The 2014 Quadrennial Defense Review (QDR) outlined and prioritized security interests nested with the National Security Strategy and provided guidance on how to support these priorities within the limitations of defined budget. Great emphasis on modernization and reducing force numbers with an explanation of how a confined budget is applied to management of DOD resources resounds throughout the QDR. In terms of rebalancing the force, personnel reduction are outlined with identified risk and no clear path defined for a force “regeneration” should an emergent need arise. The focus of the rebalance should avoid the risk of the decreased ground force personnel to the extent detailed in the QDR 2014. To reconcile this rebalance in light of
…show more content…
However, General Dempsey assesses that is unlikely those relations can fully mitigate the force reduction outlined. Arguably, the importance of landpower is that it is necessary when there is a need to control terrain or people. So, in terms of the core interests of security, prosperity, values, and international order, landpower still plays an undeniable central role. However, serious reductions in capabilities were outlined in the QDR for Air, Naval, and Marine forces also. Without extensive analysis of all these branches, it is obvious cost savings are applied throughout all defense capabilities. Therefore, one of the most cost effective approaches to a rebalance could exist in rebalancing active component and reserve component …show more content…
However, getting the right balance of active component forces with the ability to mass on one of the most likely contingency areas greatly reduces this risk, and the mobilization of the reserves provides the ability for that active force to refit and prepare for redeployment in a second contingency area.
Force management risk may be greatest in the area of retaining and training. Because of civilian job and military training requirement conflicts, there is a requirement for leaders to exhibit a great deal of creativity and empathy to overcome those obstacles. Retention can easily suffer if those requirements are not balanced and reserve component soldiers leave the organization due to endangerment of their full time job. Without the right kind of leadership and support, force management risk could be the highest area of risk to a force that is more reserve component
However, General Dempsey assesses that is unlikely those relations can fully mitigate the force reduction outlined. Arguably, the importance of landpower is that it is necessary when there is a need to control terrain or people. So, in terms of the core interests of security, prosperity, values, and international order, landpower still plays an undeniable central role. However, serious reductions in capabilities were outlined in the QDR for Air, Naval, and Marine forces also. Without extensive analysis of all these branches, it is obvious cost savings are applied throughout all defense capabilities. Therefore, one of the most cost effective approaches to a rebalance could exist in rebalancing active component and reserve component …show more content…
However, getting the right balance of active component forces with the ability to mass on one of the most likely contingency areas greatly reduces this risk, and the mobilization of the reserves provides the ability for that active force to refit and prepare for redeployment in a second contingency area.
Force management risk may be greatest in the area of retaining and training. Because of civilian job and military training requirement conflicts, there is a requirement for leaders to exhibit a great deal of creativity and empathy to overcome those obstacles. Retention can easily suffer if those requirements are not balanced and reserve component soldiers leave the organization due to endangerment of their full time job. Without the right kind of leadership and support, force management risk could be the highest area of risk to a force that is more reserve component