CFEC Joint Doctrine Branch Overview - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

1 / 20
About This Presentation
Title:

CFEC Joint Doctrine Branch Overview

Description:

Manage CF/Joint doctrine development process on behalf of CDS ... Standardization responsibilities subsumed by Chief of Program in Vice CDS (VCDS) ... – PowerPoint PPT presentation

Number of Views:284
Avg rating:3.0/5.0
Slides: 21
Provided by: lcoldm
Category:

less

Transcript and Presenter's Notes

Title: CFEC Joint Doctrine Branch Overview


1
CFEC Joint Doctrine Branch Overview
LCol VA McPherson CFEC Joint Doctrine Branch
QCJWC 2009
2
Outline
  • CFEC Joint Doctrine Branch mandate and
    responsibilities
  • CF/Joint doctrine development historical context
  • The doctrine development process
  • Governance and Joint Doctrine Working Group/Panel
    Responsibilities
  • Joint Doctrine Program of Work (POW)
  • Current challenges/issues for CF/Joint doctrine
  • Discussion

3
Mandate
  • CFEC Joint Doctrine Branch mandate is to
    develop, publish and maintain strategic and
    operational level CF Doctrine on behalf of the
    Chief of the Defence Staff (CDS).

4
Responsibilities
  • Manage CF/Joint doctrine development process on
    behalf of CDS
  • Provide secretarial and editorial support to JDWG
    and subordinate panels
  • Conduct editorial review and publishing of all
    CF/Joint doctrine (CFEC website management) on
    behalf of CDS
  • Ensure harmonization of CF/Joint doctrine with
    key Allies and Alliances as applicable
  • Facilitate the use of Joint terminology within
    the CF

5
Joint Doctrine Development Historical Context
  • In 2006, the Canadian Forces (CF) underwent a
    radical organizational restructure at the MOD
    level
  • Called CF Transformation
  • Prior to this, CF-Strategic and Joint doctrine
    development was the responsibility of the Deputy
    Chief of the Defence Staff (DCDS)
  • Responsible Directorate was J7 Directorate of
    Doctrine, Training and Lessons Learned (Dir DTLL)
  • DTLL managed/developed CF/Joint doctrine on
    behalf of DCDS/CDS
  • Harmonized doctrine development activities with
    NATO Standardization Agency/MIC/Five Eyes
    community/CANUS on behalf of DCDS/CDS
  • In Summer 2006, the Dir DTLL responsibilities
    were reassigned to the newly formed Strategic
    Joint Staff (SJS)
  • Standardization responsibilities subsumed by
    Chief of Program in Vice CDS (VCDS)
  • One staff officer assigned to SJS to keep Joint
    doctrine file active
  • Staff officers also assigned to Lessons Learned
    and Collective/Joint Training and Exercises
    within SJS

6
Joint Doctrine Development Historical Context
  • In Sep 06, CF-Strategic/Joint doctrine
    development was reassigned to the Directorate of
    Concepts in newly formed Chief of Force
    Development (CFD) organization.
  • Result was Dir Concepts and Doctrine (Dir CD)
  • In Dec 06, the Dir CD was disbanded
  • Concepts transferred to Directorate of Future
    Security Analysis DFSA within CFD
  • Joint doctrine development transferred to
    Canadian Forces experimentation centre (CFEC)
  • Lessons Learned also subsequently transferred to
    CFEC from SJS in Feb 07
  • In May 07, an independent internal review report,
    the Chief of Review Services (CRS) Report on the
    Currency and Maintenance of CF-Strategic/Joint
    doctrine was published
  • Report contained a number of conclusions and
    recommendations on the current state of
    CF-Strategic/Joint doctrine development in the CF

7
CRS Report on Currency and Maintenance of CF
Doctrine Main Findings - May 07
  • There is a lack of published CF
    military-strategic doctrine to bridge national
    strategy with the Joint operational and tactical
    levels.
  • There is a general lack of understanding and
    appreciation within the CF for the important role
    of Joint operational doctrine
  • The link between operations, lessons learned,
    CDE, doctrine, training and validation is
    broken, thereby losing the benefit of synergy
    amongst functions
  • This has resulted in an inability of training at
    all levels to keep pace with emerging doctrinal
    developments
  • The CF Joint doctrine development process lacks
    agility and does not have a mechanism to get
    emerging doctrine quickly into the hands of those
    who need it

