Connecting the Force: Building US Military Interoperability for the Modern Battlefield
Abstract:
Institutional strategy in a post-information age cannot solely focus on platform development and employment but rather must emphasize ensuring a force has the right connections to operate and rapidly adapt to a flat and transparent operating environment. The three dimensions of interoperability outlined in Allied and Joint doctrine, technical, procedural, and human, provide a framework for force and concept developers to follow ensuring a modern force is connected and adaptable enough to meet the unforeseen demands of tomorrow’s conflicts.
When pressed on force design shortfalls in the first year of the Iraq War, then-Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld infamously quipped, “You go to war with the army you have, not the army you might want or wish to have at a later time.” While a wide swath of the American media landscaped disparaged Rumsfeld for the tone and setting of his comment, his logic was not flawed. In fact, the “countless duels” Carl von Clausewitz defined as war, expand far beyond the battlefield and include research and development investments, doctrine and concept development, and choices in force structure all occurring long before hostilities begin. J.F.C. Fueller’s concept of Constant Tactical Factor expands on this idea describing how battlefield advantages derived from industrial and technological innovation are often short lived and cyclical due to adversarial counters and innovation. In the end, Rumsfeld was describing the underlying problem institutional strategy seeks to solve, building a military as close to the army you want, while allowing the flexibility to overcome adversarial counteractions and rapidly changing environments to field the army you need, before the enemy does.
Starting around 2017, the Department of Defense (DOD) began refocusing force development away from low intensity conflict that was the emphasis of the Global War on Terror to addressing the need to build a joint force capable of large-scale combat operations against a peer competitor. One of the largest challenges DOD faces is building a force well-suited for warfare in a post-information age environment defined by the proliferation of high-end sensors, cheap but destructive weapon systems (e.g., drones, etc.), hyperconnectivity, artificial intelligence, quantum computing, and more involvement of civil society. Within this milieu the historic emphasis of institutional strategy, fielding the right equipment with supporting doctrine and concepts is becoming equally important as ensuring a force has the right connections to operate and rapidly adapt to a flat and transparent operating environment. In this context, the joint force also needs the right mix of exquisite weapon systems and numerous cheap platforms that are disposable.
The ability to connect and adapt is paramount. As the US military shifts its focus towards large-scale combat operations against peer competitors, the importance of building a joint force with the right design that is capable of operating in a post-information age environment cannot be overstated. But how can the joint force achieve this when trying to learn lessons from the war in Ukraine, while envisioning how to fight in the Indo-Pacific? Connections come in various forms, but there are three dimensions of interoperability that should frame how the modern US military should look – and what the joint force must understand, build, maintain, or expand during competition to be best postured to deter in crisis and win the next war.
The Three Dimensions of Interoperability
The three dimensions of interoperability—technical, procedural, and human—form the cornerstone of effective multinational military operations. Technical interoperability focuses on ensuring compatibility between mission command and logistics management systems, enabling seamless communication and information exchange across allied formations. This dimension encompasses the integration of various platforms, systems, and technologies, allowing for the rapid sharing of data and resources across national boundaries. It requires the development of standardized protocols, open architectures, and modular systems that can easily ‘plug-and-play’ with capabilities from other military services, government agencies, and allied nations. Procedural interoperability involves the harmonization of policies, doctrine, and Tactics, Techniques, and Procedures (TTPs) to enable effective joint and coalition operations. This dimension ensures that allied forces can operate together cohesively, following common guidelines and practices.
Without achieving ‘unity of joint data,’ the US military will struggle to fight a near-peer adversary that aims to disrupt data collection and integration, thereby undermining the joint force’s ability to conduct large-scale combat operations.
The human dimension, often considered the most critical, builds the foundation of mutual understanding and respect essential for unity of effort and operational success. It involves fostering relationships, cultural awareness, and shared training experiences that enable personnel from different nations to work together effectively. This human aspect is particularly crucial in regions like the Indo-Pacific, where building connections with partner nations is vital for regional security and cooperation, which supports broader efforts at achieving integrated deterrence.
