“The Basics”

“The

Bas

ics”

Pe

ace

Ope

ratio

ns

MPAT Workshop

Module Series

(1st Coordinating Draft 7 June 02)

Preface

This MPAT Workshop Module – Peace Operations is focused on support of the Multinational Forces Standard Operation Procedures (MNF SOP) and the Multinational Planning Augmentation Team (MPAT) Collaborative Planning Workshops.

This is a collaborative effort of the nations participating within the MPAT program. This is NOT just one nation’s doctrinal approach.

This module fully acknowledges that there is no common doctrine for Peace Operations. Further, this module is not intended to portray a single integrated doctrinal approach to Peace Operations.

•Intent of module series is to act as a basic starting point for multinational Peace Operations planning and operations.

Click here forKey References

Proceed toMain Menu

Click here forGlossary

Peace OperationsWorkshop Module Series

Module 2 : PEACE OPERATIONS REALITIES AND OPERATIONAL MODEL

Module 4 : CTF COMMAND AND CONTROL OPTIONS AND CTF HQs TEMPLATE FOR PO

Module 3 : PEACE OPERATIONS “WORKING DOCTRINE”

Module 5 : PO – KEY PLANNING DOCUMENTS

Module 6 : PEACE OPERATIONS – CTF PLANNING PROCESS

Module 1 : THE BASICS

RETURN TO PREFACE

Module 1

Peace OperationsBasics

Return toMain Menu

Proceed withModule 1

Preface – Module 1 This Peace Operations Module is based upon:

•Multinational inputs from Multinational Planning Augmentation Team (MPAT) nations

•Multinational Force Standing Operating Procedures (MNF SOP) developed by MPAT participating nations

•Numerous doctrinal publications from United Nations documents, national multinational sources, Joint Publications series, and other key Peace Operations articles (see references section of this module)

A review of the MNF SOP (Part A & B) and of other supporting MNF Workshop Modules will assist in gaining an understanding of Peace Operations

To establish your base knowledge of Peace Operations (based upon MNF SOP) please take the Pretest before proceeding.

Review MNF SOP

Take Pretest/Post-Test

Review SOP Workshop Module

Proceed on with Module 1

Key Definitions MNF: Multinational Force – Broad

Overarching Term• Describes the broader force of participating Nations’

governments, agencies, and includes the Strategic Military Planning Headquarters (HQ).

• The entire organization of nations, participating forces, and support based upon shared interests.

Two Types of MNF Operations:

•Coalition: Ad-Hoc / Crisis Based

•Combined: Alliance / Treaty Based (Example: Regional Organization - NATO)

Key Definitions(continued)

CTF: Coalition / Combined Task Force (operational level of planning and operations)

• Coalition TF (CTF): Ad-Hoc / Crisis Based

• Combined TF (CTF): Alliance / Treaty / Regional Organization Based (predetermined guidelines and / or contingency plans present)

These definitions support the MNF SOP focus upon the operational level of planning and operations (task force level).

Peace Operations

“There are no standard Peace Operations”JP 3-07.3

Elements of National & International Power will be used – not just one dimension:•Diplomatic

•Economic

•Information

•Military

•Psycho-Social

Each Peace Operation will have its own unique situational setting

•Unique political factors

•Unique diplomatic characteristics

•Unique geographical, cultural, language, and security characteristics

Peace Operations Challenges

Who Executes Peace Operations?1. United Nations (UN) – 2 Types

• UN Sanctioned/Authorized operations (Regional Organizational Led (Combined) or Multinational Led (Coalition – Lead Nation concept)

• UN Sponsored/Mandated operation (UN Chain of Command – UN led)

Note: There are significant differences in the Command Relationships, Control, and Coordination Processes for

the above PO options – see Module 4

2. Regional Organization (Combined) Led (NATO, OAU, etc.) • Non-UN Alliance / Treaty based

3. Multinational Organization (Coalition) Led• Lead Nation Concept (Non-UN)

• Multinational Crisis Action Planning Ops

• Ad-hoc based on emerging crisis / No regional framework is present to address crisis

Broad Categories of Peace Operations

Peacekeeping Operations (PKO)

Peace Enforcement Operations (PEO)Note –Terminology Differences: Many variations in terminology.1. UN commonly refers to Peace Operations as Peacekeeping and also uses the

term Peace Support Operations (PSO) at times.2. NATO uses the term PSO.3. Other nations use variations of terminology (based upon political and

operational implications / factors). 4. The MNF SOP will use the overarching term of Peace Operations with two

broad categories of operations as outlined above for clarity in mission planning.

Peacekeeping Operations (PKO)

Purpose: Designed to monitor and facilitate implementation of an agreement (cease fire, truce, and other related agreements) and support diplomatic efforts to reach a long-term political settlement.

Key Factor: Undertaken with consent of all major parties to a dispute.

PKO Example #1Title: Multinational Force and Observers in the Sinai (MFO)

Mission: A Multinational (non-UN) operation empowered by Egypt and Israel to supervise

truce provisions in the Sinai Peninsula.

Nations: Ten participating nations including US and Asia-Pacific partners, Fiji and New Zealand.

“The mission of the Sinai MFO is, very simply, to OBSERVE, VERIFY, and REPORT.” --MNF Observer Team

Years: Operation began in 1982. It is an ongoing mission.

Mission Background: The MFO is a Multinational peacekeeping mission, created as a result of the 1978 Camp David Accords and the 1979 Treaty of Peace. Since 1982, various nations have contributed military and civilian personnel to serve in Egypt’s Sinai Peninsula. The ten participating nations include Australia, Canada, Columbia, Fiji, France, Hungary, Italy, New Zealand, Uruguay, and the United States. Headquarters for the Sinai MFO mission is in Rome, Italy.

Yom KippurWar

1973

Camp DavidAgreement

1979

Non-UN Multinational Led Operation

Timeline of the Sinai Peninsula1973 - Present

Egypt & Israel withdraw to armistice lines

US organizes & deploys MFO

UN unableto obtainauthority for PK Force

1982

Ongoing Peacekeeping Mission•Operation of checkpoints•Periodic verification of peace provisions•Additional verifications as requested by parties to Agreement•Freedom of navigation through Straits of Tiran

ONGOING MISSION

WAR!

PKO Example #2Title: United Nations Mission in Ethiopia and Eritrea (UNMEE)

Mission: UN sanctioned/authorized (UN led) operation, the Organization of African Unity (OAU) is lead. Mandate requires monitoring cessation of hostilities; verifying redeployment of Ethiopian and Eritrean Forces; and monitoring a security

zone.

Nations: More than 40 including US and Bosnia-Herzegovina

Years: 31 July 2000 to Present Date

Mission Background: Fighting broke out between the two African nations in May of 1998 as a result of a border dispute. The UN Secretary General requested mediation and in July of 1999 a framework for redeployment was agreed upon.Tensions remained high and in May of 2000 hostilities resumed. Diplomatic activities intensified, and in May the OAU implemented a cease fire agreement. Two months later the Security Council established UNMEE as an official Peacekeeping mission. On 12 Dec 2000 negotiations concluded with a comprehensive Peace Agreement between Ethiopia and Eritrea. Termination of the mission is linked to the completion of the delimitation and demarcation of the Ethiopian-Eritrean border areas.

