Pages

Friday, August 03, 2018

Commonality

NATO is not obsolete even if members don't have a common threat perception. As a means of enabling coalitions of the willing it has great value by promoting the ability of national military forces to work together.

This is useful if NATO has to put together units from various member states:

At the U.S. Army-hosted Joint Warfighting Assessment in Germany last month, the service, as well as joint and multinational partners, took steps to cement the capability to fight together on the battlefield by working to build a command network where any country can plug in its capability and seamlessly see a common picture of the battlefield and real-time operations.

The JWA is the first of its kind. Previous assessments were not focused on joint capability and took place at Fort Bliss, Texas.

If brigades can be put together, deterrence on the eastern frontier of NATO facing Russia is enhanced.

And the ability of NATO to join America in an operation outside of the continent is possible.

Remember, the Army and Marines have to pay attention lest commonality diverge as each service buys systems for their own needs. How much more important is this for an alliance of separate nations?

Remember too that this Army program is needed despite the existence of NATO which is supposed to promote interoperability; and despite experience with allies in Afghanistan operating with Army units. I shudder to think of how bad it would be without NATO.

I hope to have thoughts on this published, having submitted an article related to this issue for a contest recently.  We shall see.