(1) “Arguably, the most important military component in the War on Terror is not the fighting we do ourselves, but how well we enable and empower our partners to defend and govern their own countries. How the Army should be organized and prepared for this advisory role remains an open question, and will require innovative and forward thinking.” — Secretary of Defense Robert Gates, 10 October 2007.1
(2) Military goals will depend on the performance of the security forces of the host nation.
The Army should create a permanent standing advisory command with responsibility for all aspects of the advisor mission—from doctrine through facilities. An advisory command is essential to enable and empower the security forces of our allies to defeat extremism.
It has been argued that foreign forces cannot defeat an insurgency—the best they can hope for is to create the conditions that will enable local forces to do so. The most important contribution the U.S. Army makes to the develop¬ment of security forces like the Iraqi Army (IA) and Afghan National Army (ANA) is embedded advisory (or
…show more content…
forces and are likely to be far more palatable to the local public whose support is ultimately the key in any counterinsurgency campaign, the advisory role of U.S. forces has become increasingly important. Strategic outcomes now hinge on advisor mission competence and success for at least two reasons. First, because America does not have enough ground forces to meet all security threats everywhere and must therefore rely upon the strategic leverage foreign troops provide; and second, because those forces have more legitimacy than do American troops who can be perceived as occupiers. “Strategic outcomes now hinge on advisor mission competence and success… because America does not have enough ground forces…[and]…because those forces have more legitimacy than do American
A third character, the Ambassador Gilbert MacWhite, is a patriotic diplomat who lives up to many of the SOF Imperatives, but fails at one. His intent is admirable and the Ambassador realizes the actions required to combat the communist threat. One of the SOF Imperatives that he abides by is to ensure the legitimacy and credibility of Special Operations. ADRP 3-05 defines this as “legitimacy is the most crucial factor in developing and maintaining internal and international support. The United States cannot sustain its assistance to a foreign power without this legitimacy.” The publication also elaborates that decisions and actions that comply with U.S. and international laws foster legitimacy and credibility. This concept ties into several
September 11, 2001, Osama Bin Laden decided to “wake the sleeping giant.” The US immediately sent SOF units and CIA officers to recon the area and meet with the Northern Alliance. The primary battle leading up to this operation was Tora Bora, which was absent of conventional forces. Up until this point, the war on terror was predominantly a Special Operations fight along with Air Force for overhead support.3 SOF and the Northern Alliance had already displaced Taliban forces out of many towns and villages in northern Afghanistan to gain control of key terrain. Key towns in northern Afghanistan including Taloqan, Konduz, Herat, and Mazar-e Sharif took only three weeks to clear.4 The SOF units were making huge impacts across the country calling in air strikes. At the same time the SOF units were diligently...
A big challenge faced by those planning the operation, was that no one had the full picture. The command and control of units in Afghanistan were split into three separate entities; each had their own assets and intelligence sources. The U.S. ground forces under United States Central Command (CENTCOM) were lead by Lieutenant General (LG) Paul Mikolashek out of Kuwait. How...
Shalikashvili, J.M. (n.d.). Shape, Respond, Prepare Now -- A Military Strategy for a New Era. National Military Strategy. Retrieved September 14, 2004, from http://www.dtic.mil/jcs/nms/index.html#Top
The Army requires its members to adhere to prolonged training and learn specialized skills. From the moment a soldier transitions from the civilian sector into the Army, he is indoctrinated with training. Regardless of rank, the Army demands each soldier to be technically proficient and mentally competent in order to be qualified in a respective Military Occupation Specialty. As a soldier progresses in his military career, he is required to continue his education and training. Army leaders are expected and required to continue developing their skills through academic studies, operational experience, and institutional training. An opposing view argues that anyone can learn these skills; however, statistics show less than 0.5% of the population serves in the armed forces, indicating a soldier is a rare mix of intelligence and character.1 These lessons are necessary qualifications to achieve what General Martin Dempsey describes as “effectiveness rather than efficiency.”2 Much like the profession of medicine which must heal, the media which must provide truth, and law which must provide justice, the profession of arms must provide secur...
...state. Failure to include local forces immensely reduces our span of influence and increase dependency between the host nation and the USG.