In July 2000 100 observers were assigned to the mission and up to 4,200 military personnel were authorized. The mission also introduced the use of SHIRBRIG, Stand-by High Readiness Brigade for Peacekeeping and Humanitarian Tasks. In the meantime, negotiations continued for a final and comprehensive settlement of the dispute.

UNMEE Mission Background

On the mission of UNMEE: “We have a job to do, we shall doIf effectively and efficiently, then we will withdraw.”

UN Secretary General

UNMEEEstablished

July 2000

UN Sponsored (UN Lead) Operation

UNMEE Timeline

ComprehensivePeace Agreement

December 2000

November 2000

SHIRBRIG Deploys

May 2000

FightingResumes

Severe Drought; 8 million effected

March 2000 June 2000

Agreement on cessationof hostilities

OAUFrameworkAgreement

July 1999

Eritrea/EthiopiaBorder dispute

May 1998

UN Sponsored/MandatedPeacekeeping Mission/Ch VI

31 July 2000

Peace Enforcement Operations (PEO)

Purpose: Use of necessary means up to and including military force to compel compliance with resolutions or sanctions designed to establish security, peace and order.Key Factor: Application of appropriate means, military force or clear threat of military force to compel compliance of parties involved.

Nations: UNPROFOR began with the force of 10,000 troops. With commitment of IFOR, NATO member countries sent more than 60,000 troops and civilian police to the region.

Years: Feb 1992 – 1995 UNPROFOR; 1995 - Present Date IFOR/SFOR

Mission Background: UN Security Council established UNPROFOR in the wake of the dissolution of Yugoslavia. Conflict broke out in l991 when the Yugoslav Federal Army attempted to reestablish control over Slovenia and Croatia. The UN mandate changed several times as the conflict generated humanitarian relief requirements. The Dayton Accords took effect in December of 1995 and a NATO-led Implementation Force (IFOR) moved into the region. The introduction of allied armor, attack aviation and ground combat forces backed by the will of participating nations curtailed the actions of the Serbs and other indigenous forces.

PEO Example #1 Title: UNPROFOR--United Nations Protection Force initially to Croatia then to BH IFOR—NATO led, UN Sanction force to BH, Croatia and Serbska

Mission: Initial mandate was to “create conditions of peace and security” in Slovenia and Croatia under Chapter VI. The mission was expanded to include BH and placed under Chapter VII. When that mission failed to achieve its objectives, the US sponsored a peace process that resulted in a UN sponsored NATO led Ch VII

operation to enforce provisions of Dayton Accords.

UN PROTECTION

FORCE (UNPROFOR)

Jul 1995

Sebrenicia•UN Protected Area•Atrocities committed

Dec 1995

UNPROFOR Withdraws•Unable to perform PE operations•Cumbersome decision process•Dayton Peace Accord•Formal ceasefire

Timeline of a Peace OperationBalkan Region—Bosnia/Herzegovina

1992-Present

Tran

sitio

n

UN Sponsored/Mandated Op (UN Lead) UN / NATO Peace Enforcement-

IFOR-1995-96 SFOR-1996-present

NATO MISSION INBOSNIA-HERZEGOVINA

(Combined)

UN Sanctioned/Authorized – Regional Organization Led

(Combined)

ONGOINGUN/NATOMISSION

1992-Yugoslavia dissolves-Yugoslav federal army attempted to regain control of Slovenia & Croatia

CIVILWAR

The civil side of the mission in BH was overseen by the Office of the High Representative, a creation of the Dayton Process. The UN was charged with providing the International Police Training Force under the supervision of UNMIBH. SFOR accomplished all of the military objectives of DAYTON. Although, still under

UN/NATO MISSIONS TO THE BALKANS BACKGROUND

Peace Enforcement authority, Peacekeeping activities are now being used in areas where consensus has been achieved.

PEO Example #2Title: UN Missions to East Timor

UNAMET—UN Observer Mission (PKO)

INTERFET - UN Sanctioned/Authorized – Multinational Coalition -- Lead Nation

(PEO)

UNTAET - UN Sponsored/Mandated – UN Led (PEO / PKO / Peace Building)

Mission: Multiple mandates beginning with Peacekeeping and culminating in a Peace Enforcement mission with transition to civil administration.Years: 1999-present

Nations: More than 40

Mission Background: East Timorese independence vote set off a spasm of violence and destruction. UN Peacekeepers were quickly isolated. UN Security Council then sanctioned/authorized an international force to restore security.

UN assistance to E. Timor conducted in three phases:

UN MISSIONS TO EAST TIMOR ADDITIONAL MISSION BACKGROUND

“There could be casualties. And the Australian public should understand that. It is a serious, dangerous operation.” --Australian Prime Minister John Howard, August 1999

Note that UN Peace Operations in this region overlapped in time and included multiple mandates.

2. INTERFET—Peace Enforcement with Australia as lead nation. Ch. VII 15 Sept 1999-23 Feb 2000. UN Sanctioned/Authorized (Multinational Coalition – Lead Nation Concept) (PEO)

3. UNTAET— Peace Enforcement, Peacekeeping, and Peace Building. 25 Oct 1999 to Present Date. UN Sponsored (UN Led)

1. UNAMET— Referendum monitoring UN Observer Mission. 11 June-25 Oct 1999 UN Sponsored/Mandated – UN led (PKO)

UNMISET

May 20, 2002**23 Feb 00

UNTAET assume responsibility **

Security Restored; INTERFET handsover to UNTAETObserver

Mission/VoteReferendum

11 June 99

Autonomy Ratified

30 Aug 99

May 02

NationhoodDeclared

UNTAETauthorized to build internal capacity once order is restored

25 Oct 99UNTAET UN Resolution

Timeline of a Peace OperationPacific Region—East Timor

1999-Present

UN Mission to E. Timor(UNAMET)

Peacekeeping Mission (UN Mandated/Sponsored-UN Led Operation)

UN Transitional Administrationin E. Timor (UNTAET)

Peace Enforcement Mission

(UN Sanctioned/Authorized – Multinational Coalition–

Lead Nation)

UN authorizesINTERFET;Australia is LN (PE Chap VII)

**15 Sept 99INTERFET UN Resolution**

Tran

sitio

n Peace Enforcement / Keeping Peace Building Mission

(UN Sponsored/ Mandated – UN Led Operation)

Tran

sitio

nRiotingBegins

Peace Operations Activities

Peace Operations- Peace Keeping

• Operations designed to monitor and facilitate implementation of an agreement

- Peace Enforcement• Operations designed to compel compliance

with resolutions or sanctions designed to establish security, peace and order

Military Operations can support Diplomatic Efforts (three areas)- Preventive Diplomacy

• Diplomatic actions taken in advance to avert a crisis

- Peacemaking• Process of diplomacy, mediation,

negotiation, or other forms of peaceful settlement

- Peace Building • Post-conflict actions, predominately

diplomatic, economic, and security related that strengthen and rebuild governmental infrastructure and institutions

Peace Operations are normally interwoven with one another…PKO being executed with Preventive Diplomacy and Peacemaking ongoing; or PKO and PEO could be ongoing in same CTF AO (but in different regions of country).

