Presentation is loading. Please wait.

Presentation is loading. Please wait.

SEMINAR 3. COL Gregg Athey – Army CAPT Paul Albertson – Coast Guard Mr. Eric Fisher – Civilian CAPT Rob Ferguson – Canada CAPT Abduelhafid ElAreibi -

Similar presentations


Presentation on theme: "SEMINAR 3. COL Gregg Athey – Army CAPT Paul Albertson – Coast Guard Mr. Eric Fisher – Civilian CAPT Rob Ferguson – Canada CAPT Abduelhafid ElAreibi -"— Presentation transcript:

1 SEMINAR 3

2 COL Gregg Athey – Army CAPT Paul Albertson – Coast Guard Mr. Eric Fisher – Civilian CAPT Rob Ferguson – Canada CAPT Abduelhafid ElAreibi - Libya CDR Juan Helmke – Chile CDR Michele Huddleston – Navy LTC Chris Connolly - Army Lt Col Chad Blair – Marine Corps Lt Col Joseph Winters – Air Force CDR Cindy Ramsey – Navy CDR Andy Amidon – Navy LCDR Ryan Logan - Navy SEMINAR 3 COL Gregg Athey – Army CAPT Paul Albertson – Coast Guard Mr. Eric Fisher – Civilian CAPT Rob Ferguson – Canada CAPT Abduelhafid ElAreibi - Libya CDR Juan Helmke – Chile CDR Michele Huddleston – Navy LTC Chris Connolly - Army Lt Col Chad Blair – Marine Corps Lt Col Joseph Winters – Air Force CDR Cindy Ramsey – Navy CDR Andy Amidon – Navy LCDR Ryan Logan - Navy

3 Geographic Combatant Commands Moving beyond Goldwater–Nichols Synchronizing DoD & DoS …from Joint to Interagency & Combined REGIONAL IGOs

4 NSSNMSFORCE STRUCTURE IMPLEMENTATION CASE FUTURE ENVIRONMENT 4 Things That Should Keep a U.S. Leader Up at Night1 Instability in states with WMD (Iran, North Korea, Syria) Nuclear, but also biological & chemical2 China in transition Due to its sheer weight in international system 3 Destructive technologies in hands of wider array of state, non-state & individual actors Both obviously malign & seemingly benign tools 4 Impact of global environmental & societal trends Climate change, water, natural resources & pandemics 5 Loss of U.S. relative power as others rise Uncertainty about “post-American world”

5 NSSNMSFORCE STRUCTURE IMPLEMENTATION CASE FUTURE ENVIRONMENT 5 Things That Should Energize a U.S. Leader1 Continuing sense of American greatness & potential “Can-do”-ism, adaptability, innovation2 Leveraging energy to foster national security Strong hand in oil, natural gas, nuclear, wind, solar 3 Leveraging individual empowerment worldwide “Golden Age” of human development & innovation 4 Rising powers (NATO, Brazil, Indonesia, South Africa) Potential for building stronger international order 5 India Biggest democracy, market economy, balancing power 6 Transition and evolution of sovereign states in Africa Egypt, Nigeria, South Africa, others

6 NSSNMSFORCE STRUCTURE IMPLEMENTATION CASE FUTURE ENVIRONMENT 6 FUTURE ENVIRONMENT KEY ASSUMPTIONS More of our greatest challenges will transcend national borders 2 Much wider array of state & non-state actors will have bigger say in tackling those challenges 3 U.S. will still matter in shaping responses to those challenges 4 World is a less violent place 1

7 NSSNMSFORCE STRUCTURE IMPLEMENTATION CASE FUTURE ENVIRONMENT 1797 Preservation of government & permanence of present happy state 1823 Preservation of Western Hemisphere right to pursue life, liberty & happiness 1918 That the world would be made fit, safe to live in 1947 Establish US leadership in supporting & maintaining freedom of peoples 2006 Seek & Support democratic movements in every nation & culture, end tyranny in our world AMERICAN VALUES OVER TIME AMERICAN VALUES OVER TIME

8 NSSNMSFORCE STRUCTURE IMPLEMENTATION CASE FUTURE ENVIRONMENT 8 NATIONAL SECURITY STRATEGY “It is the policy of the United States to promote international interdependence while strengthening our role as a global leader to increase peace, security, freedom, justice & equal opportunity in the world” Our goal is achieved by: Advancing global & regional partnerships to ensure responsible conduct in an interdependent system 1 Addressing growing transnational threats through engagement in developing global solutions 2