Keeping the people of the United States safe from the ever rising threat of terrorism and continual conflict is an important task for this nation’s military. Distraction and lack of cohesion leads to failures and unnecessary casualties. A concentrated focus on the battles at hand is a key task in overcoming the world’s threats and to be ready to fully function in the capacity assigned. Preparation, before the need arises, leads to more lives saved and success in accomplishing the mission.
Leaders today need to have an appreciation for the operation process, understand a situation, envision a desired future, and to lay out an approach that will achieve that future (Flynn & Schrankel, 2013). Plans need to be created that can be modified to changes in any factors considered. However, plans should not be dependent on specific information being precise or that require things to go exactly according to schedule. Instead, the staff NCO should be flexible where they can and always be prepared for the unexpected. Today’s military members are fighting an unconventional war in Iraq and Afghanistan. The enemy constantly changes their tactics, techniques, and procedures (TTP’s) to counter the United States technological advances, making planning very difficult for leaders. There are multiple tools at a staff NCO’s disposal to try to anticipate an outcome of a current operation, but also assist with the development of concepts in follow-on missions. The Military Decision Making Process (MDMP) is just one tool a staff NCO can utilize. In order to stay ahead of the enemy, create effective plans and orders, it is critical for a staff NCO to assist the commander, and understand that the MDMP and planning are essential in defeating the enemy and conserving the fighting force.
As becoming an officer in the military, there are abounding roles and positions that will be expected of all officers to perform. Military officers are to be a member of an armed force and to hold a position of authority. There will be roles to be performed that do not have a right or wrong answer, but an officer will take action to perform his or her role and take responsibility of their action.
The Strengths and Weaknesses of Joint Warfare Armed with numerous studies, and intensive public hearings, Congress mandated far-reaching changes in DOD organization and responsibilities under the Goldwater-Nichols Department of Defense Reorganization Act of 1986. This landmark legislation significantly expanded the authority and responsibility of the chairman, Joint Chiefs of Staff. Included in this expanded authority and responsibility was the requirement for the chairman to develop a doctrine for the joint employment of armed forces. As operations Urgent Fury, Just Cause, and Desert Storm have vividly demonstrated, the realities of armed conflict in today's world make the integration of individual service capabilities a matter of success or failure, life or death. Furthermore, the operation Desert One demonstrated the need for a strengthened Joint Warfare Doctrine and the consequent change in Joint Warfare Employment.
...d me with our staff and Soldiers we have been given the opportunity to lead. The time and effort spent will be well worth it. Possessing a shared understanding of the operational environment will aid in our planning process when conducting operations throughout our theater of operation. In every operation we execute we know that we will accept prudent risks, identification and mitigation of those risks will determine our ability to accomplish our mission. Incorporating the principles of mission command by building cohesive teams through mutual trust, fostering an environment of shared understanding, and accepting prudent risk will make me an effective adviser to the commander, aid the staff during the operations process, and provide an example for Soldiers to emulate. My involvement in all aspects of mission command is critical to the success of our organization.
In today’s operational environments, the U.S. Army is facing a range of problems and mission sets that are arguably more complex than previously encountered. Forces face an array of demands that encompass geo-political, social, cultural, and military factors that interact in unpredictable ways. The inherent complexity of today’s operations has underscored the need for the Army to expand beyond its traditional approach to operational planning. In March 2010 in FM 5-0: The Operations
The military strategy in Afghanistan was lined out for Obama by General Stanley McChrystal. It was made intensely clear that if the plan was denied, it would be almost like declari...
In order to protect national security interests as outlined in the 2014 Quadrennial Defense Review, the U.S. armed forces must rebalance and be capable of conducting operations across the spectrum of conflict in order to win against both a regular and irregular adversary, combating a wide scope of tactics and strategies ranging from terror tactics to full scale, multi-phased conflict against a peer or near peer by maximizing the capability of the force and nation. When comparing and contrasting U. S. military operations and capabilities with regard to regular versus irregular warfare, it is important to understand the definition of irregular and the spectrum of conflict. In recent history, the term “irregular warfare” has been used interchangeably with or alongside insurgency and counterinsurgency warfare. This usage and comparison is too narrow.... ...
Recently Afghanistan has grown significantly in terms of its ability to care for itself. A national army and a developing police force are becomi...