MutuallySupportive

Legal Basis for Peace Operations

UN Charter – Resolutions/Mandates based on the UN Charter as a whole primarily Chapters VI, II, and VIII

International Treaties/Multinational Agreements/Conventions

National Constitutions/Declarations/ Resolutions/Statutory Authorizations

• VI – Pacific Settlement of Disputes – Addresses peaceful means

• VII – Action with Respect to Threats to the Peace, Breaches of Peace, and Acts of Aggression –Addresses enforcement actions

• VIII – Regional Arrangements – Regional arrangements to maintain peace & security

Doctrinal Principles of POThe following are the principles of Peace Operations:

•Freedom of Movement•Credibility•Flexibility•Use of Force•Transparency•Mutual Respect•Civil Military Cooperation

•Objectives•Security•Unity of Effort •Legitimacy•Impartiality•Consent•Perseverance•Restraint

Distinction Between PKO and PEO

Of the previously mentioned principles the three main principles are:

•Consent

•Use of Force

•Impartiality

Distinction between PKO and PEOPrincipalFactors

PKO PEO

Consent All parties consent (support PKO goals)

Partial or no consent by parties (little or no support for PEO goals)

Use of Force(restraint)

Self defense only Compel or coerce compliance with established rules of engagement

Impartiality does not denote neutrality, it is, however, a constant and may be applied as follows:

Principal Factors PKO PEO

Impartiality

Treat all sides equally and fairlyApply mandate without prejudice

When necessary, enforce the mandate on violatorsPrincipled Impartiality**

**May be considered as principled impartiality

Complex Emergencies (Contingencies)

Since 1990, Peace Operations have moved from interstate conflicts to intrastate. Complex Emergencies are now the norm• Failed states - total breakdown of government

institution & infrastructures Term used to describe Humanitarian

Operations (concurrent with PO) that have the following dimensions:• A complex, multi-party, intra-state conflict

resulting in a humanitarian disaster which might constitute multi-dimensional risks or threats to regional and international security.

• Peace Operations now must be executed along with the challenges of rebuilding societies, re-establishing institutions, promoting good governance.

- Restoring infrastructure, economy, security, and reducing human suffering.

CTF Planning Challenges for POUncertainty, ambiguity, and lack of clarity will dominate Peace Operations – transition plans will be the norm as missions shift

Inclusive and detailed civil-military planning is paramount to PO success. Military is in support of the larger political / civil mission

Peace Operations are not static…will be dynamic and ever-changing (grey areas will be present)

Example: Cease-fire present, but breaks down over time. Critical factors of consent, impartiality, and use of force are realigned. The above factors may vary within various sectors of CTF AO.

Contingency planning is an on-going process that requires full CTF Commander emphasisStresses need for continual situational assessment and planning by the Future Plans cell within the CTF Planning Process

PKO PEO

PKOPurpose: Monitor/facilitate implementation of an agreement

•Support diplomatic efforts to reach a long-term political settlement

Key Factor: Consent of parties to dispute enables PKO Force

Goal: Support implementation of mandate agreement

PEO Purpose: Use of military force to compel compliance with resolution / sanctions

Key Factor: Consent of parties to dispute is limited or nonexistent for PEO force

Goal: Restore security, peace and order

Grey Area

Factors shaping the grey area include:• Consent• Impartiality• Use of Force• Diplomatic/political variables• Humanitarian considerations• Dynamic Situation• Uncertainty

Contingency Planning is Essential to Address Grey Areas

Peace Operations Summary

Complex Emergencies (Contingencies): PKO or PEO combined with Humanitarian operations (the norm for Peace Operations after 1990)

Executed by:•UN – 2 Types (UN sponsored/mandated or UN sanctioned/authorized)

1.UN Sanctioned/Authorized

a)Regional Organization Led (Combined)

b)Multinational Led (Coalition - Lead Nation Concept)

2.UN Sponsored/Mandated (UN Led)

•Regional Organization Led (Combined – Non UN Led)

•Multinational Organization Led (Coalition – Non UN Led – Lead Nation)Legal basis – UN Charter / International Treaties, Multinational Agreements, Conventions/ National Constitutions, Declarations, Resolutions, Statutory Authorizations

Special emphasis must be placed upon Mission Analysis, Commander’s Estimate and Contingency Planning

Peace Operations•PKO

•PEO

Proceed to Module 2Take Post-TestReturn to Main Menu

Peace Operations Pretest/Post-Test

It is recommended that the Pretest/Post-Test below be taken now.

A score of 70% or less indicates that you should review this module again.

Take the Pretest/Post-Test

Proceed to Module 2

Return to Module 1 Preface

Pretest/Post-Test – Module 1GRADING NOTE: Please record you answers on a separate piece of paper, you will

grade yourself. The below questions are not “set up” to be computer graded at this time (working action).

1. What are the two types of Peace Operations? A. Peacekeeping and Peacemaking

B. Peacemaking and Peace Building

C. Peace Enforcement and Peacemaking

D. Peacekeeping and Peace Enforcement

2. Only the UN can execute Peace Operations. A. True

B. False

3. A complex emergency (or sometimes called complex contingency) is: A. Only applies to Peace Operations under UN-led operations

B. Peace Operations conducted simultaneously with Humanitarian Operations

C. A combination of Peace Enforcement and Peacekeeping Operation

D. A time-sensitive crisis involving only Peace Building

Pretest/Post-Test – Module 14. CTF Stands for what?

A. Combined Task Force only

B. Coalition Task Force only

C. Can be Combined or Coalition Task Force

D. None of the above

5. Planning for Peace Operations requires special emphasis in the areas of: A. Mission Analysis, Commander’s Estimate and Contingency Planning

B. Personnel assignment and staff functions

C. Special plans for media support

D. None of the above

6. If three factions with a country agree to a ceasefire and also agree to the deployment of a multinational force to enforce the ceasefire agreement, this is a: A. Peacemaking Mission

B. Peace Enforcement Mission

C. Peace Building Mission

D. Peacekeeping Mission

Pretest/Post-Test – Module 17) What are the two types of UN Peace Operations (from a command relationship

perspective)? A. UN sponsored and UN mandated

B. UN mandated and UN directed

C. UN sponsored/mandated and UN sanctioned/authorized

D. UN declared and UN directed

8) What UN Charter chapters involve Peace Operations? A. VI and VII

B. VI, VII and VIII

C. IV and V

D. Chapter VII only

9) The three main principal factors for Peace Operations are: A. Consent, impartiality, communications

B. Consent, impartiality, use of force

C. Political Objectives, use of force, legality

D. Consent, UN mandate, use of force

Pretest/Post-Test – Module 1

10) If a Country has serious instability issues with three factions fighting within a country and a UN mandate is passed to deploy a multinational force to the Country to take whatever means are necessary to stop the fighting and restore stability (Note: one faction agrees with the mandate), this is a: A. Peacemaking Mission

B. Peace Enforcement Mission

C. Peacekeeping Mission

D. Peace Building Mission

===============================================================

Now move to the next slide to check your answers you have recorded and compute your score

Test Results The correct answers are:

1. D

2. B

3. B

4. C

5. A

6. D

7. C

8. B

9. B

10. B

You scored ______ correct answers for a ______% score.