9 NSSNMSFORCE STRUCTURE IMPLEMENTATION CASE FUTURE ENVIRONMENT 9 Existential Threats Asymmetric & Transnational Threats Threats of WMD Regulated Global Commons International Interdependence Freedom & Liberty Economic Growth Security for US, Allies & Partners Economic Prosperity Respect for Universal Values International Order (advanced by US) Individual Right to Life, Liberty, Happiness Economic Opportunity for All Respect International Order Responsibility of Leadership DETER, PREVENT & DEFEATDEFENDPROMOTE

10 NSSNMSFORCE STRUCTURE IMPLEMENTATION CASE FUTURE ENVIRONMENT 10 NATIONAL MILITARY STRATEGY Objectives: Defend the Homeland 2 Strengthen International & Regional Security 1 Deter & Defeat Aggression Against the U.S. & Allies 3 A networked & adaptable Joint Force that provides military capability to defend our Nation & Allies. Our military power will be flexible, responsive & complementary to other instruments of national power. Our Joint Force will work with regional partners to advance our shared interests in peace, prosperity & security.

11 NSSNMSFORCE STRUCTURE IMPLEMENTATION CASE FUTURE ENVIRONMENT 11 1.Forward Reconnaissance & Engagement 2.Shared Global Security 3.Hard Power OPERATIONAL CONCEPTS Joint Interagency Combined Building on Goldwater–Nichols

12 NSSNMSFORCE STRUCTURE IMPLEMENTATION CASE FUTURE ENVIRONMENT 12 FORWARD RECONNAISSANCE & ENGAGEMENT Early warning of potential transnational threats −Strategic reconnaissance through SOCOM regional coordination centers −Investment in DoD Foreign Area Officer community Ability to respond to transnational threats −DoD & Interagency synchronization; networked intelligence −Forward deployed SOF; global ready conventional forces Optimization of U.S. force employment with smaller footprint forward −Regionally oriented coordination centers to build security capacity −Small team engagement vice large unit occupation abroad 1

13 NSSNMSFORCE STRUCTURE IMPLEMENTATION CASE FUTURE ENVIRONMENT 13 SHARED GLOBAL SECURITY Empower regional partners to respond to regional challenges −GCC divestiture −Develop and/or reinforce IGO security (i.e. AU, ASEAN) Share burden of collective security in countering transnational threats −Regional partnerships −U.S. plays prominent supporting role, not always the lead Build regional capability & capacity −Military to military engagement −Military exchanges for best practices 2

14 NSSNMSFORCE STRUCTURE IMPLEMENTATION CASE FUTURE ENVIRONMENT 14 HARD POWER Defense in depth −Global strike −Dominance in space & cyberspace Power Projection −Increased SOF forward; global ready conventional forces −U.S. power abroad is exchanged for regional partnerships Assured Access −Regional partnerships −Cross-domain synergy (Air-Sea Battle Concept) 3

15 NSSNMSFORCE STRUCTURE IMPLEMENTATION CASE FUTURE ENVIRONMENT 15 FORCE PLANNING ARMY: 25.5% Reduction ─Fewer AC Brigades; retain core Reserve capabilities NAVY & MARINE CORPS: 12.8% Reduction ─Fewer Carriers, Amphibious Groups, Air Wings & Subs AIR FORCE: 13.6% Reduction ─Less emphasis on Air Superiority & Theater Strike SPECIAL OPERATIONS: 7% Increase ─Investment in next generation capabilities Future Security Environment + New Military Strategy = Leaner Required Force

16 NSSNMSFORCE STRUCTURE IMPLEMENTATION CASE FUTURE ENVIRONMENT 16 Risks Mitigation Build-up time for multiple regional conflicts: 4-6 months minimum Reduced CVN & ARG surge capability, fewer ships for independent deployments USMC more dependent on USN & USAF aviation Decrease emphasis on air superiority & theater strike Measured response = effective response Increase alliances & partnerships Maintain forward presence, logistic & sustainment capabilities Increase capabilities in space, cyber, ISR & global strike Next generation investments maintain industrial base FORCE PLANNING

