Army Unity of Command
Army Unity of Command
Unity of Command代写 Army Unity of Command. Like any other ideal organizations, army structures are based on the unity of commands.
Like any other ideal organizations, army structures are based on the unity of commands. The command principle ensures that orders and control are centralized for a specific objective. Lack of chain of command results to the disorientation of purpose and failure. The practice of unity of command started in America in the Civil War and after the ascension of General U.S. Grant as General-in-chief of the U.S. Army. Unity of Command代写**范文
The general intention was to bring all military efforts and decision under one person and control. In this regard, it is essential to evaluate the meaning and application of unity of command by the U.S. Army about the Afghanistan war on terror famous referred to as Operation and ENDURING FREECOM and Anaconda.
What is Unity of Command and How Does It Relate to Case Study? Unity of Command代写
The United States army considers the unity of command as one of the twelve principles of joint operations.
Unity of command refers to how the army operates under the command and control of a single commander who has the powers and authority to give directions to all forces in a particular purpose. In the principles of war, unity of command means that one commander commands all troops in the field. Also, the unity of command gives orders to the subordinate army sergeants. Unity of command defines how relationships and communications are led to a common purpose.
In the Operation ENDURING FREEDOM in 2001, the supreme command came from CENTCOM. Unity of Command代写
The unity of command can be related to how the operations were executed. CENTCOM worked as the coalition commander for the whole operation with no delegated commands to the subsidiaries in the field. With its headquarters in MacDill AFB, the CENTCOM deployed command centers in other countries like Prince Sultan Airbase in Saudi Arabia and the other one in Bahrain. Unity of Command代写**范文
The two were centrally used as the command sources from the CENTCOM (Fleri, Howard, Hukill, & Searle, 2003). However, according to the case, CENTCOM could not command forces which were not under its areas of responsibility like the Land and SOF Components.
Notably, before the Operation ENDURING FREEDOM, Joint Force Special Operations Component was established. Unity of Command代写
The central operation command aimed to create unity between the U.S. and Afghan command centers (Hope, 2008). JFSOCC was challenged as CENTCOM bypassed the command line by giving commands directly to the JSOTFs. Therefore, faulting the unity of command which led JFSOCC failing on its mandate to control the joint operations. As such, it reflects how vital unity of command is in the military operations. Unity of Command代写**范文
The faulty command line delayed JFSOCC commander from taking over the tasks which were too critical for the mission. As a result, some operations were a challenge to the forces due to unconventional and ad hoc protocols which the forces were not familiar particularly in joint missions. Therefore, failing to adhere to the planned command line could have destabilized the force’s mission in Afghanistan.
Another aspect is the joint forces which functioned under the joint doctrine. Unity of Command代写
The unity of command is evident from the use of Ground Forward Air Controllers to every force operating in Afghanistan and Air Control Element which was missing in SOF. Also, SOLE and CAOC air command was reinforced in the structure. The fact that these four elements were missing in the joint forces proved a challenge to subsequent missions in Afghanistan. Therefore, the command and control execution established ensured smooth air liaisons throughout the whole mission.
Additionally, the unity of command worked for Operation Anaconda.
The whole planning process worked under the command and control of JFSOCC. Anaconda being a joint mission to Shahi Kot area required clear objective as well as joint command center which integrated both forces’ protocols. In the absence of JFSOCC, the U.S. and Afghanistan troops could not have worked smoothly. Therefore, JFSOCC commander directed TF DAGGER to carry out Anaconda planning which saw much integration of Afghan in the war again terrorists in Shahi Kot valley. The planning process was made possible by clear commands between forces and led to the development of Task Force Mountain which was sent to Shahi Kot valley.
What Issues Caused Unity of Command Confusing and How Can It Solve? Unity of Command代写
Although both Operation Anaconda and ENDURING FREEDOM were successful, there were confusions in the unity of commands (Feickert, 2013). CENTCOM commander failed to establish subordinate unified commands in Afghanistan. CENTCOM assumed command and control of the joint war which was unconventional and faulted the role of JFSOCC. It led to challenges in unifying the joint operations and tactical efforts on the battlefield as well as the use and command of military assets. The CENTCOM command was a departure from the usual practices, particularly for the Afghanistan army. The unity of command emerged a significant issue in the multinational forces Afghanistan.
