U.S. Army Capabilities Integration Center In the future, the Army will continue to see an increase in all ranges of technologically advanced ballistic missiles, cruise missiles, long-range rockets, and air to surface missiles available to state and non-state actors. These offer our potential adversaries a means to offset continued U.S. and allied military dominances, especially when coupled with weapons of mass destruction payloads. This problem will affect regional conflicts as well as threaten the U.S. homeland. The defense of the U.S. homeland and operations in forward theaters are no longer separate operational environments, but rather part of a single global operational environment. The future joint force must simultaneously defend the homeland while it executes multiple, distributed and decentralized operations throughout a singular global operational environment—thus the need for global missile defense.
TRADOC Pamphlet 525-7-5, The United States Army’s Concept Capability Plan for GlobalMissile Defense 2015-2024 identifies the required future global missile defense capabilities during the 2015-2024 timeframe. TRADOC Pamphlet 525-7-5 describes how Army forces will synergistically support operations at all levels to include joint and multinational. In examining the Army’s future global missile defense (GMD) capabilities, the concept capability plan (CCP) describes the operational environment, the emerging threats, and the joint interdependences required. This CCP describes GMD as a network-centric, integrated system of multi-tiered measures that include the synchronization of all operations that involve multiple geographic combatant commanders’ areas of responsibility.
The identification of these capabilities will provide a coherent way ahead for the further examination for potential doctrine, organization, training, materiel, leadership and education, personnel, and facilities solutions through the support to the joint and Army capabilities based assessment processes. It will also provide technology vector and material development guidance to the Missile Defense Agency on the capabilities that the Army will require to fully support the modular force battle field.
The realization of these capabilities is essential to achieving the Army’s capstone concept objective for a strategically responsive, campaign quality force, and countering adversary anti-access operations. As this CCP crosses so many joint and Army functional areas, I strongly encourage its use by other proponents, Services, and joint organizations.
This page intentionally left blank.
Operational Problem a. The future will continue to see an increase in missile delivery systems available to state and non-state actors. This expanding threat, coupled with the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction payloads, offers a method to potential adversaries to offset continued U.S. and allied military dominance. Technological advances and their propagation will make available to foes all ranges of ballistic missiles, cruise missiles, long-range rockets, and air to surface missiles. This, coupled with potentially catastrophic and disruptive warheads and the cooperation between state and non-state actors, creates even more uncertainty and makes the need for missile defense a high priority. This problem will affect regional conflicts, and in certain circumstances, threatens the U.S. homeland. This latter concern may have an effect on the U.S. ability for power projection and sustainment of deployed forces. The defense of the U.S. homeland and operations in forward theaters are no longer separate operational environments, but rather part of a singular global operational environment. Future joint forces must simultaneously defend the homeland while it executes multiple, distributed, and decentralized operations throughout a singular global operational environment – thus the need for GMD.
b. Current missile defense operations are challenged by inadequate interoperability among weapon systems, sensors, and battle management. Collaborative planning, integrated fire control, and combat identification are constrained by both technical and procedural issues. The potential threat of ballistic missiles, cruise missiles, long-range rockets, and air to surface missiles with weapons of mass destruction munitions will continue to grow as these systems rapidly proliferate; therefore, it is critical that GMD be evolved or developed to counter these enemy capabilities. Weapon inventories may not be adequate to withstand massive swarming attacks from all directions. Separate battle management command, control, and communication for missile and air defense, as well as separate strategic and operational/tactical systems, are not only expensive, but may be inefficient in countering the wide and varied threats. Potential opponents will look for weapon systems, sensors, and battle management seams to exploit. GMD must become what it is not now, a modular, full spectrum, networked, deployable, integrated missile defense capability for global, homeland, regional, and theater defenses.
