1
CO
S L
an
d S
tra
teg
y /
CE
M -
Str
até
gie
(T
erre
)C
OS
La
nd
Str
ate
gy
/ C
EM
- S
tra
tég
ie (
Ter
re)
Land Concept and Capability Development“Army of Tomorrow” & Future Army 2040”
Presentation to Soldier Systems TRMVisioning & Requirements Workshop
16 June 2009
Lieutenant Colonel Ron BellDirectorate of Land Concepts and Designs
Soldier Systems TRMVisioning Workshop
2
CO
S L
an
d S
tra
teg
y /
CE
M -
Str
até
gie
(T
erre
)C
OS
La
nd
Str
ate
gy
/ C
EM
- S
tra
tég
ie (
Ter
re) Aim
• Provide an overview of Land capability development• Describe Land Operations 2021• Introduce Future Army 2040
3
CO
S L
an
d S
tra
teg
y /
CE
M -
Str
até
gie
(T
erre
)C
OS
La
nd
Str
ate
gy
/ C
EM
- S
tra
tég
ie (
Ter
re)
Land Capability Development
4
CO
S L
an
d S
tra
teg
y /
CE
M -
Str
até
gie
(T
erre
)C
OS
La
nd
Str
ate
gy
/ C
EM
- S
tra
tég
ie (
Ter
re) Land Staff Lines of Operation
Chief of the Land StaffLGen Andrew Leslie
Assistant Chief of the Land StaffMGen Guy Thibault
Chief of Staff Land StrategyBGen Alain Tremblay
Army Training AuthorityMGen Marquis Hainse (Comd LFDTS)
Chief of Staff Land OperationsBGen Ian Poulter
RGp Army Council
Army Capability Development Board
Army Research Board
Army Training Council
Army Training and ProfessionalDevelopment Board
Army Management Board
Army Program Board
Chairmanship for each governance body representing the three lines of operation is established. However, due to their distinctive terms of reference, these bodies do not automatically report to the CLS through the APB. In fact, it is common practice that they report directly and independently to the RGp, ASPT or the AC as determined by the specific items under consideration. As each chairman is also a member of the APB, RGp, ASPT and AC, this is not considered to be a dysfunctional practice.
Army Strategic Planning Team
Capability Development
Training and Professional Development
ForceManagement
5
CO
S L
an
d S
tra
teg
y /
CE
M -
Str
até
gie
(T
erre
)C
OS
La
nd
Str
ate
gy
/ C
EM
- S
tra
tég
ie (
Ter
re) COS Land Strategy – Mission
• COS Land Strat will govern Land capability development from Conceive to Build.
ManageConceive Design Build
6
CO
S L
an
d S
tra
teg
y /
CE
M -
Str
até
gie
(T
erre
)C
OS
La
nd
Str
ate
gy
/ C
EM
- S
tra
tég
ie (
Ter
re) The Evolving Army
Capability
Time+4 +10 years +25 years
Conceive the
Army of th
e Future
Inform
FS
E
Objective
BUILD
Tomorrow
Today
Future
Develop TowardsFuture Capabilities
CapabilityObjective
7
CO
S L
an
d S
tra
teg
y /
CE
M -
Str
até
gie
(T
erre
)C
OS
La
nd
Str
ate
gy
/ C
EM
- S
tra
tég
ie (
Ter
re) Trends in the Future
Security Environment (FSE)
Characteristics• Irregular & protracted conflict • Highly agile & adaptive
adversaries • Complex trans-national and
asymmetric threats and challenges
• Homeland threats • Increase in CNA• Ops in complex terrain• COTS & novel tech• Greater integration of man
and machine• Declining labour pool
Implications• Mission command • Network enabled ops• JIMP environment• Focus on will and resolve • Adaptive strategies and
tactics • “Early” responder capability• Faster procurement cycles • Robust and redundant
networks and systems • AI & autonomous robotics• Competitive recruitment
strategies
Diverse Environment
Diverse Threat
Diverse Tasks
Canada First
12
CO
S L
an
d S
tra
teg
y /
CE
M -
Str
até
gie
(T
erre
)C
OS
La
nd
Str
ate
gy
/ C
EM
- S
tra
tég
ie (
Ter
re) The Continuum of Operations
Peacetime Military Engagement
Major CombatPeace Support Counter-insurgency
Stability Operations
Defensive Operations
Offensive Operations
EFFORTS AND RESOURCES WILL EBB
AND FLOW ACROSS THE TACTICAL LEVEL
OPERATIONS AND VARY WITH THE CAMPAIGN
THEME
OPERATIONAL LEVEL
CAMPAIGN THEMES
TACTICAL LEVEL
ACTIVITIES
“Full-spectrum operations”
13
CO
S L
an
d S
tra
teg
y /
CE
M -
Str
até
gie
(T
erre
)C
OS
La
nd
Str
ate
gy
/ C
EM
- S
tra
tég
ie (
Ter
re) Operational Functions
CSASS
Command The operational function that integrates all the operational functions into a single comprehensive strategic, operational or tactical level concept. Sense The operational function that provides the commander with knowledge. Act The operational function that integrates manoeuvre, firepower and offensive information operations to achieve the desired effects. Shield The operational function that provides for the protection of a force's survivability and freedom of action. Sustain The operational function that integrates strategic, operational and tactical levels of support to generate and maintain force capability.
