 Jefferson Davis Highway, Suite 1204, Arlington VA 22202-4302. Respondents should be aware that notwithstanding any other provision of law, no person shall be subject to a penalty for failing to comply with a collection of information if it does not display a currently valid OMB control number. 1. REPORT DATE MAY 2003 2. REPORT TYPE 3. DATES COVERED - 4. TITLE AND SUBTITLE Wargaming Homeland Security and Army Reserve Component Issues 5a. CONTRACT NUMBER 5b. GRANT NUMBER 5c. PROGRAM ELEMENT NUMBER 6. AUTHOR(S) 5d. PROJECT NUMBER 5e. TASK NUMBER 5f. WORK UNIT NUMBER 7. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION NAME(S) AND ADDRESS(ES) Army War College,Center for Strategic Leadership,650 Wrught Ave,Carlisle,PA,17013-5049 8. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION REPORT NUMBER 9. SPONSORING/MONITORING AGENCY NAME(S) AND ADDRESS(ES) 10. SPONSOR/MONITOR S ACRONYM(S) 12. DISTRIBUTION/AVAILABILITY STATEMENT Approved for public release; distribution unlimited 13. SUPPLEMENTARY NOTES The original document contains color images. 14. ABSTRACT see report 15. SUBJECT TERMS 11. SPONSOR/MONITOR S REPORT NUMBER(S) 16. SECURITY CLASSIFICATION OF: 17. LIMITATION OF ABSTRACT a. REPORT b. ABSTRACT c. THIS PAGE 18. NUMBER OF PAGES 4 19a. NAME OF RESPONSIBLE PERSON Standard Form 298 (Rev. 8-98) Prescribed by ANSI Std Z39-18

currency with their evolving readiness posture. Homeland Security Play in Wargaming Since September 11, 2001 all national games and simulations contain a homeland security element. Correctly understanding and portraying the response to a homeland threat or attack remains a great challenge to all organizations because the homeland security structure is still evolving and lacks the clarity and definition associated with traditional national security responses. Both the SCE and JLASS reflected scenarios that replicate current reality projected into the future. Each portrayed a world in which major overseas conflicts competed with significant incidents within the continental United States for employment of Reserve Component assets. Although both SCE and JLASS are student war games focusing primarily on student educational objectives, many of the insights gained provide the basis for future modeling and evaluation that will lead to greater Reserve Component efficiencies and enhanced homeland security effectiveness. The USAWC s SCE portrays scenarios covering sixteen major and minor situations; twelve of which occur overseas and four of which occur within the homeland. The SCE homeland security scenarios include a major disaster (earthquake), a series of attacks by domestic and foreign terrorists, and a major terrorist attack in a southern port. In addition, NORTHCOM is faced with responding to a terrorist chemical attack in Canada. The JLASS exercise portrays four scenarios; three overseas and one in the homeland. The JLASS homeland security scenario is focused on state directed terrorist attacks within the U.S. in conjunction with their conventional war against the U.S. overseas. As a result of these concurrent crises, students must prioritize and balance the need to employ Reserve forces in support of three major contingency operations against significant demands for Reserve Component support from local and state government. Priorities: Homeland Security Versus International Defense Both exercises clearly demonstrated that securing the homeland while prosecuting the Nation s wars overseas will place significant strains on military capabilities, especially within the Reserve Component. The key issue is: if the first priority of the United States is homeland security (HLS), do overseas efforts become the second priority? A follow-up question may be: should not DoD s support to protect the homeland concentrate on offensive actions overseas? If so, even with homeland security being the first priority a majority of DoD forces will be focused overseas. This complicates the situation for the National Guard who serves two masters the President and the State Governors. Given the ever-increasing likelihood that National Guard forces could be needed both at home and overseas in a multiple-crisis situation, a review of our overall national strategy, with a goal of identifying appropriate and dedicated forces for both priorities, should be considered. Reserve Component time, energy, and resources directed at one focus instead of two related, but distinctly separate missions may lead to greater efficiencies and even more importantly, greater effectiveness. A Role for NORTHCOM? The establishment of NORTHCOM is based on the Cold War combatant command model of major commands such as U.S. European Command (EUCOM) and U.S. Central Command (CENTCOM). Within the wargames there evolved a significant debate on whether this new command is the right organization or even necessary. The debate continues and may come down to the question of: Do we need a Combatant Command to fulfill the stated NORTHCOM mission? Is the solution that DoD s Reserve Components are responsible for the CSL 2