8
CRS Report on Currency and Maintenance of CF
Doctrine Main Findings - May 07 (contd)
  • With few resources devoted to Joint doctrine
    development, CF Joint operations doctrine will
    increasingly lag that of NATO and major allies
  • Capital equipment procurement decisions will lack
    an appropriate doctrinal basis as a result of the
    deficiencies in Joint operational doctrine
  • There is a lack of training and professional
    education in Joint operations doctrine and
    doctrine development (including staff courses
    such at Canadian Forces College (CFC)
  • The individual Environments will develop Tactical
    doctrine in isolation at their Warfare Centers
    that may not reflect CF Joint considerations

9
The Joint Doctrine Development Process
  • Based upon procedures used to develop doctrine in
    NATO (AAP 47)
  • Compilation of current Joint doctrine best
    practices
  • Informed by Lessons Learned
  • Harmonized with international doctrine of key
    Alliances and Allies to optimize interoperability
  • Linked to concept development
  • Promulgated doctrine informs Force Development
  • Understood by the professional education and
    training facilities that teach the doctrine.
  • Implemented by operational level headquarters.

10
The Joint Doctrine Development Process
  • Process is managed on behalf of CFD by CFEC Joint
    Doctrine Branch (JDB) under direction of CO CFEC
  • JDB is secretariat for Joint Doctrine Working
    Group (JDWG)
  • JDWG provides governance/oversight on behalf of
    CFD
  • JDB provides secretariat to Panels
    developing/revising CF/Joint doctrine
  • Develops/manages CF/Joint doctrine Programme of
    Work
  • JDB provides chairs for Capstone and some
    selected Joint doctrine Ops Panels
  • i.e. CFJP 3.0 (CF in Operations), COIN
  • Other members of JDWG provide Subject Matter
    Expert (SME) chairs for Joint Doctrine Panels
  • JDB chairs Joint Terminology Panel and coords
    inputs to Defence Terminology Data base
  • Joint Doctrine Working Group
  • Was CF Doctrine Board (Pre-Transformation)
  • Acts as advisory body to CFD
  • Reports to Capability development Board (CDB)
  • Chaired by CO CFEC
  • Endorses the annual Programme of Work

11
Governance Joint Doctrine Working Group
  • Members
  • Chair (CO CFEC)
  • Secretary (CFEC Joint Doctrine Branch)
  • Canada COM
  • CEFCOM
  • CANSOFCOM
  • CANOSCOM
  • CMS
  • CLS
  • CAS
  • Observers
  • SJS rep
  • ADM (Pol)
  • ADM(PA)
  • JAG
  • ADM(IM)
  • CMP
  • CDI
  • CFC
  • other reps (panel chairs) as reqd by the
    specific doctrine under discussion (CBRN, CIMIC,
    PSYOPS, etc.)
  • reps from the joint doctrine developments centres
    of AU, UK and US will normally be invited to
    observe

12
Command Council
13
Panel Responsibilities
  • Writing, development and maintenance of CF/Joint
    doctrine for consideration by the JDWG
  • Custodianship held by Chair
  • Integrating the views of the CF doctrine
    communities of interest into Joint doctrine
    development
  • Consensus building leading to Ratification
  • Ensuring doctrinal interoperability with our key
    allies and principal Alliances
  • Submitting the final product, (ready for
    Ratification by the users), to CFEC Joint
    Doctrine Branch for editing
  • JDB circulates for ratification IAW CFJP A1
  • Once ratified, doctrine submitted to the
    appropriate approving authority (CFD/CDS) for
    formal promulgation.

