More than 300 representatives from 30 nations are examining solutions to future warfighting challenges in Rome this week at the 2009 Concept Development and Experimentation Conference. Specifically, members of U.S. Joint Forces Command (JFCOM) and NATO nations are conducting work that will promote multinational cooperation. Conference participants are discussing concept development and experimentation in the areas of countering hybrid threats, providing security force assistance, developing strategic communications and deterring non-state actors. Although the concepts that are being discussed focus on future confrontations, leaders of the conference agree that those concepts that can aid today’s joint warfighters are likely to go to the head of the list for fast tracking.

Rear Adm. Christian Canova, French navy, says that the most significant part of strategic communications from the NATO standpoint is understanding that the connections are not just about military leaders. Instead, troops on the ground also must have access to strategic communications capabilities so that they can synchronize their actions with the strategy military leaders have in mind. Adm. Canova is the deputy assistant chief of staff for future capabilities, research and technology, Allied Command Transformation.

Rear Adm. Dan Davenport, USN, director of Joint Concept Development and Experimentation, JFCOM, agrees with Adm. Canova and adds that strategic communications must be embedded in every operation. “Aligning the strategic narrative from across the government and across the coalition is particularly important. Then within that strategic area that the military can provide, each nation can determine its specific contribution,” Adm. Davenport states.

In addressing how work being conducted at the conference could be applied to current and future missions in Afghanistan, the admirals concur that the purpose of the event is to explore and find concepts that can be turned into doctrine and then flow through the acquisition of capabilities phase. But, while workshop attendees are concentrating on the future, the challenge also is to contribute to current operations. According to Adm. Davenport, “If we come up with a new idea or solution that looks like it has value to current operations, we will transition that as fast as possible.”

Adm. Davenport and Adm. Canova each emphasized, however, that the goal of the conference is to gain mutual understanding about how various nations can work together as allies during future operations and to share ideas about how to take on some of the toughest problems facing the nations’ governments.

Many of today’s defense policies and military forces are still organized for World War II-type threats, and that doesn’t suffice in the age of terrorism, where security and information sharing both have prominent roles. A more collaborative approach is needed, and NATO has to look ahead for emerging challenges in light of a wider risk. The security business is different from the defense business. In defense, the lines of communication and structure are well known, and the supply lines are understood. In security, the market is indistinct; there is no requirement of training, and the face of the customer is elusive. Admiral Sir Ian Forbes, KCB, CBE, and former NATO Supreme Allied Commander, spoke at Technet International in Brussels, Belgium, explaining that the challenges in security are international, but the solutions are national.

Within today’s emerging security landscape, NATO is no longer the leading player but is part of an international relationship. This collaborative environment requires that NATO and organizations such as the European Union and the United Nations make their relationship work practically, not just rhetorically or politically.

The NATO Communication and Information Systems Agency (NCSA) is the organization that connects NATO and as such has a significant role in protecting information through information security and cyber defense. Lt. Gen. Kurt Herrmann, GAF, director, NCSA, explained that his organization handles 200 sites, 10 different security levels, six major operations and 100,000 users, providing management, support, delivery and sustainment of information systems. It is essential to ensure a free flow of information, not just technology, the general explained, detailing the importance of more information flow to more collaboration. The organization must stay ahead with not only advanced technology but also proactive policies to provide the most cost-effective solution that doesn’t stop the flow of information. The general used a quote he credited to Dr. Gary Hinson comparing security to the brakes on your car….it slows you down, but it also makes it possible for you to go a lot faster.

Throughout the first day of this event, many of the experts emphasized that the most significant security challenges being faced are human ones, not technology ones. If security is too cumbersome, users will find a way around it or will revert back to legacy systems that they are more comfortable with. In light of the growing cyber threat, this is a great concern. The number of cyber attacks increased 60 percent between 2008 and 2009, and the amount of malicious code increased 265 percent in the same time frame, reported Brig. Gen. Murat Ucuncu, chief of information systems division, Turkish General Staff. The security awareness of users as well as network administrators is often a problem too, and organizations must provide training in these areas, he emphasized.

