USSF Doctrine, Chapter 5
If you haven’t read any in this series yet, you can start at the beginning of my analysis of the USSF Doctrine in my Introduction post.
In that introduction, the doctrine prefaces this chapter as a description of “professionals who must simultaneously commit themselves to two demanding professions.” We’ll learn what those two professions are and the proficiency therein as we dive into what exactly the makeup of the United States Space Force should be.
Chapter 5: Military Space Forces
“War is neither a science nor a craft, but rather an incredibly complex endeavor which challenges men and women to the core of their souls. It is, to put it bluntly, not only the most physically demanding of all the professions, but also the most demanding intellectually and morally”.
This quote from Williamson Murray in 2011, a historian hailing from Yale and boasting years of military experience, will be a theme through the chapter, as the intellectual bar for members of the US Space Force will be set quite high. The future, then, relies on the “expertise of the visionary pioneers dedicated to the many applications of orbital flight".
In developing this expertise, the doctrines, equipment, and capabilities which we might muster are of little use without the people. They are our greatest asset and must possess expert knowledge as well as be empowered by the state and by their superiors. The development of people and arming them with leadership, skill sets, and foresight is a priority.
But what expertise should they be armed with? This is broken down into 5 areas:
Leadership Skill Sets
Operations covers the employment of systems with principles of war to gain advantage on the battlefield.
Engineering: the design of and manufacture of space systems and planning for support. It is also the job of the engineering discipline to identify, discover, and invent opportunities of optimized system performance.
Acquisitions is the arm which brings brings this expertly engineering equipment to the operations and warfighting teams. These must follow priority driven timelines in order to fulfill operational needs.
Cyber divisions perform the enduring and never-ending task of defending the network/link dimension of space operations while connecting our own information centers.
Intelligence binds all these skill sets together by providing assessments of adversaries and operational environments.
With these in mind, the mentality of the USSF operators is discussed.
Spacepower Mentality
Effective and responsible use of spacepower requires the USSF to employ explorers, diplomats, entrepreneurs, scientists, developers, and warfighters. These unique individuals come together to build a global presence whose purpose is to assure allies, deter aggression, coerce competitors, and defeat adversaries. In accomplishing this, excellence in two demanding professions is necessary: Warfighting and Mastery of Space. We’ll start with the latter.
Mastery of Space
Success in this domain requires an excellent technical understanding of the physical, network, and cognitive dimensions. An knowledge of physics, aerospace, and other physical sciences is essential just as much as the intangible predictive understanding of the interests and behaviors of entities involved. These skills are only developed over time through education, training, and experience. Ultimately, mastery of space can be boiled down to the ability to observe, orient, and make decisions faster than adversaries in order to converge combat power at the right place at the right time.
This mastery is described as both a science and an art. The science has several disciplines in itself while the art has certain layers.
A science in that most of the information put to use is a systematic organization of knowledge collected by humans throughout years of hypothesis and experimentation. This collection of facts is roughly predictable.
An art in the way that the application of imagination, creativity, and abstractions are employed to trailblaze new capabilities. This abstractness is also evident in the fact that these operations are all carried out by human actors, which brings the fickleness of the human element. This makes all military operations and exchanges inherently unpredictable.
Scientific Spacepower
Orbital Warfare: the knowledge of orbital maneuverability and the skill to provide allies with capabilities while denying those capabilities to adversaries.
Space Electromagnetic Warfare: knowledge of the spectrum and its uses. The skill to manipulate access. An awareness of how adversaries employ this spectrum.
Space Battle Management: knowledge of how to orient forces within the space domain and skilled decision making to accompany it. This science also needs the ability to identify threats and actors within the domain.
Space Access and Sustainment: the knowledge of the logistical challenges which go along with short-term and prolonged space operations. It goes without saying that commanders need the infrastructure and ability to fulfill these challenges as well.
Military Intelligence: the knowledge behind conducting intel-focused operations, and the ability to leverage the strength of the intelligence community.