If your score is less than 70% or less it is recommended that Module 1, The Basics be reviewed.

Review Module 1Slides Only

Review Module 1w/ Narrative

Return toMain Menu

Proceed toModule 2

MNF SOP

Under Construction

MNF SOPUnder Construction

Return toMain Menu

Return toPreface -Module 4

Return toModule 1 Preface

Return toPreface -Module 4 Part D

MNF SOP

Under Construction

SOPWorkshop Module

Under Construction

Return toMain Menu

Return toModule 1 Preface

MNF SOP

Under Construction

Review Module 1Slides Only

Under Construction

Return toTest Results

Return toMain Menu

MNF SOP

Under Construction

Review Module 1w/ Narrative

Under Construction


Return toMain Menu

MNF SOP

Under Construction

Print FunctionUnder Construction


Return toMain Menu

Module 2

Peace Operations Realities

& Operational Model

Return toMain Menu

ReviewModule 1


Peace Operations Realities

Support vs. Victory: CTF Commanders and Staff are required to understand the following realities of Peace Operations• The military is always in support of the larger political / civil

mission (military is a component of a larger effort).• In Peace Ops, there is neither an enemy nor a military victory.

The military task is to set the conditions to enable other agencies to achieve the overall political end state outlined in the mandate.

• Military can:- Temporize- Maintain situation- Reduce levels of violence- Induce compliance

Peace Operations Realities(Continued)

Basic Mission: The ambit of appropriate ROE. The military mission will revolve around establishing or maintaining a safe, secure, and stable environment

Civil-Military Planning / Coordination: Identification of the civil-military tasks required by the mandate and identification of the main causes for the crisis is a critical action during the initial CTF Mission Analysis and Commander’s Estimate

CTFOnly a Component !!

CTF COALITION FORCES

POPULATION

NON-GOVERNMENTALORGANIZATIONS

(NGO)

INTERNATIONALORGANIZATIONS (IO)

CIVILIANAUTHORITIES

NATIONAL LEVEL MILITARIES

PARAMILITARY GROUPS

POLITICALMILITARY-MILITARY

NATIONALCIVIL-MILITARY

CIVIL-MILITARY

Ref: COE

PEACE OPERATIONS SUCCESS IS NOT A MILITARY SOLUTION

21st Century Peace Operations

Operates within Complex Emergencies instead of classical Peacekeeping

Since 1990 the norm has been intrastate conflicts. Complex Emergencies are now the norm (e.g. failed states)

Peace Operations operate within a continuum of civil-military operations

Evolution of UN Peacekeeping

Ref: PKI

Second Generation - Expanded Peacekeeping that included Peace Enforcement Operations (1990-1995)

Third Generation - Expanded Peacekeeping within the limits of the UN’s ability. More complex, smaller in size and focused on Peace Building. Generally this does not include Peace Enforcement (Chapter VII) Operations (1995-1999)

Fourth Generation - Expanded Peacekeeping, but the United Nations is taking on more nation building activities. Lead Nations and Regional Organizations conducting Peace Enforcement Operations (1999-present)

First Generation - Traditional Peacekeeping (1948-1990)

Features of Traditional Peacekeeping

Ref: COE

Interstate Conflict Governments Functioning and in Control Government Infrastructure intact Military and Police Structures operating Judicial Systems in place International Rules operable Minimum Contact with Population Minimum Involvement with Civilian

Agencies Ref: COE

Features of Current Peacekeeping May Include:

Intra-state Conflict Governments ineffective or not in

control Factional Political Groupings &

Leadership State Infrastructure broken down Judicial & Police Breakdown Military factions & Warlords Weapons proliferation International and Traditional Rules not

operable Intermingled with Populations Full Range of Civilian Agencies / NGOs

Ref: COE

OPERATIONS IN SUPPORT OFDIPLOMATIC EFFORTS

PEACE ENFORCEMENT

PEACE MAKING PEACE BUILDING

PREVENTIVE DIPLOMACY

Coexist Work Together

SituationDependant

Complex Emergencies The NormRef: PKI

PEACE KEEPING

Preventive Diplomacy

Peace Operations (Coexist – Work Together)

Ref: PKI

Peace Enforcement

Peace Making

Peacekeeping

Peace Building

Peace Operations

Peace Operations – Complex Emergencies

Ref: PKI

Peace Enforcement


Peace Making

Peacekeeping

Peace Building

Peace Operations

Peace Operations – Recent History (Complex – Not Static – Dynamic in Nature)

Ref: PKI

Peace Enforcement


Peace Making

Peacekeeping

Peace Building

Peace Operations

2. INTERFET

1. UNAMIR

3. KFOR

5. UNTAET

7. UPHOLDDEMOCRACY

4. UNMIH

6. UNPREDEP2,3

1

7,8

4

6

5

8. SFOR

Peace Conflict Post-Conflict Post-Conflict Peace Instability


Humanitarian Assistance

Ref: PKI

Peace Making

Peace Enforcement

Peacekeeping

Peace Building

Observation, Monitoring

Enforcement of Sanctions

Demobilization

Support to Civil Military

SUPPORT OPERATIONS

MILITARYOPERATIONSM

ILIT

AR

MIL

ITA

RYY

CIV

IC

IVI

LL

CRISISCRISIS STABILIZATIONSTABILIZATION

ECONOMIC& SOCIAL

LIFESUPPORT

OPERATIONAL MODEL

LIFESAVING

DIPLOMATIC

CTFDeploy-Mandate-Transition-Re-deploy

Military Mission

UN / IOs / NGOs Overall Mandate Missions Ref: COE

Peace Operations SummaryA Continuum

PO are larger than military• The military task is to set the conditions to enable the other

agencies to achieve the overall political state outlined in the mandate.

Return toMain Menu

Proceed toModule 3

PO are a Continuum of Operations that include:• PKO, PEO, and support to diplomatic actions of Peace Building, Peace Making, and Support to Preventive Diplomacy working together to achieve the mandate for the operation

The initial Mission Analysis and Commander’s Estimate is a critical phase for identification of the Civil-Military tasks required by the mandate

Module 3

PEACE OPERATIONSWorking Doctrine

Return toMain Menu

ReviewModule 2


Doctrinal Challenge

There is no fully agreed upon Multinational Peace Operations doctrine to support CTF planning and operational requirements

No United Nations Peace Operations doctrine

NATO Doctrine comes closest to addressing the issues (ATP-3.4.1)

A Review – Basic Planning FrameworkPrincipalFactors

PKO PEO

Consent All parties consent (support PKO goals)

Partial or no consent by parties (little or no support for PEO goals)

Use of Force(restraint)

Self defense only Compel or coerce compliance with established rules of engagement

Impartiality does not denote neutrality, it is, however, a constant and may be applied as follows:

Principal Factors PKO PEO

Impartiality

Treat all sides equally and fairlyApply mandate without prejudice

When necessary, enforce the mandate on violatorsPrincipled Impartiality**

**May be considered as principled impartiality

Convergence of DoctrineNATO Fundamentals (Note: NATO uses Peace Support Operations – PSO as defining term). MNF SOP uses PO terms.

