US - Sweden MOU (01 Aug 2009)

Joint Planning Document

DRAFT



Version 143

0126JuneApril 2010

United States Joint Forces Command Swedish Armed Forces

Joint Warfighting Center (JWFC) Joint Staff, Headquarters

116 Lake View Parkway, Suite 100 107 85 Stockholm

Suffolk, Virginia 23435 Sweden

For questions or comments please contact:

US JOINT FORCES COMMAND JWFC

(757)203 7715 ,

Table of Contents

Table of Contents------i

Executive Summary------iii

1.0 Mission and Goals------1

1.1 Mission------1

1.2 Goals------1

2.0 Roles and Responsibilities------1

2.1 Designated Agents------1

2.2 Implementing Agents------1

2.2.1 Sweden------1

2.2.2 United States------2

2.3 Joint Planning Committee------3

3.0 Operations and Execution------4

3.1 Operational Processes------4

3.2 Exercise Planning Process------4

3.3 Execution------5

4.0 Personnel------5

4.1 General------5

4.2 Swedish Personnel------5

4.3 U.S. Personnel------6

4.4 Other Personnel------6

4.5 Travel------6

5.0 Related Programs------7

5.1 US Regional Security Cooperation Network------7

5.2 BALTSIMNET------7

5.3 SEESIM------7

5.4 PfP Consortium of Defense Academies------7

5.5 US-Swiss MOU for Advanced Distributed Learning------7

5.6 PfP Information Management System (PIMS)------7

5.7.....NATO Education Training Network------8

5.8 Other Information Systems------8

6.0 Technical Arrangements------8

6.1 Description------8

7.0 Communication Systems------8

7.1 General------8

7.2 Communications Responsibilities------9

8.0 Education and Training------9

8.1 General------9

8.2 CAX Familiarization------9

8.3 Exercise Academic Phase Training------9

9.0 Security------10

9.1 Operational, Material, and Information Security------10

9.2 Physical Security------10

10.0 Sustainability------10

Annex A – Way Ahead, April 2010------A-1

Annex B - Milestones------B-1

Annex C - Technical Arrangements------C-1

Appendix 1 Training and Exercises

Appendix 2 Concept Development & Experimentation

Appendix 3 Training Capabilities

Appendix 4 Advanced Distributed Learning

Appendix 5 Lessons Learned

Appendix 6 Education and Academia

Appendix 7 Research and development

Executive Summary

The purpose of this Joint Planning Document is to describe how to build Partner Capacity within the Persistent Partner Simulation Network, what organization, roles and responsibilities of the participants, accomplishments to date, and to provide detailed plans for progressing the program toward the goals of the MOU.

In a June 1998 presentation to the Euro-Atlantic Partnership Council (EAPC), the United States (U.S.) Secretary of Defense advocated efforts to create a Partnership for Peace (PfP) cooperative security network that would enhance the conduct of PfP military exercises and cooperative defense education. During that timeframe the US Joint Forces Command and the Swedish Armed Forces were independently engaged in efforts to use distributed simulation and computer-aided exercises (CAX) in support of PfP training. Bi-lateral cooperation in a demonstration of a PfP Simulation Network (PSN) was deemed in the interest of both nations.

To that end, on 18 November 1998, the U.S. and the Government of the Kingdom of Sweden entered into a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) for cooperation in the development and operation of a simulation network that would enhance PfP education and training and serve as a springboard for enhancing interoperability between NATO and the armed forces of the PfP nations.

The purpose of this Joint Planning Document is to describe the PfP Simulation Network, the organization, roles and responsibilities of the participants, accomplishments to date, and to provide detailed plans for progressing the program toward the goals of the MOU.

The first major application of this MOU was a PfP Simulation Network demonstration conducted in conjunction with the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) Summit in Washington, D.C., in April 1999. During the Summit, Heads of State endorsed the PfP Training and Education Enhancement Program (TEEP). The TEEP is to provide a structured approach to optimize and improve training and education in the Partnership to meet current and future demands of an Enhanced and More Operational Partnership (EMOP), focusing specifically on the achievement of interoperability. The Allies have repeatedly endorsed the TEEP policy and there is a desire to assist the Partners in their training. It is widely understood that Partners will participate in NATO-led non-article 5 PfP operations, which might range from filling posts in headquarters which are in the direct chain of command up to and including a Combined Joint Task Force Headquarters (CJTF HQ).