Engineering and Acquisition: deals with a deep knowledge of the current state of the art of technology. Hand in hand is the ability to bring together technology to ensure that we have the best equipment possible.
Cyber Operations: the knowledge to use and manipulate global networks, the ability to defend them, and the skill to take this knowledge on the offense.
Among all these areas of the science stand two measuring sticks. Speed is rapidity of action: how fast we can bring assets to bear in the space domain. Focus is the convergence of assets and their effects which build onto each other.
The Art of Spacepower
As mentioned above, almost all actions and endeavors carried out in the space domain are done by human actors. This creates an environment of unpredictability and the tendency of the best laid plans to go awry. Warfare is not deterministic, and a cunning adversary can easily dodge predictable action. This necessitates a study of the art of warfare to “recognize the pivotal factors upon which victory hinges” and to “unleash a creative force that overwhelms an adversary”.
This study must cover three layers: breadth, depth, and context.
Breadth helps professionals understand the enduring nature of war and insight on its evolution. The intent is a gathering of the knowledge which “highlights how war’s universal principles extend into space.”
Depth seeks to more intuitively understand the human element of warfare. This knowledge would refer to how luck, timing, and biases impact the course of a military engagement. Michael Howard goes in depth in The Use and Abuse of Military History from the Journal of the US Army War College. A lack of historical space warfare makes modern study difficult; on the other hand this is very nice because peace is a preferred state.
Context is important on understanding why actors in the warfighting domain make the decisions they do. Under both political and social context, this study must look at economy, culture, language, ethnic history, psychology, and religion to create an understanding of motivations and predict reactions.
These disciplines and fields of study are all areas in which our leaders must be highly proficient.
Leadership
Leadership of warfighting, supporting, and decision making forces in the space domain requires personnel who are intimately familiar with the strengths, weaknesses, and organizational climate of the forces under their control. Like all leaders, they possess incredible responsibilities and wield immense power over the livelihood of those under their command. In this, the USSF defines two key responsibilities.
Warfighter Readiness: leaders have the responsibility to ensure that their teams have equipment, training, and support. More importantly, the doctrine stresses, they must make sure that those under command have personal resiliency. On a personal level, the crew must be tough and stable.
“The demands of warfare amplify the personal and emotional stress a member experiences. Those who are physically, mentally, or emotionally overwhelmed will struggle to adapt and thrive in dynamic and stressful environment.”
In this, care for one’s subordinates and accomplishment of missions become uniquely tied.
Mission Execution: Space mastery (see above under science and art) will separate the good leaders from the great ones. Ideally, a good leader will cultivate a team which reflects the seven scientific spacepower disciplines and understands the historical human element by studying the art of war. Tactical level leaders require a combination of situational awareness, technical proficiency, and critical thinking skills.
These two responsibilities should be undertaken with a mindset focused around agility, innovation, and boldness (as discussed in the doctrine Introduction). Empowerment of leaders within the hierarchy is key, but with an understanding of the value of risk management.
Military space forces must operate under skilled managers of risk. This value is discussed in the doctrine with the Silicon Valley mindset of failing forward, placing innovation and lessons learned on a pedestal.
“A defensible decision process and disciplined approach to risk management must be the standard with which failure in pursuit of empowered innovation is judged.”
Conclusion
This ends my essays on the USSF Doctrine of Spacepower. The document ends with a recap of the chapters as the Introduction prefaced them. Finally, future leaders in the field are encouraged and empowered to study works by the following in order to deepen their understanding of the principles of art and science discussed
Kepler (orbital mechanics)
Clausewitz (theory of war)
Maxwell (electromagnetic spectrum)
Sun Tzu (theory of war)
Goddard (rocketry)
Corbett (survivability and resourcefulness)
Mahan (military power projection)
Newton (physics)
Liddell Hart (military history and theory)
Thank you for reading! I’d love to hear your thoughts and opinions. Drop a comment or send a message.
