Promoting harmonisation of land doctrines

DEVELOPING LOGISTIC SUPPORT FOR ANEU BATTLE GROUP

FINABEL Study Nr C.38.R

3

You can download this study on www.finabel.org

3

FOREwORD OF GENERAL (BE) BERNARD jACOBSChairman of the Finabel Principal Military Experts’ Committee

Created in 1953, the Finabel committee is the oldest military organisation for cooperation between European Land Forces; it was conceived as a forum for reflection, exchange, studies development and proposals on common interest topics for the future of its members.

Finabel, as the only regional organisation at this level, strives at: • promoting interoperability and cooperation of land components while seeking

to bring together concepts, doctrines and procedures; • contributing to a common European understanding of land defence issues. It

focuses on doctrine, training and the joint environment.

Finabel aims to be a multinational, independent, apolitical and informal forum at European Land Forces level, based on consensus and equality of member states.

By offering the opportunity to the member states’ officers and Land Forces Com-manders to meet, Finabel favours fruitful contacts in a spirit of opening and mutual understanding.

It contributes to reinforcing interoperability of Finabel member land forces in the framework of the North Atlantic Treaty Organisation (NATO), the European Union (EU), and ad hoc coalitions; Finabel neither competes with nor duplicates NATO or the EU military structures but contributes to these organisations in its unique way.

Initially focused on cooperation in armament’s programmes, Finabel quickly shifted to the harmonisation of land doctrines, starting from the statement that should be first obtained a common vision of force engagement on the terrain before hoping to reach a shared capability approach and the realisation of joint equipments.

Finabel studies are recommendations freely applied by its members. However, these studies are the result of an intensive and in-depth work carried out by many officers from various EU member states, who have applied on them their exper-tise, operational experience and enthusiasm.

I sincerely wish that Finabel studies will be concretely useful and find the place they deserve in our Land Forces, in order to facilitate interoperability and im-prove our daily tasks of preparation, training, exercises and engagement in ex-ternal operations.

Bernard JACOBS

You can download this study on www.finabel.org FOREwORD

4

Working Group CHARLIE

4

DEVELOPING LOGISTIC SUPPORT FOR ANEU BATTLE GROUP

Working Group CHARLIE

6 7

BIBLIOGRAPHICAL DATA STUDY C.38.R

1. References : PME Meeting 2/2007 2. Other references : See below

3. Promulgation : 10 October 2009 4. Revisions :

5. Number of Pages : 15 6. Classification : UNCLASSIFIED

7. Title :DEVELOPING LOGISTIC SUPPORT FOR AN EU BATTLE GROUP

8. Originator : LtCol Sjoerd Bunk, Delegate Netherlands

9. Address : Royal Netherlands ArmyEducation and Training Centre LogisticsKnowledge Centre & DoctrineOTCLOG/KCENPO BOX 1093769 ZJ SoesterbergNetherlands

10. Key words : Logistics, EUBG.

11. Summary: Concepts and Doctrine are the processes through which we develop our requirement for future military capability to meet the required effects and establish how we will subsequently apply military capability to achieve those effects;To support future expeditionary operations for launching an EU Battle Group our focus is increas-ingly on the development of logistic as an enabling capability: a highly effective, agile and net-worked component that underpins the operational commanders’ ability to execute their missions successfully. It will be multinational, integrated and interoperable, tested, certified, verified and developed to provide military commanders with confidence in their ability to deliver the required effect at the required operational tempo within a tailored made logistic footprint.

Success will be built on balanced, adaptable systems and force elements combined with con-verged, lean logistic processes, supply chains, maintenance and medical aspects;This approach is fundamental to the support of a modern expeditionary strategy that emphasises flexible force packages and their rapid deploy ability, exploiting multimodal lines of communica-tions over the required distances. A lean, agile and networked Logistic Support System enables rapid deployment with reduced footprints, whilst providing the required sustainability at the right time to the right place, in order to meet the demands of rapid reaction expeditionary operations.

6 7

REFERENCES

a. European Security Strategy (Council Doc 15895/03 dated 08/12/03);b. Treaty on European Union;c. Headline Goal 2010 (Council Doc 6309/6/04 dated 04/05/04);d. EU Military Rapid Response Concept (Council Doc 5641/1/03 Rev 1, dated 24/01/2003)

(currently under revision);e. EU Battle Group Concept (Council Doc 13187/06 Rev dated 05/10/2006);f. An Initial Long-term Vision for European Defence Capability and Capacity needs.

