Getting Strategy Right

[Polarbear1605]

One problem we actually had was the critical issues with Turkey, which falls under EUCOM. CENTCOM and EUCOM had different views on how to proceed. Who is the final arbitrator in the current system?

I also want to propose a future scenario where we have another Axis like coalition that we go to war with that has allies in multiple COCOM AORs (kind of like Al Qaeda, but I'm now talking about States now, much more serious threat). We need a global strategy to deal with it, who prepares it? Who leads it? What COCOM in the current structure is responsible? Of course that is just DOD, so who compels the other interagency members to row with us? We talk whole of government approach, but that doesn't happen much above the PRTs in combat zones.

It will stop five and a half plus one geographically distantly located and focused Commands from doing it their way. As I said, the idea of decentralization was great. As you say, we do not have the FlagO quality to make it work.

Now you’re talking brothers! (But I still don’t like Melton’s article) I am now beginning to understanding where you want to go. I think giving national command responsibility to the chairman is too simplistic a solution and would result in a step back to undue service influence. Sorry, not trying to upset anyone …just being honest. Frankly, I was waiting for the old general staff argument, thanks for not bringing that up. BTW which one of you two is in charge of the other? JMM are you in charge of these two? IMHO you both need supervision but I need some help as I scroll past your replies, consequently, getting you mixed up with one another…j/k …and another apology.

We have agreed that the national command authority needs a good, consistent, method, apparatus, leadership, etc., to generate timely and effective national strategy. We have also agreed that the current unified command structure has it flaws. (I also feel some but not all of those flaws could be corrected if the generals followed its procedures instead of looking for work arounds.) I feel the solution to the national strategy issue is good leadership (generalship) and yes the resolution will take years; why not start now. I cannot accept the too long argument when we have been in Afghanistan since 2001. I feel you agree there is a leadership issue and I understand we are trying to solve the strategy issue quicker with a command structure change.

What I am concerned about is, if we change it, we do not recreate the same past problems; specifically, what I have been calling service optimization. The chairman has a historical tendency to play to the service chiefs…after all, they live together in the Pentagon. Yes G-N cut the chairman’s command authority privates off but I feel you can’t sow them back on, nor should we want to …after all; they cauterized the wound with Teflon. It was part of the same process they used when they covered his butt with that non-stick substance.

Here is my structural solution. Take US Joint Forces Command (the old USLANTCOM) and give that command strategic operational authority over the COCOMs (the old regional CINCs or whatever they are called lately). Require that super COCOM general to not only generate adequate strategy but also coordinate the strategic seams between COCOMs (now that’s motivation for strategy). As part of this command structure change, require this headquarters to move out of Norfolk and into the old Navy Annex that overlooks the Pentagon (actually, I am not sure if it is still standing). This guy will need to be close to the president and the symbolism will not be lost on the existing Chairman nor the Pentagon Staff. If you want to see a great strategy, promises this guy a fifth star upon deliver and acceptance of the national strategy. Personally, I think a better solution here would be to subtract one star from every existing general except this new guy. (BTW, Ordierno ain’t the guy.) You still have some issues here… SOCOM is one (should be a force provider) and the command relations with the functional support CINCS another. Yes, you need to bring in the CIA, State Department, etc. but start that with the strategic planning process, if the opportunity is available. Those government agencies are huge rice bowls that will not break easily.

Bill, Ken and JMM..would really like to shake your hand over a beer someday..if your ever in Raleigh, NC…look me up 