THE "MOSAIC" WARFARE: A NEW AMERICAN STRATEGY FOR THE FUTURE

Abstract

Technological developments in recent decades, especially in the military field, have led to a major discrepancy in the Revolution in Military Affairs (RMA), especially because they have left behind doctrines and organisation of military structures for combat. The great innovations in robotics, artificial intelligence, nanotechnology and unmanned systems have gradually led to the replacement of regular fighters in modern battlespace and have reduced the number of military specialist in high-tech. Creating cost-effective opportunities to overwhelm the adversary, along with the desire for multi-dimensional protection and reducing the loss of life, have become the basic goals of American military theorists and defense researchers. As a result, it has become imperative to develop a strategy that brings together "all puzzle elements" of advanced technologies and coordinates them on any potential adversary, in order to achieve a total and rapid victory. Called the Mosaic Warfare, the new US strategy presents the way in which the US currently combines various types of advanced platforms to achieve strategic surprise. The new strategic approach also requires the development of new defense capabilities to be able to act in a system-of-systems network, such as C5ISR/C6ISR (command, control, communications, computers, cyber defense, combat systems, information, surveillance and research) and the future Smart Military Base. Therefore, this paper aims to present new concepts being introduced by the "Mosaic " Warfare, analysing the importance that thefuture typology of conflicts will have in the development of the main strategic documents of NATO member states, including Romania.

Headnote

Technological developments in recent decades, especially in the military field, have led to a major discrepancy in the Revolution in Military Affairs (RMA), especially because they have left behind doctrines and organisation of military structures for combat. The great innovations in robotics, artificial intelligence, nanotechnology and unmanned systems have gradually led to the replacement of regular fighters in modern battlespace and have reduced the number of military specialist in high-tech.

Creating cost-effective opportunities to overwhelm the adversary, along with the desire for multi-dimensional protection and reducing the loss of life, have become the basic goals of American military theorists and defense researchers. As a result, it has become imperative to develop a strategy that brings together "all puzzle elements" of advanced technologies and coordinates them on any potential adversary, in order to achieve a total and rapid victory. Called the Mosaic Warfare, the new US strategy presents the way in which the US currently combines various types of advanced platforms to achieve strategic surprise.

The new strategic approach also requires the development of new defense capabilities to be able to act in a system-of-systems network, such as C5ISR/C6ISR (command, control, communications, computers, cyber defense, combat systems, information, surveillance and research) and the future Smart Military Base. Therefore, this paper aims to present new concepts being introduced by the "Mosaic " Warfare, analysing the importance that thefuture typology of conflicts will have in the development of the main strategic documents of NATO member states, including Romania.

Keywords: Mosaic Warfare; C5ISR/C6ISR; Smart Military Base; Artificial Intelligence; Kill Web; OODA-loop.

Introduction

As a result of the complex and unforeseen events that have taken place worldwide in the last decade and which have changed the way of thinking and conducting military conflicts, the United States has considered that it is time for a new strategy for the future military conflicts, a strategy of achieving complete victory in any type of warfare. Named the Mosaic War, this strategic approach is meant to take over the innovations and modernisations that appeared in Military Science and Art, made by the different military philosophies, starting with Sun Tzu. Indeed, many of the innovative ideas that characterise this new approach to the future warfare might be also found in Sun Tzu's "Art of War". But they were processed and adapted to the innovative tactics of the German's "Blitzkrieg", waged against the Allies in World War II, when an asymmetric advantage was obtained by using an overwhelming force of armor, motorised infantry, artillery and aviation, to create temporary breaches in the opponents' static defense that, in turn, was successfully exploited later.

Other military conceptual elements were taken from the "Assault-Breaker" strategy, being established as a compensation for the Vietnam disaster. Starting from the tank-aircraft binomial of German tactics, the second generation strategy developed a first strategic framework focused on the deployment of an initial system-of-systems capability, in which air sensors and missile systems worked together to overcome, as a military power, the huge Red Army counterpart, without reaching nuclear escalation.

A third generation of US military strategy included the concept of "EffectBased Operations (EBO)", which emerged from lessons learned in Afghanistan and Iraq. But the EBO concept has been adapted more to Military Operations other than War (MOOTW), leaving the conventional war to combine, ad-hoc, high-tech platforms and existing super-developed capabilities, with parts from already elaborated concepts and doctrines (developed for the use of each existing weapons platform), to which was also added the poor training of troops for the efficient use of those platforms. What has been preserved from EBO is represented by "nodes" and "effects".

