Combined Resolve

Combined Resolve
Name	Combined Resolve
Type	Multinational field training exercise
Location	Europe
First	2014
Participants	United States Army, USAREUR-AF, Republic of Korea, Bundeswehr, Royal Netherlands Army, Poland, NATO
Status	Active

Combined Resolve

Combined Resolve is a recurring multinational field training exercise focused on high-intensity combat training, interoperability, and readiness among NATO and allied forces. Conducted primarily on training areas in Germany and surrounding regions, the exercise emphasizes combined arms maneuver, sustainment, and command post integration to prepare participants for large-scale combat operations akin to those envisioned by NATO Allied Command Operations and partner doctrine. It serves as a platform for professional military education, tactical innovation, and multinational interoperability testing among land forces.

Overview

Combined Resolve brings together brigade- and division-level headquarters, maneuver battalions, artillery units, engineer formations, and sustainment elements drawn from USAREUR-AF, member states of NATO, and partner nations such as the ROK. Exercises are conducted on training areas including the Grafenwöhr Training Area, Hohenfels Training Area, and other installations historically associated with exercises like Operation Joint Guardian and Saber Guardian. Scenarios replicate contested environments influenced by lessons from operations such as the Russo-Ukrainian War, the Iraq War, and the War in Afghanistan (2001–2021), while aligning with doctrines produced by NATO Allied Joint Doctrine and the US Army Training and Doctrine Command.

History and Evolution

Originating in the mid-2010s as part of an expanded emphasis on high-end readiness after exercises like Steadfast Jazz and Trident Juncture, Combined Resolve evolved from company- and battalion-level events into brigade-combat-team-scale rotations. Early iterations integrated live-fire combined arms maneuvers influenced by historical studies of the Battle of Kursk and the Second Battle of Fallujah. Over successive rotations, the exercise incorporated advanced simulation tools derived from Distributed Interactive Simulation initiatives and command post training tested at Joint Multinational Simulation Center and similar institutions. The event steadily broadened participation to include non-European partners, reflecting strategic linkages akin to those demonstrated in the US-ROK Combined Exercise series.

Exercise Objectives and Scope

Primary objectives include validating multinational command and control procedures endorsed by Supreme Headquarters Allied Powers Europe, refining combined arms tactics exemplified in FM 3-0 (Operations) and NATO Standardization Agreement (STANAG) frameworks, and enhancing logistics interoperability consistent with Allied Movement and Transportation principles. Scope ranges from maneuver and fires coordination reminiscent of Operation Desert Storm planning to cyber and electronic warfare awareness paralleling concerns highlighted during the NATO Cooperative Cyber Defence Centre of Excellence analyses. Exercises often certify readiness for follow-on deployments under frameworks like Article 5 deterrence postures and regional contingency plans overseen by Allied Rapid Reaction Corps.

Participating Forces and Roles

Participating formations typically include brigade combat teams from the United States Army, armored brigades from the Bundeswehr, mechanized battalions from the Polish Land Forces, and troop contributions from the Royal Netherlands Army and other NATO members. Headquarters elements such as division staffs emulate responsibilities described in NATO Defence Planning Process guidance, while partner observers from the Republic of Korea Armed Forces and other allied militaries study interoperability with elements of the USAREUR-AF. Support roles are filled by logistics brigades patterned on United States Army Sustainment Command structures, aviation units influenced by NATO Airborne Early Warning tasks, and medical units aligned with NATO Medical Services procedures.

Training Activities and Scenarios

Training activities encompass live-fire combined arms maneuver, air-ground integration comparable to Operation Allied Force coordination, urban operations influenced by case studies such as the Siege of Sarajevo and counterinsurgency evolutions from the Iraq War. Scenario sets range from defending against a conventional mechanized offensive to conducting stability operations in contested urban terrain, often incorporating electronic attack simulations from models used by the NATO Communications and Information Agency. Tactical training uses ranges modeled after NATO Combined Arms Tactical Trainer standards while integrating virtual participants through systems akin to the Joint Land Component Construct.

Command, Control, and Evaluation

Command arrangements mirror multinational headquarters constructs seen in Allied Rapid Reaction Corps deployments, with senior leaders exercising command from both forward command posts and tactical operations centers. Evaluation is conducted by observer-controller teams drawn from institutions like the Joint Multinational Readiness Center and assessed against metrics found in NATO Defence Planning and US Army training circulars. After-action review processes utilize methodologies developed at Combat Training Center rotations, emphasizing lessons learned capture, doctrine refinement, and recommendations for organizational change.

Impact and Criticism

Combined Resolve has reinforced interoperability among participating forces, contributed to doctrinal updates in NATO and US force planning, and provided realistic rehearsal opportunities for coalition contingencies similar to exercises such as Trident Juncture and Saber Strike. Critics point to costs comparable to those debated during Operation Atlantic Resolve and concerns over environmental impacts on training areas like Grafenwöhr Training Area, as well as the challenges of achieving full integration among disparate systems as highlighted in reviews by institutions such as the RAND Corporation and national defense audit agencies. Proponents argue the benefits in readiness, deterrence signaling to adversaries like the Russian Federation, and coalition cohesion outweigh these issues.

Category:Military exercises