Alternative Futures Approach to Nuclear Deterrence Planning : Alternative Futures Approach to Nuclear Deterrence Planning 15 July 2002 Capabilities Based Planning for the New Triad 8725 John J. Kingman Road, MSC 6201 Fort Belvoir, VA. 22060-6201 UNCLASSIFIED UNCLASSIFIED


Slide2: Introduction Attachments Worlds and Operational Situations Requirements Generation Adaptive Options Database Force Structure Guidelines Conclusions and Recommendations Acronyms Table of Contents Executive Summary Appendices


Purpose: Purpose Provide a report detailing a “proof of concept” capabilities-based approach for developing integrated strategic strike planning recommendations Context Study Method Worlds and Operational Situations (OPSITs) Requirements Generation Adaptive Options Database Force Structure Guidelines Provide recommendations for use of the method developed in this study


Slide4: Context Framework for the Strategic Force Continuum Policy Goals Assure Deter Dissuade Defeat New Triad Offense (Nuclear, Non-Nuclear SOF, Info Ops) Infrastructure (Long-Term, Responsive) Defenses (Active, Passive) C4ISR Adaptive Planning Continuum of Capabilities Non-nuclear strike Selective, tailored options Fight from forward positions Swift, decisive defeat Capabilities-Based Planning Define and implement as practical planning tool Depth, breadth of targeting Rapid reconstitution/ upload Hedge against uncertainty, surprise Long-term horizon; risk management QDR DPG NPR


Capabilities-Based Planning: Capabilities-Based Planning Planning is driven by uncertainty of threat and certainty of surprise Focus on range of capability needs vice specific threat Diverse set of capabilities is needed to deal with plausible adversaries Not country specific but… Multiple contingencies and real geographies Capability includes both content and capacity Content-performance at the individual platform level Capacity-performance across force structure Study focus is strategic strike capability Analysis captures strike targets through the lens of a range of possible adversaries Types of targets lead to content Numbers of targets lead to capacity


Slide6: Today ~ 20-30 years hence Top-down independent approach Proven and credible method Accounts for uncertainty Plausibly bounds the spectrum of challenges and possibilities Scenarios tied to worlds Integrated focus on the future to help today’s decision making Scenario-Based Planning: Alternative Future Worlds Approach Worlds “A tool for ordering one’s perceptions about alternative future environments in which one’s decisions might be played out.” Peter Schwartz, Art of the Long View


Study Methodology: Study Methodology R E Q U I R E M E N T S T R A D E O F F A N A L Y S I S 2020 Force Structure Recommendations Inputs 2020 Alternative Worlds Operational Situations Threat + Target Base Capabilities Assume NPR Offensive Force Options for Modernizing and Augmenting U.S. Offensive Forces Adaptive Options Database


Worlds and OPSITs: Worlds and OPSITs R E Q U I R E M E N T S T R A D E O F F A N A L Y S I S 2020 Force Structure Recommendations Inputs Threat + Target Base Capabilities Assume NPR Offensive Force Options for Modernizing and Augmenting U.S. Offensive Forces Adaptive Options Database 2020 Alternative Worlds Operational Situations


Developing the Futures Framework: Requirements Generation Process Developing the Futures Framework Representative Spectrum of Targets, Geographies, and Constraints for Force Planners III II I 1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4 OPSITs More Benign More Stressful Today 2020 Worlds Different Targets Different Geographies Different Constraints


Alternative Worlds : Alternative Worlds Uncertain World Worlds were developed for this study by varying the following factors consistently and within plausible bounds: Key Variables International System International organizations Treaty regimes Key adversaries Intentions Capabilities Health of global economy Broad growth Flat growth Recession World I: Global Consensus - Rogues and non-state actors challenge World II: Great Power Conflict - Peer competitors challenge World III: Global Disorder - Multi-polar challenges