The 2014 Ukrainian crisis, as well as the tendency of the Russian Federation to regain its status of super power to control and maintain influence in its areas of strategic interest, combined with the increase of China's global economic and military power, forced Washington to think a new military strategy to counter all new risks and threats, including the possibility of a major conventional conflict with a nuclear regional power.

As a result, the Pentagon has moved on to developing and testing new concepts that respond to possible future threats, such as: "Operations on the Coastline in a Contested Environment", "Multi-Dimensional Operations" or "Multi-Dimensional Combat". Among them was the new strategic approach sugessted by scientific researchers from the US Governmental Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA), called the Mosaic Warfare. The new strategy aims at bringing together individual combat platforms to build a common and comprehensive operational picture of a quick and decisive victory against any aggressor, as well as the development of an appropriate package of skills. The main goal of the new strategic framework, called the Mosaic Warfare, is to overrun the Russian strategy and Anti-Access/Aria Denial (A2/AD) systems that can prevent the US from intervening in the regions controlled by Moscow and Beijing.

1.The Mosaic Warfare's Impact on Approaching Future Military Conflicts

There is a theory amongst many military thinkers and scientific researchers in which the existence of many types of high-tech weapon systems (currently in use or being in different stages of production/testing), created to accomplish specific goals and objectives, is not enough to integrate into a joint, inter-agency and multinational picture of the modern battlespace. They could not produce a complete picture of that battlespace, but portions of it. According to this idea, some American scientific researchers started to consider the need to establish a conceptual framework in which "all pieces of a puzzle" to perfectly integrate, even if they changed their place and functions.

Moreover, the 2018 US National Defense Strategy stated that the US is currently capable of dealing with a nuclear or conventional threat from regional powers, such as Russia or China. But recent Pentagon war games have shown that American forces will never be able to successfully retaliate against a cumulative effect of the two states, united in a military Alliance/Strategic Partnership1.

The first scientific researcher who labelled the name of the new Mosaic Warfare strategy was the former DARPA Director, Mr. Thomas J. Burns and his deputy, Dan Patt, who acknowledged that current weapons systems were not built to address the complexity of modern battlespace to turn it into an asymmetrical advantage, in which the deployment of sense-decide-act systems, among the multitude of battle platforms in parallel warfare, waged on a broad front, should achieve a mass of fire and not of forces2. This goal could reduce human losses and increase the survival of US military forces, ultimately creating a System-ofSystems (SoS) for Joint forces' actions.

The massive use of unmanned and robotic systems instead of manned platforms is one of the characteristics of the new type of warfare. It is intended to increase the lethality and complexity that go beyond the efficiency of opponents' decision-making systems. Another feature, described by John Waterston, one of DARPA's program managers, is the commanders' ability to have a quick option to introduce new components into the SoS, to replace destroyed ones or to include new tactics that require different capabilities3.

Not of a less importance is the feature of consumability, which means the willingness to be replaced or sacrificed when the situation requires it. This feature draws attention to the principle of proportionality of the use of conventional forces. The systemic resilience is another important characteristic of the new strategic approach. Not only the establishment of kill chain effects, but also the systemic interconnection of all sensors, decision makers, forces and platforms that can lead to a combination of thousands of options available, forcing the opponent to analyse all existing options in a very short time and make a thourogh decision accordingly. And it does not matter so much the opponent's reaction, as long as there are other options for using the Web kill.

As a result, the new strategy aims to bring at the level of ultra-tech weapon systems, the other two components of the Revolution in Military Affairs (RMA) - organisation and doctrine/culture. Thus, strategic, operational and tactical commanders will have the option to inter-change and mix different armaments platforms in the Mosaic Warfare. In turn, the organisation for combat and operations planning will probably become multi and inter-disciplinary, being more focused on force protection in the multidimensional battlespace, which will require a more efficient use of different platforms and capabilities depending on the degree of accessibility and their superiority features.

Therefore, it is desirable to achieve a unified, technology-based strategy that incorporates the interface, communications networks and software for precise and synchronised navigation, allowing all sophisticated systems to act together in a multidimensional and cohesive battlespace (see Figure no. 1)4.

This new approach moves from Network-Centric Warfare to Decision-Centric Operations and combines the latter with the maneuverist approach (Maneuver Warfare) of platforms and forces to create multiple operational dilemmas for a strong opponent at the regional level6. This approach will also avoid high costs and losses of own capabilities, of which those platforms with advanced technologies are quite expensive and not as numerous as any commander would like to have at war.

