Essay On Joint Force In 2025

In a 2015 article, “Is U.S. military becoming outdated?” written by Stuart Bradin, Keenan Yoho, and Meaghan Keeler-Pettigrew, the authors argued that despite the U.S. military maintaining a position of global dominance “without peer” during conventional operations, it is not the ideal force against current and future threats. The authors claim that there are several negative factors arising due to the past sixteen years of war against several state and non-state elements, inferior cultural differences of government bureaucracy compared to commercial firms, and a misallocation of defense spending that leaves the US military waging war inefficiently while simultaneously losing technological dominance against current and future threats.

With Trump’s election this year, his rhetoric of “Making America Great Again” and therefore revitalizing our military will soon become a reality. Trump has formally requested a reappropriation of funds; around $54 Billion, towards the US military. Part of Trump’s campaign promises had to do with making the military more robust; ensuring America’s title of militarily strongest in the world. In order to achieve this goal. Trump’s federal government has the option of many different aspects of the military to focus on. Of these, funding weapons of mass destruction, cyber security, and further military research and development prove themselves as most relevant in the contemporary military.

During this last half of the twentieth century the US military was under siege from all sides, internal and external. The root cause of this situation can be traced back to Vietnam and the governments lack of true commitment. What resulted was the near destruction of the US military. The military managed to come out in the end to become perhaps the best military in the world by completely reevaluating itself and reorganizing almost every aspect . The primary focus will be on the reorganization of the Army and Air force, and how they were affected by the disaster of Vietnam. The US military managed to come out one top through completely reorganizing the way the military works and thinks. Focusing

The threat environment has expanded from a strategic, nuclear, symmetrical threat from bombers, ICBMs, and air-or-sea-launched cruise missiles, to a continuing symmetrical threat in addition to an emergent asymmetric threat, focused across all domains, borders and agencies. Accordingly, our political leaders recognized a need to transform the military for a new ‘home game’. United States Northern Command (USNORTHCOM) was established to assume responsibility for the defence of the US homeland, and this new Command was tasked to provide military assistance to civil authorities (MACA).

The Department of Defense (DOD) must decide how to rebalance the armed forces general force structure to meet future challenges and opportunities in an austere fiscal environment. The general force structure and capabilities of Joint Force 2020 necessary to adjust the force based on current strategic direction and fiscal constraints is a smaller, efficient, adaptable and integrated joint force. The 2014 Quadrennial Defense Review (QDR) emphasizes US military forces will evolve and remain modern, capable, and ready while accepting some increased risk through force reductions. Rebalancing will require innovative approaches and solutions to protect the homeland, build global security, project power, and win decisively with a leaner force.

Served as the Levant analyst on the Joint Operation Center (JOC) Current Intelligence Team (CIT) during the Iraq crisis. Tasked with standing up a 24 hour intelligence section on the watch floor to provide intelligence support to the JOC watch staff and joint planning group (JPG). My daily duties were to provide the most up to date information for the daily intelligence summary, commanders read book, and preparation of the daily situational awareness brief for directorate and CG. As a trusted analyst I individually managed, addressed, and answered five requests for information directly from the 2-star Commanding General (CG) without requiring follow ups. Additionally, I supported the joint planning efforts by answering 12 additional requests

The United States military has never been as weak as it is under Barack Obama. In a time where the world is getting more dangerous every day, whether it is the growing threat of ISIS, Russia or North Korea, the current president insists on continuously making cuts to the military. According to an independent panel appointed by the pentagon and congress, “the shrinking U.S. armed forces, which are being downsized to fit that strategy and budget cuts, is a serious strategic misstep on the part of the United States and is inadequate given the future strategic and operational environment.” This essentially means that these cuts are weakening the military so much, that it will be ineffective to deal with global threats.