14
CO
S L
an
d S
tra
teg
y /
CE
M -
Str
até
gie
(T
erre
)C
OS
La
nd
Str
ate
gy
/ C
EM
- S
tra
tég
ie (
Ter
re) Capability Development PRICIE Consideration
Personnel, Leadership and Individual Training• PD initiatives• Indiv Trg initiatives (SQ, PLQ) and plans• Army Succession Plan• Manning Priorities• Health and Welfare
Research & Development, and Operational Research• R&D Plans• DGOR Plan• Contracted studies
Concepts, Doctrine and Collective Training• Doctrine Writing Plan• Battle Task Standards• Collective Training Plan
Infrastructure, Environment and Organization• O&E Restructure Plan• Infrastructure Development Plan• Environmental Assessment
Information Management, and Technology• Information Systems• Information Architecture
Equipment and Support• Equipping Plans• Equipment Tables• Support Systems• Environment
15
CO
S L
an
d S
tra
teg
y /
CE
M -
Str
até
gie
(T
erre
)C
OS
La
nd
Str
ate
gy
/ C
EM
- S
tra
tég
ie (
Ter
re)
CFC2IS
LAV III
LAV TUA
LAV RWS
BISON C3I
LEO II ARV
EOSL (2035)
EOSL (2035)
Build 3 – Force 2021“Transform”
Build 1 – Force 2011“Position”
Build 2 – Force 2016“Align”
Army of Today Army of Tomorrow
Equipment Strategy
Deductions
ISTAR
LCSS
ISSP
C2 / Comd Sp Network
Leo ARV
Leo AEV
Leo I (C2)
Leo AVLB
Coyote
LUVW
APV - RG31
EOSL (2030)
ADATS (400 Series)
FIFC – Guns
105 C3
105 LG 1
81 Mor
LWTH (155 mm)
60 Mor
FIFC – CASW
AHSVSEOSL (2020)
Build 4 – Force 2026
EOSL (TBC)
LAND CAPABILITY DEVELOPMENT PLAN – PART 2 – MATERIEL
TLAV (M113A3)
FIFC – Mortars
EOSL (2031)
EOSL (2035) or LE 2055
Funding
CF Demands/Pressures
TUA Missile
Sensor Suite Package
HLVW
MLVW
LSVW
BV 206
DivestedCougarGrizzlyM109ADATS (33 to 16)C1 105mm (less AVCON and Gun Salutes)
$
ALAWS
EOSL
EOSL (TBC)
MSVS
FFCV – CCVFIFC – CASW
In service
M72
ERYX
84 mm Carl Gustav
.50 Cal
SARP II
LCDP Version 071113
8
Establishment
Experimentation
Structure
FG Output
ISTAR (Indiv Sensors)
LCSS CR1 CFC4ISRLCSS CR2 and CR3 LCSS LE to 2016
EOSL (2020)1
EOSL (2015)
FFCV – CCV
Heavy
Light
Medium
Indirect Fire
Direct Fire
Svc SpCapability
Non-Strat (including simulation)
Coyote LE (2041)
3
4
7
EOSL (2011)2
10
1
5
5
9
9
14
11
6
2007
2007
2011
2011
2016
2016
2021
2021
2026
2026
Force 21 Equipment Objectives
• Balance (Medium & Light) • Modular platforms – family of
vehs• Full Spectrum operations
capable• Networked Enabled
• Modularized Protection• Enhanced Mobility
• Threat Detection Capability• Smaller Crew Size/Common
Functions• Robotics and Autonomous
systems
Army of Tomorrow
• Strategically Relevant• Combat Effective
• Multi Purpose• Knowledge based
• Mission Outcomes Centric• Medium Weight• Soldier-centric
• Adaptive & Agile• Network Enabled
• Achieves Integrated Effects• Affordable and Sustainable
• Balanced for a Comprehensive Approach
• Optimized for COIN• Technologically Relevant
Coyote LE or transition to new platform
Retain AVLB and AEV (Leo 1 chassis) until EOSL 2020 or divest sooner?