To be more realistic in the context of future military conflicts, in which frequent situational changes and uncertainty of available information will be more than inherent, the focused approach to operations on adverse decision-making systems increases the adaptability and survival of the US forces. These could be possible through maximising the use of military formations, organisation and reorganisation for combat of military units and large units, reduction of electronic emissions and pro-active actions against the adverse Command-Control, Intelligence, Surveillance and Recconnaisance (C2ISR) systems. All those actions should increase the complexity and uncertainty through which the adversary perceives US military operations and destabilise its decision-making process. In short, the streamlining of the concept Mission Command that, although theoretically existing in the US doctrines and regulations, has never been put into practice. This is because, at the tactical level it is considered that young commanders do not have enough staff to support them in taking independent decisions regarding the efficient use of forces under their command, even during the lack of communications, which lead them to return to outdated tactics that are predictable in opponents' eyes.

In order to reduce some limitations of the mission control at the tactical level and allow US forces to conduct more distributed military operations, scientific researchers have replaced military theorists and analysts and proposed the introduction of autonomous systems - including unmanned vehicles and communication network management -7, as well as the transition from command, control, communications, computer, information, surveillance and research (C4ISR) systems to command, control, communications, computer, cyber defense (element in addition to C4ISR), combat systems (element in addition to C5ISR), information, surveillance and research (C5ISR/C6ISR). The latter will be analysed in the next chapter to demonstrate its importance and the benefits it brings to the new strategic approach. Thus, it is created a structure that combines the human factor command with the Artificial Intelligence (AI) control - the human-machine binomial. The human factor will ensure flexibility and apply his/her creative ideas in the decisionmaking process, while AI will bring speed and proportionality in ensuring the ability of forces to cause multiple dilemmas to opponents. In short, commanders will review and evaluate the recommendations made by the AI systems control before submitting their orders, which will allow them to adjust and review their operations plans.

At the tactical level, this new type of warfare understands combat as a complex, emerging system that uses robotic mobile formations along with cyber and electronic effects to overcome adverse forces. Achieving victory in missions carried out by tactical units and subunits requires a quick and creative combination of small, cheap and flexible unmanned systems with existing capabilities, thus providing a multitude of options leading to changing existing conditions and emerging vulnerabilities on the battlefield. Simply put, the use of a man-machine team that combines flexible unmanned systems with human intuition at a pace that an opponent cannot follow and counter. When forces attack simultaneously from multiple directions, they produce a series of dilemmas that can cause the adverse system to collapse (see Figure no. 2)9.

Adapting the organisation of forces to the new type of warfare, as well as the elaboration/revision of the doctrine/culture necessary for training both military decisionmakers and planners, as well as the fighters, are the two elements of the RMA that must be considered in order to reach a real revolutionary thinking in the military field.

The organisation of the mosaic force design will have to address both challenges of the future operational environment and shortcomings of current strengths and capabilities10, to increase the power of information networks that, combined with advanced processing and disaggregated functionality, will restore America's military competitiveness in conflicts with similar military powers and increase their resilience. It is desired to move to smaller elements of the force structure, which can be reorganized or "rearranged" in the modern battlespace and which are trained and prepared to use multiple and various disaggregated platforms, achieving, thus, the destruction of an adverse system.

The capabilities of the future type of warfare will have to adapt the current decision-making process - observation, orientation, decision and action (OODA Loop) -, as well as to replace the introduction of all those functions in a single high-tech platform (such as F-35) in order to produce kill chain effects, with the establishment of a network of sensor nodes that can simultaneously collect, prioritize, process and exchange data and information, ensuring a continuous common operational picture. All functions are dispersed and distributed to a large number of manned or unmanned platforms that can exchange data and process functions in a constantly changing system (kill web) - see Figure no. 3.

Thus, the necessary forces for the Mosaic Warfare are modular and flexible, highly interoperable and comprising dispersed functions from which can create networks of multiple and simultaneously effects against an emerging opponent target. The respective forces are characterized by the speed of reaction, the existence of several nodes and the maintenance of efficiency, even when they absorb information or their nodes are worn out.