There is a continuing need to assist Partners at all levels of training and the PfP Simulation Network referred to in the Washington Summit is a valid way to accomplish this. This network can focus on military command and staff training for NATO-led PfP operations and through computer assisted technologies and communications that link national or multinational staffs and remote site command posts. This will enhance regional cooperation, enhance partner interoperability, and promote regional stability.

The PfP simulation network is a set of protocols, standards, and processes needed to create, on a temporary basis, the infrastructure and technical elements required to support a distributed simulation exercise. The protocols and standards enable Partner nations to create the hardware and software suites needed to participate in or lead exercise events while the processes enable those Partners to quickly establish the required organization and communications network. The PfP simulation network will identify the nodes within Partner and NATO nations that have the requisite systems that enable their participation in a distributed simulation exercise. This information is then used as a fundamental building block of an exercise.

Since the demonstration at the Summit the participants have executed and continue to plan a series of Viking exercises that will continue to “raise the bar” in complexity, scope, and level of participation in distributed simulation exercises. Other activities have included formation of a modeling and simulation working group within the PfP Consortium of Defense Academies, and participation in the activities of the US Regional Security Cooperation Network Program in Europe as the exercise and initiative SEESIM, involving a number of nations in the southeastern Europe.

The work of the MOU is being guided and executed through a US – Sweden bilateral Joint Planning Committee (JPC). In between the JPC’s the hands-on work is made through continuous workshops named Joint Working Group (JWG). In February 2002 the JPC decided to develop a more detailed plan of action for PfP SIMNET activities over the remaining life of the MOU (through CY 2008). The members also agreed to expand the participation of NATO and PfP countries in exercise planning, participation, and execution.

This Joint Planning Document implements the U.S.– Sweden MOU and documents mutually agreed-to statements of fact, intentions, procedures, and parameters for future actions and matters of coordination. Neither Party will be obligated to provide any article or services to the other Party. As provided in the MOU, any obligation undertaken by either Party will be in accordance with the laws and regulations of the respective Party, and will be subject to the availability of funds. All costs incurred as a result of demonstrations, exercises and operation of a Simulation Network shall be borne by each participant for its respective facility, personnel expenses and ancillary support. Subject to these conditions, expenses for common operations and requirements shall be borne equally by the participants, or as otherwise agreed.

1.0 Mission and Goals

1.1Mission

To fulfill the requirements of the US-Sweden Memorandum of Understanding to establish and operate a PersistentfP simulation network and to demonstrate, through a program of exercises, education and training how a simulation network capability can distribute training, enhance military interoperability among Partners, and support the PartnerfP programs as a whole.

1.2Goals

The goals of the US-Sweden MOU and building Partner capacity through the Persistent PartnerPfP sSimulation Nnetwork are to:

  1. Define the standards, protocols, tools and processes to create and build up a Persistent PartnerPfPSsimulation Nnetwork.
  2. Establish and conduct a series of demonstration exercises.
  3. Enhance Concept Development and Experimentation
  4. Leverage existing capabilites and technology.
  5. Maximize training, education and participation opportunities for Partner nations and organisations.
  6. Enhance research and development

2.0 Roles and Responsibilities

2.1 Designated Agents

The MOU specifies that each signatory shall appoint a “Designated Agent” responsible for implementation of the MOU. The Designated Agents will co-chair the Joint Planning Committee and approve the Joint Planning Document(s). The U.S. Joint Forces Command is the Designated Agent for the United States. The Swedish Armed Forces is the Designated Agent for Sweden, and theSwedish Armed Forces Joint Staff will provide program management and support for activities initiated by Sweden or United States as well as co-chairing the Jjoint Pplanning cCommittee.

