Leveraging Space: an Examination of the Ultimate High Ground at Echelons Brigade and Below

Summer 2017 Leveraging Space: an Examination of the Ultimate High Ground at Echelons Brigade and Below by LTC Coley D. Tyler Describing the space domain as “the ultimate high ground” may seem cli ché, but there are some underlying truths in the statement that the U.S. Army has taken for granted since the advent of the space-enabled force in the late 1980s. Imagine a day without:

• Space assets providing intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance (ISR) of denied areas;

• The Global Positioning System (GPS) providing position, navigation and timing (PNT) for joint friendly-force tracking;

• Precision-guided munitions;

• Satellite communications (SATCOM); or

• M i s s i l e w a r n i n g ( M W ) o r environmental monitoring (EM) providing terrestrial weather, enabling land operations … … and you quickly recognize the Army’s reliance on the capabilities afforded by the ultimate high ground of space. Over the course of the previous three decades, the Army has shifted from be ing space-enabled to space-depen dent, a condition our potential adver saries understand and intend to exploit in future conflict. Space provides multiple capabilities that enable movement and maneuver, but our adversaries will increasingly put these at at risk to neutralize our long-held technological advantage and challenge conventional assumptions of domain superiority. Therefore units must be adept at operating in a de nied, degraded or disrupted space op erating environment (D3SOE). This article addresses how formations can best prepare for this reality to en sure mission accomplishment regard less of the level of space-domain deg radation. Commanders must be aware of the threat, understand the role of space capabilies within the Army and exercise future space support within the emerging conceptual frameworks of multi-domain battle (MDB) and the Army Functional Concept for Move ment and Maneuver (AFC-MM). Threat Any adversary can be space-capable with access to many of the same capa bilities the U.S. Army enjoys if it can af ford the commerical rate for provided services.1 Space-faring nations – na tions that possess their own space ca pabilities – have a wider range of op tions. Some possess the ability to de velop their own space systems and function in the space domain as near-peer competitors with the United States. These capabilities generally provide ISR, PNT, SATCOM, MW and EM for their forces. Some of these near-peer competitors have also devel oped counter-space abilities or the ability to threaten others’ space assets and means.2 Some nations employ a mix of national and commercial capa bilities, while others depend on com mercial only. Considering that a typical U.S. Army brigade combat team (BCT) has more than 2,500 pieces of PNT-enabled equipment and 250 pieces of SATCOM-enabled equipment, assured access to space is tremendously important.3 The recent conflict in Ukraine highlighted issues the U.S. Army could face in the future. Russian separatists were highly successful executing electronic attacks, GPS jamming/spoofing and signals in terceptions and targeting.4 Carl von Clausewitz opines that “[h]is torical examples clarify everything and also provide the best kind of proof” if properly used through explanation, ap plication, supporting facts and deduc tion of doctrine.5 Sun Tzu also counseled that one who knows the enemy and knows himself will not be endangered in a hundred engagements. One who does not know the enemy but knows himself will be sometimes victorious and sometimes will meet with defeat. One who knows Figure 1. Illustration of space support to operations. (Graphic by LTC Coley D. Tyler)

Summer 2017 neither the enemy nor himself will in variably be defeated in every engage ment.6 If we heed their advice, then under standing how the space domain can af fect the U.S. Army (in light of potential threats) and how it is structured to le verage the ultimate high ground is very instructive for a “space saavy” future force. Space’s role Recent observations, trends and in sights reveal that most units are ill-pre pared for a D3SOE and there is much room for improvement. For example, in the 2015 Gypsy Kilo exercise – a Joint Navigation Warfare Center (JNWC)-faciliated contested PNT and navigation-warfare (navwar) event – JNWC simulated D3SOE conditions for company-sized elements and conclud ed that units experienced significant is sues navigating and maintaining situ ational awareness of force orientation in degraded environments.7 National Training Center rotation after-action reviews routinely reveal:

• Underuse of GPS encryption;

• D ef i c i e n c i e s i n s p e c t r u m - management operations/Joint Restricted Frequency List;

• Poor SATCOM terminal operations;

• Insufficient contested-space techniques (for example, primary-alternate-contingency-emergency plans, tactical standard operating procedures and battle drills); and