LAV III LE or transition fleet to FFCV Medium
LAV TUA divest or transition to FFCV Medium
Digitize LG1 and C3 105 Gun (Res F training integration)
AHSVS integration
TLAV to fulfill the role of CCV or pursue FFCV CCV
Mortar base plate or mounted version
Divest 60 mm and .50 cal, or retain
Divest or adopt into fleet
HLVW replacement decision
BV206 reset of MILCOT
ALAWS cancel or deliver
Requirement for LSVW replacement project
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
AD / CRAM Capability Gap
EOSL (2019)
EOSL (2022 with upgrades)
EOSL (2026)
CNR Modernization
LEO II (IOC)LEO II (FOC)
IOC
EOSL (2012)
Digitized 105 Trg Fleet
EOSL (2025)
EOSL (2010?)
EOSL (2017)
EOSL (2030) or LE 2055
EOSL (2030)
EOSL (2028)
EOSL (2028)
Frigate Replacement (20 Billion)
Arctic Offshore Patrol Ship (3.1 Billion)
Chinook (2.1 Billion) and Tactical Airlift (3.2 Billion) Joint Strike Fighter (10 Billion)
CF-177 (1.8 Billion)
Destroyer Replacement (7 Billion)
Joint Support Ship (2 Billion)
MHP (3.2 Billion)FWSAR (1.8 Billion)
FFCV – Medium
12
FIFC – Precision Rocket/Missiles
FFCV – Light Capability
FFCV – Medium
NVG/LAD
FFCV – Light Capability
FIFC – Guns
FIFC – Precision Rocket/Missiles
BV 206Arctic Capabilities
13
FFCV - FIFC (Guns, Precision Rocket/Missiles)
FFCV – Light Capability FIFC – Mortars
LOSV
LEGEND
Domestic Capabilities
FFCV Variants
FFCV Expedited Changes
Domestic Expedited Capabilities
Maintained by COS Land Strat / DLCD / SSO CD (LCol MB Boswell)
Campaign Horizons / Planning Methodology
Sustain
Act
Command
Sense
Shield
Generate
Horizon 1 Horizon 2 Horizon 3
EnhancedJoint
2013
FullyIntegrated
2028
FullyJoint
2018
2016
Army of Today
Army of Tomorrow
Future Army
2009 2021 2040
Land Ops 2021
Land Ops 2040
Land Concepts
The Army Strategy
2011
Focus of the Land Capability Development Plan
Land Capabilities
16
CO
S L
an
d S
tra
teg
y /
CE
M -
Str
até
gie
(T
erre
)C
OS
La
nd
Str
ate
gy
/ C
EM
- S
tra
tég
ie (
Ter
re)
Land Operations 2021
Adaptive Dispersed Operations
The Force Employment Concept for Canada’s Army of Tomorrow
17
CO
S L
an
d S
tra
teg
y /
CE
M -
Str
até
gie
(T
erre
)C
OS
La
nd
Str
ate
gy
/ C
EM
- S
tra
tég
ie (
Ter
re) The Evolution of ADO
The Future Security
Environment 2007-2030
Part One
8 November 2007 - DRAFT
18
CO
S L
an
d S
tra
teg
y /
CE
M -
Str
até
gie
(T
erre
)C
OS
La
nd
Str
ate
gy
/ C
EM
- S
tra
tég
ie (
Ter
re)
Conflict results from a complex interaction of beliefs, actions and structures in periods of political, economic, and social instability. Resolution of this type of conflict requires an integrated, multi-dimensional approach that addresses actions, structures, and beliefs throughout the moral, physical and informational spheres.