2.2 Implementing Agents

2.2.1 Sweden

The Swedish Armed Forces have been designated as the agent responsible for implementing the MOU on behalf of Sweden. As such, they will coordinate specific details during Joint Planning Committee (JPC) meetings. Sweden will coordinate with USJFCOM personnel to schedule JPC Meetings.

In order to promote cooperation and self-reliance among mutual identifies Partner nations and organisations, Sweden will participate in or originate political-military and command post exercises involving computer simulations. Sweden will also assist in organizing and conducting scenarios for multinational PfP exercises involving elements of Peace Operations. Specific functional area responsibilities in program planning and management, system operations and maintenance, exercise operations and maintenance, and system acquisition are detailed below.

Program Planning & Management – The Swedish Joint StaffForces Command will lead the planning, design, coordination, procedure development, requirements analysis, conference chairing, system integration and other tasks associated with general program management.

System Operations & Maintenance (Communications & Computers) – The Swedish Joint Forces Command will work towards partnering with other programs to establish low cost, available circuits that can support typical exercise configurations.

Swedish led -Exercise Operations & Maintenance – The Swedish Joint Forces CommandStaffwill provide technical assistance for exercise support. Included in this task is operations support, support in the establishment of communications and computer configurations, and modeling and simulation support. Sweden will provide funding for Swedish equipment and technical support personnel used in the exercise.

Swedish Supported Exercise Operations & Maintenance – The Swedish Joint Forces CommandStaffwill provide advice during planning and may provide limited communications and equipment for supported exercises. Models, and Command, Control, Communications, Computers, and Information systems in supported exercises will be the responsibility of the lead nation. Swedish-compatible, high-level architecture (HLA) compliant (when they are developed), or Swedish-sponsored systems will be used.

System Acquisition – It may be necessary to invest an annual allotment in system development for the Persistent PartnerfP Simulation Network. Products may include modeling and simulation tailoring for PartnerfP configurations, improved information systems in support of exercises, and information management systems such as digital libraries. These products will be used to support the expansion and modernization of the simulation network capacity.

The United States

US Joint Forces Command has been designated as the agent responsible for implementing the MOU on behalf of the U.S. The US Joint Forces Command Joint Warfighting Center (JWFC) will provide program management and technical support for the PfP Simulation Network. The U.S. will designate JPC members and coordinate with Swedish personnel to schedule JPC Meetings. US Joint Forces Command will coordinate with NATO and the U.S. unified combatant commanders to nominate (leverage) existing exercises that could use this technology. The U.S., through the Office of the Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense for NATO and Europe, will provide funding for equipment and technical support personnel as delineated in this Joint Planning Document.

The United States, on a case-by-case basis, will lend, to PfP nations, a limited amount of computers and communications equipment to conduct exercises from Sweden. The JWFC will provide planning and exercise support personnel as required. Specific functional area responsibilities are detailed below.

Program Planning & Management – US Joint Forces Command will lead the planning, design, coordination, procedure development, requirements analysis, conference chairing, system integration and other tasks associated with general program management.

System Operations & Maintenance (Communications & Computers) – US Joint Forces Command will maintain a pool of ready assets to support exercises. Equipment includes communications pods and computers. US Joint Forces Command will also work towards partnering with other programs to establish low cost, available circuits that can support typical exercise configurations.

US led -Exercise Operations & Maintenance – US Joint Forces Command, supporting one of the unified combatant commanders, will provide technical assistance for exercise support. Included in this task is funding of Warsaw Initiative Fund-qualified partner travel, establishment of communications and computer configurations, modeling and simulation support, supported unified combatant commander funding and operations support. The U.S., through the Office of the Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense for NATO and Europe, will provide funding for equipment and technical support personnel.

US Supported Exercise Operations & Maintenance – US Joint Forces Command and the supported unified combatant commander will provide advice during planning and provide limited communications and equipment for supported exercises. Models, and Command, Control, Communications, Computers, and Information systems in supported exercises will be the responsibility of the lead nation. Use of NATO-compatible, HLA compliant, or NATO-sponsored systems is encouraged.

