AOC 2019: New approach to innovation needed as EW threat expands

Having heard from government departments, agencies and defence primes at AOC 2019 on the state-of-play of US electromagnetic warfare (EW) capabilities, representatives from commercial industry and intelligentsia provided their own perspective in the global era of Great Power dynamics.

For the first time in a generation, the US finds itself in direct competition with nation states that rival and in some cases exceed certain aspects of electromagnetic and information warfare.

Chief among these is Russia, whose experience in Ukraine and Syria has given its forces real-world experience in how to effectively conduct EW and information warfare, and China with its rapidly modernising armed forces and burgeoning resources.

Bryan Clark, senior fellow at the Center for Strategic and Budgetary Assessments outlined that Russian doctrine showcased an information-centric approach and the ‘new-generation’ of warfare as seen in Ukraine. Further steps, he said, would see Russia look to grow its EW capability to the tactical level and simultaneously recapitalise its equipment.

China was ‘moving away from attrition-based warfare to information-based warfare’ as it expanded its EW abilities.

The US and its allies meanwhile, had ‘a very uneven ability to interoperate in the EW spectrum,’ Clark detailed, citing Australia as one ally that US could operate with but warned that some NATO countries were ‘at risk of being left behind’.

One solution to contested EW space was the need to ‘leverage’ commercial technology and innovation, Clark said.

Meanwhile, John Evans, CEO of Carillon Technologies, called for a rethink in how government procurement is carried out, arguing that although defence primes and high-tech commercial enterprises were one source of innovation, they could not be solely depended upon. High-tech commerce, while innovative, was beholden to returning profit to owners and shareholders.

Primes, he argued, could serve to stifle innovation as the need to draw out a programme to maintain market share drove the imperative, pointing to the B-52 bomber as one example. The B-52 bomber was introduced into USAF service in 1952 and is expected to continue to the 2050s.

Additionally, programmes themselves were based on a flawed model of development, focused around what Evans called ‘project-based’ innovation.

‘We have been practicing more or less the same project-based innovation strategy for the past one hundred years and it turns out that it doesn’t work. You need [to adopt] learning-based innovation,’ he explained.

This learning-based innovation served to identify challenges to a desired effect and work through the processes to determine the most effective solution. Project-based concepts, Evans claimed, worked to rank good ideas and then ‘chose the best one’.

One solution, Evans suggested, was for the government to take control of the innovation process through a learning-based approach.

‘I think the government has to do [innovation] on its own. The activity you are funding is not projects, it is challenge,’ Evans said.