Hat tip to WoTR for this article:http://warontherocks.com/2015/10/fro...erventionism/?
Hat tip to WoTR for this article:http://warontherocks.com/2015/10/fro...erventionism/?
davidbfpo
A short RAND commentary, post-Paris murders:http://www.rand.org/blog/2015/11/the...y-of-war.html?
Two passages for economy of effort:What makes the French way of war distinct from, say, the U.S. way of war has to do with scarcity. The French military is highly conscious of its small size and lack of resources. This translates into several distinctive features of French military operations. One is an insistence on modest objectives, on limiting strictly the aims of a military invention in line with a modest assessment of what the military can accomplish. The French thus aim low and strive to achieve the minimal required. Whenever possible, they try to limit the use of the military to missions for which militaries really can be of use. Meaning, militaries are good at violence; if violence is what is required, then send in the military. Otherwise, not. The French military abhors mission creep and want no part in things such as 'nation building.'
They strive for sufficiency and hope to achieve limited goals through the application of the smallest possible measure of force, what they refer to as “juste mésure,” i.e. just enough to get the job done, and no more. This requires knowing how much is enough, not to mention accepting risk that Americans would prefer not to run and largely do not have to.
davidbfpo
Former U.S. Army Chief of Staff General Raymond Odierno elaborated a vision for the Service’s future that left many questions unanswered. Specifically, he called for the Army to be more expeditionary as well as more scalable, tailorable, and regionally aligned. General Odierno’s successor and the current Army Chief of Staff, General Mark Milley, similarly has spoken of the need for the Army to be “agile,” “adaptive,” and “expeditionary,” and to have an “expeditionary mindset.”1 Lieutenant General Gustave Perna, writing in the March–April 2016 issue of Army Sustainment, has also evoked the imperative of having an “expeditionary Army.”2 What, however, do these terms mean? What would it take for the Army to realize the generals’ vision, and what, if any, are the associated risks?
A recently published RAND study of French army operations in Mali in 2013 noted that in many ways, France’s army epitomizes the characteristics General Odierno and General Milley have highlighted. It is a living example of a technologically sophisticated force that checks all of the generals’ boxes; it does well precisely the things the generals call on the U.S. Army to do. Studying how the French army has organized itself and operates provides insight into what their ideals might mean in concrete terms for the U.S. Army and the associated benefits—but also the implied compromises and risks U.S. planners need to consider.
What It Means to Be Expeditionary: A Look at the French Army in Africa
By Michael Shurkin | Joint Force Quarterly 82 | July 01, 2016
http://ndupress.ndu.edu/JFQ/Joint-Fo...rmy-in-africa/
A scrimmage in a Border Station
A canter down some dark defile
Two thousand pounds of education
Drops to a ten-rupee jezail
http://i.imgur.com/IPT1uLH.jpg
Adam G & readers,
There is a closed thread New boots, Chinooks please: French lessons for the US Army, which has a link to the cited RAND report and a number of posts by members:http://council.smallwarsjournal.com/...ad.php?t=21323
Good catch the new article.
Last edited by davidbfpo; 07-11-2016 at 10:29 PM. Reason: 43,803v
davidbfpo
Bookmarks