The three dimensions of interoperability create a framework that allows multinational forces to achieve allied security objectives efficiently and effectively in complex operational environments; their utility is not limited to combined operations, but they can also help shape joint and service institutional strategies.
Starting with a Concept: The Need for Procedural Interoperability
At its core, military staffs are simply a conduit of information and analysis. Military commanders utilize their staffs to enhance situational awareness and support decision-making. Additionally, military staffs serve as connectors, simultaneously sending and receiving information to and from higher headquarters, subordinate units, and adjacent organizations. Moreover, military staffs are cross-domain and cross-functional connectors, which, according to joint doctrine, “allows commanders to synchronize, integrate, and direct joint operations.”
While numerous policy and doctrinal statements emphasize the importance of connections, there is a glaring absence of a unifying concept to serve as the foundation for procedural interoperability. The Combined Joint All-Domain Command and Control (CJADC2) concept needs to evolve from a set of principles to a comprehensive, DOD-wide framework. This framework should include codified cross-service data standards and robust exercises that integrate alliance members and industry partners, similar to Project Convergence but for operational forces. Currently, too much of the joint force, along with various commands, relies on different companies and contractors to manage and integrate data. Without achieving ‘unity of joint data,’ the US military will struggle to fight a near-peer adversary that aims to disrupt data collection and integration, thereby undermining the joint force’s ability to conduct large-scale combat operations.
An effective military staff excels at “receiving, processing, and transmitting information in a way which will yield the maximum gain for the minimum cost.” In the modern operating environment, the internet of things, proliferation of sensors, and access to vast streams of data have significantly increased the number of connections a staff must engage with to be effective. This exponential growth in information and data underscores the critical need for developing that prioritize rapid integration in an interconnected battlespace, ensuring staff officers and NCOs possess a baseline level of data literacy. Additionally, the surge in information requires not only understanding which connections to exploit but also identifying those to ignore or even manipulate based on the situation. Too many units lack personnel capable of understanding data analysis and statistics, resulting in numerous lost opportunities to enhance military effectiveness.
Technical Challenges: Overcoming Barriers to Connection
Technical challenges present significant barriers to establishing robust connections within modern military forces. The DOD currently grapples with a complex ecosystem of disparate platforms and systems that hinder interoperability. This fragmentation is evident across various branches of service and even within the individual services. The Army’s four corps exemplify this diversity as each corps uses their own combination of command-and-control systems including, but not limited to, Command Post Computing Environment (CPCE), Maven Smart Systems (MSS), and Mission Partner Environment (MPE). Field Manual (FM) 3-0, Operations asserts that the headquarters that is “best positioned and resourced to achieve convergence with Army and joint capabilities.” Yet, the lack of standardization across Army headquarters creates significant obstacles for the headquarters’ ability to seamlessly share information and coordinate operations, particularly in joint or multinational scenarios. Moreover, the rapid pace of technological advancement often outstrips the military’s ability to integrate new systems, leading to a patchwork of legacy and cutting-edge technologies that struggle to communicate effectively.
To address these challenges, the DOD must prioritize three key areas. First, there’s an urgent need to develop and implement standardized APIs (Application Programming Interfaces) across all software and hardware development and procurement. These APIs would serve as universal connectors, allowing diverse systems to communicate and share data efficiently, regardless of their origin or specific architecture. Second, the military must work toward reducing barriers to entry for allies and partners into DOD systems and networks. This effort involves technical solutions and policy changes to facilitate secure information sharing while maintaining operational security. Lastly, a comprehensive, DOD-wide strategy for system integration and modernization is critically needed. This strategy should prioritize that any new system development is based on user-level inputs, operational requirements, and interoperability. Ensuring future acquisitions integrate with existing infrastructure and align with long-term interoperability and adaptability goals is essential. All too often, joint and coalition military exercises struggle because of a breakdown in command-and-control, leading participants to rely on WhatsApp and Signal to communicate with one another. By addressing these technical challenges, the DOD can create a more cohesive, adaptable, and effective force that can meet the demands of multi-domain operations in modern warfare.
