Defining Army Capabilities to Meet Building Partnership Capacity Requirements.

摘要

The U.S. Army has an opportunity to define itself for the future in terms of force structure and mission set to meet the demands imposed upon it by national leaders. Those leaders responsible for national security, defense, and military strategies have articulated in these strategies the future requirement to build partner nation capacity through advising and assisting. Further, they stipulate that these endeavors should be small footprint excursions utilizing subject matter experts. At between 3,500 and 5,000 soldiers, a Brigade Combat Team (BCT) is far from a small footprint. An effort on the part of the Army to modify its force structure so that it can provide Building Partnership Capacity activities is legally justified by statute in Title 10 USC. In addition, the Army already has doctrine that painstakingly identifies the 'ways' in which it should conduct Building Partnership Capacity activities. The proficiency requirements placed upon BCTs are vast when taking into consideration the spectrum of conflict in which they engage. Designed for high-end combat operations, BCTs must train to proficient readiness for offensive, defensive, and stability operations against both conventional and hybrid threats. This is a costly and challenging endeavor for even the best organizations. A dedicated force structure geared toward the smaller footprint of advise and assist capacity building efforts would better allow unit commanders to effectively focus on the training proficiency of their organizations. The creation of a standing Army capability to accomplish Building Partnership Capacity requirements is legally justified by Title 10 USC, and there is Army doctrine in place to guide the process. The opportunity exists for the Army to meet the national requirements with forces that are moderately proficient in many types of operations, or with forces that are highly proficient in specific types of operations.