DImE, PmESII and now MIDLIFE

[Hacksaw]

As for this assumption:

"Instead we used MDMP (military decision making process) and focused our efforts on the alleged center of gravity, which was Saddam’s Regime. The regime collapsed, then we entered the decisive phase (transition to peace) and didn’t have a plan. If we used EBO, and realized one of our objectives was a democratic government installed, we would have built a plan to support the effects to achieve that objective, but we didn’t, and we’re still picking up the pieces."

It is just flat out wrong... there is a whole litany of reasons for why the post combat phase of OIF I went poorly... However, not identifying Phase IV as a critical phase is not included in that list... there was no shortage of planners questioning "where's the beef" regarding Phase IV... just as there is no shortage of planners who argue passionately that very detailed plans for Phase IV were developed, but either ignored or not promulgated based on command decisions... I can state definitively that by May 03, the 101st AASLT had published and were implementing the Long-term Strategy for stabilization of Northern Iraq, and before that had implemented stability lines of operations in Mar 03 that were subsequently formalized by the May 03 Plan.

That plan, even before it was finalized, was used by the Div CDR as a forcing mechanism with every high ranking officer/civilian who ventured into the Mosul Palace... each took a copy of the plan with them as seed to spur others to write their own (my own conjecture as to his intent)...

IMHO... the problem wasn't a failure to identify the importance of Phase IV... rather an unwillingness on the part of SECDEF and those closes to him (up and down) to acknowledge the possibility that the locals might not all be joyous-joyous to greet the conquering heroes of the Coalition...

We are probably all still too close to have a full-picture, but I can state without any reservation and with complete confidence that EBO wasn't the solution to a poorly coordinated phase IV

Live well and row

[Bill Moore]

We don't need the unnecessarily bureaucratic EBO process to develop objectives. Military planners have always developed objectives, and subordinates have synchronized their operations to accomplish those objectives.

I don't recall the start of phase IV in OIF the same way as Hacksaw, but as he stated we were probably too close to the problem to see things clearly. Hard to believe, but that was six years ago now.

After our unit secured our objective in early APR 03, we briefed retired BG Gardner (sp?) who was in charge of the reconstruction effort (phase IV) before Bremmer came in. In response to our questions requesting guidance and money to stand up government services, the response was that they were working on it. So while a shell of a plan may have existed, it apparently was coordinated with the interagency nor resourced. Cdrs at the local level took the initiative and did what they "thought" was right in lieu of guidance and common objectives to work towards.

In the fog of war we empower leaders at the lowest levels to make decisions as we should, but they would have prefered to make decisions that supported known and approved objectives from higher instead of wagging it on our own. Of course, after a few weeks guidance came (maybe more than we wanted), and we adjusted. Not the best way to run a war, but it seems to be the historical norm.

[Hacksaw]

We don't need the unnecessarily bureaucratic EBO process to develop objectives. Military planners have always developed objectives, and subordinates have synchronized their operations to accomplish those objectives.

I don't recall the start of phase IV in OIF the same way as Hacksaw, but as he stated we were probably too close to the problem to see things clearly. Hard to believe, but that was six years ago now.

After our unit secured our objective in early APR 03, we briefed retired BG Gardner (sp?) who was in charge of the reconstruction effort (phase IV) before Bremmer came in. In response to our questions requesting guidance and money to stand up government services, the response was that they were working on it. So while a shell of a plan may have existed, it apparently was coordinated with the interagency nor resourced. Cdrs at the local level took the initiative and did what they "thought" was right in lieu of guidance and common objectives to work towards.

In the fog of war we empower leaders at the lowest levels to make decisions as we should, but they would have prefered to make decisions that supported known and approved objectives from higher instead of wagging it on our own. Of course, after a few weeks guidance came (maybe more than we wanted), and we adjusted. Not the best way to run a war, but it seems to be the historical norm.

Bill,
I couldn't agree more and I'm not sure how we differ in our rememberences... We got a similar shrug of the shoulders from Garner then went to work... Since I have been assured by those who were planners at ARCENT that in fact a detailed plan did exist... I just knew that at the Div level we had zero visibility of a plan, were never directed to write a supporting plan, hence we did what good units do (and like you said)... figured it out as best we could and got on with it -- and every bubba who left our HQ took a copy...

I can remember the email I wrote to CENTCOM planners that I had worked with regarding AFG the previous year...
"What the hell do you guys want us to do here? The stores are open, food is on the shelf, the police are corrupt, and their is sporadic gun play in the evenings... in other words -- Tampa. When are you going to start pulling people out 'cuse this will turn south quick"

When those same, very logical and sensible people only 8 mths prior, came back with gobbeligock - I sensed things were not going to go nearly as smoothly from that point onward...

Even the blind squirrel finds the occassional nut!

Live well and row

[Klugzilla]

I just wanted to mention two minor things. First, FMI 3-07.22 is no longer doctrine. While a good book that filled a tactical doctrine gap (it hit the street in late 2004), it expired in 2006 (the expiration date was one of the key differences for FMIs, although we will not have any more FMIs). Second, MIDLIFE should appear in the new JP 3-22, which is the new FID joint pub. I don't much like it personally, as everything there can fit into DIME pretty comfortably, but the SOCOM folks like it and it is supplementary to DIME. Thus, a commander can use it when appropriate and just use DIME when appropriate.

[Jedburgh]

.....differences for FMIs, although we will not have any more FMIs). Second, MIDLIFE should appear in the new JP 3-22, which is the new FID joint pub....

For those with CAC/.mil access the draft JP 3-22 Foreign Internal Defense, dated 26 Jun 09, is available here.