Competing Beliefs
Unacceptable StructuresMoral
Physical
Informational
• Perceptions• Knowledge • Culture• History
• State Violence• Crime• Corruption• Repression
• Ineffective Authority • Military Occupation• Urbanization• Natural Resources• Poverty• Social Stratification
The Nature of Conflict in the FSE
Catalytic Actions
Command
Fusion & KM
Human Dimension
JIMP
The Network
Omni-Dimensional Shield
Focused Logistics
Joint Fires Support
IntegratedIntegratedEffectsEffects
TheTheSoldierSoldier
AgilityAgility SustainmentSustainment
Network Network EnabledEnabled
Full Spectrum Engageme
nt
Distributed Autonomous Systems
The AoT Battle Group
Adaptive, networked, and integrated forces alternatively dispersing and aggregating throughout the multi-dimensional battlespace in order to
find, fix, and strike full spectrum threats to security and stability
Functional Functional ConceptsConcepts
Operating Operating ConceptConcept
Enabling Enabling ConceptsConcepts
Manoeuvre Warfare Manoeuvre Warfare TheoryTheory
Effects Based Effects Based ThinkingThinkingpositional, psychological, temporal synergistic creation of effects
2. Network in Place & Operating
1. The AoT BG Arrives in AO
3. Manned/Unmanned Sensors Operating
4. JFS in Place & Operating5. Coys Disperse as Reqr
6. Pls Disperse as Reqr
7. Sects Disperse as Reqr8. Teams Disperse as Reqr
9. Sensors/teams ID & Locate Threats
10. Teams/JFS Conduct Full Spectrum Engagements
11. Teams/Sects, Pls, Coys Aggregate as Reqr
ADAPTIVE DISPERSED OPERATIONS
Moral
Physical
Informational
21
CO
S L
an
d S
tra
teg
y /
CE
M -
Str
até
gie
(T
erre
)C
OS
La
nd
Str
ate
gy
/ C
EM
- S
tra
tég
ie (
Ter
re) Land Operations 2021 – ADO
What it Means . . . What Changes. . . • All-encompassing network • Enhanced soldier capability• Adaptive = agile (in capability development, in
force generation, and in force employment) • Dispersed in time, space and purpose (underpins
the comprehensive approach)• Balanced force:
– Flexibility / modularity– Enhanced precision, lethality, and protection– The requirement for mass (“boots-on-the-ground”)
remains
22
CO
S L
an
d S
tra
teg
y /
CE
M -
Str
até
gie
(T
erre
)C
OS
La
nd
Str
ate
gy
/ C
EM
- S
tra
tég
ie (
Ter
re)
Land Ops 2021:ADO
Designing The Army of Tomorrow
SYSTEMSSTRUCTURES
CONCEPTS
- Formation 2021- (Optimized) Battle
Group 2021
- Human Dimension- The Comprehensive
Approach
- Family of Land Combat Systems
P
ea
ce
Su
pp
ort
Ma
jor
Co
mb
at
Th
e O
pe
rati
on
al L
ev
el C
am
pa
ign
Th
em
es
Pe
ac
eti
me
Mil
ita
ry E
ng
ag
em
en
t
Adaptable
Flexible
Medium Weight
Off Def
Stability
Do
me
sti
c
Ra
ng
e
CO
IN
Off Def
Stability
Off Def
Stability
= combat operationsOff Def
LandForces
Linking Structure to Task
A medium weight, high tech force balanced for counter-insurgency
(COIN)-like scenarios in failed and failing states operating within a Joint / Interagency / Multinational / Public
environment, and capable of operating across the spectrum of
conflict.
Formation 2021 and Battle Group 2021
NCE
NSEMP
CSS
EW
What are the essential capabilities? What is the optimal division of responsibilities?
Coordination of national and multinational logistics, medical services and MPs
National and multinational units / BGs
Coord of national and multinational Arty & Engrs
Multinational command with complexities such as Int sharing and national ROE
Inter-operability of communications systems
Capacity building capabilities in conjunction with our partners (OMLT, PRT/CMTT, SAT, Police Trg)
Balancing “Fires” and “Influence Activities” (Information Operations)
What are the structures and and capabilities required to command & control, synchronize and resource the war winning and battle winning efforts in 2021?
