#4 What is a Multinational Operation?
– Dr Regeena Kingsley
Multinational Operations (MNOs)
Multinational operations (MNOs) have become an overriding feature of combat during the twentieth and twenty-first centuries. Operations conducted by an allied force drawn from several nations have taken place in multiple theatres around the world during this period.
During the twentieth century, for instance, MNOs took place in France during World War I; in Northern Russia at the close of the war in 1918; in both the European and the Asia-Pacific theatres of war during World War II; in Palestine, Korea, the Dominican Republic and Lebanon during the Cold War era; in the Balkans, namely Croatia, Bosnia-Herzegovina and Kosovo, following the disintegration of the former Yugoslavia; in South America, in response to wars in Nicaragua, El Salvador, Guatemala, and on the Caribbean island of Haiti; and on the African continent in response to violent civil wars such as those in Somalia, Rwanda and Angola. In the early twenty-first century allied operations have continued in Africa, notably in Sierra Leone, Ethiopia, Eritrea, the Congo, Chad and the Sudan, and have likewise taken place in the South Pacific, particularly on East Timor and the Solomon Islands. Most famously, multinational operations have been in progress in the Middle East and Central Asian theatres, in the form of the international operations conducted by ‘coalitions of the willing’ in both Iraq and Afghanistan, respectively.
One may clearly see by this that operations conducted in concert with allies have been a regular and common feature of war within the international system in recent world history. Nevertheless, only today at the dawn of the 21st century has the study of MNOs taken on greater importance and urgency. This is for two reasons: firstly, MNOs have become the prevailing norm in global security affairs, with single nations increasingly less likely to conduct unilateral military operations and carry the economic and military burden on their own; and secondly, the problematic allied operations presently being conducted in Afghanistan and Iraq have highlighted the manifold difficulties of conducting coalition warfare in the modern era – with international forces conducting multifaceted, non-conventional counter-insurgency campaigns, in order to secure countries from an invisible, technologically-evolving and resourceful transnational insurgent Enemy (who additionally do not respect international Laws of War, employ asymmetric methods including terrorism, and operate chiefly within densely-populated urban and civilian areas) and all within the context of an ever-globalising, interconnected and media-pervasive world.
As a consequence of these realities, it is today more important than ever before that MNOs conducted around the world be studied and lessons drawn to improve military efficacy in the resolution of global conflicts, both for the wars of today and those in future years.
What is a Multinational Operation?
A military operation may generally be defined as ‘a military action’, ‘the carrying out of a strategic, tactical, Service, training or administrative military mission’ or ‘the process of carrying on combat, including movement, supply, attack, defence and manoeuvres needed to gain the objectives of any battle or campaign’. [1]
A multinational military operation, by comparison, is defined as:
A collective term to describe military actions conducted by forces of two or more nations, usually undertaken within the structure of a coalition or alliance.[2]
This international force is commonly referred to as a Multinational Force (MNF), that is ‘a force composed of military elements of nations who have formed an alliance or coalition for some specific purpose’.[3]
In fact, there is a broad range of military terminology in use for MNOs worldwide. This terminology includes – but is not limited to – multinational operations, allied operations, combined operations or international operations, undertaken by either a multinational force, international force, polyglot force, alliance, or a coalition. The latter two, alliances and coalitions, differ from each other however in one crucial respect. Whereas alliances have been forged through formal agreements or treaties, in order to ensure long-term cooperation and military operability between members to the treaty in pursuit of shared security objectives, a coalition is a short-term ad hoc arrangement in which States join together militarily for a common – though finite – cause.[4]
Key Features of MNOs
Whatever the arrangement, MNOs are characterised by a number of key features, all ever-present within a multinational force regardless of the size, structure, shape, location or even the specific purpose of the operation. While sometimes overlooked, these features are intrinsic to every MNO and together they have ‘strong emotional dynamics that may have an impact on multinational efforts’ [original emphasis]. [5]
Firstly, it must be recognised that all member nations participating in a multinational security operation are sovereign entities with vested national interests, and often too, their own political agendas behind involvement in the operation. These interests and agendas may change over time as the operation progresses through its various operational phases and will remain of pivotal concern to multinational command. [6]
Secondly, national contingents deployed to a MNO are ultimately controlled by their respective national governments, rather than any single multinational command, and receive and respond to government instructions through a separate national chain of command. Since this national command authority ‘is never relinquished’ by the governments of participating nations, there are inevitably both multinational and a range of national ‘command channels’ issuing command directions to deployed force units at all times.[7] National directions may frequently be incompatible with commands issued from multinational command.
Thirdly, each contributing nation to a MNO will have its own unique constitutional, linguistic and cultural boundaries, involving political, economic, social and religious values and outlooks, that may vary widely from other participating nations.[8] This means that national idiosyncrasies are likely to be pervasive within the MNF.
Fourthly, logistical requirements will vary between national contingents involved in the MNO. For example, contingents may differ greatly in: the size of their units; the age and range of equipment in use; operational methodologies and doctrines (including rules of engagement and force employment caveats); standard and pre-deployment training; overall professional skill levels; and even their staff procedures. [9] Multinational command will consequently need to give great attention to these differing logistical requirements, in order that the international operation functions smoothly across multiple resource and capability divides.
*This blog is an excerpt taken from Dr Regeena Kingsley’s original doctoral research in Defence & Strategic Studies (2014) entitled: “Fighting against Allies: An Examination of “National Caveats” within the NATO-led International Security Assistance Force (ISAF) Campaign in Afghanistan & their Impact on ISAF Operational Effectiveness, 2002-2012”.
Dr Kingsley’s full Thesis and its accompanying volume of Appendices can be viewed and downloaded from Massey University’s official website here: http://mro.massey.ac.nz/xmlui/handle/10179/6984
[1] New Zealand Defence Force (NZDF), Headquarters New Zealand Defence Force (HQNZDF), ‘Glossary and Acronyms’, Foundations of New Zealand Military Doctrine – NZDDP-D 2004, New Zealand Defence Doctrine Publication, Wellington, 2004, G-9.
[2] U.S. Department of Defense (U.S. DoD), The Dictionary of Military Terms, Joint Pub 1-02, New York, Skyhorse Publishing, 2009, p. 361.
[3] Ibid., p. 360.
[4] U.S. Department of Defence (U.S. DoD), Joint Chiefs of Staff Publication, Joint Publication 3-16: Joint Doctrine for Multinational Operations, 16 July 2013, p. GL-4, http://www.dtic.mil/doctrine/new_pubs/jp3_16.pdf, (accessed 6 June 2009).
[5] ‘Chapter A-1: ‘Introduction – Asia-Pacific Shared Interests, MNF SOP Objectives, Applicability, and MNF Considerations’, in Multinational Standing Operating Procedures (MNF SOP), 6th working draft, Artificial Intelligence Applications Institute (AIAI) of the University of Edinburgh, 10 April 2002, pp. A1 B-1 – A1 B-2., www.aiai.ed.ac.uk/project/coax/demo/2002/mpat/SOP/A1.DOC (accessed 20 January 2009).
[6] Ibid.
[7] Ibid.
[8] Ibid.
[9] Ibid.