Operational Situations*: Operational Situations* World I Global Consensus World II Great Power Conflict World III Global Disorder OPSITs reflect world in which they occur OPSIT 1: Iraqi chemical attack on forward U.S. forces OPSIT 2: Sudan and non-state actor bio-attack on CONUS OPSIT 3: Libya imminent chem/bio-attack on European allies OPSIT 4: Pakistan coup and possible nuclear conflict with India OPSIT 1: Sino-Russian strategic nuclear attack on CONUS OPSIT 2: Imminent N. Korean attack against forward U.S. forces OPSIT 3: Discovery of Chinese missiles in Argentina OPSIT 4: Imminent Iraqi WMD attack on CONUS OPSIT 1: Egypt radiological attack on forward U.S. forces OPSIT 2: Naval confrontation with Russia over Baltic States OPSIT 3: China Taiwan invasion goes nuclear against U.S. assets OPSIT 4: Iran territorial aggression against Saudi Arabia * Representative situations are not derived from current operational planning


Requirements Generation: Requirements Generation T R A D E O F F A N A L Y S I S 2020 Force Structure Recommendations Inputs R E Q U I R E M E N T S Threat + Target Base Capabilities Assume NPR Offensive Force Options for Modernizing and Augmenting U.S. Offensive Forces Adaptive Options Database 2020 Alternative Worlds Operational Situations


Requirements Methodology: Requirements Methodology Use resulting Objectives Matrix in Force Structure Development Identify strategic strike capabilities Extrapolate current and projected target data Worlds and OPSITs Summarize preliminary Requirements across OPSITs by capability Use planning factors to develop objectives for each capability Assign target packages for each OPSIT Tie OPSIT targets to required capabilities


Identifying Required Strategic Capabilities: Identifying Required Strategic Capabilities Potential Operational Guidance Damage Limitations Full Dimensional Protection Overcome Defense Range of Potential Target Types Potential Political Constraints Country Restrictions Measured Response Target Related Targeting Conditions Soft Point Target Kill (SP) Soft Area Target Kill (SA) Hard Point Target Kill (HP) Hard Area Target Kill (HA) Shallow Buried Target Kill (SB) Deep Underground Target Kill (DU) Mobile Target Kill (MOB) Prompt 1 (P1) Prompt 2 (P2) Chem/Bio Agent Defeat (AD) Penetrate (Pen) Political Constraints Avoid Overflight (OF) Limit Collateral Damage (CD) Capabilities ICBMs Soft Strategic Infrastructure Time Urgent WMD Mobile ICBMs Major Economic Target Others


Deriving Target Bases for Each World: 2002/2007/2012 Target Base Deriving Target Bases for Each World Target Bases by World Adversaries Target Cats. Russia China Iraq Iran WMD Forces Conventional Forces War Supporting Infra. Leadership # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # 2007 2012 2020 35 30 25 20 15 10 5 0 Linear Regression Extrapolations ICBM Silos: Iraq Extrapolations Max Min World I World II World III Illustrative Data 2002 Data Points Extrapolations Illustrative Curve Intelligence Estimates Today World I Target Base World II Target Base World III Target Base Today 2020 III II I Worlds 2007 2012 Intelligence Community Input Iran WMD Forces Conventional Forces War Supporting Infra. Leadership # # # # # # # # # # # # Russia China Iraq # # # # Iran WMD Forces Conventional Forces War Supporting Infra. Leadership # # # # # # # # # # # # Russia China Iraq # # # # Iran WMD Forces Conventional Forces War Supporting Infra. Leadership # # # # # # # # # # # # Russia China Iraq # # # #


Translating Targets to Capabilities: Translating Targets to Capabilities OPSIT 1: Russia OPSIT 4: Iraq OPSIT 2: DPRK OPSIT 3: Iran World I Target Base World III Target Base Assign target types to capabilities and relate pertinent targeting conditions and political constraints by adversary and selected mission Assign Target Packages for Each OPSIT World II, OPSIT 2 Target Related Soft Point Target Kill Soft Area Target Kill Hard Point Target Kill Hard Area Target Kill Shallow Buried Target Kill Deep Underground Target Kill Mobile Target Kill Capabilities Numerical # # # # # # # Egypt Russia China Iran WMD Forces Conventional Forces War Supporting Infra. Leadership # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # Iraq Sudan Libya Pak WMD Forces Conventional Forces War Supporting Infra. Leadership # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # Targeting Conditions Prompt 1 Prompt 2 Chem/Bio Agent Defeat Penetrate Political Constraints Avoid Overflight Limit Collateral Damage Russia DPRK Arg Iraq WMD Forces Conventional Forces War Supporting Infra. Leadership # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # Associate with Target- Related Capabilities by OPSIT Broad categories to be targeted are specified within each OPSIT Develop OPSIT-Based Preliminary Capability Requirement World II Target Base


