The output specifications in the NZDF Output Plan, and as summarised in this Statement of Intent, provide indicative force element employment options to provide choice to the Government when considering the commitment of NZDF elements to operations. These options relate mainly to the size (quantity) of force elements or parts thereof, and the Response Time, for applicable Employment Contexts. For example, in terms of contributing infantry elements to operations under the Land Combat Forces (Output Expense 7), the Government has the choice of selecting a sub-element, such as an infantry platoon (up to 40 personnel) for low-level tasks at short notice, or larger elements, such as a company group (motorised or non-motorised – up to 260 personnel) for higher-level tasks at longer notice.
While these employment options provide a basis for planning, training and assessment of the NZDF, the requirements of actual operational deployments will vary from these standard options. Every operational deployment is different and will require a different “mix” of factors based on the known requirements at the time. Before forces are committed to operations the NZDF will conduct operation-specific planning in order to provide the government with more detailed advice on employment options, costs and risks. The major factors that will affect government decisions include:
- Variation between the Employment Context planning assumptions and the actual operational situation, such as:
- National/Political imperatives – Foreign Relations policy
- Geographic Location.
- Threat level/s.
- Military tasks to be performed.
- Rate of effort required.
- Friendly Forces / Support.
- Geography / Demography / Local Infrastructure / Host Nation Support, etc.
- Size of deployed forces.
- Time available to raise force elements/the force to OLOC and to provide task-specific enhancements and training.
- Duration of operational commitment (total length of deployment).
- Level of additional funding required. [Can it be funded from within the current annual appropriated funding for Output Expense 16 (Operationally Deployed Forces) or will additional funding be required? Some reprioritisation of funding within the NZDF may also be required].
- Concurrency requirements considerations for both deployed and non-deployed forces. This includes the ability to deliver essential military capability in the New Zealand/South Pacific area (such as for tasks under EC 1) while the force is deployed, and the need, based on total length of deployment, for raising replacement and rotation forces to OLOC before deployment.
The Government, in considering possible commitment to operations, may well need to apply “trade-offs” between the factors listed above. For example, multiple-force elements are often reliant on the same pool of personnel and equipment for sustainment and rotation purposes; this therefore reduces the length of concurrent deployments that can be sustained.
The total length of deployment poses one of the greater risks for government when considering commitment to operations. Essentially, for the comparatively small forces that the NZDF has, the greater the size of the force to be deployed and the longer the deployment, especially for deployments in excess of 12 months, the greater the risk in the ability of the NZDF being able to sustain that force - in terms of personnel rotations and logistic support. Deployments of greater than 12 months also carry the risks of other DLOC Mission Essential Tasks being eroded if they are not required on the deployment. The NZDF commitment to East Timor (1999 - 2002) provides for a good example in this regard. To reduce the risks the following major decision options, which continue to be used in various forms to this day, were made in that particular instance:
- Army, in all but the initial deployment, used members of the Territorial Force to round out the Regular Force sub-units. Five of the battalion groups deployed contained at least 10% Territorial Force personnel. Territorial Force (TF) personnel, on contract to the Regular Force, are being used more frequently on current-day operational deployments. The TF plays a valuable role in allowing the NZF to meet its operational commitments domestically and internationally.
- Army used artillery force elements in the infantry role. This could not have been achieved if the threat level had required the deployment of artillery elements in their primary role or simply for “protection” of the force. Artillery elements continue to be used in the infantry role from time to time.
- The RNZAF, in line with UN requirements, was able to reduce the number of helicopters deployed from six to four - with a corresponding reduction in crews required - and rotated crews on a three-month basis.
- The Government recognised (and funded) the need for regeneration to DLOC of the battalion groups, post-deployment to Timor Leste.
The mix of factors that go into the government’s and the NZDF’s decision making on options for deployment on operations is complex. It is therefore not realistic to expect the NZDF to detail in this Statement of Intent a detailed matrix of options for every conceivable situation that might lead to the government requiring a military response. However, in the detailed strategic and operational planning that is conducted for likely operational commitments to known situations, the government will be presented with the options. The options presented will detail the known military risks. In general, these risks will revolve around the level of threat (physical and environmental), the length of deployment and the associated ability of the NZDF to sustain the operations in terms of personnel (rotations) and logistic support, and the ability of the NZDF to perform essential concurrent operations in New Zealand and the South Pacific.
Previous | Contents | Next