Printable View
In the spirit of Niel's picture, and also with respect to an ongoing discussion about doctrine, training, leader development and education, I wanted to share something we are thinking about. We were discussing mindsets and the ways they are formed and shaped and we drew out something that looks like this diagram. Thoughts from the council?
Best, Rob
Good chart.
The one thing that I would highlight if I was briefing this slide is that to conduct SFA to prepare a HN security force to conduct the Direct Approach is not an example of applying the indirect approach on the part of the trainer. It is simply what I would call "The direct approach, once removed."
I only highlight this, because due to our general threat-centric nature it is sometimes hard for people to grasp what is meant by direct approach vs indirect approach as they tend to look at it as two different ways of getting at the threat.
The indirect approach, as we meant it from our operations in OEF-P, are those actions directed at the root causes of the insurgency. They are the populace-centric engagement events that one does. Initially when the security environment is quite difficult they may be a supporting effort, but the goal must always be to shift to making them the main effort as soon as possible. SFA should also be preaparing HN forces to take over this role as well.