17 NSSNMSFORCE STRUCTURE IMPLEMENTATION CASE FUTURE ENVIRONMENT 17 IMPLEMENTATION CASE Joint Interagency Combined Building on Goldwater–Nichols

18 NSSNMSFORCE STRUCTURE IMPLEMENTATION CASE FUTURE ENVIRONMENT 18 KEY CONCEPTS Global whole of government solutions vs GCC engagement Leading foreign policy with diplomacy vs military levers of national power Forcing function for interdependence Focus on prevention of crisis vs reactive crisis planning Reduce transnational seams IMPLEMENTATION Phased divestiture of the GCCs −Transfer responsibility, funding & manning o Department of State – Country Teams, Bureaus & USAID o Regional Alliances – NATO, AU, others o Department of Defense – Joint Staff SOCOM – forward to develop regional security capability Maintain CJTF concept for contingency military operations when required −Global, scalable GEOGRAPHIC COMBATANT COMMAND (GCC) DIVESTITURE

19 NSSNMSFORCE STRUCTURE IMPLEMENTATION CASE FUTURE ENVIRONMENT 19 AFRICOM ECOMOG / AU EUCOM NATO / EU SOUTHCOM OAS CENTCOM GCC / Arab League PACOM ASEAN / CFC Korea NORTHCOM and Functional Commands PHASED GCC DIVESTITURE PLAN Current Regional Security Leadership Enduring Security Partnership

20 NSSNMSFORCE STRUCTURE IMPLEMENTATION CASE FUTURE ENVIRONMENT 20 GCC DIVESTITURE Stake- holders InterestsImpacts Department of Defense Perception of preeminence in foreign engagement Funding shifts to Joint Staff Loss of four star billets & the military staff Shift from the normal operations method Department of State Shift of national focus on diplomatic lever of national power with less military influence Increased focus Increased funding & manning Congress & U.S. Public Security professionals Constituents & districts losses Politics Statutory requirements Evolve Goldwater-Nichols Potential loss of military footprint in districts Appearance of a more ambivalent U.S. foreign policy United Nations Dependent on U.S. leadershipDifficulty of consensus Shift responsibility to regional powers Security Council more important Key Allies & Partners Reliance on U.S. military forces for security Need to provide own security Need to contribute to regional security

21 NSSNMSFORCE STRUCTURE IMPLEMENTATION CASE FUTURE ENVIRONMENT 21 GCC DIVESTITURE Stake- holders ObstaclesMitigation Department of Defense Increased risk – less military engagement in diplomacy Cultural change Increase Foreign Area Officer & Defense Attaché corps Phased elimination of GCC Department of State Cultural change Little to no political constituency Increase country team manning Congress U.S. Public Votes Does not support DoS like the military Budget neutral Phased approach Long term decreased cost – prevention of costly wars United Nations Difficulty of consensusIncreased U.N. involvement Focus on strong nations to fill leadership functions for its region Key Allies & Partners Own financial constraints Initial decrease in interoperability while standardization is formalized – in less developed partnerships NATO, other alliances & partners funding increase

22 Geographic Combatant Commands Moving beyond Goldwater–Nichols Synchronizing DoD & DoS …from Joint to Interagency & Combined REGIONAL IGOs

23 23 Questions?

24 NSSNMSFORCE STRUCTURE IMPLEMENTATION CASE FUTURE ENVIRONMENT 24 Strategic EnvironmentHow the Services Will Respond RisksMitigation Large-scale land warfare unlikely USN /USAF more prominent role as two land wars end Increase service interdependence by eliminating redundant capabilities Force modernization vs fiscal challenges Rapidly respond with force packages for “1+”; reinforce at D+180 SOF forward presence to emphasize FID & maintain CT Renewed focus on joint interoperability Invest in next generation forces Build-up time for multiple regional conflicts: 4-6 months minimum Reduced CVN & ARG surge capability, fewer ships for independent deployments USMC more dependent on USN & USAF aviation Decrease emphasis on air superiority & theater strike Measured response = effective response Increase alliances & partnerships Maintain forward presence, logistic & sustainment capabilities Increase capabilities in space, cyber, ISR & global strike


Download ppt "SEMINAR 3. COL Gregg Athey – Army CAPT Paul Albertson – Coast Guard Mr. Eric Fisher – Civilian CAPT Rob Ferguson – Canada CAPT Abduelhafid ElAreibi -"

Similar presentations


Ads by Google