•Civil Military Cooperation•Objectives•Security•Unity of Effort •Legitimacy•Impartiality•Consent•Perseverance•Freedom of Movement•Credibility•Flexibility•Use of Force•Transparency•Mutual Respect•Restraint

Ref: PKI

Peace OperationsFundamental Planning Factors

Civil Military Operations Key to long term

stability and mission end state

Military should support and enable

Establish coordination mechanisms

Ref: PKI

Objectives Military objectives

directly associated with Political objectives

Political objectives are not static

Military must participate in diplomatic process

Ref: PKI

Military Objectives must be appropriate and attainable

Security Multidimensional and

Dynamic• Capability• Perceptions• Physical• Contingency Planning

Extends to non-military

Active Risk Management Program

Ref: PKI

Unity of Effort

No unity of command but cooperative effort• Common end-state• Compromise• Understanding• Consensus• Communications

Ref: PKI

Legitimacy External legitimacy

Internal legitimacy

Factors• Legality• Impartiality• Perceptions• International and

National Will• Vision

Ref: PKI

Impartiality Perception by

• Belligerents• External Audience

Affects Consent and Legitimacy

Not Neutrality• Force must be used

if neededRef: PKI

Consent Shapes the Operation

Not Static

Must be promoted and sustained

Affected by• Legitimacy• Credibility• Impartiality

Ref: PKI

Levels of Consent Who Gives Consent?

May not be present at all levels !! International Bodies

• UN Security Council• UN General Assembly

Troop Contributing Countries

Third Parties

Parties to the Conflict Military Organizations Military Factions Local Commanders Warlords

ProvidesLegitimacy

Strategic LevelEnvironment

Operational & Tactical Level Environment

Ref: COE

Perseverance Prepare for extended

engagement

Sustain will

Support by personnel and logistics

Maintain MoraleRef: PKI

Freedom of Movement

Relates to Initiative

Affects• Credibility• Consent

Ref: PKI

Credibility Depends on

• Force Capability• International and

National Will• Authority• Resources• Decisive Action• Impartiality

Perception is critical

Ref: PKI

Flexibility Adjust to

accommodate new situations• Receptive• Responsive• Contingency

Planning

Situational Awareness essential

Ref: PKI

Use of Force Tool to set conditions for

enabling peace process

Authority established

Necessary Force

ROE• National Differences

understood and deconflicted PRIOR to deployment

Ref: PKI

Transparency Reinforce Legitimacy,

Impartiality, and Civil Military Operations

Balance between OPSEC, Media and

Transparency

Information technology

Ref: PKI

Mutual Respect Professional Conduct

of the Multinational Force

Status of Forces Agreements

Treatment of all parties to the conflict

Common Principles among all members of the Multinational ForceRef: PKI

Restraint Use of Force

• Precise• Timely• Appropriate• Proportional• Sufficient

Manage the consequences

Ref: PKIReturn to

Main MenuProceed with

Module 4

Module 4

CTF Command and Control Options

and CTF HQs Template for

POReturn to

Main MenuReview

Module 3Proceed with

Module 4

Preface – Module 4 This Workshop Module is focused on the CTF Command Relationship options available for Peace Operations.

This Module also addresses a possible CTF Headquarters template to address the multinational and multifaceted challenges of Peace Operations.

This Module builds upon the MNF SOP Chapter B-3 Command / Control / Coordination Multinational Relationships and Chapter B-7 Military Operations Other Than War (MOOTW). Peace Operations Command Relationships are addressed within this Chapter in Annex A (Peace Operations). It is highly recommended that these Chapters be read prior to reviewing the Module

Review MNF SOP Proceed on with Module 4

Command and Control Command and Control of Multinational

Peace Operations are dependent upon unity of effort. This is based primarily on agreed relationships within the CTF command and CTF Headquarters.

CTF Commanders and planners need to ensure that Command Relationships and CTF HQ organization are maximized to meet the demands of the Peace Operations missions and provide for thorough civil-military planning and coordination.

Part A:

Peace Operations Command / Control / Coordination

Key Concepts and Terms

Key Concept #1

Within the CTF there are two chains of command:

1. Respective NATIONAL Chain of Command

2. CTF MULTINATIONAL Chain of Command

Operational Control (OPCON): Command authority to organize and employ forces, assign tasks, designate objectives, and give authoritive direction necessary to accomplish the mission

Command and Control Relationship Concepts

Support: Command authority for support relationships to assist in the coordination and direction of MNF logistical planning, coordination, and control / direction (types will be covered later in brief)

Tactical Control (TACON): More restrictive command authority that is limited to the detailed control of movements or maneuvers within a given operational area (AO) necessary to accomplish assigned missions or tasks.

General Support

That support which is given to the supported force as a whole rather than to particular subdivision thereof.

Mutual Support

That support which units render each other against an enemy because of their assigned tasks, their position relative to each other and to the enemy, and their

inherent capabilities

Direct Support

A mission requiring a force to support another specific force and authorizing to answer directly the supported force’s request for assistance

Close Support

That action of the supporting force against targets or objectives that are sufficiently near the supported force as to require detailed integration or

coordination of the supporting actions with the fire, movement or other actions of the supported force.

Categories of Support (A Form of Command Relationship)

Key Concept #2:MNF Command Solutions

MNF Options:

Adjust the Parameters:• Adjust the operating definitions and authorities of OPCON, TACON,

and SUPPORT.

Create New Operative Terms:• Create new terms agreeable to MNF participants to reflect the

authorities required for the situation and to address National concerns.

Modified Lead Nation Organization: (see Part B

following for example)• Modify to maintain the benefits of the lead nation organization

concept while balancing the concerns of respective Nations within the MNF effort.

Part B:


(Strategic and Operational Levels)


(Strategic and Operational Levels)

Options:1. Multinational Lead Nation (Non–UN Operation)2. Multinational Lead Nation – Modified (Non-UN

Operation)3. Regional Organization Led (Non-UN)4. UN Sanctioned/Authorized – Lead Nation Led or

Regional Organization Led5. UN Sponsored/Mandated – UN Led or Regional

Organization Led

Lead Nation NCA(Nation #1)

(AS National Authority)

Supported Strategic Commander

(CDF)

Participating Nation #2

(US National Authority)


(ROK National Authority)

Supporting Strategic Commander

(Combatant Commander)

Supporting Strategic Commander(ROK JCS)

Commander Coalition Task Force

(CCTF)

Participating US Forces

ParticipatingAS Forces

ParticipatingROK Forces

Legend:Strategic Guidance OPCON or TACONAnd SupportNational Command National Command Theater

Support Guidance:AS Forces have Priority of effort as the supported cmdr withUS and ROK supporting.