• Inadequate unmanned aerial systems (UAS)/counter-UAS operations.8 U.S. Army senior leaders believe the old adage, “The more you sweat in peace, the less you bleed in war.” In December 2015, the Chief of Staff of the Army (CSA) challenged the combat-training centers (CTCs) for “increased exposure to electronic warfare … as close to combat as you can get without actual death. Rachet up the intensity … to make the experience a leader and Soldier crucible.”9 The Combined Arms Center (CAC)’s commanding general published a di rective mandating the inclusion of D3SOE training into all professional-military-education (PME) courses. The commander’s intent is “[t]o ensure the Army Space Training Strategy is fully implemented within [PME] to improve the Army’s understanding and [use] of space capabilities, improve operations in contested operational environments and create a continuum of career-long space education throughout the pro fessional-development system.”10 The U.S. Army Space and Missile De fense Command (SMDC) is working hard to reverse these trends by fully implementing the Army Space Training Strategy (ASTS) that the Army G-3 di rected in preparation for the future and by providing D3SOE home-station training to better prepare units for training rotations. SMDC supports U.S. Army space train ing and professional development and education through three lines of effort (LoEs): institutional, operational and space cadre: The institutional LoE aims to increase knowledge and awareness of space ca pabilities through education and training at Training and Doctrine Com mand (TRADOC) centers of excellence and schools. Currently at the Maneu ver Center of Excellence (MCoE) on Fort Benning, GA, SMDC teaches blocks of space instruction to the Maneuver Pre-Command Course and Infantry/Ar mor Basic Officer Leader Courses. SMDC is also making progress toward implementing instruction for the Ma neuver Captain’s Career Course. Through the operational LoE, SMDC trains units at home-station and the CTCs to better leverage space capabil ities and better prepare them to fight in a D3SOE. Units can coordinate with the Army Space Training Integration (ASTI) Branch directly to integrate space training into the unit training cy cle. Lastly, the U.S. Army has a core of space cadre to offer subject-matter ex pertise within the operating force. Army space-support elements (SSE) are small cells of space cadre trained and experienced in space operations organic to army, corps, division and Special Forces Group staffs. SSE under stand planning and operational consid erations of employed space capabili ties and have a firm knowledge of the threats to those systems by an adver sary. An Army space-support team (ARSST) can augment an SSE for product devel opment and employment of unique ca pabilities during deployments, exercis es or increased-operational-tempo sit uations. An ARSST is also tailorable in size and expertise (rank and/or mili tary-occupation specialty) based on Figure 2. ASTS. (Graphic source: Space Update, MCoE Pre-Command Course brief)

Summer 2017 the supported organization’s needs. Armed with knowledge of the threat and self-awareness of space-domain operations (function and structure), the U.S. Army can better prepare the force for future conflicts. Space-cadre members resident within the force structure offer units a myriad of sup port. Examples include reverse intelli gence preparation of the battlefield/ Red space; electromagnetic-interfer ence resolution; navwar and special technical operations support; MW sys tem status; additional imagery/over head persistant infrared requests; space-systems-constellation health status; and GPS accuracy reports. Future space support Just as the Second Offset strategy of the 1980s connected the U.S. Army to space-based capabilities, the Third Off set strategy must maintain the U.S. military’s advantage over its adversar ies in space. The CSA and commandant of the Marine Corps recently signed off on an MDB whitepaper that will serve to inform the U.S. Army on how cur rent and future forces will operate and protect capabilities within the space domain in light of the emerging near-peer threat. The U.S. Army cannot al low current and planned space depen dencies to hinder operations in future conflicts. Concept-to-capability activities orches trated by TRADOC aim to address these dependencies and better protect and employ current and future technolo gies to retain a continuing advantage. How the U.S. Army plans to leverage space in the future to execute MDB and the AFC-MM is a considerable question to be addressed in the Force 2025 Maneuver Campaign of Learning. There is no doubt that space capabili ties are integral to the Defense Depart ment’s MDB concept or that the De fense Department will enable the four components of the AFC-MM solution: cross-domain maneuver, semi-inde pendent operations, integrated recon naissance and security and realized mission command.11 Future threats, coupled with newfound self-aware ness, require the U.S. Army to make changes. The ASTS guides these efforts through training, and SMDC is also actively engaged in concept-to-capability de velopment of potential capabilities across doctrine, organization, training, materiel, leadership, personnel, facili ties and policy for the force as well. In the past, the Army was primarily a receiver of space capabilities owned and operated by other services. Emerg ing doctrine in MDB is an opportunity for the U.S. Army to become more of a provider of effects. Imagine a BCT com mander being able to plan, coordinate and employ space effects from a space battalion in the same fashion as he/she would employ a fires battalion in direct support with priority of fires. This for mation hypothetically could have high-altitude airships with interchangeable ISR, SATCOM, PNT, MW or fires pay loads capable of providing real-time responsive effects for the maneuver commander. Or perhaps this unit is equipped with retrievable-payload-car rying balloons or small satellites to provide diverse capabilities dedicated to tactical formations without reliance on national assets. The possibilities are extensive, and op tions exist even in a fiscally constrained environment. Maneuver leaders owe it to their profession and their Soldiers to create the demand signal for the space community on how best to sup port. Leveraging space at brigade-and-below echelons is in a crucial stage of development. MCoE’s Capability Devel opment Division is pushing the enve lope on space integration with the multi-domain task force to execute cross-domain maneuver and employ cross-domain fires, as well as to fill gaps in obscuration across the entire electromagnetic spectrum with the U.S. Army cross-domain obscuration strategy. The nature of warfare is changing, and the question is: “Does the U.S. Army take the initiative and shape the change, or just hold on for the ride?” LTC Coley Tyler is MCoE’s space integra tion officer, assigned to SMDC-Future Warfare Center and working at Fort Benning, GA. Previous assignments in clude information-operations chief of plans, U.S. Forces-Afghanistan/North Atlantic Treaty Organization; space-op erations chief and special-activities planner, Eighth Army-U.S. Forces Ko rea; physical-education instructor, U.S. Military Academy (USMA), West Point, NY; and battalion fire-support officer, 2-7 Cavary, 1st Cavalry Division, Fort Hood, TX. His military schooling in cludes the School of Advanced Military Studies (SAMS), intermediate-level ed ucation, Space Operations Officer Qualification Course, Field Artillery Captain’s Career Course, Field Artillery Officer Basic Course and Ranger and Airborne schools. He holds a bachelor’s of science degree in civil engineering from USMA, a master’s of science de gree in kinesiology from Indiana Uni versity and a master’s of science de gree in operational art and science from SAMS. Figure 3. Army space cadre at echelons above brigade. The ARSST structure is diagrammed as an example only, as it is tailorable to fit mission requirements. (Graphic by LTC Coley D. Tyler)

