The international security environment is constantly changing. Ensuring the success of the fight against the new threats can be achieved by understanding the operational environment that is becoming increasingly more complex in the context of the profound changes in the political, social and economic environment of the past decade and of the advanced technologies that create new challenges for all forces with responsibilities in the field of national defense and security, regional and global. The trends in the current operational environment, based on the analysis of the conflicts of the last decades, lead to a new approach to the development of military capabilities, the process of planning, organizing and conducting military actions, the ways of achieving victory in the new conditions imposed by the realities of the battlefield.
The study of the military phenomenon can only be achieved by analyzing it in connection with other processes of social life and within the complex conditions determined by a set of political, social, economic, international, technological, etc factors. Thus, this research aims at identifying and presenting the main features of the military conflicts predictable in the future. Also, we made an analysis of the fundamental elements of the operational environment, from the perspective of the identified types of conflicts.
Collective defense arrangements promoted by security-related institutions have generally proven that they can produce the deterrent effect of the armed conflict. However, hybrid warfare actions have challenged the capability of countering and threatening hybrid threats. The paper seeks a point of view on developments in the current operational environment, focusing on the review of the military operations typology in identifying potential measures to counteract the actions of the hybrid war and highlighting the need for a new approach to the construction of armed power in terms of new types risks, challenges and threats
The study of the cultural factor’s influence on military actions is not a recent issue, the main concerns being aimed at identifying some solutions for the improvement of the cooperation between different national contingents during stability and support operations. Instead, the use of culture as a weapon in the sense of military capability used to predict and influence the behavior of target groups is a completely new approach, currently being within reach of only few modern armies. From another perspective, the possibility of using engagement as a new war fighting function, assuming the development of skills and capabilities necessary to deal with the local population and regional security forces, determines the necessity to educate and develop a cultural capability for all military personnel. This can be identified as a real solution for the military forces in improving their missions’ accomplishment within the context of current and future operational environments.
The war has not disappeared and will never disappear. It is constantly changing, in perfect correlation with those who created it, the people organized into social structures. It changes according to the changes in the operational environment, influenced, in turn, by the technical-scientific discoveries. All these changes impose a new philosophy of warfare in which the methods of creating and using forces acquire new valences generated by the diversity and the possibilities of access to the new technologies. Knowing the way in which indirect (having the potential) factors influence the fighting capacity of a military structure is just as useful for predicting the outcome of the operation/battle/war. Knowing this assessment, the military decision makers will be able to submit variants and solutions to the political decision maker, who will choose the one that he will appreciate as being the most appropriate.
Nowadays, the military forces’ operational environment is shaped by dynamic changes that give its most representative characteristics such as volatility, uncertainty, complexity and ambiguity (VUCA). Based on this and taking into consideration the tendency of NATO to use more prominently its multinational military structures, we are obligated to adapt our way of teaching and training if we want to be effective in the process of educating the next leaders for future military environments. In other words, during the classes, also in the field, we should try to educate and train our cadets, at least, to think from a joint, interagency, intergovernmental and multinational (JIIM) perspective when conducting military actions, even at a small tactical level, such as the platoon.
The lessons learned from the most recent conflicts or theatres of operations in Iraq, Afghanistan, Ukraine, or Syria prove that the Intelligence Preparation of the Battlefield (IPB) process is no longer sufficient. Why? Because in the irregular and hybrid conflicts the centre of gravity is represented by the civilian population, which requires precise understanding of the operational environment, including aspects about the local communities, and profound knowledge of the people, their social structures, their culture, their customs, and their way of thinking and reacting to certain internal and external stimuli. In such an operational environment, protecting the civilian population becomes the main mission of the armed forces. Consequently, we present the most important stages through which the Civil Preparation of the Battlespace (CPB) can be accomplished.
The permanent tendency to invest huge budgets of money in research and development in order to create military capabilities that will allow hitting a large number of targets in a short time and in an extended battlespace continues to be the main direction for neutralizing a possible opponent in the military conflicts. Due to current scientific and technological advances, the focus nowadays is on using artificial intelligence (AI) with the purpose of dominating the operational environment in the theatres of operation (TO). The present paper aims to identify how AI will shape the operational environment of future military conflicts.
The present paper identifies relevant issues and challenges connected to the comprehensive approach/holistic approach in the full spectrum of conflict. The Comprehensive Approach (CA) concept implemented by NATO, EU, UN and even state actors is to satisfy the need for proactive engagement, to foster cooperation, coordination and contribution of all actors, before and during a confrontation or crisis. Conflictuality management requires good governance, economic development, rule of law and local ownership, all this in addition to military security
The mosaic approach to conflict requires redefinition of some doctrinal concepts that can influence the way in which the response to the risks and threats to the state of security, the future of military actions and the acceptance that the technological development will be a factor for the success of the wars future. The issues addressed could be important elements in the architecture of a possible future strategic concept of integrated use of the basic elements of national power - diplomatic, informational, military and economic. At the same time, the results of this theoretical approach can contribute, as a reference point, to proposing viable and innovative doctrinal and operational solutions to counteract aggressions to national security, regardless of their nature or origin.