should adjust its priorities and spending to address the changing nature of threats in the world: What all these potential adversaries—from terrorist cells to rogue nations to rising powers—have in common is that they have learned that it is unwise to confront the United States directly on conventional military terms. The United States cannot take its current dominance for granted and needs to invest in the programs, platforms, and personnel that will ensure that dominance's persistence. But it is also important to keep some perspective. As much as the U.S. Navy has shrunk since the end of the Cold War, for example, in terms of tonnage, its battle fleet is still larger than the next 13 navies combined—and 11 of those 13 navies are U.S. allies or partners." (Staff,

In FY13 the Army will transition as we reduce the size of the assigned personnel and force structure. The initial stage of drawdown for Active Component Operational Support is expected to end by FY15 and begins to eliminate the wartime allowance completed by FY17 affecting the ability formations. The Army has enough Soldiers to fill authorization aggregate, but still has shortages in Rank and Military Occupational Specialty (MOS). We need to assign personnel that are available to determine manning effectiveness as well as readiness in deploying units. Synchronizes and integrates readiness priorities for the war fighter and our Army including all forces. The Army Forces Generation (ARFORGEN) cycle and the Army priorities are already established

The transformation in military thought towards employment of forces across multi-domain operations battlespace is based on the current threats

1. Cyberspace: One trend of the future security environment that will most influence the operational environment (OE) is the impact of the rapidly changing technology on the use of cyberspace, which will in turn effect the Joint Force going into 2025. (Carrington post, July 28, 2016).

America most rebuild its defense. Diplomacy and economic powers are more effective when supported by a military force. The U.S. military is being reduced while its technological advantage is being tested by adversaries. If we as a nation want to protect our interest, we need a military of adequate size, resources, and readiness to deal with not only threats that are known but also inevitable surprises. So we need to increase military readiness across the board. We need to reprioritize defense spending’s while pursuing reforms to the Pentagon and the Department of Defense to make it more efficient.

There will be significant global security challenges facing the United States Military by 2025. The U.S will face multiple, coinciding security issues from state actors and regional networks all taking full benefit of rapid science and technological changes. Three overlapping conflicts which has the greatest potential to influence state and non-state actors and force the Armed Forces to restructure their formations are “Wars of Silicon, Iron, and Shadow. “The United States must design an innovative readiness and investment strategy to successfully deal with all three.” These innovative concepts support Combatant Commanders so; they can win in full spectrum operations and defend U.S. interests at home and overseas. QDR 2014 provides the framework to counter these threats, which are, rebalance for full spectrum conflicts, prioritize U.S. posture to protect U.S. interest, and rebalance the capability, capacity, and readiness of the Joint Force. Joint Force 2025 will need to rebalance, be technologically superior, prioritize capabilities to deter hybrid adversaries, implement and mitigate stringent risk control measures; in addition, contend with the multifarious budgetary constraints.

Thesis: This paper identifies several general key capabilities by service component required to meet the many global threats that will face the Joint Force of 2025. The correct balance of ground force structure and technological superiority in air, sea, and cyber must occur. The global landscape contains threats to U.S. National Interests from state and non-state actors. These threats are spread all over the globe and will require the U.S. Military to strike over long distances need precision munitions, and offensive and defensive cyber technology. It will be difficult to meet these challenges without changes in acquisition strategy, reduction in headquarters staffs, and commitments from allies and partners.

The central problem discussed in this paper is to determine the general capabilities needed to rebalance the Joint Force 2025 (JF25) considering the current strategic challenges and the global security environment. This paper proposes that the JF25 focus on its competitive advantages and curtail ineffective and expensive programs to preserve its ground forces’ capability to provide deterrence and defeat capabilities critical to our National Strategic Objectives. To support this position, this paper articulates the emerging threats to U.S. National Interests and highlights the key strategic direction of published Department of Defense (DoD) strategy and strategic concepts. Secondly, this proposal provides the broad capabilities that the JF25 must aggregate from each service of the DoD. Finally, this paper articulates and mitigates the inherent risks to its proposed capabilities.