The revision of doctrinal concepts and the development of a military culture specific to the new type of warfare will take into account the change in the way of thinking of military theorists from the "artillery salvo exchange" approach of the war of attrition to that of increasing the power of the mosaic one, to maneuver and reach an advantageous position over the opponent. It is equivalent to using Mission Command, secured and accelerated by AI, to transform strategic military thinking specific to the "Industrial Age" with the education and training of fighters to act in the current "Information Age", which envisages a future confrontation of systems.

To achieve a real Revolution in Military Affairs, the Pentagon will have to:

* maintain the current commitment to the development of approved capability packages, accelerating the acquisition of high-tech platforms (such as F-35 and B-21), developing and gradually introducing disaggregated elements;

* invest heavily in the development and operationalisation of those facilitators of the new type of warfare, especially in AI, which will bring new capabilities to the force structure (such as maneuver autonomy, decision making or network routing) and will change the way in which forces are used in combat;

* experiment with new concepts of the strategic approach - such as C5ISR/C6ISR and the new Smart Military Base of the future - and include the results obtained in the operational and technical requirements of new technologies, in order to exploit any opportunity and achieve the most efficient way of using them;

* carry out a cost-benefit assessment of developing an alternative force structure to the current one, capable of discouraging or, if necessary, dominating in a high-tech systemic warfare, in which the principle of sufficient force and the art of efficient combination of capabilities can achieve that specific density of a military action that can defeat a great power adversay and maintains a discouraging role in other theaters of operations (ToO).

Thus, the US military will be able to use all means they have at their dispposal, in an innovative way, to overwhelm opponents, create multiple dilemmas and getting involved in their decision-making processes. In order to do so, they have to understand and be trained to use the new operational concepts and emerging technologies of the Mosaic Warfare.

1. C5ISR/C6ISR Systems

The biggest fear of US military specialists in future conflicts is the fact that communications will be inefficient or even neutralized. This vulnerability will be followed by the commanders' loss of windows of opportunity to explore the advantages obtained, if the principle of autonomy is not respected and the use of autonomous elements in the Mosaic Warfare could not act independently, when they are no longer connected to the network.

It has been demonstrated since peacetime that the necessary operational and technical capability requirements to counter all current and future risks and threats do not correspond with the Pentagon's weapons acquisition programmes. Thus, the most acute problem for the military, according to General Hawk Carlisle, former commander of the US Strategic Air Command, is that it persists in building "oneway" platforms that do not have the same characteristics and cannot be interchanged in combat. This is the case with the latest multi-role air combat capabilities (F-22 Raptor and F-35 Joint Strike Fighter), built by the same corporation (Lockheed Martin) and which, unable to communicate through data and encrypted, triggered the so-called "Fusion Warfare"12.

As a result, there was a need to develop a system to coordinate the networking of all available capabilities and ensure the exchange of information, unitary collaboration and the integrated work of all joint human-machine elements. Command, control, communications, computer, cyber defense, combat systems, information, surveillance and reconnaisance systems (C5ISR/C6ISR) are highly efficient capabilities that can ensure that information is passed on to decision makers in a timely manner with minimal security measures (see Figure 4)13.

C5ISR/C6ISR systems represent, in fact, a system-of-systems (SoS) that ensures the interconnection of operations management (C5/C6) with the spectrum of intelligence (ISR) and it includes14:

* architectural configuration;

* integrated technical systems dislocated in space, on air, land and sea, consisting of the latest technological developments in computers, communications, software, artificial intelligence (AI) and machine learning - such as DragonFly, the most recent innovation in cloud-based processing platforms designed to use advanced mission-specific software -, the development and advanced integration of analytical processors and computing tools, intelligent system performance and power, optical capabilities, and smart computer vision capabilities, remote and autonomous controlled capabilities, cyber mission assurance capabilities, active and passive optical capabilities in 2D and 3D and RF, network recording and archiving "blockchain" technology, results dissemination platforms, printing and optimisation networking capabilities, physical protection systems - such as Surveillance and Situational Awareness that provides comprehensive operational image -, training and simulation capabilities;

* telecommunications services, data transmission, cyber security, systems configuration, systems and software current maintenance and repairs, testing and evaluation, reliability and safety, multidimensional physical and electromagnetic protection, sustainability, risk and quality management, forecasted logistical support, training and simulation;

* staff: command team, staff, technical and specialized staff, logistics staff, staff for multidimensional physical security;

* specific infrastructure.