(EDA.LTV-03 OCT 2006 SB MoDs Levi);g. EU Concept for Force Generation;h. EU SOFA (Council Doc 13028/03 COR 2 dated 24/11/03);i. The Strategic Movement and Transportation Concept for EU-Led military Crises Management

Operations;j. Military Engineering Concept for EU-Led military Crises Management Operations

(Council document 11853/07, dated 13/07/2007);k. Health and Medical Support Concept for EU-Led military Crises Management Operations

(Council Doc 10901/07 COR1, dated 05/07/2007);l. Reception Staging Onward Movement & Integration concept for EU-Led CMO;m. Council decision 2007/384/CFSP of 14 May 2007 about Athena (OJ L.41, 13.02.2007, p 119)

(Common costs);n. Athena Special Committee decision (SN 1913/06 dated 17/03/06);o. EU Framework Nation Concept (Council Doc 11278/02 dated 25/07/02);p. Host Nation Support Concept for EU-led CMO revision 1

(Council Doc 0603/03 dated 15/06/2006);q. EU Concept for military Command and Control (Placeholder for Number);r. Draft Agreement between the EU and some third States establishing a framework for the partici-

pation of some third states in the EU CMO (Framework participation Agreement) (Council Doc 6284/04 dated 17/02/2004);

s. Suggestion for procedures for coherent, comprehensive EU Crisis Management (Council Doc 11127/03, dated 03/06/2005);

t. Study C.29.R (Employment and management of containers, sub-containers and flatracks by the Finabel countries in the context of multinational peace support operations.);

u. Study C.34.R (Participation in the setting up of a Reception, Staging and Onward Movement concept (RSOM : Reception, Staging and Onward Movement) in Crisis Response Operations (CRO) car-ried out by the Finabel countries.);

v. Study C.35.R (Command and Control (C2) in the field of Multinational Logistics);w. Study C.37.R (Contractor support to multinational forces on deployed operations);x. Draft of the Logistic Support Concept for ESDP Military Operations (revision 2 (doc. No.10042/08,

dated 02/04/08));y. Studies T.37.R/A.25.R.

8 9

1. BACKGROUND AND DOCTRINAL BASIS (CONCEPT)

1.1. Purpose of the Study

1.1.1. Concepts and Doctrine are the processes through which we develop our requirement for future military capability to meet the required effects and establish how we will subsequently apply military capability to achieve those effects;

1.1.2. To support future expeditionary operations for launching an EU Battle Group our focus is increasingly on the development of logistic as an enabling capability: a highly effective, agile and networked component that underpins the operational commanders’ ability to execute their mis-sions successfully. It will be multinational, integrated and interoperable, tested, certified, verified and developed to provide military commanders with confidence in their ability to deliver the required effect at the re-quired operational tempo within a tailored made logistic footprint;

1.1.3. Success will be built on balanced, adaptable systems and force ele-ments combined with converged, lean logistic processes, supply chains, maintenance and medical aspects;

1.1.4. This approach is fundamental to the support of a modern expeditionary strategy that emphasises flexible force packages and their rapid deploy ability, exploiting multimodal lines of communications over the re-quired distances. A lean, agile and networked Logistic Support System enables rapid deployment with reduced footprints, whilst providing the required sustainability at the right time to the right place, in order to meet the demands of rapid reaction expeditionary operations.

1.2. The Need

The operational and tactical environment is more volatile and may be further afield than in the past. Therefore logistic systems have to be more adaptable and must be able to react quickly to the changing conditions.

1.3. The Challenge

EU BATTLE GROUP LOGISTIC SUPPORT in a networked design is a solution to deal with this supply chain complexity.

8 9

Networked EU BATTLE GROUP LOGISTIC SUPPORT is the process of establishing a supply network that supports the current and future operations and helps to define a Supply Chain Strategy to address changes caused by operational conditions.

Networked EU BATTLE GROUP LOGISTIC SUPPORT covers all national and Multinational Logistic processes. Planning horizons and composition of an EU BATTLE GROUP vary in time, mission utilisation and various logistical components. This demands a flexible master planning model.

1.4. The Background

In the frame of the European Security and Defence Policy (ESDP), nations agreed on the 14th of June 2004, to create Battle Groups. The EU Battle Group is defined as “The package of forces deemed to be enough military efficient, credible, coherent and adapt to autonomous actions or to initiating the first phase of any bigger operation”.

