Specifics of NATO defence planning process

V. Slyusar, K. Kulahin
Annotations languages:


Description: The NATO Defense Planning Process (NDPP) based on defense capabilities which correspond to the level of current and future security challenges and the ambitious goals of the North Atlantic Alliance has been reviewed by the authors of the article. In addition, the relevant procedures and mechanisms, as well as entities that are involved at various stages in NATO structures, have been analyzed and described in detail. Particular attention was given to the fourth stage of defense planning “Promoting implementation”, which covers the entire four-year defense planning cycle. Its effective implementation contributes to the achievement of defense objectives at the national level, and at the level of NATO as a whole, provides support for consistent mul-tinational implementation of defense capabilities, expands advanced experience in the use of modern defense planning technolo-gies among NATO and partner countries, promotes innovative projects and multinational initiatives that have the prospect of total funding and subsequent use. The focus of the article is on ensuring the continuity of the NDPP process and its adaptation to new security challenges and threats today. In addition, the relevant priorities, requirements and technologies were clarified. The mechanism for achiev-ing orderly defense capabilities, coordinated in all major types of development of defense capabilities (doctrine, organization, training, material support, leadership, personnel management, production potential of the defense-industrial complex, functional compatibility of forces and means), was also considered in the article. Examples of minimum capability requirements at the level of various military units were given and gaps in capabilities were analyzed in the article. Such gaps, in particular, include the following: limited review by battalion level, lack of considera-tion of opportunities at the company, platoon, squad and individual soldiers. In addition, the place and role of industry in deter-mining the long-term aspects of capabilities based on the forecast of technology development in cooperation with the NATO Sci-ence and Technology Organization (STO) is invited to review.


Keywords: standardization, interoperability, defense potential, defense planning technologies, the NATO defense planning process, needs in forces and means, defense capabilities, minimum capability requirements.

References

1.Fleischer, Pawel (2015), NATO Defence Planning Process. Implications for defence posture, Securitologia, No. 1(21),pp. 103-114. https://doi.org/10.5604/18984509.1184236.
2.Biziewski, Jerzy (2014), Building Up Defense Capabilities, Sofia Security Forum, Sofia, available at:https://slideplayer.com/slide/4262795/.
3.Slyusar,V.I. and Hamaliy, N.V. (2017), New Model of Nato Defence Planning Process, NDPP, Vth InternationalScientific and Practical Conference “Coordination problems of military technical and devensive industrial policy in Ukraine. Weapons and military equipment development perspectives”, 11-12 October, Kyiv, Ukraine, pp. 86-88, available at: www.slyusar.kiev.ua/V_conf-2017_UKR_3.pdf.
4.Denezhkin, M.M., Nalivayko, A.D. and Polyaev, A.I. (2017), “Osoblyvosti oboronnogho planuvannja u derzhavakh-chlenakh NATO, na osnovi spromozhnostej” [Features of defense planning in NATO-member states, on the basis of capabilities], Proceedings of the Center for Military and Strategic Studies, National University of Defense of Ukraine, Ivan Chernyakhovsky National University of Defense of Ukraine, Center for Military and Strategic Studies, Kyiv, No. 2, pp. 34-38, available at: www.nbuv.gov.ua/UJRN/Znpcvsd_2017_2_8.
5.Ministry of Defense of Ukraine (2017), “Jedynyj perelik (katalogh) spromozhnostej Ministerstva oborony Ukrajiny taZbrojnykh Sylakh Ukrajiny” [Joint capabilities catalogue of Ministry of Defense of Ukraine and Armed Forces of Ukraine], Kyiv, 356 p.
6.NATO STANDARDIZATION AGENCY, STANAG 4569 Ed. 3/AEP-55 Ed. C Protection Levels for Occupants ofArmoured Vehicles.
7.NATO STANDARDIZATION AGENCY, STANAG 4686 Ed. 2/ AEP-62, Ed. B Procedures for the assessment ofdefensive aid suites (DAS) for land vehicles,
8.NATO STANDARD AArtyP-2(A) NATO Counter Battery Fires Doctrine.
9.NATO STANDARD AAtryP-1(C) NATO Land-Based Fire Support Procedures.
10.Slyusar, V.I. (2018), “Metodologhija identyfikaciji krytychnykh vymogh do OVT” [Metodology of identification of thecritical requirements for armaments and military equipment], VIth International Scientific and Practical Conference “Coordination problems of military technical and devensive industrial policy in Ukraine. Weapons and military equipment development perspectives”, 11-12 October, Kyiv, Ukraine, pp. 53-56. https://doi.org/10.13140/RG.2.2.36335.69281.
11.Slyusar, V.I. (2018), “Systema yssledovanyj NATO po razvytyju neletaljnogho oruzhyja” [NATO's research system onthe development of non-lethal weapons], VIth International Scientific and Practical Conference “Coordination problems of military technical and devensive industrial policy in Ukraine. Weapons and military equipment development perspectives”, 11-12 October, Kyiv, Ukraine, pp. 306-309, available at: www.slyusar.kiev.ua/conf2018_ukr3.pdf.
12.The Minister of Defense of Ukraine (2017), “Rekomendaciji z oboronnogho planuvannja na osnovi spromozhnostej vMinisterstvi oborony Ukrajiny ta Zbrojnykh Sylakh Ukrajiny” [Recommendations regarding capability-based defense planning in Ministry of Defense of Ukraine and Armed Forces of Ukraine], Kyiv, 49 p.

Reference:
 Sliusar, V.I. and Kulahin, K.K. (2019), “Osoblyvosti protsesu oboronnoho planuvannia NATO” [Specifics of NATO defence planning process], Science and Technology of the Air Force of Ukraine, No. 3(36), pp. 47-59. https://doi.org/10.30748/nitps.2019.36.06.