The capabilities considered to be strictly necessary to develop such systems are in the personnel, intelligence, operations, logistics, civil, CIS and cybernetic and include16:

* personnel - organisational management, personnel management and training;

* intelligence - target management, analysis of the operating environment, opponents analysis, establishment of probable opponents' Courses of Action (COAs);

* operations - organisation for battle (ORBAT), task organisation (TASKORG), planning, evaluation and monitoring;

* logistics - dashboard/performance chart for balanced logistics, transport planning, medical support management;

* civil - management of strategic informational planning, planning, monitoring and evaluation of CIMIC operations;

* CIS - monitoring and administration, information dissemination, systems preparation, communications management and monitoring, security;

* cybernetics - knowledge of the situation, information security solutions.

The characteristics that C5ISR/C6ISR systems should meet are: a modular, incremental and flexible design; integration with existing systems; adapted to existing communication networks to collect information and disseminate orders; flexible management of different types of environments against hostile ones; interoperability of information systems; force-oriented architecture, but with independent platforms; real-time control of ISR resources; the security of a solid and robust reliability, dispersed systems that can operate in different geographical areas; ensuring a different hierarchy for different information needs17.

In order to meet the minimum operational and technical requirements of the C5ISR/C6ISR system, the US Department for Defence (DoD) inaugurated, in 2019, the US Army Combat Capabilities Development Command C5ISR Center (CCDC C5ISR), with the mission to develop and integrate C5ISR technologies that ensure information supremacy and decisive lethality for the "Network Fighter" program. The specialised domains in which this center performs are: command, energy and integration, information and computer warfare, night vision and electronic sensors, space and ground communications18.

Some of this center' exceptional achievements, meant to innovate the skills and available means for the fighter on the battlefield, are: night vision goggles; satellite technology that ensures the recognition of own and opposing targets; advanced wireless audio and video technology; air systems, such as AIRDEF (air defense), AMPS (Automated Mission Planning) and COAAS (AD Artillery Operations Center); ground systems such as BMS (Battlefield Management) and SIMGE (Strategic Military Management); naval systems, such as SMCOA (Command and Control of Amphibious Operations) and iMARE (Command and Control of Coastal Areas); joint systems, such as iDEBRIEFING (After-Action Report), MDLP (Multi-Data Link Processor) and iJOINT (Joint Command and Control). One of the lessons learned during these achievements is the lack/reduced number of specialised personnel in key areas within a future C5ISR/C6ISR system, such as: system engineers, computer researchers, electronic engineers, specialists in intelligence operations, IT and telecommunications specialists19.

Using flexible, open, modular architectures specific to each service, C5ISR/ C6ISR systems integrate archived and real-time data and information to provide accurate and time-efficient intelligence products for the entire operational chain of command, in order to ensure the Situational Awareness in the modern battlespace for all staff participating in the operation. The functions provided by the C5ISR/ C6ISR systems include: data fusion; multi-intelligence integration, situational awareness, modern operational space management, command and control, support for SIGINT processing, large-scale intel systems20.

Of great importance in the new architecture of C5ISR/C6ISR systems is the stationed and multidimensional protection of installations in air, land, naval or space facilities. These facilities, in order to meet the futuristic requirements of the Mosaic Warfare, will have to meet all the conditions of Smart Military Bases of the future. This is vital especially for those installations intended to be stationed outside national territory.

2.The Smart Military Base of the Future

As part of the new Mosaic Warfare Strategy, US military theorists have noted that the role of military bases and how the United States will project its power in strategic areas of interest will change in the future from the old approach to preparing the battlefield for military action, which ask for threat protection and help defending critical areas. Even if military bases are considered to be part of the multidimensional battlespace, new functions have recently emerged for them, such as mobile logistic support, air resupply, multidimensional protection, cyber defence or repair of military equipment before going into combat. These new functions require, in turn, a large volume of data and information to be stored and available at all time in one place.

As a result, in 2018, the Pentagon launched an initiative regarding the military bases of the future. The model for smart cities, especially the provision of specific online services and advanced digital platforms, also seems to be adapting to future Smart Military Bases. They will need advanced analytical data systems, artificial intelligence and robotics to increase their readiness and ensure the multidimensional protection of forces, to be efficient and effective in supporting emerging missions. Even Smart Military Bases located far from the front line will have to meet the same criteria, such as: security, resilience, protection of installations against any disruption, optimisation of services and increasing the efficiency of installations21.

