I see a few observations here -
First, just because we didn't do well in the past doesn't mean we won't do the same in the future. I don't buy his argument that we will abandon COIN following Iraq/Afghanistan - we don't have the Cold War to run back to. Not that there isn't a risk, but it's unlikely.
Second, I don't get his last recommendation about moving the COIN mission to the Reserve Components.
COIN is by default a long (years long) process. How can the reserve component handle the long deployments implicit in his recommendation? Secondly, there is zero evidence to suggest RC units are better at COIN - I can attest to some experience that they were in many ways worse at COIN. (Plenty of stones to be thrown all around though)
A better argument was put to me today by COL Mansoor - make the guard/reserve the HIC force and keep the active force for COIN in the immediate term. Since we face no imminent HIC threat, ARNG formations should act as our strategic HIC reserve while the active force handles Iraq/Afghanistan in the coming years. Would be more in line with the likelihood of employment and better suited to current strengths.
I'm not sure I like either argument though.
Bookmarks