This Finabel study is based on the Draft of the Logistic Support Concept for ESDP Military Operations (revision 2 (doc. No.10042/08, dated 02/04/08)) and should be read in concurrence with this document.

The idea of setting up Battle Groups of roughly 1.500 persons able to conduct overseas and rapid response actions, took place in the aftermath of the 2003 ARTEMIS operation in Ituri. The proclaimed aim is both to contribute to the EU quick response capacity and to answer the peacekeeping needs expressed by the UN with efficient troops. In this order, this project also contributes to the “complementarities and mutual reinforcement” with the NATO Response Force – NRF. Beyond this, the creation of a Battle Group of 1.500 persons, helps reaching the EU 2010 headline goal since it favours interoperability amongst European forces. With EU Battle Groups, the EU is therefore equipped with combined forces groups able to fulfil all Petersberg1 missions. Also, the Battle Group is a specific form of the Rapid Response Elements. It constitutes one possible answer to the timely provision of the necessary capabilities for an EU-led crisis management operation (CMO) requiring a rapid response.

1Defined by the WEU in June 1992, Petersberg’s missions helped transforming, at the beginning of the 90’s, the Cold War era- defence systems in overseas projection forces with some large scope of intervention. They split into three main kinds: humanitarian and evacuation missions; peace-keeping missions, combat missions in crisis management including peace-recovering missions. Those missions have been written down in the EU Treaty (article 17 - title V) of Amsterdam (1997) and constituted the first area of action for the ESDP.

10 11

1.5. Definition and Characteristics

The Battle Group is a specific form of the Rapid Response Element. It consti-tutes one possible answer to the timely provision of the necessary capabilities for an EU-led CMO requiring a Rapid Response.In this context a Battle Group:

1.5.1. Is the minimum militarily effective, credible, rapidly deployable, co-herent force package capable of stand-alone operations, or for the ini-tial phase of larger operations;

1.5.2. Is based on a combined arms, battalion sized force and re-enforced with Combat Support (CS) and Combat Service Support (CSS) elements;

1.5.3. Will be based on the principle of a multinational operation and could be formed by a Framework Nation or a multinational coalition of Mem-ber States(MS). In any case, interoperability and military effectiveness have to be the key criteria;

1.5.4. Must be associated with a Force Headquarters (FHQ) and pre-identified operational and strategic enablers, such as strategic lift and logistics.

The ambition is that the EU should be able to take the decision to launch an operation within 5 days after the approval of a Crisis Management Concept (CMC) and than forces start implementing their mission on the ground no later than 10 days after that decision.

EU actionappropriate

Council Decision tolaunch op

Forces start implementingmission in JOA

NOTFIXED

ApprovalCMC

NLT 5 days NLT 10 days

As a consequence Battle Groups are to be built on assets and capabilities held at a readiness of 5-10 days. This readiness criterion applies as a benchmark to the MS as a whole. Taking into account national decision making, some MS may be in a position to contribute to a Battle Group at a higher readiness.

10 11

The Battle Group is designed for a range of possible missions and would have in its generic composition strength of around 1.500 persons. It will re-quire specific guidance to tailor the Battle Group for one particular mission in advance. Therefore, in response to an operation, some adaptation by the designated Operational Commander (OpCdr) is to be expected;

The Battle Group needs to be sustainable until mission termination or until relief by other forces. As a planning basis Battle Groups should therefore be sustainable for 30 days initial operations, extendable to 120 days, if re-supplied appropriately;The EU BATTLE GROUP Concept is complementary with NATO Response Force (NRF) documents, while taking into account the characteristics of the EU.

12 13

2. COMMAND AND CONTROL (C2)

2.1. Organisation of Logistic C2

The Logistic C2 arrangements will be tailored to the specific needs of the operation. Whilst MS and invited contributing Third States will retain Full Command over their logistic forces and resources, the level of authority given to the military commanders will be decided for each specific operation. In the Pre Stand-by Phase, MS and invited contributing Third States are to ensure they agree and specify an appropriate C2 structure and graduated Transfer of Authority (TOA) of logistic forces and assets.