Basically, a Smart Military Base represents the integration of technological innovations and processes that can improve the performance, efficiency and accomodation of goods and services managed on a military facility22. In other words, although there are bases that have used smart technologies and practices for energy initiatives, mobility and construction, a Smart Military Base integrates all these features, along with many others, to provide a comprehensive set of solutions to the challenges associated with operating facilities23. These many other features include the existence of a sensor framework, a large data storage capacity, intel systems, as well as a protected but visible location.

As part of Pentagon's initiative, some military bases in the United States have so far succeeded in introducing new technologies, such as: communications with 5G and NextG technology (to support aircraft flights on missions, base and perimeter security and increasing pilot training), installation and integration of a network of sensors (for intelligent perimeter security, access gate monitoring, warning, aircraft fleet management and increased security), testing of autonomous vehicles and sensors (to reduce transport costs, ensure faster basic services and increasing public safety).24

The Smart Military Bases of the future, considered true ecosystems, will encompass, as can be seen in Figure no. 5, advanced technological systems with their equipment to defend against new threats. Thus, the acquisition and introduction of advanced software for digital warehouses or the management and tracking of assets will make these bases more resilient and cheaper to manage, especially if the aim is to upgrade existing ones and not build new facilities25.

The real issues to be addressed and solved by the future Smart Military Base include: public safety, possible natural or man-made disasters, an exponential increase in housing, transportation and other services, aging facilities, challenges of viable connectivity, pollution, access to permissive and reliable mobility, increasing energy consumption demands - while the energy is so limited - cyber security risks of infrastructure26.

Building smart military expeditionary bases in volatile Theaters of Operations (ToO) is the biggest challenge for the military in all NATO member states. The special characteristics that a conflict area can have - such as a hostile environment in terms of local population and the existence of an adversary, dangerous weather and climate conditions, land difficult to access, limited resources, reduced or nonexistent Host Nation Support (HNS) - and where the North Atlantic Council (NAC) decides to intervene militarily, forced the Alliance to launch a new concept of "Expeditionary Staging", which it forwarded to a Dutch research and development Consortium of companies for implementation27. The testing phase will take place at the new established Fieldlab Smart Base Laboratory in Soesterberg. The prototype developed by this consortium, called "The Shaded Dome", provides protection against severe weather conditions, low electricity consumption and is easy to lift and dismantle, measuring between 500 and 24,000 m228

The Smart Military Bases of the future will house both the C5ISR/C6ISR systems and all the manned or unmanned elements of the Mosaic Warfare's "Kill Web" and will have to be modular and flexible to accommodate all types of tasks and functions, including medical or disaster support.

Conclusions

The Mosaic Warfare is often confused with similar concepts, such as "Systemof-Systems" or "Multi-Domain Joint Operations". Whatever the selected name, military theorists and Pentagon leaders see it as the future.

Thetaskorganisationofforcesandsystemsaccordingtothespecificsofthemission to be accomplished is not something new, as is the idea of using systems networks in conflict. What is truly new about Mosaic Warfare is the speed and complexity with which it can combine the package of available flexible forces with the reinforced Command-Control system with emerging technology, operations divided into action elements and Mission Command, in order to achieve a real framework of a future modern Maneuver Warfare, focused on information. The main goal is not to allow the opponent the necessary time to predict and understand what is going to happen. At the Pentagon, the aim is to create a SoS different from the "puzzle game" (in which the pieces can be combined if they intertwine, only), which can be flexibly networked and quickly configured to ensure the ability to resilience of operators. That means the use of any system or unit that has those characteristic functions which allow them to combine with other elements to achieve a desired joint capability at the time and place chosen by commanders. As the distinguished councelor Robert O. Work stated, The Army that will find the most appropriate combination of technology and operational concepts will probably be at the top.

The implementation of the new technologies will decisively contribute to the Mosaic Warfare approach, being focused on obtaining a decisional advantage over an opponent. Support for decision-making by AI platforms, unmanned and autonomous systems, enhanced passive sensors, smaller weapons, and electronic and cyber warfare capabilities could impose complexity and confusion on an opponent and allow for attacks on key targets. Thus, the emergence of a possible strategic paradigm on the preparation and conduct of future operations will be focused on the decision.

So far, neither NATO nor Romania have moved to such approach in the recently conducted Strategic Defense Review (SDR). Concerns about the use of advanced technologies and the development of Smart Military Bases are found in the scientific events of NATO and some developed Member States, at an early stage. Unfortunately, this will further deepen the technological gap between the US and the European side of the Alliance.

