1. CJCS fulfills the role of principal military adviser in the National Security Council system. The CJCS is the senior most military advisor to the President and in such provides that guidance directly to the President, and by participating in National Security Council Principals meetings in person. During these meetings he provides his best professional military advice to the President and the other cabinet members of the NSC. Additionally, he will send his senior most policy advisor the Joint Staff J5 to sit in on Deputies committee meetings and give his guidance at this next level down. The CJCS also outlines and writes the National Military Strategy provided to Combatant Commanders as military context and translation of the National Defense …show more content…
GEF and JSCP guide the Geographic Combatant Commander in the development of Theater Strategy. The GEF signed by the President and issued by the Secretary of Defense provides political and military guidance in context of the National Defense Strategy and based on strategic goals of Combatant Commands which forms the basis of the Joint Strategic Capabilities Plan (JSCP). The JSCP issued to combatant commanders, service chiefs, Combat Support agencies, and other relevant DOD agencies and field offices by the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff (CJCS). The JSCP provides functional planning guidance, contingency planning requirements to meet military objectives and outlines resource and force allocations and apportionments for each respective agency or command. The Theater Campaign Plans are then developed by the combatant commands using the GEF and JSCP as the higher headquarters guidance. The GEF in this context provides your strategic end states and goals. While the JSCP translates those end states into military objectives and tasks, and the resources available to achieve …show more content…
Planners as they develop strategies for achieving military objectives will war-game their strategies according to three separate criteria- feasible, acceptable and suitable. Each distinct in its criteria. First applying the test of feasibility to your strategy is to validate whether the plan you’ve developed is something that actually “can be done.” In other words, with the forces and resources available could the mission be successful. Secondly, you must look at the acceptable criteria, even though a plan may be feasible, if you were to lose 80% of your forces achieving the mission it may not be acceptable based on how important the objectives you are trying to achieve. The last criteria is suitable, and while the other two criteria may be ok, the suitable is the standard in which we judge the solution as appropriate to a given situation. An example would be given a mission to defeat a certain adversary, and the solution proposed would be apply nuclear weapons to achieve the mission. While this solution may be feasible and acceptable from a purely military standpoint, it would not be suitable, and considered overkill. All three criteria are considered when building strategies and plans to achieve military objectives. All three must be found to be collectively in concurrence for planners to recommend a strategy to a commander. As planners work at increasingly higher levels of responsibility including at a geographic Combatant Command the last criteria becomes the hardest
Sustainable Readiness Model The United States Army has been in constant conflict since September 11, 2001. It is currently drawing down its forces but at the same time needs to prepare for an increasingly unpredictable future. The readiness models of the past are not able to provide the level of readiness and flexibility needed in the future with the combination of less troops and continued operations around the world. To ensure we maintain an effective fighting force we will need the new readiness model to maintain our current capabilities and allow enough flexibility to deal with any unforeseen future missions.
Through deliberate thought, Congress has staggered the terms of the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff so it is not coterminous with the President. Subject to the authority, direction, and control of the Secretary of Defense, the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff serves as the spokesman for the commanders of the Combatant Commands, especially on the operational requirements of their commands (Cornell Legal Information Institute). The Chairman confers with and obtains information from the commanders of the Combatant Commands with respect to the requirements of their commands; evaluate and integrate such information; advise and make recommendations to the Secretary of Defense with respect to the requirements of the Combatant Commands, individually and collectively; and communicate, as appropriate, the requirements of the Combatant Commands to other elements of the Department of Defense (Cornell Legal Information Institute). Additionally, the Chairman has a bit of autonomy in the sense that he is the primary military advisor to the president as well as the National Security Council, the Homeland Security Council, and the Secretary of
Major General Sir Arthur William Currie believed preparation was the key to ultimate success: “Thorough preparation must lead to success. Neglect nothing.” (Brewster 16) An analysis of Currie’s reliance on preparation, his tactical modus operandi, and his strategic approach reveals that Arthur Currie elevated strategic and tactical thinking to the realm of high art while commanding Canadian Forces during World War 1. By doing so, he manifested all of the qualities of precise planning.
What are some of the challenges and operational requirements associated with the transition from a corps headquarters to a CFLCC headquarters? Under modularity, division and corps are designed to provide flexible command and control packages for the employment of land forces as part of a joint, and/or multinational and interagency force. Making the transition from G staff to a J staff is a significant problem-solving challenge. The operational requirements associated with the transition must generate an effective CFLCC headquarters that is capable of conducting rapid and thorough analysis, decision making, and product development. Organizing the staff by functional area rather than along traditional staff lines may immediately increase the
Book Review 2: Soldiers, Statesmen, and Cold War Crises by Richard Betts Summary: Betts starts off his book by recognizing the ambiguity around the advocacy of the use of force in a crisis by military leaders even though there is a prevalent assumption that military professionals are more aggressive than diplomats and politicians. He states he writes the book in order to provide a comprehensive survey of the postwar role of American military men in decisions on their most essential function, their use of force in combat. Betts acknowledges the vast availability of literature on military participation in decisions on defense budgets and weapons procurement, but feels there is a void when looking at decision-making from the perspective of military leadership versus civilian leadership.
