Instability and insecurity in Eastern Europe, the Middle East, Africa and Asia is accelerating at a dizzying pace due to violent extremist organizations (VEO), poor governance, humanitarian crises, sectarian violence, advanced weapons proliferation and a myriad of other reasons. This situation, along with national budgetary pressures, has caused U.S. strategic leaders to earnestly consider how the Joint Force 2025 must be rebalanced to meet these 21st century threats and to fully support our core U.S. interests of national security, a vibrant economy, universal values, and international order. Given the likely threats and the current fiscal environment, the general capabilities of Joint Force 2025 that are paramount to meeting the challenges
…show more content…
or allies is an integral part of the U.S. defense strategy that is irreplaceable. These are certainly the greatest advantages of SOF. While there are really no disadvantages to SOF per se, the over reliance on SOF to conduct operations for which more conventional ground forces may be well suited is of concern. It may very well be time to examine, the mission sets of conventional forces and leverage the lessons from Iraq and Afghanistan to steep these Soldiers and Marines even more in the techniques of irregular warfare so that the future Joint Land Force is even more capable of performing full spectrum operations. In the current and foreseeable fiscally repressed environment, cost effectiveness will also mean matching the appropriately trained and equipped soldier to the …show more content…
In order to do this, the service level capabilities of both the Air Force and the Navy should be increased. An important cross service capability that should be developed is interoperable C2, ISR, and PED systems allowing for enhanced situational awareness, intelligence sharing, and target handoff and prosecution. Another key cross service capability are aircraft which are capable of joint munitions packages and extended flight distances as the power projection platform of choice, the aircraft carrier, is both costly and vulnerable to A2/AD strategies. The prodigious advantage of developing these systems is the foundation of a joint battle strategy capable of defeating advanced A2/AD. As with any advanced system, the principle disadvantage is cost in terms of finance for research and development, followed by the time required to train service members to effectively employ these capabilities. If the U.S. chooses not further these capabilities it may to be forced to concede these common maneuver spaces or suffer significant losses in advancing U.S. interests throughout the
or allies is an integral part of the U.S. defense strategy that is irreplaceable. These are certainly the greatest advantages of SOF. While there are really no disadvantages to SOF per se, the over reliance on SOF to conduct operations for which more conventional ground forces may be well suited is of concern. It may very well be time to examine, the mission sets of conventional forces and leverage the lessons from Iraq and Afghanistan to steep these Soldiers and Marines even more in the techniques of irregular warfare so that the future Joint Land Force is even more capable of performing full spectrum operations. In the current and foreseeable fiscally repressed environment, cost effectiveness will also mean matching the appropriately trained and equipped soldier to the …show more content…
In order to do this, the service level capabilities of both the Air Force and the Navy should be increased. An important cross service capability that should be developed is interoperable C2, ISR, and PED systems allowing for enhanced situational awareness, intelligence sharing, and target handoff and prosecution. Another key cross service capability are aircraft which are capable of joint munitions packages and extended flight distances as the power projection platform of choice, the aircraft carrier, is both costly and vulnerable to A2/AD strategies. The prodigious advantage of developing these systems is the foundation of a joint battle strategy capable of defeating advanced A2/AD. As with any advanced system, the principle disadvantage is cost in terms of finance for research and development, followed by the time required to train service members to effectively employ these capabilities. If the U.S. chooses not further these capabilities it may to be forced to concede these common maneuver spaces or suffer significant losses in advancing U.S. interests throughout the