Footnote

1 David A. Deptula, Heather Penney, "Mosaic Warfare", Air Force Magazine, November 2019, URL: https://www.airforcemag.com/article/mosaic-warfare/, accessed on 15.07.2020.

2 Thomas J. Burns, "DARPA Tiles Together a Version of Mosaic Warfare", a Power-Point presentation at DARPA Military, May 2018, URL: https://www.darpa.mil/work-with-us/darpa-tiles-together-avision-of-mosaic-warfare, accesed on 14.07.2020.

3 Ibidem.

4 Stew Magnuson, "DARPA Pushes 'Mosaic Warfare' Concept", National Defence Magazine, November 2018, URL: https://www.nationaldefensemagazine.org/articles/2018/11/16/darpa-pushesmosaic-warfare-concept, accessed on 16.07.2020.

5 ···, "DARPA Tiles Together a Vision of Mosaic Warfare", DARPA, URL: https://www.darpa.mil/ work-with-us/darpa-tiles-together-a-vision-of-mosiac-warfare, accessed on 16.07.2020.

6 Bryan Clark, Dan Patt, Harrison Schramn, "Mosaic Warfare. Exploiting artificial intelligence and autonomous systems to implement decision-centric operations", Center for Strategic and Budgetary Assessments, Washington D.C., 2020, p. 11.

7 Ibidem, p. 13.

8 Sean Edwards, "Swarming and the Future of Warfare", RAND, URL: https://www.rand.org/pubs/ rgs_dissertations/RG SD189.html accessed on 16.07.2020.

9 Benjamin Jensen, John Paschkewitz, "Mosaic Warfare: Small and Scalable are Beutiful", War on the Rocks, December 2019, URL: https://warontherocks.com/2019/12/mosaic-warfare-small-and-scalable-are-beautiful/, accessed on 14.07.2020.

10 A.N.: As per David A. Deptula and Heather Penney, "The problems of the current forces refer to: the small number of high-tech multifunctional platforms, which represents a vulnerability of the American operational architecture; the unchanged practice of acquiring different types of ultramodern weapon systems, but in such a small number, which leads to the inefficiency of developing those capabilities and not securing the packages of forces needed for a major conflict; a slow process of development and operationalisation of major weapons systems; difficulties in balancing the use of the current package of forces in the whole range of military missions; current lack of key capabilities for forces to achieve usage and survivability, leading to the risk of inability to produce effects in future conflicts."

11 Lt Gen David Deptula, USAF (Ret.) and Heather Penney with Maj Gen Lawrence Stutzriem, USAF (Ret.) and Mark Gunzinger, "Restoring America's Military Competitiveness: Mosaic Warfare", The Mitchell Institute for Aerospace Studies, URL: https://www.mitchellaerospacepower.org/ oldpublications, accessed on 14.07.2020.

12 Stew Magnuson, art.cit.

13 ···, "C6ISR: Our SETA Solutions", Goldbelt C6 R&D Institute, January 2020, URL: https:// www.goldbeltc6.com/what-we-do/scientific-engineering-and-technical-assistance/c6isr-2/, accessed on 17.07.2020.

14 As per the STS International Inc., remarks regarding the solution proposed by C6ISR, URL: https:// www.stsint.com/domains/c6isr/, accessed on 17.07.2020.

15 ···, "Latest technologies' integrated connection", URL: [e-mail]

16 ···, "C5ISR", Indra Company, Madrid, 2020, p. 2.

17 Ibidem, p. 2.

18 ···, "CCDC C5ISR Center', US Army Combat Capabilities Development Command, February 2019, URL: https://www.army.mil/article/157832/ccdc_c5isr_center, accessed on 18.07.2020.

19 Ibidem.

20 ···, "C5ISR Solution Areas', ManTech Corp., April 2018, URL: https://www.mantech.com/capabilities/c5isr, accessed on 18.07.2020.

21 Rod Erickson, "Smart Military Bases - Resiliency with GIS", GISinc, April 2020, URL: https:// www.gisinc.com/blog/smart-military-bases-resiliency-with-gis, accessed on 17.07.2020.

22 George Martinidis, "Smart Cities provide the model for Smart Military Bases", Urenio Org, February 2017, URL: https://www.urenio.org/2017/02/22/smart-cities-provide-model-smart-militarybases/, accessed on 17.07.2020.

