The development of RAF air power doctrine 1999-2013

Viktoriya Fedorchak will present to the Centre for Conflict, Security and Terrorism on 10 February on 'The development of RAF air power doctrine 1999-2013'.

All are welcome.

Abstract

In the recent decades, military doctrine has returned into the strategic discourse of the British Armed Forces. Much of attention was paid to the role of doctrine in the reorganisation of the Army in terms of Bagnall’s reform. It was explored in terms of different operational environments, including PSO and COIN. Military doctrine was explored in terms of the conceptual development of the Royal Navy. However, the reflection of the development of the RAF and the evolution of air power in military doctrine was not fully investigated. The rationale for this inquiry is in the need of realising how the RAF has adapted to the post-Cold War strategic environment and what the role of its environmental doctrine was.

The offered presentation demonstrated findings of the research on the development of RAF air power doctrine in 1999-2013 is explored. Three issues of air power doctrine are explored in terms of the factors that influenced the doctrine preparation process. The four-factor model of Oliver Daddow is applied. The main explored factors are that of the external environment of previous and on-going operations, the internal environment of domestic politics and inter-service perspective, the influence of networks of academic and independent contributors and, finally, the impact of authors on the doctrine preparation process.

The research concludes that the major driving force for the revision of air power doctrine was the internal factor. Although new campaigns provided operational lessons for each edition, the doctrine preparation process was primarily influenced by the different stages of jointery institutionalisation. The dominance of jointery in the national defence stimulated the RAF to adapt its framework document – the environmental doctrine in accordance with new trends in jointery. Successively, the third edition of AP 3000 was aimed at demonstrating the service’s commitment to jointery with the two other services. The fourth edition was aimed at showing that the service could produce a joint environment doctrine under single-service authorship. Finally, the last doctrine JDP 0-30 established a crucial shift from single-service to joint authorship over environmental doctrine and new trends in its preparation.