For the Paper Entitled

Abstract and Outline

for

13th ICCRTS

For the paper entitled:

Networking the Global Maritime Partnership

Topics:

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 challenges.

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 Warfare

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.

  1. “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
  2. 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 partnerships.
  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 equipment).

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.”

  1. Learning from the past
  2. 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.
  3. “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

  1. Maritime coalitions have existed for at least two and a half millennia and navies have communicated at sea for at least that long.
  2. 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

  1. 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

  1. 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

  1. 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

  1. Battle of Trafalgar (1805)

·  Combined Fleet of French and Spanish ships were defeated by the English fleet lead by Admiral Nelson.

  1. World War I (1914 – 1918)

·  Imperial Japanese Navy ships fought along with allied ships in the Mediterranean against German U-boats

  1. 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.

  1. 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.
  2. “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

  1. 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

  1. 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

  1. World War II (1939 – 1945)

·  British convoys and US aircraft formed a successful intelligence based network to defeat German U-boat attacks

  1. 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

  1. 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:
  2. The telegraph
  3. The wireless
  4. 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 challenges

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 CCRTS.

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.

  1. 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.”
Top View