Conceptual Framework for Comprehensive National Defence System : Final report of Task Group SAS-152

The main objective of this study is to research ways and means to coordinate and integrate activities of actors with different professional cultures, doctrines, tactics and techniques, and established practices. In terms of conceptual aspects of the comprehensive defence framework and application practices, the study aims to look at how different NATO members have approached the comprehensive defence framework, identifying the key actors and stakeholders. The study has two phases. Phase 1 consisted of review of available literature on subject, and a series of case studies that largely follow the same uniform analytical approach. The aims of Phase 1 were twofold: first, to establish an empirical base ‒ a snapshot of the existing perceptions, policies, rules and regulations, institutions, and procedures ‒ potential use of which extends beyond the scope of this study. Second, to identify recurring themes and common shortfalls in the existing approaches. The purpose of case studies was to describe Nations’ approach to civil-military cooperation within the (evolving) framework of a Comprehensive National Defence Concept. In addition, to describe bi- and multi-lateral defence cooperation, or within an Alliance / Enhanced Partnership framework, and to ensure Nations are capable of coping with wide array of threats from natural and man-made disasters through hybrid threats to use of military force. For the purposes of National case studies, Comprehensive Defence is defined as situations involving the Military either in a lead or support role. Throughout the case studies, several themes and topics emerged that challenge the further development and implementation of the comprehensive defence concept. Based on preliminary findings from case studies, selected aspects of the comprehensive defence concept were further addressed in multiple domains from multiple angles whilst using intellectual tools from multiple scientific disciplines. Part 2 begins with two different perspectives of conceptual underpinnings of comprehensive defence approach. These include addressing the challenges of managing relations and expectations between society and defence, and looking at the cognitive dimension of comprehensive national defence. The following two chapters deal with systemic approaches to the concept, elaborating on the risk-based approach to national security, and exploring the applicability of enterprise architecture and capability-based planning methodologies to comprehensive defence. Further, the comprehensive defence concept is elaborated in the context of city security, followed by a look at legal aspects of integrating Armed Forces into internal security tasks. A concept model for combined comprehensive defence headquarters is presented in the penultimate chapter. Finally, the problem of the adaptation of emerging technologies for defence is addressed. Over the next few years, this rapidly evolving body of observations, analyses and recommendations will provide an extensive basis from which to substantively re-examine the assumptions, key parameters, and expected outcomes of the implementation of the concept of comprehensive defence. Hence, this report should be seen as an early stepping-stone in a long process of development and practical application of the comprehensive defence concept.