Up front -- full disclosure -- I consult for USJFCOM. That said, I think it useful that our community of interest understand the intent of the CCJO and more importantly -- what is different about this new version and its relationship with other concepts that address issues discussed in the CCJO such as combat, security, engagement, and relief and reconstruction. So, my question was to be - What's new about this version of the Capstone Concept for Joint Operations and what is the relationship between the CCJO (beyond simply being the Capstone" or higher order") and the family of operating and integrating concepts that address many of the issues contained in the CCJO? Maryann Lawlor of SIGNAL Magazine, who was two ahead of me in the reverse alphabetical pecking order, beat me to the punch...
Here's the answer in a nut shell - The CCJO is a combination of existing constructs that address the challenges we face in a way that offers fresh insights into the conduct of military operations.
The bolded emphasis is mine. As you read the CCJO and tick off the national security challenges, basic categories of military activity and common operating precepts you might find yourself thinking - I've seen this all before - and you probably have - in this or that concept, a doctrinal publication, in a white paper or one of countless studies and monographs - each looking at a particular issue or two as a separate problem set. The CCJO acknowledges all that and as such takes a holistic approach to some very complex issues - read or reread the CCJO with that in mind. This is not a document that should get the once over and shelved - it is to be revisited and pondered upon as we search for solutions.
For a quick summary of other issues addressed at the Q&A today see Gerry Gilmore's piece at American Force Press Service.
And as posted here previously - especially if the current state of concept development and the usefulness of these documents baffles you - please read the Joint Concept Development Vision released yesterday by USJFCOM. It cannot be emphasized enough how important the following three guidance principles are:
1) Concept development will be based on a thorough understanding of current doctrine. 2) Concepts will provide a clear and testable alternative to that doctrine. 3) Concepts will be validated through experimentation, practical experience, analysis, and professional debate will be transitioned systematically and expeditiously into doctrine.
For discussion on the JCDE Vision see what the Council has to say.