Summer 2017 Notes 1 SMDC Directorate of Training and Doc trine (DoTD), Space Update, MCoE PreCommand Course Brief (2016). 2 Ibid. 3 Ibid. 4 Ibid. 5 Carl von Clausewitz, On War, trans. Mi chael Howard and Peter Paret, Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1984. 6 Sun Tzu, The Art of War, trans. Ralph D. Sawyer, New York: Basic Books, 1994. 7 Navwar is a deliberate defensive and of fensive action to assure friendly use and prevent adversary use of PNT, per DoTD. 8 Space Update. 9 SMDC G-31 Training and Exercise, ASTI Branch, 2017. 0 CAC, D3SOE task order, 2017. 11 TRADOC, The U.S. Army Functional Concept for Movement and Maneuver 2020-2040, February 2017. AFC-MM – Army Functional Concept for Movement and Maneuver ARSST – Army space-support team ASTI – Army Space Training Integration ASTS – Army Space Training Strategy BCT – brigade combat team CAC – Combined Arms Center CSA – Chief of Staff of the Army CTC – combat-training center D3SOE – denied, degraded or disrupted space operating environment DoTD – Directorate of Training and Doctrine EM – environmental monitoring GPS – Global Positioning System ISR – intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance JNWC – Joint Navigation Warfare Center LoE – line of effort MCoE – Maneuver Center of Excellence MDB – multi-domain battle MW – missile warning Navwar – navigation warfare PME – professional military education PNT – position, navigation and timing SAMS – School of Advanced Military Studies SATCOM – satellite communications SMDC – Space and Missile Defense Command SSE – space-support element TRADOC – (U.S. Army) Training and Doctrine Command UAS – unmanned aerial system USMA – U.S. Military Academy Acronym Quick-Scan Send Us Your Manuscripts ARMOR magazine’s manuscript suspenses for 2017 are (these are separate from the Starry suspenses):

• Summer 2017 edition: May 24, 2017

• Fall 2017 edition: Aug. 17, 2017

• Winter 2018 edition: Nov. 21, 2017 Send Us Your Manuscripts ARMOR magazine’s manuscript suspenses for 2017:

• Fall 2017 edition: Aug. 17, 2017

• Winter 2018 edition: Nov. 21, 2017 For planning purposes, ARMOR magazine suspenses are an average of 10-11 weeks before the edition is published.