Space and the Theater Commander's War - Statistical Data Included

Joint Force Quarterly, Winter, 2000 by Thomas A. Doyne

From Desert Storm to Allied Force, the role of spacepower in the American way war has expanded. Other nations also acknowledge the merits of spacepower. According to recent figures, 32 nations as well as many commercial firms and private consortia have objects in orbit. India is reportedly developing improved imagery satellites--from 5m to 1m resolution--based on a lesson learned from skirmishes with Pakistan over Kashmir. Recently one company launched Ikonos, a commercial satellite with 1m resolution, whose images are available on the Internet.

Spacepower is no longer a preserve of superpowers. Victory will belong to those who best integrate and employ its capabilities on the operational level. But a review of current doctrine and organization reveals areas in need of improvement. Specifically, spacepower should be included in the basic plan portion of the operation plans and execution paragraph of orders used in crisis action planning. Organizationally, JFCs must have a director of space and information operation forces, similar to a director of mobility forces under the joint force air component commander (JFACC) to integrate strategic and inter-theater airlift, in order to provide unity of effort for spacepower. Such recommendations will enable JFCs to fully exploit spacepower in combined arms teams.

Doctrinal Waterloo

The unified command plan (UCP) has defined the responsibilities of U.S. Space Command (SPACECOM) since 1985. Commander in Chief, Space Command (CINCSPACE), serves as the focal point for military space operations, including communications. He is also tasked to "provide military representation to U.S. national, commercial, and international agencies for matters related to military space operations." Force enhancement--intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance, weather, missile warning, navigation, and communications, the most mature SPACECOM mission areas--notably overlaps information operations. As a result, the unified command plan assigns information operations missions related to computer network attack and defense to the command.

Despite the expansion of its authority, SPACECOM links to the regional command are still undeveloped. Joint Pub 0-2, Unified Action Armed Forces, and Joint Pub 3-0, Doctrine for Joint Operations, state that JFCs may establish functional components within JTFs to provide centralized direction and control of certain functions and operations. Joint Pub 3-0 also states that a functional component is appropriate when forces from two or more services operate in the same dimension or medium. But these documents stop short of mentioning a space component or task force.

On theater command and control of spacepower, the draft of Joint Pub 3-14, Joint Space Operations, stipulates: "A supported CINC/JFC/JTF commander should designate a coordinating authority for space operations under the JFC (for example the JFACC)." However, it contains no details and only focuses on Annex N (Space Operations) and supporting space plans. In addition, it does not relate spacepower to campaign objectives or enemy and friendly centers of gravity.

Both Joint Pub 5-00.2, Joint Task Force Planning Guidance and Procedures, and CJCSM 3122.03, Joint Operations Planning and Execution Systems, Volume 2, treat spacepower within the context of joint force. In particular, the former incorporates space in planning responsibilities of the J-2 (intelligence), J-3 (operations), J-5 (planning), and J-6 (communications) staff elements. But emphasis on spacepower diminishes as CJCSM 3122.03 and AFSC Pub 1 apply joint doctrine to campaign design and operational plan/order development. For example, the former publication provides the format for Annex N, which is attached to operation plans but provides little guidance on incorporating spacepower into the basic plan. While Joint Pub 5.00-2 tasks intelligence staffs with preparing estimates of enemy space capabilities, CJCSM 3122.02 does not mention space in discussing areas of interest. CJCSM 3122.02 and AFSC Pub 1 highlight phasing campaigns and orienting them on attacking centers of gravity while protecting one's own. But they do not provide planners with structural or analytical frameworks for incorporating spacepower into campaigns.

Pertinent doctrine is found in Air Force doctrine documents (AFDDs) 1, Air Force Basic Doctrine, 2, Organization and Employment of Aerospacepower, and AFDD 2-2, Space Operations. The first logically links air and space operations in spite of differences and asserts that airpower and spacepower "share the advantage of three-dimensional maneuver" and therefore are governed by the same tenets. Thus centralized control and decentralized execution apply to spacepower just as they do to airpower. "It is a basic principle of air and space doctrine that command and control of air and space forces be centralized under one officer--an airman." In this scenario an airman is one who appreciates and knows how to employ the full scope of aerospace capabilities. However, AFDD 1 does recognize that space forces differ from most air forces because they are global. Thus it acknowledges that SPACECOM has operational control over them, just as U.S. Transportation Command (TRANSCOM) retains control over strategic airlift.