Recent experiences with EUBGs show that it is advisable to combine the lo-gistical elements in one (ad-hoc) multinational logistic unit, thereby reducing the logistical footprint.The Force commander through the CJ4 Staff, is responsible for the overall lo-gistics planning and execution, and co-ordination of deployed logistic forces. Wherever possible, the Force commander should have the same control over logistic forces as he has over combat forces. Where this is not possible, the Force commander should be granted sufficient authority over the assigned lo-gistic forces to ensure the full integration and co-ordination of logistic effort. Not withstanding the C2 arrangements, they do not necessary imply that the Force commander has full control over assets and stocks.

2.2. Logistic Communication and Information System(s)

The highly responsive EUBG demands an innovative approach to command and control the operation including the logistic part.The modern operational environment requires total visibility and transpar-ency of the logistic assets, stocks and activities. Advanced CIS capabilities will provide more accurate and timely reporting, essential for the commander to execute these responsibilities. In the future, total asset visibility, to include asset tracking, will improve logistics chain management between the EU and the MS and allow the commander to maximise the use of all assets in theatre, including combat units, medical support and even contractors.

A real-time logistics common operational picture will provide the command-er greater adaptability, speed and agility of the force, while minimising the logistics footprint in theatre through sensor-driven, network-centric capabili-ties. CIS is the critical enabler for distribution-based sustainment systems to ensure that units are appropriately stocked at all times. Among other signifi-cant benefits, it allows the commander to appropriately control the phasing of deployment and RSOI to achieve desired effects and increase efficiency of multinational logistics formations that rely on national data to carry out their missions.

12 13

The provision of communication systems runs from top to bottom of the C2 chain. Hence in any deployment of the Battle Group, the EU will be required to provide appropriate and secure CIS to the potential EU OHQ, and that se-lected OHQ will have to provide similarly capable CIS to the (F)HQ. Given the (F)HQ is considered to be an integral part of the Battle Group package, the Battle Group contributing MS will have to provide complementary capable CIS below the (F)HQ. The provision of CIS capabilities should be included in the Battle Group CC (BGCC).

2.3. Logistic Force Generation and generic planning.

2.3.1. In order to be prepared for the stand-by phase, generic logistic planning has to start at the earliest opportunity following the force generation for that specific EUBG. In this phase appropriate contact should be es-tablished within the potential C2 chain in order to initiate preparations for the standby phase itself.

2.3.2. About 1,5 year before the stand-by phase the Initial Logistic Planning Conference (ILPC) must take place, the result being the (draft) initial logistic agreement on the following subjects:

- Multinational logistic support arrangements- Commonly Funded Logistic Resources;- Contractor Support;- Host Nation Support;

2.3.3. About 15 months before the stand-by phase the Main Logistic Planning Conference (MLPC) must take place, the results of the MLPC being:

- The signed initial logistic agreement;- The (draft) Multinational Logistic Technical Arrangement (TA) including

the Initial Statement of Requirements ((i)SoR).

2.3.4. The TA addresses specific tasks to nations and covers the following subjects:

- Definitions;- Purpose of the TA;- Scope and Duration;- Type and scope of support;- Utilization of facilities (including service level);- Security and Force Protection;- Costs;

14 15

- Accounting procedures:

* General;* Cost formulas;* Payment and reimbursement procedures;* Consultative body:

(1) Financial management group;(2) Assortment board;(3) Erp control of the supply chain;

* Contractual guidelines;* Preparation of logistical intelligence gathering and reconnaissance;* Medical support;* Claim settlement;* Settlement of disputes;* Commencement, Amendments, Termination;

2.3.5. About one year before the stand-by phase the Final Logistic Planning Conference (FLPC) must take place. The results of the FLPC are:

- The signed TA;- The agreed SoR consisting of the following annexes:

* Class I, including water;* Class II;* Class III + IIIa (POL);* Class IV;* Class V;* (Strategic) Transportation and Onward Movement;* Medical Support;* CIS;* Accommodation;* Maps;* Miscellaneous.* Personnel logistics* Services/Life Support

14 15

2.4. Logistic Planning for an actual operation

In the stand-by phase, once the EUBG gets a mission, the planning of the logistic support of the operation comprises of the following aspects:

2.4.1. Logistics

Before the EUBG can be deployed, the availability of accommodation, power supply, water, food, etc. has to be assured, either by own means or third party logistic suppliers;

2.4.2. Transport

Transportation is needed both for people, equipment and other resources. A large part of the transportation has to be done during the first phase of the operation. Additional transport is needed throughout the mission;

2.4.3. Logistic Intelligence

Prior to the deployment and also during the operation, Logistic Intelligence gathering is necessary. Examples of prior Logistic Intelligence are the avail-ability of infrastructure (Harbour, airport, railhead, handling equipment), cus-toms, communications, local resources, supply routes, climate, etc.