homeland security command organizations and missions, while the active duty forces maintain responsibility for overseas defense missions? If so, does this mean that the Active Components and the Reserve Component become completely separate entities, in which case only the President or Congress can authorize the Active Component to task the Governors to provide Reserve Component forces for overseas missions. Another alternative envisions the National Guard tasked as the exclusive military component for HLS, while the Reserves would exclusively support DoD s active component forces, again with only the President or Congress -empowered to shift National Guard forces to support Active Component forces. The challenge for the National Guard and Reserve forces to be responsible for two distinct and growing missions sets may become overwhelming, especially when long-term mobilizations lead to recruitment and retention difficulties. Initial Game Findings 1. Critical homeland security plans, policies and procedures are still being debated and have not been finalized by national and state decision makers. The interaction of the DHS, the Assistant Secretary of Defense for HLS, and NORTHCOM is still developing and is, therefore, very difficult to portray in a realistic manner. 2. Both Active and Reserve Component forces are being severely taxed by both overseas and homeland security commitments. Recommendations 1. As decisions are being made on homeland security plans, policies and procedures war game developers, designers, and executors must quickly integrate them into high-level war games. 2. Pending Active and Reserve Component force structure changes need to be wargamed to review the changes on both homeland and overseas missions. 3. A review needs to be conducted through wargaming of the present command and control (C2) organizations that are supporting both homeland and overseas security requirements to determine whether more streamlined structures can be used to protect our nation s overall safety and security. 4. A separate, HLS-specific, experiential war game be conducted in order to assist in defining HLS roles and missions, and that these methods and techniques be replicated for proper portrayal in subsequent national-level war games. 5. Distributed information nodes to support wargaming be established within selected DoD and DHS organizations to support both student and real world players education and training objectives. The Way Ahead U.S. Army War College students, through future iterations of SCE and JLASS, will learn and examine the issues surrounding homeland security organizations and the military s role and gain insights and lessons learned for pertinent DoD and DHS planners. It is anticipated that the results of these efforts and of CSL 3

other events, such as the annual USAWC/RC workshops, will assist the DoD, DHS, and other relevant government agencies in focusing on the goals of establishing more efficient and effective procedures for homeland security as we combat terrorism, secure the homeland, and bring peace to the nation. This publication and other CSL publications can be found online at http://www.carlisle.army.mil/usacsl/ index.asp. ******* The views expressed in this report are those of the participants and do not necessarily reflect official policy or position of the United States Army War College, the Department of the Army, the Department of Defense, or the Department of State. Further, these views do not reflect uniform agreement among workshop participants. This report is cleared for public release; distribution is unlimited. * * * * * This publication and other CSL publications can be found online at http://www.carlisle.army.mil/usacsl/index.asp. * * * * * The views expressed in this report are those of the participants and do not necessarily reflect official policy or position of the United States Army War College, the Department of the Army, the Department of Defense, or any other Department or Agency within the U.S. Government. Further, these views do not reflect uniform agreement among exercise participants. This report is cleared for public release; distribution is unlimited. U.S. ARMY WAR COLLEGE Center for Strategic Leadership 650 Wright Avenue Carlisle, PA 17103-5049 OFFICIAL BUSINESS STRATEGIC LEADERS ADAPTING TO THE FUTURE ENVIRONMENT CSL 4