Author Topic: Why the Trump Administration Should Adopt a Mission-Oriented Combatant Command Structure  (Read 284 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

rangerrebew

  • Guest
Why the Trump Administration Should Adopt a Mission-Oriented Combatant Command Structure
Lauren Fish

November 17, 2016
TweetShareShare
Printer-friendly version

It’s often said that to determine someone’s priorities, take a look at how they spend their time and their money. Organizations are no different. Glancing at an organizational chart does not just reveal reporting relationships – it depicts the organization’s focus. In the U.S. military, the combatant commands organize time (planning) and money (resources). They currently reflect an immediate post-Cold War institutional shift toward a regional orientation that does not match modern needs. Chairman Dunford argued this spring that future “conflicts are very quickly going to spread across multiple combatant commanders, geographic boundaries and functions” and the current planning process is muddled and does not prioritize threats.  The Unified Command Plan (UCP) should be updated to reflect the priorities of the U.S. military by disbanding the geographic combatant commands and replacing them with mission-oriented commands.
« Last Edit: November 18, 2016, 01:01:31 pm by rangerrebew »