Before Operation Anaconda, there were command authority issues. Unity of Command代写
Initially, JFSOCC was to take over the operations command which CENTCOM had a fault. CENTCOM had made the troops used to its way and hence introducing a different command authority made was challenging. Therefore, there existed separate command chains for black SOF and interagency operations. CJTF Mountain lacked control over forces under the command of CENTCOM commander and could give orders to the American Army. On the other hand, Black SOF lacked adequate authority differed on priorities which would have enabled it to access to assets also used by CJTF Mountain operations. Thus, there was confusion in the command during operation execution phases because command structures were competing for the same asset for the same operation.
Another confusion was caused by the command relationships which existed before Operation Anaconda and those created in OPORD 02-001. Unity of Command代写
These relationships made TF DAGGER and TF-BAR to become rigid in adopting another command as saw it retain OPCON of their associated aviation assets. The confusion was further aggravated when it was not clear who had execution authority for TACON during Operation Anaconda. These assets were required by the CJTF Mountain for the tactical command, but it was not clear as SOF could not establish AC the source of command and control of AC-130s and thus assumed they only belong to SOF. The conflict in command led to a waste of time during the planning and at the most convenient time when firepower was desperately needed to win over the enemy.
Moreover, the new command different from those used by CENTCOM resulted in an abrupt change in operations different from those which were in use.
The “command changed operations from land dispersed SOF centric which had a decentralized plan for most ground operations to a geographically concentrated large common grounds forces which needed more planning before execution” (Fleri, Howard, Hukill, & Searle, 2003). The changes were also accompanied by a short period for adjustment between operations. Thus, troops were not adequately prepared to adopt the new operating commands. This affected how Operation Anaconda was executed though it was successful.
Recommendations Unity of Command代写
The confusion in command and control of joint forces could have been solved by applying a few strategies.
First, realign all U.S. functions under the USEUCOM and empower SACEUR whose lack fractured the operations. Although CENTCOM was effective as the central power in commanding and controlling operations in Afghanistan, continuing its function mad integration of other troupes in the multinational forces as well as the involvement of Afghans difficult. As such, the unity of command would have been achieved by replacing CENTCOM command with JFSOCC was mainly focused on unifying the commands between the various forces in the mission. Unity of Command代写**范文
Thus, troops, the contribution would have improved, and coordination of other troops made easier. Besides, integration of logistics and aligning them to the operations would have been effective and hence reduce time wastage and redundancies in the missions.
The capacity building of the Afghan National Army and Afghan Air Corps would have been integrated into the joint operations. Unity of Command代写
According to the case, the Afghan army was sidelined in the mainstream operations particularly Operation Anaconda (Fleri, Howard, Hukill, & Searle, 2003). Information was kept a secret, and they were not involved in the planning process which would have reduced their commitment and lower the success of the mission. These functions would have helped the commander in working out the differences in commands and adoption. As well, the capacity building was needed in the joint training field operations which were lacking and hence causing the operations dysfunction. Unity of Command代写**范文
Also, the team would have smoothened the relationships between the various troops as it was observed that forces under ISAF and those of CSTC-A were not going along well. In essence, the training, equipping, and fielding the Afghan army as well as their integration into the operations was critical in ensuring successful coordination and corporation with foreign troops. The ANA also required continuous mentoring and sustainment to ensure their commitment to the mission. Overall, these measures would ensure ANA, and other troops feel part of the mission and hence work for its success.
The unity of command is an essential element in every army particularly during the execution of operations. Unity of Command代写
In the context of the case study, the importance of the unity of command is emphasized. It is true that having conflicting command centers may confuse as observed planning and execution of operation anaconda. Failure to address these problems in the unity of command will lead to failure of the joint operations. Therefore, conflicting command centers should be harmonized to ensure proper coordination, relationships and communication during and after the mission.
References Unity of Command代写
Fleri, E., Howard, E., Hukill, J., & Searle, T. R. (2003). Operation Anaconda Case Study. College of Aerospace Doctrine, Research and Education, pp. 1-28.
Feickert, A. (2013). The unified command plan and combatant command Background and issues for Congress. Library of Congress Washington DC Congressional Research Service.
Hope, I. (2008). Unity of Command in Afghanistan: A Forsaken Principle of War. ARMY WAR COLL CARLISLE BARRACKS PA.