A concept of employment for « force protection » has recently been developed. Two remarks have to be made from the outset. On the one hand, although minimizing the losses remains a permanent concern for the whole chain of command whatever might be the situation to which the forces are confronted, that same requirement is even more important during interventions conducted to achieve objectives less tangible than the mere defense of our vital interests. This is especially true in a crisis resolution situation. And, on the other hand, the joint nature of that document isn't just due to the will to be trendy. It highlights the concern that is shared by all the components confronted to the challenge that is posed by opponents that are most of the time irregular ones, and the need for developing a deliberate and synchronized synergy of all the various leverage means that are present in a theater in order to respond to that challenge.

Providing our forces with the necessary resilience capability becomes then crucial since they have to put themselves at risk in order to achieve their mission. Force protection, which is an essential element of the freedom of action and of the safeguard of the combat effectiveness, results from a global posture.

Why providing the force with a necessary resilience capability ?

Intra-states types of conflicts, because of their complexity and human dimension, imply being permanently looking for the right balance between power and influence within time and space . Armed forces try, in priority, to control, most of the time, in an enduring way, the multifaceted violence implemented by an irregular opponent¹, who is at one time our enemy and the next day our interlocutor or even our partner. Within that logic they must maintain a close contact with the populations; this is a prerequisite for the establishment of stability, even if, at first sight, going into one's shell could appear to be the best way to guarantee the forces security. Though the objectives are less tangible than the defense of strategic interests, any human casualty or any important material loss could undermine the national or multinational determination to resolve the crisis in a lasting way. This implies that the deployed force is very much exposed, even over exposed not only in an operational way but also politically, psychologically and in front of the media. It is thus confronted to a paradoxical challenge: to expose itself while minimizing its vulnerabilities.

What is it all about?

Force protection covers all ways and means, except combat action², intended to minimize the vulnerability of the personnel, installations, equipment, operations as well as of the image of a force engaged into crisis management, in front of all types of dangers³ and in all circumstances.

Although it should not be regarded as an objective in itself, force protection aims at safeguarding commanders' freedom of action on the theater of operations as well as the operational efficiency of the force while protecting its credibility and legitimacy. It participates in maintaining combat capabilities⁴ as well as the political freedom of action because of the impact that losses would have on western public opinions' sensitivity.

Force protection can be achieved thanks to active and passive means; it applies especially to land forces that conduct security or assistance tasks. It also applies to all temporary installations (bases, command posts …) as well as to the movements, especially to the logistics ones.

The host nation as well as the international environment may impose constraints of various natures (legal, judicial, political or cultural …) that may have an impact on force protection.

Within the framework of a coalition, force protection is an issue that must be tackled in a multinational way in order to reduce as much as possible the volume of national means to be engaged. However the variety of behaviors, objectives or means implemented by the various national contingents may become a source of weaknesses.

What are the main principles of implementation?

Force protection should be mainly conceived as an overall posture.

Force protection must always be in the minds of all levels of command at all stages of an operation from force generation to redeployment. That “globalization of the force protection approach” is illustrated at the operational level by the definition of the means, the strategic choice of stationing and deployment areas, the command and control organization, the balance of efforts, the priorities and constraints. The operation and the force commanders have then to promulgate respectively rules of engagement and rules of behavior to facilitate the implementation of force protection that has to be immediately integrated within the theater overall operation plan. That OPLAN relies on measures⁵ that are defined and coordinated at operational level and based on a sound knowledge of the environment (understanding of the theater's human and socio cultural specificities)

Force protection is a permanent and continuous process.

Theater danger assessment based on intelligence provided by all sources available, initiated before the deployment and constantly updated, is thus a permanent concern . It allows to look for the level of protection that is best adapted⁶ to the threat by means of setting priorities in space and time at all levels. The setting of these priorities takes into account the level of risk, the probability of its occurrence and how critical it is for the force. That optimization of the level of protection is being conducted within a logic of economy of means⁷ to the benefit of the force's main mission as well of its integration within the population⁸. Its implementation must avoid an excess of security that could result either in forbidding actions that would however be required, or in diverting too many means from their main missions. The selected level of protection induces series of measures, individual or collective, preventive or reactive, defensive. These measures aim, in particular, at reducing or suppressing the effects of an aggression before they have an impact, as well as at protecting personnel and infrastructures against the effects of an aggression within material and immaterial domains, at regenerating, within a constrained timeframe, a minimum operational capability. The force must be able, at short notice, to change its posture in both ways i.e. reducing or increasing the level of protection, in accordance with the threat, the mission's requirements and the environment.

An over-all reaction capability is necessary

On the theater, it is thus necessary to look for and implement immediate measures that do not require additional means or new courses of action. On the national territory, within the framework of the close loop lessons learned process, it is required to envisage specific solutions and to rapidly conduct the necessary acquisitions especially when human life is at risk.

The resolution of a crisis requires most often a transitory phase of stabilization during which our forces put themselves at risk especially in order to win hearts and minds. Guaranteeing at any time the force's resilience is thus required, in particular to preserve its credibility and vitality. Force protection responds to that requirement. It is a permanent concern and it requires to be conceived and kept consistent at theater level; it also requires to be adapted to the risks' assessment and to get a capability to react in theater as well as on the national territory. It must obey to the principle of “just sufficiency”. Though force protection is required whatever might be the modus operandi, it should however not impede, neither alter nor constrain the main mission.

¹ Followers of a global strategy that consists in by-passing and wearing out our power.

² Force protection doesn't cover these land units that conduct combat operations. They must ensure their security within the framework of their mission.

³ The word danger has to be taken in a wider meaning. It includes threats that are identified, produced by a physical capability and a willingness to do harm as well as the risks that can be caused by the environment (technological incidents, pollution, weather, diseases…), or to dysfunction of a force action. (accident, fratricides, collateral damages, exactions…).

⁴ Personnel, equipment (vehicles, ships, aircraft,…), installations (supply bases, communications means,…), information, force's moral and intellectual capabilities.

⁵ The measures of protection that are defined at the operational level must be transformed by the components for the tactical level and then adapted to the situation by developing technical and tactical guidance (for instance, in the case of dedicated forces,). Some measures may then be translated in terms of missions for the lower level.

⁶ Concretely, at theater level, it can be decided to modify the units' missions, because of force protection issues.

⁷ Economy of means requires joint components' complementarity.

⁸ Over protection may be detrimental to the force's efficiency and thus to its image.