Consultation /Coordination

Collaboration/ Support

CCC

CCC

CCC = Coalition Coordination Center

NationalCommand

Element (NCE)

NationalCommand

Element (NCE)

Option 1: Multinational Lead Nation (Non–UN Operation)

CCTF


ParticipatingNation #3

ParticipatingNation #1

Commander


Coalition Coordination Center

Lead Nation


Nation #1

Supporting Strategic Commander

Legend:Strategic Guidance OPCON or TACONAnd Support

National Command National Command, Theater or COCOM

Coordination

Consultation / Coordination

Collaboration/ Coordination

Option 2: Multinational Lead Nation – Modified (Non–UN Operation)

Note: NationalCommand ofrespective forces is the same as Option1 for nationsunder OPCONof CCTF – thruNCEs at CTF Hq(Not Shown)

Note: Usedwhen foreigncommandof a Nation’sForces isa major concern.

Option 3: Regional Organization Led (Non-UN)

Commander Coalition Task Force

(CCTF)

Participating US Forces

ParticipatingAS Forces

ParticipatingROK Forces

Legend:

Strategic Guidance OPCON or TACONAnd Support

National Command

NationalCommand

Element (NCE)

NationalCommand

Element (NCE)

NationalCommandHQ for US

NationalCommand

HQ for ROK

Regional OrganizationCommand and Control Arrangements

Based upon Alliances and Treaties

Lead Nation Authorities

SRSG

Human Rights Component

Humanitarian Component

Election Component

Police Component

Administrative component

Observer Force

UN SG

CTF Military Force

Component

Component

Component

Component

Option 4: UN Sanctioned/Authorized - Lead Nation Led (or Regional Organization Led)

Supporting NationsAuthorities

Legend: Lead Nation Strategic Direction

and Guidance

Strategic Coord

Same Structure as Option 1

(Or RegionalCmd)

SRSG

Human Rights Component

CTF - Military Force Humanitarian Component

Election Component

Police Component

Administrative Component

Observer Force

National AuthoritiesFor Each Country

UN Security Council

Option 5: UN Sponsored/ Mandated – UN Led

Legend: National Command Strategic Guidance

Direction & Coordination Strategic Guidance/Legitimacy

SG

Strategic and Operational Levels C2Special Note for Planners

Military Chain of Command: Note that all options outlined except for Option 5 have a clear strategic and operational military chain of command. Option 5 has no strategic military Command and Control Headquarters above the CTF level.

UN Led PO: This has significant implications for when UN Sponsored/Mandated – UN Led PO should be undertaken (see Brahimi Report on following slide)

Peace Enforcement: requires a viable and robust military organization with a strategic, operational, and tactical level of command in place for planning and execution of PEO operations (Option 1, 2, 3, or 4)

Strategic and Operational Levels C2Special Note for Planners (continued)

Brahimi Report on Peace Operations – presented to the UN SC on 21 Aug 2000 stated:• UN Peace Operations should entail three

principal activities:1. Conflict Prevention and Peacemaking2. Peacekeeping3. Peace Building

• Peace Enforcement should only be attempted by the coalition of the willing.

Part C:


(CTF Component Operational Levels)


(CTF Component Levels)

Options:1. Service Components / Task Forces2. Functional Components / Task Forces3. Combination of Components and

Task forces4. Other special groupings of nations

and forces that best meets operational requirements of mandate

Lead NationNational Authority


Supporting Strategic Commander(s)

Commander Coalition / Combined

Task Force(CCTF)

CAFFORAir

Forces

CARFORArmy

Forces

CNAVFORNavy

Forces

CCC

CSOTF

National Forces

National Forces

National Forces

National Forces

National Forces

National Forces

National Forces

National Forces

CCMOTF(Civil Military)

CPOTF(Psychological)

Supporting Nation (s)National Authorities

Legend:Strategic GuidanceAnd Support

OPCON or TACON

Tentative, This componentmay or may not be activated due to nature ofthe crisis.

Coordination, Supportand Consultation

Coalition Coordination Center (used in coalitions)

CMARFORMARINEForces

CCC

Option 1: Service Components / Task Forces





Task Force(CCTF)

CFACCAir

Component

CFLCCGround

Component

CFMCCMaritime

ComponentCSOTF

National Forces

National Forces

National Forces

National Forces

National Forces

National Forces

National Forces

National Forces

CCMOTFCPOTF


OPCON or TACON



Supporting Nation(s)National Authorities

Coalition Coordination Center (used within coalitions)

CCC

CCC

Option 2: Functional Components / Task Forces





Task Force(CCTF)

CFACCAir

Component

TASK FORCEWEST

TASK FORCEEAST

CCC

CSOTF

National Forces

National Forces

National Forces

National Forces

National Forces

National Forces

National Forces

National Forces

CCMOTFCPOTF


OPCON or TACON



Supporting Nation(s)National Authorities

Coalition Coordination Center (used within coalitions)

CCC

Option 3: Combination Components / Task Forces

Nations Grouped into TF East and West / OneAir Component for integration of air under one Cmnd

Part D:

Peace Operations CTF Headquarters Template

(Starting Point for Headquarters Organization)

Preface – Module 4 Part D

This part of the Module is focused upon the proposed starting point for the CTF HQ template within the MNF SOP.

This Module builds upon the MNF SOP Chapter B-5 CTF Headquarters Concept of Operation and Organizational Concepts.

It is highly recommended that this MNF SOP Chapter be read prior to reviewing this Module

Review MNF SOP Proceed on with this Module

CTF HQ Organizational Considerations

Peace Operations are not traditional war fighting operations • Support, not victory• Complex, ambiguous, dynamic environment• Non-traditional players

CTF HQ operational tasks for Peace Operations must be identified and planned for early in the CTF activation process

CTF Headquarters Template ---- Essential Battlestaff

Personal Staff

Coalition / Combined Logistics Coordination Center(CLCC) Secret – MNF REL

“Yellow Shaded Area “ Shared Top Level Classification Info Area

Special Access

Ops(SOF)


Task Force(CCTF)

DCCTF

COS

C1Personnel

C2Intel

C3Operations

C4Logistics

C5Plans

C6Comms

C7Civil/Mil

CoalitionCoordination

Center(CCC)

Civil-MilitaryOperations

Center(CMOC)

CTF Planning Process(PLANS, FOPS, COPS)

(MNF Top Level Classification)

Classification:Secret – MNF REL

Classification:Case by Case

MNF REL = MULTINATIONAL RELEASABLE LIAISON & COORD =

Effective Multinational and CTF Media Support Staffs (Coalition / Combined Media Pools) Proceed to Module 5

Return toMain Menu

Module 5

Peace Operations Key Planning Documents

Return toMain Menu

ReviewModule 4


Key CTF Planning Documents

Security Council Resolution (UNSCR) Peace Agreement Mandate Status of Forces/Mission Agreement

(SOFA/SOMA) Terms of Reference Rules of Engagement (ROE) Memoranda of Understandings (MOUs) Consolidated Appeal Process (CAP)

Ref: PKI

Note: These are living documents than need continuous management

Security Council Resolution (UNSCR) United Nations Security

Council (UN SC) passes Resolutions that establishes the basis for the Peace Operation.

Peace Operations Resolutions normally contain two sections: First part contains political statements from the UN SC and the second part outlines the Mandate for the Peace Operation.

Peace Agreement CTF Planners need to

refer to any and all Peace Agreements agreed to among the parties to the conflict (past and working agreements).