Building Enduring Relationships: The Human Dimension
The human dimension of interoperability is a critical, yet often underappreciated aspect of building a modern, effective military force. At its core, this dimension acknowledges that warfare, despite technological advancements, fundamentally remains a human endeavor. The axiom that “you can’t surge trust” encapsulates this essence of this dimension, emphasizing the need for long-term relationship building and sustained engagement. These relationships extend far beyond formal military-to-military interactions, encompassing a wide range of stakeholders including allied forces, partner nations, industry leaders, and even potential adversaries. In practice, this means investing in personnel exchanges, joint training exercises, and collaborative research and development initiatives. It also involves cultivating cultural awareness and linguistic skills among military personnel to facilitate deeper understanding and more effective communication with diverse partners. The US military’s various exchange programs, such as the Foreign Area Officer program, exemplify this approach, producing officers with deep regional expertise and personal connections that prove invaluable in times of crisis or conflict.
Moreover, the human dimension of interoperability extends into the realm of civil-military relations, particularly in the context of emerging technologies and the rapidly evolving nature of modern warfare. The US military must forge stronger ties with the technology sector and innovative industries, moving beyond traditional defense contractors to engage with cutting-edge startups and research institutions. This engagement is crucial for staying ahead in areas like artificial intelligence, quantum computing, and cybersecurity, where civilian innovation often outpaces military development. Programs like the Defense Innovation Unit (DIU), AFWERX, SOFWERX, and the Army Futures Command represent steps in this direction, but there is still a need for more comprehensive and sustained engagement.
Additionally, military leaders must cultivate relationships with policymakers, the media, the domestic public, and the global audience to ensure both a broader understanding of, and support for military operations in pursuit of achieving US strategic objectives. By focusing on these human connections, the military can build a more resilient, adaptable, and effective force that is better prepared to navigate the complexities of modern geopolitics and warfare. Effectiveness in this context can also mean leveraging civil societies (e.g., NAFO, etc.) around the world that are supportive of US interests and want to contribute to influence operations that shape the information environment in favor of US objectives.
Conclusion: Adapting to the Fog of War
Thanks to fog, friction, and adversarial agency, no military goes to war with the force requirements it needs to obtain a perfect victory. Nonetheless building out connections during campaigning not only increases how close to “right” a force might be, but more importantly, doing so provides the foundation for the rapid change and adaptability required to adjust to any situation at hand. By building robust connections during peacetime campaigning, we not only increase the likelihood of fielding the right force, but we also create the foundation for rapid adaptation when faced with the inevitable uncertainties of combat. This is imperative because most wars turn into a cat-and-mouse game of adaptation, countermeasures, and innovation. Effectiveness in this context only happens with the right strategic culture in the DOD that fosters institutional flexibility to achieve an accelerated innovation cycle, which the Russo-Ukraine War has shown can range from one week to three months.
Battlefield advantages derived from innovation are often short-lived due to adversarial countermeasures. Therefore, our focus must be on creating a force that is not just well-equipped, but well-connected – capable of rapid integration, adaptation, and response to emerging threats. This challenge requires a concerted effort from the services, joint staff, and DOD, and also requires those organizations to embrace a long-term stance to joint force development and interagency coordination, self-control to avoid chasing the “tech de jour”, and humility to abandon legacy systems, service rivalries, and existing projects. Additionally, it requires oversight from the legislative branch to ensure that it is funding and maintaining a force focused on connections and not stovepipes of excellence.
Given the increasing complexity and changing character of modern warfare, let us remember Rumsfeld’s pragmatic observation and strive to build a force that is not only prepared for today’s challenges but connected and adaptable enough to meet the unforeseen demands of tomorrow’s conflicts. In doing so, we ensure that when we go to war, we do so with the army we need, not just the army we have.
Disclaimer: The views expressed by the authors are theirs alone and do not reflect the official position of the US Naval War College, Department of the Air Force, Department of the Army, Department of Defense, or the US Government.
Cover photo courtesy of the Department of Defense. Photo By: Taylor Curry, Air Force. VIRIN: 230802-F-NB144-1002Y