14
Canadian Forces Joint Doctrine Hierarchy May 2009
Updated 22 July 2008
CFJP 01 CF Joint Doctrine B-GJ-005-000/FP-000
CFJP 1A CF Doctrine Development Manual
A-AE-025-00/FP-000
CFJP 6.0 Joint CIS B-GJ-005-600/FP-000
CFJP 8.0 Joint Resources and Finance (TBD)
CFJP 9.0 Whole of Government Operations B-GJ-005-9
00/FP-000
CFJP 3.0 CF in Operations B-GJ-005-300/FP-000
CFJP 7.0 Joint Doctrine and Training (TBD)
Joint Publications
CFJP 3.1 Domestic Operations
CFJP 3.10 Information Operations
CFJP 3.1.1 Inter-Agency Domestic
CFJP 3.10.1 Psychological Operations
CFJP 3.2 Stability Operations
CFJP 3.10.2 Joint Public Affairs
CFJP 3.2.1 Crowd Confrontation
CFJP 3.10.3 OPSEC Doctrine
CFJP 3.11 Integrated C2
CFJP 3.3 Air Ops
CFJP 3.12 Mil Engineering Support
CFJP 3.4 Peace Support
CFJP 3.13 Not allocated
CFJP 3.4.1 NEO
CFJP 3.14 Joint Force Protection
CFJP 3.4.2 Humanitarian Disaster relief
CFJP 3.15 Joint EOD Support
Legend
CFJP 3.5 COIN
Promulgated
CFJP 3.15.1 Conduct of IED Ops
CFJP 3.6 Special Ops
CFJP 3.15.2 IED TTP Handbook
CFJP 3.8 NBCD Strategic
CFJP 3.16 Space Operations
CFJP 3.8.1 NBCD Operations
CFJP3.9 Joint Targeting
CFJP XX Inter-Agency International
Development on hold
15
Joint Doctrine Branch Past Planned Activities
  • FY 2008/2009
  • CFJP A1 (Joint Doctrine Development Manual)
  • CFJP 01(Canadian Military Doctrine)
  • CFJP 1.0 (Joint Personnel Management)
  • CFJP 5.0 (Operational Planning Process)
  • CFJP 5.1 (Use of Force Manual)
  • Whole of Government Doctrine Discussion Paper
    (DDP)
  • FY 2009/2010
  • CFJP 2.0 (Joint Intelligence)
  • CFJP 3.0 (Joint Ops)
  • CFJP 4.0 (Joint Logistics)
  • CFJP 6.0 (Joint CIS)
  • CFJP 9.0 (Whole of Government Ops)
  • CFJP 3.1 (Domestic Ops)
  • CFJP 3.2 Stability Ops)
  • CFJP 3.3 Joint Air Ops
  • CFJP 3.5 (COIN)
  • CFJP 3.6 (Special Ops)
  • CFJP 3.9 (Joint Targeting) (
  • CFJP 3.16 (Space Ops)
  • DDP for C4 ISR

16
Challenges/Issues
  • Promulgation of ratified CF/Joint doctrine
  • Personnel

17
Promulgation of Ratified CF/Joint Doctrine
  • Ratification process used for CF/Joint doctrine
    development and ratification process is
    NATO-based
  • CFJP A1 is derived from NSA AAP 47
  • Ratification process is Consensus-based
  • Ratification for Capstone/Keystone is unanimous
    (reservations noted)
  • Ratification process is fully supported by all CF
    stakeholders and Ratification Authority is
    self-determined
  • Some Dot COMs (and other J Staff equivalents)
    have pushed ratification consultation to Flag
    Officer level
  • ECSs usually ratify at Warfare Centre level
  • SJS/Adm (Pol)/Adm(PA) and J Staff functions also
    ratify higher-order doctrine

18
Personnel
  • Current manning strength is 60
  • One officer dedicated to International
  • NATO, Five Eyes (QCJWC), US JPWP
  • Three officers one NCM dedicated to National
  • Two editorial support staff
  • International Section Head is now parachuted into
    in Natl Doc Dev 5
  • Vacancies to be filled in 2009/2010

19
CFEC Joint Doctrine Staff 01 Apr 09
Translator (MOU)
20
Questions???
Write a Comment
User Comments (0)
About PowerShow.com