MPAT TEMPEST TEMPEST EXPRESS-1 AFTER ACTION REVIEW COL BREWSTER--FACILITATOR November 2000

Purpose Conduct a facilitated After Action Review (AAR) of MPAT TE-1 Staff Planning Workshop Open discussion Free flow of ideas Your feedback is important for the success of future workshops

AGENDA MPAT Objectives and Accomplishments MPAT Objectives and Accomplishments Things We Did Well Things We Did Well Areas for Discussion Areas for Discussion MPAT--What Next? MPAT--What Next?

MPAT TE-1 Workshop Objectives Exercise and refine the crisis action planning (CAP) procedures in the MPAT SOP scenario Identify planning requirements for a multinational response to a HA/DR scenario Practice and refine procedures for the use of MPAT information sharing networks and collaborative planning tools (ODYSSEY)

MPAT TE-1 Workshop Accomplishments Discussed and practiced crisis action planning (CAP) procedures using the MPAT SOP Conducted a practical exercise using a multinational response to a HA/DR scenario Experimented with and improved use of the MPAT information sharing network, ODYSSEY Achieved an outstanding multinational exchange of ideas and collaborative cooperation

Things We Did Well Conducted a well-planned workshop Promoted common objectives for 19 nations Promoted common objectives for 19 nations Stimulated multinational-level thinking and exchange of ideas What else do YOU think we did well? What else do YOU think we did well?

Areas for Discussion EXERCISE DESIGN (2) MULTINATIONAL FORCE COMMAND AND CONTROL ODYSSEY PLANNING TOOL PLANNING ISSUES PLANNING ISSUES ACADEMIC ISSUES

EXERCISE DESIGN (1) Was TEMPEST EXPRESS a good fit for the MPAT Workshop? Was the pace of the exercise appropriate? Was the pace of the exercise appropriate? What did we REALLY learn? How important is it for the SAME participants to attend the next MPAT workshop?

EXERCISE DESIGN (2) Is there a better way to prepare participants prior to an MPAT Workshop? How do we get better input and participation from the MPAT attendees? Should the academic training remain centralized, or broken into smaller groups to promote discussion? What needs MORE emphasis? What needs LESS emphasis? What needs LESS emphasis?

Command Relationships Operational Control Authoritative direction for all military operations and training Ability to organize and employ commands and forces Assign tasks and designate objectives Tactical Control Detailed local direction and control of movements Does not include organizational authority Support - one organization aids, protects, complements, or sustains another. Answers directly to supported force’s request for assistance.

Other Authorities Coordinating Authority A consultation relationship. The authority to require, but not compel, agreement. More applicable to planning and similar activities. Direct Liaison Authorized (DIRLAUTH) The authority to coordinate or consult with agencies inside or outside the granting command

NCE MSTGVSTG HQCTF RDCC x 2 NDCC COMMAND AND CONTROL STRUCTURE Mounting HQ DRTG GOP HQ AFP SOTGReserve NCE TCN ? ? RFA System ?

COA PASIMULA CCTF COMBINED STAFF* PUERTO PRINCESA/CEBU CTG B CAGAYAN DE ORO CTG A ILOILO CITY CFACCCLARK/CEBUCFMCC USS ESSEX/CEBU KC-135 C-17/C-141/C-5 K/C-130 ESSEX ARG/MEU ROKN TF AUS LSH UK FF RPN TF 80 MALAYSIAN LST AFP FI MAL SING TH BD MADAGASCAR CPOTF/CSOTF AFP USA/USMC UK/NZ/CAN/AUS ROK CSOTF/POTF WESCOMNDCC COMMAND & CONTROL STRUCTURE *INCLUDES BOARDS, BUREAUS, CELLS: HA/DR COORD BOARD, ATO CHAIR, MTO (MARITIME), INFO OPS, ENGR COORD BOARD, MED SPT COORD BOARD LOG SPT COORD BOARD, CIB SOUTHCOMVISCOM COORD SUPPORTING ?

Relationships / Authorities AFP NDCC DRTF DRTG DRTU RDCC NGOs NGOs

ODYSSEY PLANNING TOOL Did ODYSSEY support the planning efforts? What are some suggested improvements to promote collaborative planning? Were the RFI and Observation tools user-friendly? Were ODYSSEY advantages clearly explained? Were ODYSSEY advantages clearly explained? Was the level of ODYSSEY training adequate?

ACADEMIC ISSUES Were the briefings tailored to the MPAT missions? Were the papers and materials provided in the MPAT Binder adequate? Suggestions? Were the administrative resources and support adequate for the planning effort? Were the COA groups the right size? Was there Were the COA groups the right size? Was there adequate functional expertise present?

PLANNING ISSUES How does a CJTF effectively integrate host country and supporting nation/U.S. doctrine? How do we get more/better input and participation from the MPAT attendees? Were the scenario and orders realistic? Were they in sufficient detail to facilitate planning? Did the staff understand the requirements for Did the staff understand the requirements for which they were tasked? Suggestions?

MPAT--What Next? Take-home items: MPAT Binder & Materials, CD After Action Report to be mailed when complete After Action Report to be mailed when complete Implementation of this workshop’s recommendations for MPAT improvement

MPAT--What Next? Next event is an SOP/Exercise Design workshop (Hawaii, mid-January 2001) Next TEMPEST EXPRESS workshop (Bangkok, 26 Feb-3 Mar 2001) will focus on HA/DR in conjunction with Exercise COBRA GOLD Follow on SOP/Exercise Design workshop (Malaysia, mid-July 2001)

MARAMING SALAMAT ! TO OUR GRACIOUS HOSTS ARMED FORCES OF THE PHILIPPINES BRIG GEN SANTIAGO AND STAFF