It is through military preparedness that commander-in-chief can create the defense of “Manifest Destiny” in order to maintain free governments and democratic institutions within the Western
During Operation Anaconda’s harsh combat environment, the subordinate’s commanders and leaders were able to rely on their expertise and situational awareness to allow them to make the necessary orders on the battlefield. The mission command idea is based upon principals including competence, mutual trust, shared understanding, commanders intent, mission orders, disciplined initiative, and risk acceptance. Operation Anaconda showcased the significance of applying mission command principles in complex and challenging environments. Although the initial battle plan faced setbacks, the ability to adapt, integrate joint assets and improve allowed coalition forces to achieve their objectives.
In this paper, I will juxtapose some of the characters in the book with the ARSOF imperatives - the guidelines SOF operators need to know, understand, and employ to achieve mission success when working in the joint, interagency, intergovernmental, and multinational (JIIM) environment, highlight the successes and shortcomings each person encountered, and discuss the
In 1972 Morton Halperin lamented the substantially reduced influence of the military given the limited access the Joint Chiefs had to the President and over reliance on the SECDEF. He cited the need to “press upon the Joint Chiefs to transcend service biases and come up with agreed positions based on a unified perspective.” By the early 1980s, there was a growing movement to reform the JCS system, led by the sitting chairman, Gen. David Jones. US military operations in Grenada and Lebanon in 1983 brought the endemic and longstanding operational ineffectiveness driven by service parochialism into relief, and helped drive the impetus for bi-partisan legislative
PRINCIPLES OF MISSION COMMAND 1 Operation Anaconda: Principles of Mission Command SSG Tigilau, Saili N. 42A Senior Leaders Course (SLC) RC Phase 1 Class 23-003 Instructor: SFC Brian C. Bethea Fort Knox, Kentucky 10 March 2023 PRINCIPLES OF MISSION COMMAND 2 Principles of Mission Command According to ADP 6-0 (2019), mission command is the Army?s approach to command and control that empowers subordinate decision making and decentralized execution appropriate to the situation (Department of the Army). In the case study written by Richard Kugler on Operation Anaconda, the seven principles of mission command was imperative on how future missions
By definition, “mission command is the exercise of authority and direction by the commander using mission orders to enable disciplined initiative within the commander’s intent to empower agile and adaptive leaders in the conduct of unified land operations,” according to ADRP 5-0. Mission command is about knowing when to change the task to fit the purpose. This paper is intended to analyze the mission command of one side of the battle, focusing on the commander’s role in the operations process. The Battle of Bunker Hill was the most important battle of the American Revolution because of Colonel Prescott’s superior command and control.
Joint Planning for Operation Anaconda SFC Spurlock, Matthew MLC Class 005-18 Joint Planning for Operation Anaconda Since the beginning of the Global War on Terrorism, there have been numerous battles. One of the most important battles that shaped future joint planning of operations was Operation Anaconda. The outcome of this operation was ultimately successful, however, the original intent from the commanders were not met due to errors in the joint planning process. Joint planning during Operation Anaconda proved ineffective because of inaccurate intelligence about the terrain and weather, the exemption of Air Force and Navy during the initial planning phase, and false assumptions about the enemy. Intelligence Intelligence Preparation
North of the 38th parallel, in North Korea lies a serious of innocuous hills where some of the bloodiest fighting occurred during the Korean War. The forgotten war might be lost in the conscious of the American people, but the lessons learned on Heartbreak Ridge will forever be with the United States Army. The Battle of Heartbreak Ridge took place over a seven mile stretch of land that included three sharp peaks that were separated by steep valleys. The Battle lasted from September 13th 1951 to October 15th 1951 (Loudermilk, 2017, para. 1). This battle was the follow up to the Battle of Bloody Ridge where US forces claimed victory and pushed the Korean People’s Army (KPA) to Heartbreak Ridge.
These aspects of equipment and record keeping also affect the functional planning of the U.S. Army. Using a wartime scenario, a Commanding Officer needs to know precisely the amount of equipment on hand, including weapons and ammunition, in order to properly plan an operation. Proper planning, in this sense, ensures that the operation is conducted sufficiently and no lives are
Strategy also defines what kind of resources we need to achieve the goals set by the