While the push forward for better collaboration and information-sharing capabilities will require technical advances, the experts at today’s NATO workshop in Brussels, Belgium, are struggling with an even bigger challenge than connecting the bits and bytes.

The complex policy, governance and legal issues that a single interoperability level creates must be resolved because, as workshop moderator Dag Wilhelmsen emphasized, real lives are involved. Wilhelmsen, the technical director of the NATO Communication and Information Systems Service Agency, opened the workshop by saying the aim is to establish a common language, vision and standards for identity management in a federated environment.

The banking industry, historically a broker of trust between transaction parties, had a prominent presence in the workshop. Perhaps the most widely recognized example of federated identity management is the ATMs that can be accessed from most bank terminals across the world. The closer you get to money, the higher the identity management level must be. It is about risk management too, not just technology, Hilary Ward, who heads the managed identity services, global transaction services for Citigroup, suggested to the participants.

Standards and accreditation organizations as well as NATO representatives and other industry thought leaders talked about various products and case studies. Clearly, one size does not fit all, yet there have to be mechanisms in place so that information can be shared and identities can be verified. The appropriate level of access can change in different scenarios–and the role of individuals can change as well.

Many questions and answers punctuated each presentation, with audience members offering insight and often adding to the conversation with their own expertise and recommendations. The AFCEA Europe office will be posting presentations on its Web site the first week of November so that the collaboration opportunity can continue.

MILCOM 2009 panelists discussing network centricity and coalitions explained the differences that exist in the methodology during operations that comprise more than just U.S. joint forces. Expectations as well as information must be managed, and this can be difficult in an environment that involves different languages as well as different cultures.

Malcolm Green, chief of communication services, NC3A, shared that the International Security Assurance Force’s (ISAF’s) concept of communications involves each country operating in Afghanistan using its own infrastructure. This is necessary at least in part because of the language barriers that exist in the area. The intelligence that runs across this federated network also comes from each of the coalition’s countries. “The principal point here is that it is the information we want to manage, not the technology. The technology should be transparent to the user,” he said.

NATO forces in the region have both static as well as deployable communications assets. In addition, the forces have crisis response operations capabilities.

Green shared that network centricity at the ISAF can be best understood by examining the what, the why and the how. The “what” is merely having an Internet capability, but while this is simple in developed nations, it is not as easy in regions such as Afghanistan where no infrastructure or technology of any kind exists. Communications capabilities used in this theater must be robust and agile, he added.

The “why”—or benefit of network centricity—is not new, Green pointed out. One of the best examples is Wal-Mart, a company that has a network that enables an extremely efficient logistics chain. It is this same type of responsiveness that coalitions must emulate.

ISAF has been able to bring network centricity to operation Enduring Freedom through funding on the national, multinational and NATO levels. This approach not only ensures that no single nation is left holding the bill but also allows forces from each member country to use the systems they are accustomed to, Green explained.

Three Thales employees also participated in the panel. They shared information about the phenomenal success of the Full Operational Capability Plus (FOC+), which the company was contracted by NATO to bring to the Afghan theater of operations. Because of prior work with the company, NATO officials were able to bring their concept to Thales, and the capability was up and running within approximately 90 days.

The FOC+ is now the communications backbone in Afghanistan. It is an open architecture with systems approved by the NC3A, and it is security accredited. It integrates legacy and new systems and has been operating with 99.8 percent service availability. The FOC+ offers videoconferencing, VoIP, data, e-mail, Web and full-motion video access. More than 150 Thales personnel went to Afghanistan to install the system and remain there to support it.

Thales’ contract with NATO to provide FOC+ equipment, support and services will expire in October 2010, at which time the contract is likely to be re-bid, Green explained.

Gen. James N. Mattis, USMC, will step down as NATO’s Supreme Allied Commander Transformation during a change-of-command ceremony on September 9. Taking over the reins is Gen. Stephane Abrial of the French air force. The ceremony will take place on the USS Dwight D. Eisenhower , Naval Station Norfolk, Virginia.

Gen. Abrial is the former chief of staff of the French air force. This is the first time in the organization’s 60-year history that a non-U.S. officer has been permanently assigned as one of NATO’s two Supreme Allied Commanders. Gen. Mattis will remain as the commander, U.S. Joint Forces Command.