System Acquisition – It may be necessary to invest an annual allotment in system development for the Persistent PartnerfP Simulation Network. Products may include modeling and simulation tailoring for PartnerfP configurations, improved information systems in support of exercises, and information management systems such as digital libraries. These products will be used to support the expansion and modernization of the simulation network capacity.

The Joint Planning Committee

The Joint Planning Committee, co-chaired by the head representative of the Swedish Armed Forces Joint Staff, MG Michael Moore and the USJFCOM head representative, Mr. Greg Knapp, will meet annually to develop plans and take decisions necessary to fulfill the mission and its development.

Purpose:

Sample Agenda (APPENDIX XX)

Membership

Chairs / MOU Leads / TA Representatives / Recorder /

Frequency of Meetings

The Joint Working Group

The Joint Working Group, chaired by the hosting nation, representatives of the Swedish Armed Forces Joint Staffheadquarters and the JWFC, will meet no less than semi-annually to fulfill tasks given by the JPC and to prepare the upcoming JPC.

TA Working Groups

The Technical Arrangement Working Groups, chaired by the hosting nation, representatives of the Swedish Armed Forces, the USJFCOM and identified Partners will meet upon request to fulfill tasks given by the JPC and the JWG.

3.0 Operations and ExecutionTechnical and Project Arrangements

Operational Processes

The U.S. and Sweden will develop and validate all processes required to support the Persistent Partner Simulation Network and its exercises. Existing and emerging NATO doctrine and standards will be used to the maximum extent possible. Mutually agreed upon doctrine will be followed where applicable.

Overview

Technical Arrangements

Definition

Development and Approval Process

Format (See Appendix XX)

Project Arrangements

SAME SAME

List of CY 10/11 Technical Arrangements

Exercise Planning Processes

Planning Conferences are major milestones during the planning phase of CAX preparation. It is the only time all principle participants have a chance to meet face to face to discuss and resolve issues that otherwise may be unknown to the exercising planning headquarters. Even within the headquarters, these meetings play a key role to resolve issues and determine status since it allows everyone to concentrate on a single effort: how to plan the details of an exercise and assure all of the exercise objectives will be met.

Exercise Specification Conference (ESC) This is generally the first time all participants come together. Required participants include Sweden, US Joint Forces Command, all training echelons, and working group chiefs. This conference also reviews the draft training objectives developed by lead nation, exercise design, key events list, and proposed schedule. The general parameters of the exercise (participants; command structure; distribution; communications {both real-world and exercise}; logistics support; budget; analysis; DISTAFF and EXCON composition and location; and planning functions) are identified. The ESC usually occurs no earlier than 14 months prior to STARTEX and normally takes two days to complete.

Initial Planning Conference (IPC) The same functional representatives at the ESC need to be at the IPC. Any outstanding issues identified by working groups need to be resolved in open session. The attendees review the exercise concept, discuss available technologies, and provide appropriate direction. Attendees discuss and review resources for the exercise, exercise directives and MOAs. The attendees develop, promulgate, and agree upon Exercise milestones and timelines. The tasking window defines the start of each phase and location of training events. The IPC defines any “caps” and/or “limitations” placed on the exercise. The final process determines an accurate structure for the manning documents and promulgates the training objectives. Sweden releases an IPC minutes message summarizing and promulgating action for critical issues identified during the conference. The IPC usually occurs no earlier than 12 months prior to STARTEX and normally takes three days to complete.

Main Planning Conference (MPC) The same functional representatives at the IPC need to be at the MPC. Unresolved issues from the IPC should be discussed and current status presented. A new prioritized list of issues should be developed in open session, based upon inputs from the various working groups. The Sweden should be ready for comments on the draft exercise operations order (EXOPORD) distributed prior to the meeting. The participants will be ready to brief current status of CAX preparation to include database preparation, site survey schedule, Confederation of Models to support exercise, equipment list, and required augmentation. Final preparations for site surveys will be made at the MPC. Depending on the complexity of the exercise, the MPC will last three to five days and will occur at least eight months prior to STARTEX.