Summarize Preliminary Requirements: Summarize Preliminary Requirements Capabilities World III World II World I Target Related Soft Point Target Kill 700 0 107 193 53 91 127 66 267 171 112 199 World I World II World III Iraq Sudan Libya Pakistan DPRK Argentina Iraq Egypt Russia China Iran OPSIT 1 OPSIT 2 OPSIT 3 OPSIT 4 OPSIT 1 OPSIT 2 OPSIT 3 OPSIT 4 OPSIT 1 OPSIT 2 OPSIT 3 OPSIT 4 4 Russia 674 Illustrative Data …But we don’t plan against the worst case


Slide18: Develop Planning Factors Target coverage sufficient to credibly deter/defeat accounted for with planning factors


Slide19: Applying Planning Factors Planning Factors Preliminary Requirements Final Requirements Soft Point Target Kill Apply Planning Factors Capability objective defined by most challenging OPSIT after application of planning factors


Slide20: Deriving Objectives for Conditions/Constraints Associated Conditions/Constraints: Soft-Point Target Kill Illustrative Data Final Requirements Associated conditions and constraints produce other drivers for trade-off analysis


Slide21: Objectives Matrix Illustrative Data Summary requirements for developing 2020 strategic force composition Target Related Political Constraints Targeting Conditions


Adaptive Options Database: Adaptive Options Database R E Q U I R E M E N T S T R A D E O F F A N A L Y S I S 2020 Force Structure Recommendations Inputs 2020 Alternative Worlds Operational Situations Threat + Target Base Capabilities Assume NPR Offensive Force Options for Modernizing and Augmenting U.S. Offensive Forces Adaptive Options Database


Adaptive Options Database: Operational Forces* Responsive Forces* New Options Adaptive Options Database * Operational and Responsive Forces as outlined in 2001 Nuclear Posture Review Adaptive Options Database Platform/delivery/warhead options related to capability and characterized by various factors. Operational Factors Political Factors Acquisition Factors Capabilities


Force Structure Guidelines: Force Structure Guidelines R E Q U I R E M E N T S T R A D E O F F A N A L Y S I S 2020 Force Structure Recommendations Inputs 2020 Alternative Worlds OPSITS Threat + Target Base Capabilities Assume NPR Offensive Force Options for Modernizing and Augmenting U.S. Offensive Forces Adaptive Options Database


Developing Force StructureRecommendations: Developing Force Structure Recommendations Assess Related Acquisition Factors Cost Time Technical Feasibility Assess Related Political Factors Domestic Reaction International Reaction Assess Related Operational Factors Reliability Range Rapid Retargetability Survivability Assess Options Against Spectrum of Capabilities Soft Point Hard Point etc….. Adaptive Options Database Objectives Option Decision Matrices Trade-Off Analysis Evaluate and Prioritize Options Forces Development By Target-Related Capability Force Structure Assessment and Testing Iterate Considering Force Level Issues Inputs


Assess Options Against Targeting Objectives: Assess Options Against Targeting Objectives Options Capabilities Roll-Up Conditions/Constraints Coverage Index: Outstanding Good Sufficient Marginal Poor Risk weight assigned to account for downside impact of not having options able to meet conditions/constraints Inputs Adaptive Options Database Objectives


Option/Capabilities Summary: Option/Capabilities Summary Capabilities Coverage Index: Outstanding Good Sufficient Marginal Poor Options Assessed Against Objectives Display relative performance of each option for each capability Target-Related Capabilities


Assess Options Against Other Than Target-Related Factors: Assess Options Against Other Than Target-Related Factors Seven Option Decision Matrices Assessment of characterizing factors to limit range of decision-making variables Operational Factors Reliability Range Rapid Survivability Roll-Up Option 1 Option 2 Option N Outstanding Good Sufficient Marginal Unacceptable Political Factors Least provocative More provocative Provocative Very Provocative Most Provocative Poor Poor Most Provocative Retargetability


Prioritize Options: Prioritize Options Evaluation Option N: Good capability coverage but significant issues in other factors Option 2: Sufficient capability coverage; operational acquisition factors satisfactory but major political challenges Option 1: Sufficient and acceptable in related factors Conclusion Option 1 is top priority for Hard Point Target Options Decision: Outstanding Good Sufficient Marginal Poor Options/Capabilities Summary Hard Point Options Decision Matrix


