A notable shift in geopolitics began more than 10 years ago with the collapse of the Soviet Union. From the perspective of the U.S. military, the primary thrust of this shift was to replace a unitary, implacable, and constantly threatening foe-world communism, represented by the Soviet Union, China and their allies-with more nebulous and multifarious threats. Combined with the experience of World War II, this long-enduring face-off contributed to the development of a conquest paradigm in U.S. military doctrine. Despite the experiences in Korea, Vietnam, and other places over the ensuing decades, the majority of doctrine was written to deal specifically with a major theater war (MTW) through the employment of the conquest paradigm.

This paper analyzes Effects-Based Operations as the most effective way to frame future joint operations in a complex, uncertain environment. This new complex and uncertain environment is characterized by adversaries who have increasingly more access to weapons of Mass Destruction/Effects and whose actions will likely be very unpredictable, and could directly threaten the American homeland. Secretary of Defense, Donald Rumsfeld stated that, "such new, unexpected and dangerous adversaries must be dissuaded, deterred, and defeated without undue cost to American interests abroad or attacks on the U.S. homeland." In a speech presented March 2002, on transformation he stated that what is needed now at the threshold of the 21st Century is a "new way of thinking and a new way of fighting." The Joint Forces Command has adopted and continues to evolve the concept of EBO within a Joint warfighting construct to answer in part to both challenges. This paper determined that EBO shows great promise as a broad organizing approach to future warfare but has significant obstacles to overcome to be successfully integrated into a new Joint warfighting construct. EBO has been unfairly scrutinized due service centric views and rivalries. These service centric views must be overcome to ensure joint procurement of compatible C4ISR systems, the development of effective war gaming or modeling tools, and the requirement for the integration of joint, hard realistic training. EBO should provide the framework for service doctrine to expand ensuring a synergy between elements of national power, capabilities of each service, domains in which each service operates and the process of thinking and conducting future warfare.

This second edition of Military Strategy, Joint Operations, and Airpower introduces contemporary strategy at the operational level of war. Developed as foundational reading for all US Air Force Academy cadets, this textbook is designed to close the gap between military theory and practice.

This article provides background on an effects-based approach and explains the key elements, highlights their application in current joint operations, and discusses their incorporation in joint doctrine, training, and education. In the interest of providing the "bottom line up front," an effects-based approach adds value to traditional joint processes in four areas: (1) improved unified action among military, interagency, multinational, and nongovernmental organizations; (2) an expanded understanding of the operational environment beyond the traditional military battlespace focus; (3) an improved joint planning process that uses effects to clarify the desired endstate conditions in terms of the operational environment; and (4) an enhanced joint assessment process that measures effects attainment rather than just task accomplishment.

As the lead agent for the Secretary of Defense for transformation of joint forces to meet these challenges, U.S. Joint Forces Command (USJFCOM) supports the joint community by pursuing a number of transformation-related objectives. One objective being discussed by the Secretary of Defense and other senior leaders in the Department of Defense (DOD) is creating capabilities within an overall framework of shared, knowledge empowered, effects-based operations (EBO). Since 2001, the command has focused on testing and refining the concept while seeking the best ways to implement it. This evolution has included Service participation in joint experimentation, discussions with faculty at mid- and senior-level Service and joint schools, observation of effects-related constructs in action at deployed operational headquarters, and engagement with interagency and multinational partners. This article provides background on an effects-based approach and explains the key elements, highlights their application in current joint operations, and discusses their incorporation in joint doctrine, training, and education. In the interest of providing the bottom line up front, an effects-based approach adds value to traditional joint processes in four areas: 1) improved unified action among military, interagency, multinational, and nongovernmental organizations, 2) an expanded understanding of the operational environment beyond the traditional military battlespace focus, 3) an improved joint planning process that uses effects to clarify the desired endstate conditions in terms of the operational environment, and 4) an enhanced joint assessment process that measures effects attainment rather than just task accomplishment.