Theater Military Advisory and Assistance Group (TMAAG)
Theater Military Advisory and Assistance Group (TMAAG) by Brigadier General Thomas M. Jordan (USA Ret.) at SWJ Blog
Quote:
With the newly released publication of its principal operational manual, FM 3.0, the Army defined the principal conceptual underpinnings which will drive operational concepts over the next 10-15 years. The latest edition recognized the importance of understanding the complexity of the operational environment, and the nature of persistent conflict where the application of the military element of power is just one of the key ingredients necessary to achieve success. In light of this understanding, the Army adapted and raised the importance of stability operations onto an equal footing with combat operations. While the Army has made some important changes in training to implement this idea, the pending HQDA approval and resourcing decision of the Theater Military Advisory and Assistance Group (TMAAG) design and implementation strategy represents a visible and demonstrable investment in resources that reinforces the Army commitment to building partnership capacity (BPC) in an uncertain world. The proposed implementation strategy would establish one TMAAG for USARSO in FY10 (EDATE: 16 Oct 09) as proof of principle (PoP). The PoP would test the concept and make appropriate refinements as part of the overall determination to resource additional TMAAGs.
TMAAG’s origin was the Army’s “Unified Quest 2007” series of seminar wargames that supported the Chief of Staff of the Army’s (CSA’s) annual study plan. One of the resulting insights was a potential gap in the Army’s ability to meet Combatant Commanders' daily operations requirements regarding theater security cooperation, military engagement, and Building Partnership Capacity (BPC). The CSA directed TRADOC, and in turn, the Combined Arms Center at Fort Leavenworth, Kansas as the lead to develop an operational concept and organizational solution to the perceived gap...
Good start and a needed capability. Though one
has to wonder why it will take so long to get to a proof of principle test...
I know why, I just don't agree it's necessary and I know it can be short circuited IF the right people want to do that. Obviously they don't. Which is not good...
I understand the CSA has disapproved the TMAAG
concept in its current form saying that it is not an Army requirement.
Furhter deponent sayeth not...
Posting rules preclude what I'd like to say. Sheesh.
The key now is determining what comes next
In the CSA's defense, TMAAG scratched only a small part of the security force assistance itch, and at substantial cost. TMAAG was Army only, Phase zero only, tactical only, training only, foreign militaries only. It still may have been a step in the right direction. The key now is to see how the USG develops the required capabilities and capacities to successfully engage with foreign security forces in order to build partner capacity.
The true SFA requirement is
joint, interagency, intergovernmental and multinational
across all phases of operations
from the ministerial/institutional level down to the individual soldier/policeman, border guard, etc
includes organizing, training, equipping, rebuilding and advising (incl combat, if necessary) those forces
includes military, police, paramilitary and infrastructure forces
The argument that "we'll never do another Iraq" is irrelavent. We need to actively build partner capacity before things "go south", but also to build potential coalition partners for future operations.
Hood (1st Cav) Gets Lucky
Just a note on Hood and specifically 1st CAV Division. They got lucky. MG Dan Bolger will be headed their way to assume command soon. He will certainly bring an interesting and personal perspective on the issues surround SFA, MiTTs, and integration with conventional forces on the COIN battlefield.
Best
Tom