Mandates for Peace Operations will normally refer to these Agreements and form a foundation for consent within the operation.

Mandate

The Mandate is the central document for outlining the scope of the operation.

The Mandate is either contained in a UN SC Resolution, an Initiating Directive from a Regional Organization or Multinational Organization, or can be included in Warning Orders and OPORDs for the operation.

Mandate Requirements It is critical that a clear end state be contained in the

Mandate

CTF Key Planning Point: The Mandate is the strategic guidance for the CTF Commander. It forms the foundation for the initial Mission Analysis and follow on Commander’s Estimate. The Mandate must be complete in its guidance and clear in its mission parameters (if not, planners must seek out additional guidance and clearly establish the mission parameters).

Also establishes the following:• ROE guidance• Legitimacy for the operation• Nature of the operation• Strategic Objectives and Political / Military end states• Strategic Mission and Tasks• Freedoms, constraints, and restraints• Expected Duration • Logistics and key supporting aspects• Civil-Military coordinating mechanisms

Status of Forces/Mission Agreement (SOFA/SOMA)

Negotiated agreements that establish the detailed legal status of PO forces – critical document.

Negotiated by the UN, Regional Organization, or Multinational Organization for the CTF at National levels (not a CTF action, but CTF planners may participate in development with higher headquarters).

Negotiated with the Host Nation and / or Affected Nation and are considered an International Agreement

Terms of Reference(TOR)

Developed to govern implementation of the PO

Based upon the situation and Mandate; may be subject to approval by the parties to the dispute (addresses details of PO)

Describes the mission, command relationships, organization, logistics, accounting procedures, coordination and liaison, and responsibilities or personnel assigned or detailed to the PO force (flexible document).

Normally written at the national level (UN, Regional or Multinational Strategic HQ) however, the potential CTF Commanders and staff may assist in initial development and need to be involved as amendments are developed

Directives that delineate the circumstances and limitations under which CTF forces respond to, initiate or continue engagement with other forces or elements

Define when and how force may be used

Initially ROE will be established by the National Strategic / UN level of planning. However, the CTF Commanders must provide continual assessments of the threat and recommendations for adjustments as required.

ROE can make the difference between success and failure • Requires ongoing

contingency planning and assessment

Rules of Engagement (ROE)

Memoranda of Understanding (MOUs)

Are used to establish agreements within the CTF forces as required

Flexible tool to establish formal

agreements as required (can supplement and / or replace TORs).

Can be used between nations or for the CTF force as a whole to establish procedures or processes.

Existing MOUs need to be identified during the CTF’s activation to determine applicability for current Mandate (can greatly assist in interoperability challenges)

CAP: Combined Appeals Process

Legal Basis• General Assembly Resolution 46/182• 1994 Inter-Agency Standing Committee approved CAP

Guidelines

Produces CHAP: Common Humanitarian Action Plan• Presentation of possible scenarios• Sectors to be addressed• Criteria for Prioritization• Relationship with other assistance programs• Statement of humanitarian principles• Long term goals

Proceed to Module 6Main Menu

Module 6

Peace Operations CTF Planning Process

Return toMain Menu

ReviewModule 5


CTF Planning Process

As outlined in the MNF SOP, there are two critical areas that require clear standardization within the CTF:

• CTF Crisis Action Planning (CAP) system • CTF HQ Planning Process

This Module addresses these areas in the context of Peace Operations and stresses key planning factors

Planning Environment

Multinational operations – Crisis Oriented Interagency OperationsDiplomatic process is laborious and not timelyPolitical influence felt down to tactical levelTactical decisions could have strategic impact CMO is the focus NGO and IO will be part of the fabric of the environment. High level of media focus Risk management is a central theme Resource delivery will be slow and inadequate

Lead Nation National Authority

Regional OrganizationUnited Nations

1. Strategic Assessment

2. Collective NCA/UN Decision for Multinational Military effort

3. Resolution / Mandate Developed Debated UN SC

4. Resolution Issued or5. Multinational or Regional Organization Consultation Decision

SITUATIONSITUATION

DEVELOPMENTDEVELOPMENT

CRISISCRISIS

ASSESSMENTASSESSMENT

COACOA

DEVELOPMENTDEVELOPMENT

COACOA

SELECTIONSELECTION

EXECUTIONEXECUTION

PLANNINGPLANNING

Phase 1 Phase 2 Phase 3 Phase 4 Phase 5 Phase 6

EXECUTION

CTF ACTIVATED – CTF PLANNING SYSTEM ESTABLISHED

(C5 Future Plans / FOPS / COPS)

MPAT CADRE DEPLOYSCTF CRISIS ACTION PLANNING (CAP)

CTF COMMANDOPERATIONAL

CTF COMPONENTS ORGANIZED

WARNING ORDER

WARNING ORDER

CTF

TH

EATE

R

NA

TIO

NA

L

OPE

RA

TIO

NA

L

S

TRA

TEG

IC

ST

RA

TEG

IC

PLANNING & ALERT ORDER

CDR’S ESTIMATE

CDR’S ESTIMATE

Note: Planning OrderIs optional; Alert Order required.

Deployment Order (s) Issued As Required

SSC OPORD

CTF DRAFT OPORD

Approved ORDER

ONGOING LEAD NATION NATIONAL / UN CONSULTATION

EXECUTE ORDER

EXECUTE ORDER

Review

CTF Crisis Action Planning (CAP) Process -- Broad Overview

Critical CTF Planning Points(CTF Crisis Action Planning)

PO planning is no different than for any other military ops

However, two critical areas of planning must be focused early on in PO planning:

1. Strategic Level: Clear Situational Analysis and Strategic Assessments at the National / UN Strategic Levels – Clear Mandate

See following slides for above two areas of focus

2. Operational Level: Thorough CTF Mission Analysis, Course of Action Development, and Commanders Estimate

Lead Nation National Authority

Regional Organization United Nations

1. Strategic Assessment

2. Collective National Authority/UN Decision for Multinational Military effort

3. Resolution / Mandate Developed Debated UN SC

4. Resolution Issued or5. Multinational or Regional Organization Consultation Decision

Focus 1: Strategic Level Clear Guidance & End State Clear Mandate

Focus 1

Focus 2

WARNING ORDER

WARNING ORDER

CDR’S ESTIMATE

Focus 2: CTF Mission Analysis, COA Development, & Commander’s Estimate

MissionAnalysis

COADevelopment

COAAnalysis

COAComparison

Plan/OrderDevelopment

MissionAnalysis

Brief

CDRPlanningGuidance

COA DecisionBrief to Cdr

COASelection

Commander’s Est.To Lead Nation

National Authority(or UN)

Critical CTF PO Planning Process

Warning Order

CDR’S ESTIMATE

12

Provides for an integrated and managed process of the movementof plans from the planning stage, to the refinement stage, and thento the execution stage

CTF HQ Planning ProcessKey to Maintaining Planning Flexibility

& Contingency Plan Development

Focus

168 Hrs (1 wk)** and

beyond

“What’s Next”

Mid – TermTo

Long Range

C5 Future Plans (PLANS)

**Timeframes are conditioned based and can be adapted to meet the Commander’s requirements

Focus

96-168 Hrs**

“What‘s the Situation&

What RefinementsAre

Required”

Near Term

Future Operations(FOPS)

“Hand-Off”of Plan

CTF: 0-24 Hrs

CTF: 24-96 HrsC3 Future Operations (FOPS)

Focus

0 – 96 hrs**

“Issue & MonitorWhat Adjustments

Are

Required”

Current

Current Operations(COPS)

“Hand-Off”of Plan

Mission Analysis Essential and must not

be truncated to meet political exigencies

Consider political and military guidance

• May not be timely and adequate

Based on comprehensive AO understanding

Ref: PKI

•Demographic analysis•Use of all sources: NGO/ IO •Coordinated in-country surveys

Mission Analysis Continued Focus on Consent and Legitimacy

• Will determine the nature of the operation.

