ARRC Journal 2018 | Page 7

READY FOR TODAY – EVOLVING FOR TOMORROW • As individuals, we must understand the difference between ‘hearing’ and ‘understanding’. NATO Standard English has its limitations and the speaker needs to ensure the listener has understood and not just heard. This brings a big responsibility to native speakers. Spanish and British Army personnel conduct weapons familiarisation duri ng Exercise Trident Juncture 2016 Culture Another challenge is culture. Working in an international organisation requires awareness, acceptance and understanding of multiple cultures. Just as misunderstood language can create frictions, different cultures can and will cause similar problems if not managed. This is not only the ‘social’ cultural difference experienced by ‘foreigners’ when they choose to live abroad, but also the different ‘professional’ cultures. At its core, culture is a set of standards, values and beliefs which determines the way we think, how we act and what we cherish. It is impossible to instantly put aside our cultural norms when posted in an international organisation, because they are the root of our identity. Where our posting is only temporary, and not for life, it is even harder, because Internationals will go back home sooner or later. We must accept that, to succeed, an international organisation needs to be a ‘melting pot’ for cultures, give room for those differences and work to ensure we provide a ‘safe environment’ for people to work in. We then will be able to generate cohesion and an atmosphere that delivers success because of our differences rather than despite them. So, how can we harness the advantages and minimise the frictions of cultural differences? There is no one answer, but here are my suggestions: • As leaders we must understand all those under our command and ensure we maximise their strengths and help minimise their weaknesses. We must create an atmosphere where cultural differences are valued, recognised and harnessed (the good ones anyway). • As individuals we must understand that cultural differences and ways of working are not inferior, that ‘there can be more than one way to skin a cat’ if I am permitted to use an English colloquialism and, just sometimes, the ‘other way of doing it’ might just have its merits. So What? As DCOM ARRC, I have had the privilege to observe both the strengths and weaknesses of a multi-national headquarters from above and, now at the end of my tour, I can look back at an interesting and intense 3 year period. A period where I truly learned what can be achieved when you not only harness the military experience and intellectual power of multiple nations, but share responsibilities as well and put it to work. The ARRC is rooted in its operational high readiness role, but at the same time it is at the forefront of experimentation and development activities. It invokes transformation and evolution - for example the new UK Doctrine on Corps Operations; largely written by the ARRC’s multinational, multicultural community - and it works hard to be a career and life opportunity. But we need to be more forward looking; thinking ourselves deeper into the future and try to predict what we need to be and planning how we get there ahead of our adversaries, so for my closing points I offer the following thoughts: British, Croatian and Italian service personnel assigned to the Allied Rapid Reaction Corps conduct operational wargaming during Exercise ARRCADE Fusion 2017 • The importance of NATO becomes ever more evident, and the ability of the Alliance to adapt is crucial for its survival. The freedom to grow, shrink, focus and re-role as necessary are becoming increasingly important factors for success. Mass migration, natural disasters caused by climate change, geo-political issues and diminishing natural resources cause tensions around the globe and NATO must have the means to respond to them all; and if necessary concurrently. • We need to remember that military personnel serving in the NCS/NFS have their own national chain of command, Rules of Engagement and caveats. This has an effect on the unity of command, but we need to get as close as we can in building a real professional multinational organisation with shared responsibilities. • Every nation sees different values in the NATO Alliance, and uses their membership in a different way. Some nations invest a lot of money in their defence organisations to reach NATO “While language is a beautiful thing and our ability to integrate 29 nations something to be proud of, how do we minimise the friction of language?” Maj Gen D’Alessandro standards, others invest less money. The same could be said about NATO policies and doctrine. Some nations have included NATO doctrine in their national ones, others vice versa. • Resurgent threats have different responses from different nations. For some it is ‘ah, back to the good old days’, for others it is completely new and for others ‘we warned you’. However, the world has changed since the fall off the Berlin Wall in 1987. The ways we conducted major military operations in the past differs very much from how we see it today. This difference demands a change of mind set for all of us and a realisation that we cannot just reach back to the things we have learned in the past. We have to understand, we have to learn and, most importantly, we have to adapt; and we must do so now if we are to be ‘Ready for tomorrow’. I started by saying that the strength of NATO is in its diversity, unity and the common goal. The potential damaging internal dangers lay in that as well. We need to guard against these internal dangers. We have to be prepared as an alliance against external threats and should continue to minimise the potential for internal friction. ABOUT THE AUTHOR Maj Gen Roberto D’Alessandro is the Deputy Commander at HQ Allied Rapid Reaction Corps. ALLIED RAPID REACTION CORPS 7