<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><xml><records><record><source-app name="Biblio" version="7.x">Drupal-Biblio</source-app><ref-type>27</ref-type><contributors><authors><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Todor Tagarev</style></author></authors></contributors><titles><title><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">On Bulgaria’s Defence Policy 2015-2020</style></title><secondary-title><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">CSDM Views</style></secondary-title></titles><keywords><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">defence budget</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">defence policy</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Force Development</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">modernization</style></keyword></keywords><dates><year><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">2015</style></year><pub-dates><date><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">October 2015</style></date></pub-dates></dates><number><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">32</style></number><publisher><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Centre for Security and Defence Management</style></publisher><pub-location><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Sofia</style></pub-location><language><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">eng</style></language><abstract><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">On September 30th, 2015 the Council of Ministers approved a “Programme for the development of the defence capabilities of the armed forces of Republic of Bulgaria till 2020.” This is the main document, defining Bulgaria’s defence policy. It will be discussed by the National Assembly, with the expectation to be adopted. This will however lead to a significant divergence from the obligations undertaken at the NATO Wales Summit, the “National Programme 2020” of the 2014 Caretaker Government, and the consensus reached at the Consultative Council on National Security (chaired by the President) in April 2015. Furthermore, this analysis shows that the Programme will not serve to determine and guide future decisions and actions in the defence sphere. The stagnation of the armed forces will continue, even against the recognition of increasing direct threats to the security of the country. Finally, the anticipated parliamentary approval of the Programme will make even fuzzier the responsibility for the status of the armed forces and their readiness to protect the sovereignty and the territorial integrity of Bulgaria.
The full text of  CSDM Views 32 is in Bulgarian.
</style></abstract></record><record><source-app name="Biblio" version="7.x">Drupal-Biblio</source-app><ref-type>17</ref-type><contributors><authors><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Debbie Blakeney</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Leonard Kerzne</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Binyam Solomon</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Paul Chouinard</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Andrew Billyard</style></author></authors></contributors><titles><title><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Operational Research Tools Supporting the Force Development Process for the Canadian Forces</style></title><secondary-title><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Information &amp; Security: An International Journal</style></secondary-title></titles><keywords><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">capabilities-based planning</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Capability Assessment Methodology</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Capability Discussion Matrix</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Force Development</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Operational Research</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Strategic Costing Model.</style></keyword></keywords><dates><year><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">2009</style></year><pub-dates><date><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">2009</style></date></pub-dates></dates><volume><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">23</style></volume><pages><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">81-98</style></pages><language><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">eng</style></language><abstract><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%"> In June 2005, the Chief of Defence Staff (CDS) of the Canadian Forces (CF) mandated that Capability Based Planning (CBP) be institutionalized as a part of a centrally driven, top-down approach to Force Development (FD) within the Department of National Defence. For the last two years, Operational Research ana­lysts have been instrumental in the development of tools and processes to support all aspects of CBP. In this paper three CBP tools will be described: The CDS Ac­tion Team 3 Capability Assessment Methodology (CATCAM), the Capability Dis­cussion Matrix (CapDiM), and the Strategic Costing Model. CATCAM was devel­oped to compare the value of disparate CF capabilities. Presently, the tool deter­mines a priority list of activities (the sub-components of capabilities) by employing a top-down risk assessment of activities against the desired mission effects of a spe­cific FD scenario. CapDiM was developed to prioritize force options by evaluating their contributions against a set of criteria. To display the resultant priority list of force options, CapDiM creates a “Bang for Buck” graph that plots the value of each force option against its corresponding cost. The Strategic Costing Model was cre­ated to cost all aspects of the CF force structure. The model costs the total capabil­ity demand for the CF including, for example, the capability cost of: personnel; capital; research and development; operations and maintenance; and national pro­curement. The Strategic Costing Model permitted the first 30-year view of CF de­mand versus supply.
</style></abstract><issue><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">1</style></issue></record></records></xml>