24
Institutionalizing a Comprehensive Approach to Operations through study of the Joint Interagency Multinational Public (JIMP) Environment
26
CO
S L
an
d S
tra
teg
y /
CE
M -
Str
até
gie
(T
erre
)C
OS
La
nd
Str
ate
gy
/ C
EM
- S
tra
tég
ie (
Ter
re) Family of Land Combat Systems (FLCS)
Future CombatVehicle Systems
(FCVS)
Future DirectFire Capability
(FDFC)
Future SoldierSystem(FSS)
AutonomousSystems
(AS)
Future AviationSystems
(FAS)
Future NetworkCapability
(FNC)
Future ServiceSupport System
(FSSS)
Future IndirectFire Capability
(FIFC)
The AoTFamily of Land
Combat Systems(FLCS)
Note: Some Land Force equipment or capability might not be captured by this model.
Projects that are within the
CFDS/FLCS envelope
LWTH funding already earmarked
CCV
LRPRS
TAPV
LAV III UG
TLAV UG
GBAMD
LVMP
Future Network Capability
Moral
Physical
Informational
SENSOR MIX STUDY
27
28
CO
S L
an
d S
tra
teg
y /
CE
M -
Str
até
gie
(T
erre
)C
OS
La
nd
Str
ate
gy
/ C
EM
- S
tra
tég
ie (
Ter
re) The Human Dimension –
Toward 2021
Attributes & Competencies
Ethics & Professionalism
Morale, Cohesion &
Trust
Decision Making Stress &
Resilience
Culture
Who do we need?
Who will we get?
And how do we keep
them?
29
CO
S L
an
d S
tra
teg
y /
CE
M -
Str
até
gie
(T
erre
)C
OS
La
nd
Str
ate
gy
/ C
EM
- S
tra
tég
ie (
Ter
re) Army of Tomorrow Summary
• End state — a balanced, medium weight, high tech force optimized for mid-intensity operations (i.e. that zone on the spectrum of conflict where combat and stability operations are roughly in equal measure), but effective across the entire spectrum of conflict.
• The AoT will demand:
– Mass.
– Agility/mobility.
– Integrated effects.
– An expanding network.
– The institution embrace the comprehensive approach to operations.
– Investment in enhanced command and control structures and new war winning capabilities at the JIMP-enabled formation level, with more focus on information operations and influence activities.
• Greatest challenge:
The attraction, development and retention of sufficient soldiers with the right skill set to be effective in the future security environment, ever mindful of the characteristics and culture of generation Y.
30
CO
S L
an
d S
tra
teg
y /
CE
M -
Str
até
gie
(T
erre
)C
OS
La
nd
Str
ate
gy
/ C
EM
- S
tra
tég
ie (
Ter
re) Partner Group 2 Thrust Advisory Groups (TAGs)
• Command• Sense• Act
• Shield• Sustain• Integrated Land Analysis
31
CO
S L
an
d S
tra
teg
y /
CE
M -
Str
até
gie
(T
erre
)C
OS
La
nd
Str
ate
gy
/ C
EM
- S
tra
tég
ie (
Ter
re) Arctic Study
32
CO
S L
an
d S
tra
teg
y /
CE
M -
Str
até
gie
(T
erre
)C
OS
La
nd
Str
ate
gy
/ C
EM
- S
tra
tég
ie (
Ter
re)
Future Army 2040
FUTURE ARMY 2040
FIRST LOOK
33
CO
S L
an
d S
tra
teg
y /
CE
M -
Str
até
gie
(T
erre
)C
OS
La
nd
Str
ate
gy
/ C
EM
- S
tra
tég
ie (
Ter
re) Evolution of FA 2040
The Future Security
Environment 2007-2030
Part One
8 November 2007 - DRAFT
FUTURE ARMY 2040
FIRST LOOK
34
CO
S L
an
d S
tra
teg
y /
CE
M -
Str
até
gie
(T
erre
)C
OS
La
nd
Str
ate
gy
/ C
EM
- S
tra
tég
ie (
Ter
re)
Physical Environment
Science
Technology
Economic
Social
Military
Legal
Political
Land Forces Context
The way we see it…
The future is not something that just happens ... it is something we do, by the choices we make or avoid.
35
CO
S L
an
d S
tra
teg
y /
CE
M -
Str
até
gie
(T
erre
)C
OS
La
nd
Str
ate
gy
/ C
EM
- S
tra
tég
ie (
Ter
re) Futures Wheel End Product
FA 2040
Economic
Legal
Science and Technology
Small TechMolecular
Manufacturing
Human Rights
Social
Human Enhancement
Political Environment
Military
Increase havehave not's
Increase rate ofproduction
Shorter Eqpt Lifecycle
?
?
?