2.4.4. Budget

The actual funds for the operation should be budgeted and made available. Budfin officers should have sufficient mandate to spend money in theatre.

2.5. Post stand-by phase

After the stand-by period the Cdrs will provide a post stand-by report includ-ing the lessons identified for future BG doctrine development and operational planning.

16 17

3. MULTINATIONAL LOGISTICS

3.1. Interoperability and cooperation

The modes of logistic support available to EU-led military operations range from a fully integrated multinational logistic force to purely national support. The chosen mode or a combination of them will, among others, depend on the type, scale, and size of an operation. In general multinational logistics coop-eration reduces the logistic footprint and costs and is therefore the preferred course of action.

3.2. Role and position of NSEs

NSEs should be as small as possible and preferably be co-located with the MLU.

3.3. Contracting and Outsourcing

See references u. Study C.37.R Contractor support to multinational forces on deployed operations.

3.4. HNS and infrastructure

Generally speaking the use of HNS reduces the logistic footprint and creates favourable conditions with regard to the local population. Therefore the com-mander of the force has the legal personality and the mandate to negotiate contracts in the name of the EU.

The use of local infrastructure reduces the need for engineer support and transportation. Therefore the possibilities of using local infrastructure is part of the logistic intelligence gathering and should be investigated at the earliest opportunity possible.

16 17

4. OTHER ISSUES

4.1. Reconnaissance and forward elements

In order to gather the logistic intelligence and create the right conditions for deployment, it is important that personnel with logistic expertise form part of any forward elements, including recce parties.

4.2. Financial Issues

The financing of the common costs of operational expenditure arising from operations having military or defence implications will be in accordance with ATHENA. For each Battle Group operation it will be necessary to have des-ignated Financial Experts at appropriate levels (OHQ and FHQ), who should be fully conversant with this mechanism. When a Battle Group package is committed, MS and invited contributing Third States are to identify shared costs that cannot be covered by ATHENA, and establish arrangements prior to the Stand-by Period to cover them.

4.3. EU Battle Group Logistic Training

4.3.1. The necessary training and preparation of the forces remains the respon-sibility of the contributing nations. MS train and prepare their respective constituent parts of the EUBG package to meet the Battle Group stan-dards. Nevertheless BGs will need to undertake realistic training on a multinational level, including multinational logistic training.

4.3.2. Exercises should be shaped in such a way that a BG package becomes familiar with possible areas, scenarios and operations, hereby taking in account a long distance deployment with short notice to move.

4.3.3. The strategic deployment, RSOM(I), the use of HNS and contractors are essential to the success of the EUBG and should therefore be an important part of the CPX. During this training attention should be given to logistic information sharing (LOGFAS, LOGREP, stockpile and assets visibility, etc) and the interoperability of national logistic information systems.

It is important to integrate all the RSOM(I) activities in the FTX, with a spe-cial emphasis on the logistic planning and sharing of logistic information.

18 19

4.4. Force protection for logistic forces

4.4.1. See references FINABEL study G.26.R: Force Protection for Log Forces.

The main topics of this study are:

- Description and analysis of the threat logistic forces are exposed to- Logistics Force protection measures currently available- Force protection requirements for logistic forces in future operations- Description of the capability gap- Recommendations to improve protection capabilities of logistic forces

4.4.2. Whilst all forces should be capable of self-protection, the FCdr should consider appropriate levels of FP for logistic forces, installations and LOC in order to minimise the impact on logistic activities. Mine clear-ance, POD and LOC security are essential for an operation. An effec-tive protection is most critical during the Reception and Staging, since arriving forces are not provided with the necessary combat capability, being, generally, lacking in major weapon systems or other defence equipment.Therefore, the Force Commander must assure that required force protec-tion measures are enforced, being consistent with the threat carried out by the enemy. To this end, he must operate close to the RSOM unit Com-mander. Once sufficient forces are in theatre, some can be exclusively assigned the FP role. FP by the Force doesn’t take away the auto-defence responsibility of each unit, included the logistic units.

