Interesting paper which does a good job of defining things from a 30,000 ft vantage point and from a slightly idealistic and isolated viewpoint. On the ground things appear differently. The core competencies of cultural, linguistic, analytical, and military abilities are shared by a number of USG, Host Nation, and opposition actors who actually shape the battlefield. Numbers (troops to task), abilities, and resourcing play key roles in what actually occurs. On the USG side substantive actors may include DoS FSO's and GS types, DoD active and reserve FAO and CA types, and other USG entities as well as contractors of many stripes. The host nation and opposition have similar set-ups. It is my observation that an organization structured with short term generalists filling roles better suited to long term specialists is not as likely to be as effective as it could be In it's desired role. In short, the paper makes me wonder about military core competencies and mission creep.
Bookmarks