Adjusting to the Realities of the Modern Military World: The Nordic Approach
(Source: Frost & Sullivan; issued Oct. 4, 2004)BR>
Defending your own national territory from an assault by an enemy force is a scenario that few war-fighters in European countries have to prepare for in the modern world, unlike the almost inevitable budget restraints that are now being placed on Defence Ministers and their colleagues.
As democracies realise that defence spending can be seriously reduced, Armed Forces are having to rethink and restructure their entire way of doing business. This challenge is one that the countries in the Nordic region have encountered and are now well on the way to overcoming through innovation and lateral thinking.
The capabilities of a modern armed force are a much different proposition than those of the Cold War era - the dynamics have changed entirely from a war fighting force to one that is adapted to other activities apart from war, namely peacekeeping and policing. Modern forces need to be highly deployable, integrated, interoperable and specialist if there smaller forces are going to punch above their weight in the Allied battlespace. Unfortunately this means that as budgets decline the need to purchase high quality platforms and systems is significantly increasing. However, the impact of this has been substantially off-set by reducing the overall manpower of the forces.
The Swedish Army has developed from a position of having 13 brigades (in reality only effective after mobilisation) to a new structure in which there will be six brigades, four of which are at an unprecedented level of readiness and availability.
In Norway over five thousand personnel will be lost from 2002 to 2005 due to restructuring. The creation of the Norwegian Defence Logistics Organisation in January 2002 was partly a result of the cost efficiency drive; however, it is also a natural progression from the use of several units to provide logistic support. Two and half years later the organisation is viewed as a real success. Still it is evolving, which is key in this modern technological world, when being static is regarded as falling behind.
This loss of personnel and cutbacks in force size presents opportunities for investment in technology and equipment. Each Nordic country has embraced the US-led network-enabled battlespace initiative. Only this week, the Finnish Defence Forces confirmed in a White Paper the revolution which their C4I capability is due to undergo, whilst Sweden, a long time supporter of network based defence, is regarded by many now as one of the front runners in the race to have a truly networked force.
Currently in Norway, talks are under way to see how they can maximise the use of satellite technology to reform their strategic communications. Plus we should not forget the acquisition of the five frigates (one will be delivered every year starting next year); these excellent boats will provide a superb mobile defensive capability, especially with the Aegis weapons system software and NH-90 helicopters.
However, it is not solely the type and amount of equipment that is being procured, it is the approach these countries are using which needs to be commended.
The methodology, style and nature, of the acquisitions should be taken as benchmarks as to how future defence procurement can be organised. And so the Nordic Standard Helicopter Project (NSHP), a four country project initiated in the late 1990s when Sweden, Norway, Finland and Denmark realised that they were due to undertake similar procurement projects.
However, the realisation of the advantages of economies of scale if the countries were to combine their capability need led to an extremely innovative procurement project. Those economies of scale don’t just limit themselves to the maths that if they buy 50 helicopters they’ll get a better deal than if they each purchase 17 individually. The project also means that the countries will receive substantial benefits in terms of training, through-life logistical costs, and perhaps just in general pooled operational experience – a lesson learned and shared is a future problem avoided.
Of course this journey has not been a simple one. The participating countries have all experience days of hurdle jumping and problem solving, but the key to success is held in the persistence and diligence of the negotiators. Even Denmark, at a fairly late stage in the proceedings, decided that it would have to opt out of the project (It was the simple fact that ultimately the NH-90 was not going to fit their requirements) did not throw a spanner into the works. What was the reaction of the other countries that had all seen their bargaining power fall and their costs rise? They made sure that Denmark stayed on the programme in an observer capacity.
Another such example of Nordic co-operation the Viking Project (set up in the mid 1990s in the hope of developing a affordable next-generation submarine design) was a response to Sweden, Denmark and Norway all requiring four submarines for service around 2005.
Needless to say that this particular ride has not been a smooth one: Norway pulled out in 2002 and Denmark is due to follow at the end of the second design phase, leaving only Sweden. There is no doubt, however, that lessons have been, and will continue to be, learned from this experience, which is vital for the success of future projects.
It is also obvious that this experience has not had a detrimental effect on the nation’s relationships. To date there are another nine joint procurement programs underway: the 120mm ammunition for Leopard 2, the Advanced Mortar System (AMOS), the Hearing Protector with Communications Equipment, the Forward Observer System, the 40mm Automatic Grenade Launcher, the All-terrain Carrier 206, the Naval Vessel Engines, the Torpedo-Mine-Sensor, and the Sea Surveillance System Project.
The Armed Forces in the Nordic Region are examples of how future European Forces should be shaping up for the modern financial and physical battles. The impressive innovative joint procurement programs (which have been attracting interest from countries such as the United Kingdom and Singapore) alone are futuristic models of how countries can link together to overcome cost cutting.
However, running alongside this the Nordic Forces have fully adapted to the requirements of future warfare. They are becoming highly technologically capable, nimble and specialised. By concentrating on areas such as mine-clearing and mountain reconnaissance they are paving the way to take up very definite roles in future NATO, and possibly European, operations. Their niche expertise in peacekeeping situations alongside these newly developed capabilities will make them invaluable to future international operations.
-ends-