4.4.3. Logistic forces should be trained and equipped to provide an appropri-ate level of self protection. They should be able to defend themselves and survive in a hostile environment including:

- repel attacks against their facilities by light hostile forces,- protect themselves during movements against light infantry forces,- or a hostile and potentially violent population- protect themselves against CBRN attacks and Improvised Explo-

sive Devices (IED)

4.5. Strategic deployment

4.5.1. The EUBG concept requires the ability of mission ready forces and the ability to deliver them at the right time and to the right place. There-fore, the ability of nations to provide effective Strategic Deployment to a theatre of operations and for the force commander to provide an

18 19

effective, synchronised Reception, Staging, Onward Movement and Integration (RSOM(I)) process is a vital part of the operation and will be the Main Effort for commanders at the initial stages of an operation. FINABEL study C.34.R describes in detail the process of RSOM(I).

4.5.2. In general the strategic lift by air, sea and land is often assured by con-tracts drawn up with commercial firms or multinational agreements. Once a nation has decided to deploy its military forces, normally it takes 7 - 10 working days before the necessary lift assets become available.

4.5.3. Four main phases exist for the strategic deployment of EUBG forces:

- Preparation- Advance planning- Activation (real planning)- The deployment and RSOM(I) activities

The preparation and advanced planning is a national responsibility. Whilst MS are responsible for the organisation and the execution of the deployment of theirs own troops, the lead nation or (EU)BG POC is responsible for the coordination of strategic transport required to deploy the BG forces.

4.5.4. Once a EUBG is activated, the strategic deployment of a force is an OHQ/national responsibility in close coordination with FHQ (lead na-tion or BG POC) regarding priorities for deployment of troops.

4.5.5. The development of deployment plans in support of the Operation will be an iterative process. Force planning should identify all forces needed to fulfil operational requirements which have been established in the concept of operations in order to determine and to arrange the arrival of these forces into the area of operations, in accordance with the OpCdr’s en the FCdr’s priorities, guidance’s and timelines. The end product of deployment planning, will be a Multinational Detailed Deployment Plan (MNDDP), edited by the OHQ and coordinated and deconflicted by an EUMCC, to meet the OpCdr’s and FCdr’s opera-tional requirements.

4.5.6. See reference i. The strategic Movement & Transportation concept for EU-led military crises management operations.

20

20

FINABEL: AN EXPERTISE FORUM CONTRIBUTING TO EUROPEAN LAND ARMIES INTEROPERABILITY SINCE 1953

22 23

THE ONLY MILITARY ORGANISATION IN EUROPE TO DEAL WITH LAND DOCTRINE

The Finabel* Committee was created in October 1953 on the initiative of the Army Chiefs of Staff of France, Italy, the Netherlands, Belgium and Luxem-bourg. Germany joined Finabel in 1956, the United Kingdom in 1973, Spain in 1990, Greece and Portugal in 1996. In 2006, Finabel decided to enlarge itself to the whole European Union. This is a dynamic process and more than the two thirds of land forces of the EU members have already joined Finabel (for example, Poland and Slovakia as soon as 2006).

Initially focused on cooperation in armament’s programmes, Finabel quickly shifted to the harmonisation of land doctrines, starting from the statement that should be first obtained a common vision of force engagement on the terrain before hoping to reach a shared capability approach and the realisation of joint equipments.

The studies carried out by Finabel take the form of:

• Reports, which re-present the results of conceptual studies entrusted to the Working Groups;

• Agreements, which relate to the mil-itary characteristics of equipment;

• Conventions, which standardise pro-cedures, testing methods and glossa-ries in order to facilitate exchanges between member states.

* When the committee was set up the name Finabel was chosen as being an acronym of the first letter of each of the founding na-tions, and was written in capital letters. Fol-lowing the expansion of the committee it was decided that Fin-abel would become a proper noun, no longer referring to the founding countries’ initial letters, and be written in lower case.

presentation

22 23

AN ACTIVE NETWORK CONTRIBUTING TO THE DEVEL-OPMENT OF A JOINT EUROPEAN UNDERSTANDING OF DEFENCE ISSUES

Finabel contributes to the development of a joint European understanding of defence issues focusing on interoperability, doctrine and the joint environ-ment, while keeping its land specificity. Finabel neither competes with nor duplicates NATO or the military structures of the EU but contributes to these organisations, with which it has tight links, in its unique way.

As an independent, apolitical and informal reflection forum, Finabel offers its land doctrine expertise at the disposal of European land forces.