Scope a. To achieve the Army’s capstone concept objective of becoming a “…strategically responsive, campaign quality force, dominant across the spectrum of conflict and fully integrated within the joint, interagency, intergovernmental, and multinational security framework…,” the U.S. must be able to field dominant and fully integrated GMD capabilities for land component operations. Employing a combination of fixed and mobile sensor and shooter capabilities, Army GMD forces, as integral elements of the joint interdependent global missile defense system, will provide protection for the U.S. homeland, allies, friends, and power projection capabilities; will provide protection for deploying and deployed forces; and will ensure sustainable freedom of
aneuver to execute future Modular Force operations throughout the global environment. GMD is achieved through integrated efforts taken by joint, multinational, and Army missile defense forces to defeat any missile threat.
b. GMD consists of four operational elements: attack operations, active defense, passive defense, and command and control. Each element must be used with each other to provide a robust and integrated capability to provide the required capabilities to defeat the threat now and in the future. One element alone cannot provide the required capabilities to deter and if required defeat the enemies capability to employ these type weapons. An example of this integrated action comes from the Gulf War where scud missiles launched from Iraq (Central Command) attacked Israel (Europe Command) and Saudi Arabia (Central Command). Attack operations attempt to destroy proactively missiles before they are launched. Active defense actions detected launches and then intercepted and destroyed the missile or warhead within each GCC. Passive defenses measures were taken to minimize casualties, maintain operational momentum, and restore combat power. Passive defense included integrating capabilities of cover, concealment, deception, and information protection in order to defeat adversarial missile employment. Command and control included the sharing of information within and across all geographic combatant commands.
Department of the Army TRADOC Pamphlet 525-7-5
Headquarters, United States Army
Training and Doctrine Command
Fort Monroe, Virginia 23651-1047 4 August 2008 Military Operations THE UNITED STATES ARMY CONCEPT CAPABILITY PLAN FOR GLOBAL MISSLE DEFENSE 2015-2024
FOR THE COMMANDER:
OFFICIAL: DAVID P. VALCOURT
Lieutenant General, U.S. Army
Deputy Commanding General/
Chief of Staff
History. This publication is a new United States Army Training and Doctrine Command (TRADOC) pamphlet developed as part of the Army Concept Strategy for the future Modular Force.
Summary. TRADOC Pamphlet 525-7-5, The United States Army’s Concept Capability Plan for GlobalMissile Defense 2015-2024 provides a capability plan for integrating Army global missile defense (GMD) capabilities and may result in a missile defense focused capabilities based assessment (CBA). The Army GMD CBA will identify doctrine, organization, training, materiel, leadership and education, personnel, and facilities (DOTMLPF) solutions or solution sets for GMD capability gaps during the 2015-2024 timeframe. This pamphlet focuses on the strategic, operational, and tactical application of integrated GMD capabilities across the spectrum of conflict. This plan draws from approved and draft documents addressing the Army’s future Modular Force to include the division, corps, and Army Service component commands in addition to emerging joint and Army concepts relevant to Department of Defense (DOD) and Army transformation.
Applicability. This concept applies to all DOD services, agencies, and activities involved in the future Modular Force. It functions as the conceptual basis for developing required solution sets related to the future Modular Force within the domains of DOTMLPF.
Proponent and exception authority. The proponent of this pamphlet is the Director, Army Capabilities Integration Center (ARCIC), Concept Development and Experimentation Directorate (ATFC-ED), 33 Ingalls Road, Fort Monroe, VA 23651-1046. The proponent has the authority to approve exceptions or waivers to this pamphlet that are consistent with controlling law and regulations.
Suggested improvements. Users are invited to send comments and suggestions on DA Form 2028 (Recommended Changes to Publications and Blank Forms) directly to Director, ARCIC, Concept Development and Experimentation Directorate (ATFC-ED), 33 Ingalls Road, Fort Monroe, VA 23651-1046. Suggested improvements may also be submitted using DA Form 1045 (Army Ideas for Excellence Program Proposal).
Distribution. This publication is only available on the TRADOC Homepage at http://www.tradoc.army.mil/tpubs/pamndx.htm.