Forces Development: Forces Development Objective Filled 100% <100% Start Select top acceptable and available options Options Exhausted Identify Gaps Test candidate forces against objective Objective Force Structure Assessment Options Decision Matrix Candidate Forces by Capability Perform for each Target Related Capability


Force Structure Assessment: Force Structure Assessment Rank Target-Related Capabilities by difficulty Candidate Force Structure Study distribution of forces assigned and identify options assigned in excess of availability Yes Check for options assigned in excess of availability Set of candidate forces by capability that satisfy capability objectives Refill candidate preliminary force package No Allocate forces to capabilities Identify new gaps Identify shortfalls in capability robustness


Illustrative Candidate Forces Build: Illustrative Candidate Forces Build 4 2 5 7 1 HARD POINT 6 4 7 8 1 MOBILE 4 5 8 2 9 SOFT POINT Forces Available # HARD POINT MOBILE SOFT POINT Option # Option # Option 300 150 220 4 2 5 125 250 6 4 300 300 250 150 4 5 8 2 - - - - - - - - - Objective 670 Objective 375 Objective 1000 Candidate Force Package Option 1 250 2 150 3 100 4 300 5 300 6 125 7 … 8 … 9 … Prioritized options in each decision matrix Matrices ordered by target difficulty Operational Responsive New Options


Illustrative Force Structure Assessment: Illustrative Force Structure Assessment # HARD POINT MOBILE SOFT POINT Option # Option # Option 200 100 300 4 2 5 125 100 6 4 250 50 8 2 - - - - - - - Adjusted candidate force package Option 4 highly valued in all forces Delete from Soft Point Allocate to other objectives - 200 to Hard Point and 100 to Mobile Option 2 highly valued for Hard Point; required for some Soft Point 50 allocated to Soft Point for WMD/Agent Defeat 100 remain in Hard Point Option 5 valued for Soft but required for Hard Point Allocate all to Hard Point No candidate force packages meet objectives after allocation; return to Forces Development step to refill candidate force package


Illustrative Candidate Force Structure: Illustrative Candidate Force Structure # HARD POINT MOBILE SOFT POINT Option # Option # Option 200 100 300 70 4 2 5 7 125 100 150 6 4 7 600 50 350 8 2 9 - - - - - - - - - - Final force package No overlaps remain. Candidate Force Structure complete Refill Hard Point with 70 units of Option 7 Note: Options 8 and 9 could be new precision conventional options or low yield weapons Refill Mobile with 150 units of Option 7 Refill Soft Point with a mix of Option 8 + 9


Force Structure Testing: Force Structure Testing FAIL OPSITs, Objectives and Conditions/ Constraints Acceptable force level Candidate Force Structure Balanced Force PASS FAIL PASS


Slide36: Conclusions Valuable Capabilities-Based framework for long-range strategic force planning identified in this proof of concept effort Provides a clear and sound method for integration of offensive forces Identifies approximate force structure size and appropriate force mix Identifies deficiencies in meeting capability needs Assesses options for closing/reducing capability gaps Provides a means to develop a well hedged force with managed risk Methodological flexibility promotes straightforward examination of the sensitivity of results to input variations Worlds, OPSITS and target base data Planning factors Option-related factors/weights Force structure tests Extension of the method to other New Triad force components feasible New Triad Concept of Operations needed Provides the basis for an “operationalized” analytical process to guide evolution to the New Triad


Slide37: Implement and improve this process to aid in planning strike forces for the New Triad Comprehensive treatment of strategic force options Develop New Triad CONOPs Intelligence Community validation of target data Broaden the process to allow periodic assessment of the implications of the evolution to reduced levels of operational nuclear weapons Integrate remaining strategic force elements in the method to produce a unifying framework for New Triad planning Other offensive options (SOF and IO) Strategic defense options C4ISR and Adaptive Planning affect capability needs Impact of infrastructure on capability needs Provide this brief to the strategic community and Joint Staff Recommendations Strategic community provide inputs to ASCO/CSN regarding requirements for follow-on efforts using this approach to Capabilities-Based Planning