For over 50 years the Finabel Committee has operated in a spirit of fairness, consensus and openness. It is also:• a working method which has proven its worth: Finabel studies are generally

carried out within a few months;• an active and efficient network: Finabel enables staff officers from its member

states to discuss freely about operational issues they encounter, in an atmos-phere which encourages the exchange of views;

• an enduring spirit of camaraderie: the special atmosphere within Finabel cre-ates a strong personal relationship with the institution as well as a feeling of solidarity and friendship between its members. We can rightly speak of a true “Finabel spirit” which gathers all its members.

For over 50 years the Finabel Committee, by stimulating and encouraging the harmonisation of national concepts, has played a role in the creation of a com-prehensive and consistent doctrinal resource for European armies. It continues to provide their Chiefs of Staff with an exceptional, unique and inventive tool.

Finabel COS meeting in Athens - 2009

24 25

A UNIQUE LEGAL STATUS REFLECTING THE FINABEL SPIRIT

The Finabel organisation is an international de facto association whose mem-bers are selected by their respective governments on the basis of their quali-ties.

Finabel provides recommendations, freely applicable by the land components of its members.

There is no supranational or international body leading or directing the work of Finabel. Rather it is solely the responsibility of the Chiefs of Staff of the land forces. The agreements reached within Finabel remain objectives that the member states strive to achieve within the limitations of their national doctrines and resources.

Thanks to its specific status, Finabel enjoys a level of independence, autono-my in its work and freedom of speech which does not exist in other multina-tional military bodies.

24 25

A SIMPLE STRUCTURE AND EFFECTIVE AND FLEXIBLE OPERATION

The Army Chiefs of Staff

Committee

Executive Committee of Finabel, this is the highest level. It meets once a year to summa-rise work of the past year and to establish the objectives for the coming year. The chairman-ship of this committee changes annually.

The Princi-pal Military

Experts’ (PME) Committee

This steering committee is made up primarily of officers responsible for doctrine, planning and studies within the staffs of the land com-ponents of Finabel member states.

The committee meets twice a year to analyse the directives of the Chiefs of Staff and refor-mulate them in terms of missions to be distrib-uted among the Working Groups. Belgium has provided a chairman for this committee since the creation of Finabel.

The Permanent Secretariat

Located in the Belgian general staff in Brus-sels, it is the only permanent structure of the Finabel Committee and deals with administra-tive and organisational matters.

The Working Groups

Seven Working Groups, which are the main-stay of Finabel, carry out studies in various areas of interest to the Armies.

Coordination Commission

Chaired by the Head of the Permanent Sec-retariat, it gathers all Working Groups’ chair-men. Its aim is to provide a better coordina-tion between all Finabel members and a close collaboration between the groups.

26 27

THE HEART OF FINABEL: THE STUDIES AND THE WORKING GROUPS

The Finabel Working Groups’ delegates are knowledgeable staff officers who, over the years, have developed an extensive body of European doctrine in the fields considered a priority by the Chiefs of Staff in the full spectrum of mili-tary operations. The flexible operation of the institution and the rapid produc-tion of studies allow the Chiefs of Staff to take into account urgent topics.

The freedom which prevails in Finabel creates conditions to cover a lot of questions concerning land operations and makes Finabel’s studies even more relevant. Although the studies themselves do not constitute formal doctrine in its true sense, they do allow all member states to participate in establishing a consensus in a number of important areas of future collaboration.

As the Finabel meetings take place in each member state in turn, the experts of Finabel have created an informal, friendly and active community. Moreo-ver, even if the participation in all Working Groups is highly recommended, it is no longer mandatory.

The corpus made up by Finabel (encompassing hundreds of reports, agree-ments and conventions in at least two languages) is made available by each member state to the staffs, major commands and schools, reflection and doc-trine bodies.

In order to allow the fast consulting and sharing of information, all promul-gated documents are available through a secure website, which is managed by the Finabel Permanent Secretariat.

26 27

SIMPLE LINGUISTIC AND BUDGETARY ARRANGEMENTS DESIGNED TO FAVOUR EXCHANGES

It is important to stress the fact that, in the interests of fairness, all partici-pants in Finabel meetings have the opportunity to use their national language, which is translated into French or English by interpreters.

The official language of Finabel is French for the Executive and Steering Boards. The language used in the Working Groups is English.All Finabel documents are written at least in French and in English.

In budget matters, the annual national contribution is minimal: each country belongs to one of the three contribution groups (200€, 3000€ or 16 000€) based on population.