• Have political, legal, social, informational and economic implications.

Ref: PKI

Consent Shapes the Operation

Not Static

Must be promoted and sustained

Affected by• Legitimacy• Credibility• Impartiality

Ref: PKI

Key Questions What are the military and civil conditions that must be attained to achieve the strategic and operational objectives?

Ref: PKI

What sequence of action on both the military and civilian side will produce these conditions?

How should the military resources be applied in concert with civil resources to accomplish that sequence of action?

Key Questions (Continued)

How best can these actions be designed to transition from military to civil authorities?

Ref: PKI

Are the associated risks acceptable?

Objectives, End States and Success

Based on mandate, agreements, and directives

Broad including military and civil goals

Military objectives and end state are supportive• Measured by benchmarks• Clearly defined set of criteria• Linked to overall political/ economic and social

end state

Ref: PKI

End-State Reality End-state vision is initially vague, short-term, &

incomplete• Positive: Allows flexibility, provides for unforeseen

circumstances and developing political and economic realities

• Negative: Complicates military operations • Challenges for CTF to identify conditions that

support a developing end-state • Affects Transition planning

Ref: PKI

Pre-engagement vision of the end-state will be modified during the peace operation. The longer the operation the greater the potential for modification.

Military hand off to civil agencies will be drawn out depending on the stability of the end state.

Toward Resolution

MILITARY

POLITICAL

ECONOMIC

MILITARY

POLITICAL

ECONOMICRef: PKI

End StatesWill bePrimarilyPolitical&Economic

Key Sectors for MOEs (see next slide)

Example End State MatrixSectors Pre-

ConflictConflict Agreement

MandateEnd State

Security # of systems # system destroyed

# system remaining

# systems prevent aggression

Humanitarian Assistance

Status of Displaced Persons

# and location of DP

# and location of DP & status

Long term care established

Human Rights Social Reconciliation

Status of Land ownership

DP and results of hostilities

Status of land Final resolution of land ownership ( no collectives)

Governance Status of Govt.[Dictatorship]

Results of Hostilities

Status of emerging Govt.

Vision of future Govt.

Civil Law and Order

Status of Legal System

Results of Hostilities

Assessment/ Police, Judges

Description of objective system

Infrastructure Description Results of Hostilities

Assessment of capabilities

Description of objective capabilities

Public Diplomacy

Description Themes Assessment of attitudes

Description of behavior

Ref: PKI

Objectives Military objectives

directly associated with Diplomatic objectives

Diplomatic objectives are not static

Military must participate in diplomatic process

Ref: PKI

Military Objectives must be appropriate and attainable

Peace Operations – Campaign Phases(OPORD Phases)

Phase 1: Preparation and Deployment Phase 2: Lodgement Phase 3: Execute Mandate Phase 4: Post-Crisis Transition Phase 5: Redeployment

Ref: PKI

CTF Planning Technique:Phases can have sub-phases to assist in Complex Operations.

For example: Phase 1 A – Assessment Team Deployment / Initial Pre- Deployment Actions Phase 1 B – Advance Party Deployment / Pre-Training Actions

Criteria for Success Preconditions

• Factors the Commander considers necessary

• Relate directly to inherent risk

• Influences National Participation

Standards• Measures of effectiveness to

gauge progress• Basis for transition to civil

effort Ref: PKI

Measures of Effectiveness (MOE)

Developed through inter-agency and multinational process

Appropriate for each agency Related to objectives and End State Consistently measurable Attainable by resources Timely implementation

Ref: PKI

CTF Planning Technique:Outline Starting MOEs for each Phase of Campaign

And Ending MOEs for each Phase of Campaign

Measures of EffectivenessExamples

MILITARY• Separation of factions/belligerents• Cantonment of Weapons• Cessation of Belligerent Military Operations

Ref: PKI

HUMANITARIAN ASSISTANCE• Near Term Goals

- % of children in school- Average caloric intake per refugee/IDP- % of refugees/IDP in temporary shelter

• Long Term Goals- Literacy rate going up or down- Crop yields vs. food imports- Returnees/Repatriation/Resettlement

Congratulations!

Main Menu

You have just completed the MPAT Workshop Module

Series. To review Modules click on the Main Menu button below.

References

MPAT Workshop Module ReferencesThis Module series relies on emerging concepts on Peace Operations based upon recent PO international experience. The key sources for these concepts are:

Challenges of Peace Operations: Into the 21 Century Concluding Report (ISBN:91-89683-00-5) Presented to UNSG 25 April 2002. (http://www.peacechallenges.net)

NATO Pub, AJP 3.4.1, Peace Support Operations

UN Documents and DPKO web sites

•Brahimi Report – Presented to UNSG 21 August 2000 (http://www.un.org/Depts/dpko/dpko/home_bottom.htm)

Center of Excellence in Disaster Management & Humanitarian Assistance (COE) (http://coe-dmha.org)

U.S. Army Peacekeeping Institute (http://carlisle-www.army.mil./USACS1/divisions/pki/default.htm)

Center for Civil-Military Relations “EPIC Program” (http://www.ccmr.org/public/home.cfm

U.S. Joint Pub 3-07.3, Joint Tactics, Techniques,and Procedures for PO

Return toMain Menu

Return toPreface

http://coe-dmha.org/

http://carlisle-www.army.mil./USACS/divisions/pki/default.htm

http://www.ccmr.org/public/home.cfm

GlossaryIDP (Internally Displaced Person)

IFOR –

Interstate –

Intrastate –

INTERFET – International Force in East Timor

KFOR – Allied Forces in Kosovo

Peace Support Operations –

Preventive Diplomacy –

Regional Organization –

SHIRBRIG – Stand-by High Readiness Brigade for Peacekeeping and Humanitarian Tasks

SFOR – NATO Stabilization Force in Bosnia Herzegovina

UN Charter VII –

UNAMIR – United Nations Assistance Mission for Rwanda

UNMIBH –

UNMIH – United Nations Mission in Haiti

UNMISET – United Nations Mission in Support of East Timor (UN sponsored)

UNPREDEP – United Nations Preventative Deployment Force (Macedonia)

UNTAET – United Nations Transitional Administration in East Timor

UPHOLD DEMOCRACY – US Led Multinational Force in Haiti Pursuant to Security Council Resolution

Return toMain Menu