Vaikutusperusteinen operatiivinen ajattelu (EBAO) – prosesseja, tekniikkaa vai uutta ajattelua?

Kirjoittajat

• Kari Pietiläinen
• Jukka Nurmi

Abstrakti

The Effects Based Approach to Operations (EBAO) The first breakthrough for EBO is usually associated with the first Gulf War in 1991, primarily as a development of targeting at operational level. Further experience from the late the 1990´s, e.g. during operations in Serbia and Kosovo, pointed to the need to develop a faster, better co-ordinated and more focused use of a wider spectrum of means to reach the strategic end-state. Subsequently, EBO evolved to a concept for planning, execution and assessment of actions in order to realise effects at the operational and strategic levels. The general idea of EBO remained much the same – i.e. to systematically influence the behaviour of adversaries of other actors, and that the effect of specified actions shall be in focus – but new perspectives were added. Following targeting and C2 methodology, development of better knowledge and understanding of the whole operational environment, including exploitation of networked enabled capabilities (NEC), became integral to EBO. The Effects-Based Approach to Operations (EBAO) seeks to harmonize military and civilian activities to influence the overall behaviour of other actors – national and transnational, belligerent and benign – in an operational environment. Its application allows the planning, execution, and assessment of those activities to be based on a holistic and dynamic understanding of the actors in that environment. EBAO is designed to provide military organizations the ability to, with their civilian partners, better focus on a shared desired end state, the specific behaviors on the parts of other actors in the environment that would make that end state possible, and the specific “effects” that would facilitate those behaviours. The treatment of these effects (understood as intermediate system states on the way to the end state) in planning, execution, and assessment is what makes an operation essentially effects-based. The resulting benefits are a set of actions that are explicitly linked by effects to a desired end state, coherently harmonized with those of other governmental organizations, and made adaptive within the course of their execution by effective assessment. The Effects-Based Approach to Operations can be described in terms of four major functions: knowledge development, effects-based planning, execution, and assessment. EBAO proposes a few key divergences from traditional approaches in each of these areas. Knowledge Development (KD): The EBAO challenge is to take full advantage of vital information obtained from systems synthesis but not to be enslaved to, or delayed by, data analysis and information acquisition. These system descriptions help the military and civilians apply operational experience to the situation. The intent is to gain situational understanding and awareness based on synthesis of the larger interagency aspects present. Essential to EBAO is the development of knowledge through effective networking with a larger base of experts and disciplines. Situational understanding and awareness are not delivered only from a data base but is gained though professional dialogue and leadership. Effects-Based Planning (EBP): In EBP, the development and application of effects statements bridges the gap between end state and actions. It supports a thorough review of the actors in the operational environment and their potential responses to our actions. Not only is a bridge of reason provided between the two, but a context for civil-military interaction is built, and the basis for continuous assessment of the effectiveness of the operation is created. Effects-Based Execution (EBE): once effects are developed, and supporting actions planned, sequenced, and resourced, those actions are taken in what might appear to be a relatively traditional manner. But beyond the fact of those actions’ effects basis, there are two subtle but vital differences in execution. The first is that military and civilian actions should be complementary whenever possible. The second is that in combination with continuous assessment, opportunities are created to make adjustments to the plan in a less disruptive manner, making even fundamental changes potentially less costly in terms of momentum, resources, and even political will. Effects-Based Assessment (EBA): effects-based plans are not presumed to be perfect; during their execution they will require continuous assessment-informed adjustments. In EBA, progress toward the accomplishment of actions, the creation of effects, and the a"ainment of the end state are all assessed. The assessment of progress as well as the evaluation of causality requires close cooperation with civilian partners. The Effects Based Approach to Operations (EBAO) concept is new in NATO and has not been officially adopted and integrated into doctrine and practice. Despite this limitation, NATO´s different Commands seeks to modify the current planning, execution and assessment processes in order to adapt an effects based approach. Additionally, the incorporation of the “Comprehensive Approach” to NATO operations necessitates effective liaison with individuals and organizations, beyond the strictly military sphere; organizations which can effect the Civil, Political and Economic systems within the Joint Operations Area. Effects Based Targeting Joint Targeting is the process of determining the effects necessary to achieve the commander’s objectives, identifying the actions necessary to create the desired effects based on means available, selecting and prioritizing targets, and the synchronization of fires with other military capabilities and the assessing their cumulative effectiveness and taking remedial action if necessary. It is both an operational level and component level command function. The joint targeting cycle has a logical progression that aids decision-making and provides the Joint Force Commander with effects throughout the ba"lespace. It is flexible enough to be adapted to any military operation desired and across diverse functional areas, such as air interdiction and information operations. This process enables the joint force commander to most effectively employ allocated resources to achieve the assigned objectives. Artikkeli on suomeksi.