FINABEL EMBLEM

This emblem includes two swords crossed, which represent the Finabel land identity since its origin. The twelve stars remind the strong link with Eu-

rope that Finabel has had since its creation. The shield embodies defence of peace, foundation of our forces. The centre of the emblem shows two antiquity divinities in front of a shield. On the left you find Mars, Roman God of War, expressing its violence. On the right you find Minerva who per-sonifies the ordered side of War abiding by rules which characterise our democracies. This Symbol can be summarised by the expression “Reflection

serving military action”, which is the goal of Finabel.

28

TERMS OF REFERENCE OF THE WORKING GROUPS

Working Group Field Terms of reference Study example

ALPHA Effective engagement

To study and harmonise the doctrine, methods of action and procedures relat-ing to the use of land forces.

Defined together with the European Union Military Staff: Conceivable employ-ment doctrine(s) for an EU Battle Group (EU BG) at tactical level.

CHARLIE Effective logistics

To carry out studies and exchange views with the aim of ensuring the success of operations carried out by Finabel nations in an increasingly complex envi-ronment through effective logistics.

Command and Control in the field of multinational logistics.

GOLF

Force protection

capability and survivability

To harmonise all matters relating to force protection capability and the sur-vivability of troops during operations in the face of all types of threat (clas-sical threat and mass destruction).

Defined together with the European Defence Agency: CBRN EOD Risk Manage-ment tool for the incident Commander within an EU BG operation.

LIMA Effective intelligence

To study all aspects contributing to effective intelligence for land forces, in all senses of the term.

Elaboration of a generic opposing force for military instruction and training purposes.

MIKEOperational preparation and training

To study the operational preparation and training of the Finabel nations’ land forces likely to be deployed together in the framework of joint operations.

Training for military opera-tions in urban areas.

ROMEO Effective C4

To study the harmonisation and the development of new concepts relating to command, control, communications and computers (C4) in a joint, intera-gency and multinational environment.

Information warfare in cur-rent operations.

TANGOConceptual

and prospec-tive studies

To draft general concepts for Finabel and subsequently to undertake concep-tual and prospective studies in order to create a framework for further studies by Finabel Working Groups.

Study defined together with the European Union Military Staff: Definition of generic missions which can be entrusted to the EU Battle Group (EU BG).

28

Table des maTièresTABLE OF CONTENTS

0. BIBLIOGRAPHICAL PAPER C.38.R 6

REFERENCES 7

1. BACKGROUND AND DOCTRINAL BASIS (CONCEPT) 8

1.1. PURPOSE OF THE STUDy. 81.2. THE NEED. 81.3. THE CHALLENGE. 91.4. THE BACKGROUND. 91.5. DEFINITION AND CHARACTERISTICS. 10

2. COMMAND AND CONTROL (C2) 12

2.1. ORGANIZATION OF LOGISTIC C2. 122.2. LOGISTIC COMMUNICATION AND INFORMATION SySTEM(S). 122.3. LOGISTIC FORCE GENERATION AND GENERIC PLANNING. 132.4. LOGISTIC PLANNING FOR AN ACTUAL OPERATION. 142.5. POST STAND-By PHASE. 15

3. MULTINATIONAL LOGISTICS 15

3.1. INTEROPERABILITy AND COOPERATION. 153.2. ROLE AND POSITION OF NSES. 163.3. CONTRACTING AND OUTSOURCING. 163.4. HNS AND INFRASTRUCTURE. 16

4. OTHER ISSUES 16

4.1. RECONNAISSANCE AND FORWARD ELEMENTS. 164.2. FINANCIAL ISSUES. 164.3. EU BATTLE GROUP TRAINING. 164.4. FORCE PROTECTION. 174.5. STRATEGIC MOBILITy. 18

FINABEL PRESENTATION 21-28

Table des maTièresNOTES

NOTES

32

Quartier Reine ElisabethRue d’Evere 1

B-1140 BRUSSELS

TEL : +32 (0)2/701.71.77FAX : +32 (0)2/701.71.78

E-mail : finabel@mil.be

You will find our studies at www.finabel.org

Res

pons

ible

pub

lishe

r: Pi

erre

Des

jeux

- Fi

nabe

l Coo

rdin

atin

g C

omm

ittee

- Q

uarti

er R

eine

Elis

abet

h - r

ue d

’Eve

re -

B-1

140

Bru

ssel

s - +

32 (0

)2/7

01.4

1.04