23 Erv Lessel, Bill Beyer, Ted Johnson, Byting the bullet, Now is the time for smart military bases, Deloitte Center for government insights, URL: https://www2.deloitte.com/content/dam/Deloitte/us/ Documents/public-sector/us-fed-byting-the-bullet.pdf, accessed on 17.07.2020.

24 Harry Lye, "Connectivity and the military base of the future", Army Technology, URL: https://www. army-technology.com/features/connectivity-and-the-military-base-of-the-future/, acessed on 17.07.2020.

25 Harry Lye, "Connectivity and the military base of the future", Army Technology, June 2020, URL: https://www.army-technology.com/features/connectivity-and-the-mihtary-base-of-the-future/, accessed on 18.07.2020._

26 ···, "Smart Base Technologies: Building the Military Base of the Future", US Ignite, October 2019, URL: https://www.us-ignite.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/10/Smart-Bases-Technologies_2pager.pdf, accessed on 18.07.2020.

27 A.N.: This Dutch majority consortium includes Royal HaskoningDHV, Zwarts & Jansma Architects, Poly-Ned Textielarchitectuur and is supported by TNO Defence and Security (D&V).

28 Philip van Dngen, "The military base of the future", TNO Defence and Security, July 2017, URL: https://www.tno.nl/en/tno-insights/articles/the-military-base-of-the-future/, accessed on 19.07.2020.

References

BIBLIOGRAPHY:

1. ···, "C5ISR Solution Areas", ManTech Corp., April 2018, URL: https:// www.mantech.com/capabilities/c5isr

2. ···, "C5ISR", Indra Company, Madrid, 2020.

3. ···, "C6ISR: Our SETA Solutions", Goldbelt C6 R&D Institute, January 2020, URL: https://www.goldbeltc6.com/what-we-do/scientific-engineering-andtechnical-assistance/c6isr-2/

4. ···, "CCDC C5ISR Center", US Army Combat Capabilities Development Command, February 2019, URL: https://www.army.mil/article/157832/ccdc_c5isr_ center

5. ···, "Smart Base Technologies: Building the Military Base of the Future", US Ignite, October 2019, URL: https://www.us-ignite.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/10/ Smart-Bases-Technologies_2-pager.pdf

6. BURNS, Thomas J., "DARPA Tiles Together a Version of Mosaic Warfare", a Power-Point presentation at the DARPA Military, May 2018, URL: https://www. darpa.mil/work-with-us/darpa-tiles-together-a-vision-of-mosiac-warfare

7. CLARK, Bryan; PATT, Dan; SCHRAMN, Harrison, "Mosaic Warfare. Exploiting artificial intelligence and autonomous systems to implement decisioncentric operations", Center for Strategic and Budgetary Assessments, Washington D.C., 2020.

8. DEPTULA, David A.; HEATHER, Penney, "Mosaic Warfare", Air Force Magasine, November 2019, URL: https://www.airforcemag.com/article/mosaicwarfare/

9. ERICKSON, Rod, "Smart Military Bases - Resiliency with GIS", GISinc, April 2020, URL: https://www.gisinc.com/blog/smart-military-bases-resiliencywith-gis

10. JENSEN, Benjamin; PASCHKEWITZ, John, "Mosaic Warfare: Small and Scalable are Beutiful", War on the Rocks, December 2019, URL: https:// warontherocks.com/2019/12/mosaic-warfare-small-and-scalable-are-beautiful/

11. LYE, Harry, "Connectivity and the military base of the future", Army Technology, June 2020, URL: https://www.army-technology.com/features/ connectivity-and-the-military-base-of-the-future/

12. LESSEL, Erv; BEYER, Bill; JOHNSON, Ted, "Byting the bullet, Now is the time for smart military bases", Deloitte Center for Government Insights, https:// www2.deloitte.com/content/dam/Deloitte/us/Documents/public-sector/us-fedbyting-the-bullet.pdf

13. MAGNUSON, Stew, "DARPA Pushes 'Mosaic Warfare' Concept, National Defence Magazine, November 2018, URL: https://www.nationaldefensemagazine. org/articles/2018/11/16/darpa-pushes-mosaic-warfare-concept

14. MARTINIDIS, George, "Smart Cities provide the model for Smart Military Bases", Urenio Org, February 2017, URL: https://www.urenio.org/2017/02/22/ smart-cities-provide-model-smart-military-bases/

15. VAN DNGEN, Philip, "The military base of the future", TNO Defence and Security, July 2017, URL: https://www.tno.nl/en/tno-insights/articles/the-militarybase-of-the-future/