“We are challenged with maintaining technology overmatch in a world where technology is proliferating faster than ever before," said Gen. Raymond T. Odierno, 38th Chief of Staff, US Army in his general address at the Association of the United States Army (AUSA) Institute of Land Warfare (ILW) Global Force Symposium in Huntsville, Alabama (29 March - 2 April). "We must adapt new technology to war fighting capability better than anyone else.”
Odierno’s comments were made against the ongoing sequestration-enforced US Army cutbacks in the face of a plethora of global challenges. “We continue to witness an increase in the velocity of instability unforeseen a few years ago,” he said, highlighting in particular, “trans-nation extremist and the aggressive actions of several nation states.”
He went on to underline the explosive growth of non-state groups such as the so-called Islamic State (IS) and its barbaric push to establish a caliphate in Iraq and Syria; the sectarian extremism being demonstrated in northern and central Africa including Libya; and ongoing actions by al Qaeda and affiliates.
The actions of individual countries were also challenging to the US’ global strategy and security. These included the continuing Russian-backed separatist conflict within the Ukraine and its, “challenge to the resolve of NATO”, as well as Iran’s involvement across the Middle East and particularly recently in supporting the rebels (Houthis) with the ensuing collapse of organised government. He also listed the ongoing belligerence of North Korean and, “China’s military modernisation efforts which are alarming allies and challenge regional interests.”
He continued: “Budget impasse means we have degraded our readiness to historic low levels. Further reductions would put us into a place we simply cannot go. Even today we only have 33% of our brigades ready when really our sustainment rate should be closer to 70%.”
Neither did Odierno see any rapid improvement in the budget believing that readiness would at best, “flatline over three to four years,” which would mean continued reduced manpower capability. That would mean that the Army could only generate forces in readiness for current requirements and would not be able to ramp up for unexpected events.
Strategically, he portrayed a scenario that would already be familiar to many of America’s NATO partners in Europe: “It will challenge us to maintain current commitments to allies around the world. Eliminate our capability on any scale to conduct simultaneous operations - deterring in one region and defeating in another.” He also questioned whether the Army would be able to still conducted, “one prolonged multi-phase campaign against a determined enemy.”
To put this into context, the US Congressional Research Service revealed that in FY2008 30,100 military personnel were in Afghanistan while 157,800 were in Iraq, resulting in a combined deployment of 187,900 personnel. If further reductions are necessary the Army leadership has talked of reducing the force further to perhaps 420,000. Re-enforcing the point Odierno confirmed that over
140,000 US troops were currently deployed now around the world in 140 countries [despite the drawdown in Afghanistan].
It is the role of global overwatch that the US has played almost since the beginning of the Cold War that now seems to be perceived by leaders such as Ordierno as under threat. It is increasingly difficult for them now to deter multiple advisories simultaneously and generating forces and capability to meet new threats. “This requires us to hope we can predict the future accurately - something we have never been able to do,” he observed.
But erring on the positive, Ordierno perceived that some of the impending lack of capacity could be offset by the modification of existing capabilities and the development of new operational concepts [such as the US Army’s Win in a Complex World: 2020-2040], “to attain overmatch and enhance expeditionary manoeuvre.”
Three of the main objectives required to support this position included: “The enhancement of the soldier by improving lethality, protection and situational awareness; an increase in the deployability, lethality, mobility and survivability of our manoeuvre formations; enable mission command by investing in the network with agile and expeditionary tactical command posts; and being prepared for joint combined arms manoeuvre by combining tailored and scalable forces while increase efficiency and logistics.”
However, he also saw the need to reduce the command and control footprint while ensuring and protecting the information flow around the force structure.
As expected Odierno had a sizeable list of requirements to improve his force which include, “the upgraded lethality of missiles, interceptors and sensors; the integration of directed energy; and the development a new infantry fighting vehicle and a tank with autonomous capabilities.”
He concluded by stating that the challenge was to retain technological overmatch with potential advisories. But as part of that the investment had also got to focus on the people: “Too often people think technology is king but it is people that win wars… It is a contest of wills.”
 |
| Gen. Raymond T. Odierno, 38th Chief of Staff, US Army in his general address at the Association of the United States Army (AUSA) Institute of Land Warfare (ILW) Global Force Symposium in Huntsville, Alabama (29 March - 2 April). |
Odierno’s comments were made against the ongoing sequestration-enforced US Army cutbacks in the face of a plethora of global challenges. “We continue to witness an increase in the velocity of instability unforeseen a few years ago,” he said, highlighting in particular, “trans-nation extremist and the aggressive actions of several nation states.”