Futures Wheel End Product
37
CO
S L
an
d S
tra
teg
y /
CE
M -
Str
até
gie
(T
erre
)C
OS
La
nd
Str
ate
gy
/ C
EM
- S
tra
tég
ie (
Ter
re) Key Drivers of Change
1. Impact of age & demographics on military composition
2. Energy security
3. Exponential technology growth
4. Human / social response to technology
5. Expansion of operating environments
6. Global environmental change
7. Globalization
8. Conflicting / shifting identities
9. Shifting power balance
10. Resource security
11. Distribution of wealth
12. Weapons proliferation
38
CO
S L
an
d S
tra
teg
y /
CE
M -
Str
até
gie
(T
erre
)C
OS
La
nd
Str
ate
gy
/ C
EM
- S
tra
tég
ie (
Ter
re) Impact-Uncertainty Classification
Imp
act
UncertaintyLow Moderate High
Low
Mod
High
1
2
3
4
5 6
7
8
9 10
11 12
Environment
Energy
39
CO
S L
an
d S
tra
teg
y /
CE
M -
Str
até
gie
(T
erre
)C
OS
La
nd
Str
ate
gy
/ C
EM
- S
tra
tég
ie (
Ter
re) Key Drivers of Change and Polarities
1. Impact of age & demographics on military composition – Older vs.
younger through immigration
2. Energy security – Sustainable vs. unsustainable
3. Exponential technology growth – Set the pace vs. fall behind
4. Human / social response to technology – Reject technology vs. embrace
technology
5. Expansion of operating environments – Defensive capability vs.
exploitation
6. Global environmental change – Crisis reaction vs. proactive action
7. Globalization – Acceleration vs. deceleration
8. Conflicting / shifting identities – Global community vs. fragmentation
9. Shifting power balance – Cooperative / less friction vs. competitive /
more friction
10. Resource security – Sustainable supply vs. unsustainable supply
11. Distribution of wealth – Uneven vs. even
12. Weapons proliferation – Disarmament vs. proliferation
40
CO
S L
an
d S
tra
teg
y /
CE
M -
Str
até
gie
(T
erre
)C
OS
La
nd
Str
ate
gy
/ C
EM
- S
tra
tég
ie (
Ter
re) Alternate Future Space
(Energy & Environment)
Ene
rgy
Environment / Climate
Sustainable – Supply exceeds demand
Unsustainable – Demand exceeds supply
Cris
is R
eact
ion
Proactive A
ction
41
CO
S L
an
d S
tra
teg
y /
CE
M -
Str
até
gie
(T
erre
)C
OS
La
nd
Str
ate
gy
/ C
EM
- S
tra
tég
ie (
Ter
re)
Exp
onen
tial t
echn
olog
y gr
owth
Shifting power balance
Set the pace
Fall behind
Com
petit
ive
– m
ore
fric
tion C
ooperative – less frictionAlternate Future Space
(Power Balance & Exponential Tech Growth)
42
CO
S L
an
d S
tra
teg
y /
CE
M -
Str
até
gie
(T
erre
)C
OS
La
nd
Str
ate
gy
/ C
EM
- S
tra
tég
ie (
Ter
re)
Next Steps
• Scenarios
– To include the scenario for a “Zefra II-like” fictional
account
• Gap analysis
– Use back-casting to look at how we get from today
to the future
• Shocks, strategic discontinuities and wildcards
– Handled separately
43
CO
S L
an
d S
tra
teg
y /
CE
M -
Str
até
gie
(T
erre
)C
OS
La
nd
Str
ate
gy
/ C
EM
- S
tra
tég
ie (
Ter
re)
We do not know what will happen in the future.
Capability development is, therefore, about trying to hit the centre of mass of the most likely future target while, above all, maintaining:
FLEXIBILITY within our force;
the necessary ADAPTABILITY to modify our force; and
the institutional AGILITY to quickly change our force.
44
CO
S L
an
d S
tra
teg
y /
CE
M -
Str
até
gie
(T
erre
)C
OS
La
nd
Str
ate
gy
/ C
EM
- S
tra
tég
ie (
Ter
re)
Questions/Discussion
“I am tempted to declare dogmatically that whatever doctrine the Armed Forces are working on now, they have got it wrong. I am also tempted to declare that it does not matter that they got it wrong. What does matter is their capacity to get it right quickly when the moment arrives.”
Sir Michael Howard, 1974