He went on to underline the explosive growth of non-state groups such as the so-called Islamic State (IS) and its barbaric push to establish a caliphate in Iraq and Syria; the sectarian extremism being demonstrated in northern and central Africa including Libya; and ongoing actions by al Qaeda and affiliates.
The actions of individual countries were also challenging to the US’ global strategy and security. These included the continuing Russian-backed separatist conflict within the Ukraine and its, “challenge to the resolve of NATO”, as well as Iran’s involvement across the Middle East and particularly recently in supporting the rebels (Houthis) with the ensuing collapse of organised government. He also listed the ongoing belligerence of North Korean and, “China’s military modernisation efforts which are alarming allies and challenge regional interests.”
America’s Military Degradation
“As we face these we continue to divest our military capability and capacity therefore the risk continues to grow,” said Gen. Odierno, listing the 80,000 troops to date taken out of the Army with the subsequent reduction by 13 Brigade Combat Teams together with three Combat Aviation Brigades (CABs). There was also the 25% slashing of investment in modernisation as well as stalled or cancelled programmes. |
| Left to right: US Army Spc. Simon Saliba, 1st Lt. David A. Poole and Sgt. Timothy Dehaas obtain tactical security positions as fellow soldiers move toward their objective during a live-fire exercise in Romania, 8 April 2015. (Photo: US Army photo by Sgt. William A. Tanner) |
He continued: “Budget impasse means we have degraded our readiness to historic low levels. Further reductions would put us into a place we simply cannot go. Even today we only have 33% of our brigades ready when really our sustainment rate should be closer to 70%.”
Neither did Odierno see any rapid improvement in the budget believing that readiness would at best, “flatline over three to four years,” which would mean continued reduced manpower capability. That would mean that the Army could only generate forces in readiness for current requirements and would not be able to ramp up for unexpected events.
Strategically, he portrayed a scenario that would already be familiar to many of America’s NATO partners in Europe: “It will challenge us to maintain current commitments to allies around the world. Eliminate our capability on any scale to conduct simultaneous operations - deterring in one region and defeating in another.” He also questioned whether the Army would be able to still conducted, “one prolonged multi-phase campaign against a determined enemy.”
To put this into context, the US Congressional Research Service revealed that in FY2008 30,100 military personnel were in Afghanistan while 157,800 were in Iraq, resulting in a combined deployment of 187,900 personnel. If further reductions are necessary the Army leadership has talked of reducing the force further to perhaps 420,000. Re-enforcing the point Odierno confirmed that over
140,000 US troops were currently deployed now around the world in 140 countries [despite the drawdown in Afghanistan].
It is the role of global overwatch that the US has played almost since the beginning of the Cold War that now seems to be perceived by leaders such as Ordierno as under threat. It is increasingly difficult for them now to deter multiple advisories simultaneously and generating forces and capability to meet new threats. “This requires us to hope we can predict the future accurately - something we have never been able to do,” he observed.
But erring on the positive, Ordierno perceived that some of the impending lack of capacity could be offset by the modification of existing capabilities and the development of new operational concepts [such as the US Army’s Win in a Complex World: 2020-2040], “to attain overmatch and enhance expeditionary manoeuvre.”
Three of the main objectives required to support this position included: “The enhancement of the soldier by improving lethality, protection and situational awareness; an increase in the deployability, lethality, mobility and survivability of our manoeuvre formations; enable mission command by investing in the network with agile and expeditionary tactical command posts; and being prepared for joint combined arms manoeuvre by combining tailored and scalable forces while increase efficiency and logistics.”
However, he also saw the need to reduce the command and control footprint while ensuring and protecting the information flow around the force structure.
As expected Odierno had a sizeable list of requirements to improve his force which include, “the upgraded lethality of missiles, interceptors and sensors; the integration of directed energy; and the development a new infantry fighting vehicle and a tank with autonomous capabilities.”
He concluded by stating that the challenge was to retain technological overmatch with potential advisories. But as part of that the investment had also got to focus on the people: “Too often people think technology is king but it is people that win wars… It is a contest of wills.”
Andrew Drwiega, AUSA ILW Global Force Symposium, Nashville, TN
When will we learn that Obama is the ENEMY?
ReplyDelete