Regionally Aligned Forces (RAF): Concept Viability and Implementation - Carlisle Compendia of Collaborative Research - Fires, Intelligence, Movement, Maneuver, Sustainment, Protection, SOF Integration

Nonfiction, History, Military, United States
Cover of the book Regionally Aligned Forces (RAF): Concept Viability and Implementation - Carlisle Compendia of Collaborative Research - Fires, Intelligence, Movement, Maneuver, Sustainment, Protection, SOF Integration by Progressive Management, Progressive Management
View on Amazon View on AbeBooks View on Kobo View on B.Depository View on eBay View on Walmart
Author: Progressive Management ISBN: 9781310308789
Publisher: Progressive Management Publication: December 12, 2015
Imprint: Smashwords Edition Language: English
Author: Progressive Management
ISBN: 9781310308789
Publisher: Progressive Management
Publication: December 12, 2015
Imprint: Smashwords Edition
Language: English

Professionally converted for accurate flowing-text e-book format reproduction, this excellent book by the U.S. Army provides an analysis of the Regionally Aligned Forces (RAF) concept.

The Army defines Regionally Aligned Forces (RAF) as: 1) those units assigned or allocated to combatant commands, and 2) those service-retained, combatant command-aligned forces prepared by the Army for regional missions. They are drawn from the total force, including the Active Army, the Army National Guard, and the Army Reserve.3 RAF consist of organizations and capabilities that are forward stationed, operating in a combatant command area of responsibility, and supporting (or ready to support) combatant commands through reach-back capabilities from outside the area of responsibility. Furthermore, RAF conduct operational missions, bilateral and multilateral military exercises, and theater security cooperation activities.4 In theory, the RAF concept provides a scalable, tailorable capability to meet combatant commanders' steady-state and phase zero shaping requirements. Additionally, the RAF concept improves the Army's ability to provide culturally and regionally aware forces for specific missions. As U.S. bases overseas are reduced, the challenge will be to maintain robust regional engagement. The RAF concept is designed to meet this challenge.

Neither the Secretary of Defense nor any combatant commanders have directed the Army to implement RAF. Since 2001, the revised global defense posture and the pursuit of increased cost savings have shifted force basing back to the United States. Increased emphasis on U.S.-based forces could undermine our current global posture. The RAF concept, however, increases the operational tempo of the U.S.-based troops and correspondingly increases annual operating costs. When compared to traditional U.S.-based training activities, RAF is an Army-induced cost that must be addressed when explaining the concept.

The Army's mission, and the justification for force structure, remains to fight and win the nation's wars. The Army force generation (ARFORGEN) model directs Army units to prepare for likely military scenarios as prioritized in the defense strategy. ARFORGEN drives the prioritization of training resources. RAF is the supporting concept that drives force alignment for shaping operations within a theater or region. Shaping operations should be aligned with the prioritization of resources in ARFORGEN and the defense strategy. In a resource-constrained environment the supporting nature of the RAF concept should not be confused with the primary mission. In earlier times, combatant commands were assigned troops to perform the supported mission. Assigned forces conducted shaping operations and performed across the spectrum of conflict, to include theater and regional security cooperation activities. The RAF concept provides forces to a combatant commander without the full expense of forward basing. Regionally Aligned Forces, however, cannot easily prepare for ARFORGEN and RAF missions simultaneously. Opportunity costs among conflicting activities, training opportunities, and missions will occur. The strategic narrative must clearly articulate that RAF support combatant commanders' missions to prepare to fight and win the nation's wars. Current confusion about why the Army is implementing the RAF concept makes it appear that the RAF concept is a self-generated mission designed to ensure relevancy of a U.S.-based Army. The RAF concept is not the supported mission of the Army, nor should it appear to be.

View on Amazon View on AbeBooks View on Kobo View on B.Depository View on eBay View on Walmart

Professionally converted for accurate flowing-text e-book format reproduction, this excellent book by the U.S. Army provides an analysis of the Regionally Aligned Forces (RAF) concept.

The Army defines Regionally Aligned Forces (RAF) as: 1) those units assigned or allocated to combatant commands, and 2) those service-retained, combatant command-aligned forces prepared by the Army for regional missions. They are drawn from the total force, including the Active Army, the Army National Guard, and the Army Reserve.3 RAF consist of organizations and capabilities that are forward stationed, operating in a combatant command area of responsibility, and supporting (or ready to support) combatant commands through reach-back capabilities from outside the area of responsibility. Furthermore, RAF conduct operational missions, bilateral and multilateral military exercises, and theater security cooperation activities.4 In theory, the RAF concept provides a scalable, tailorable capability to meet combatant commanders' steady-state and phase zero shaping requirements. Additionally, the RAF concept improves the Army's ability to provide culturally and regionally aware forces for specific missions. As U.S. bases overseas are reduced, the challenge will be to maintain robust regional engagement. The RAF concept is designed to meet this challenge.

Neither the Secretary of Defense nor any combatant commanders have directed the Army to implement RAF. Since 2001, the revised global defense posture and the pursuit of increased cost savings have shifted force basing back to the United States. Increased emphasis on U.S.-based forces could undermine our current global posture. The RAF concept, however, increases the operational tempo of the U.S.-based troops and correspondingly increases annual operating costs. When compared to traditional U.S.-based training activities, RAF is an Army-induced cost that must be addressed when explaining the concept.

The Army's mission, and the justification for force structure, remains to fight and win the nation's wars. The Army force generation (ARFORGEN) model directs Army units to prepare for likely military scenarios as prioritized in the defense strategy. ARFORGEN drives the prioritization of training resources. RAF is the supporting concept that drives force alignment for shaping operations within a theater or region. Shaping operations should be aligned with the prioritization of resources in ARFORGEN and the defense strategy. In a resource-constrained environment the supporting nature of the RAF concept should not be confused with the primary mission. In earlier times, combatant commands were assigned troops to perform the supported mission. Assigned forces conducted shaping operations and performed across the spectrum of conflict, to include theater and regional security cooperation activities. The RAF concept provides forces to a combatant commander without the full expense of forward basing. Regionally Aligned Forces, however, cannot easily prepare for ARFORGEN and RAF missions simultaneously. Opportunity costs among conflicting activities, training opportunities, and missions will occur. The strategic narrative must clearly articulate that RAF support combatant commanders' missions to prepare to fight and win the nation's wars. Current confusion about why the Army is implementing the RAF concept makes it appear that the RAF concept is a self-generated mission designed to ensure relevancy of a U.S.-based Army. The RAF concept is not the supported mission of the Army, nor should it appear to be.

More books from Progressive Management

Cover of the book Dead on Arrival? The Development of the Aerospace Concept, 1944-58: Space Age After Sputnik, Debates About Aerospace, Truman and Eisenhower, Air Force, ORDCIT, von Braun, von Karman, Schriever by Progressive Management
Cover of the book The First Flight Across the Atlantic, May 1919: Curtiss Flying Boat, NC-1, NC-4 Restoration by Progressive Management
Cover of the book Analysis of Health Service Support with Frontier Surgeons and Ambulance Corps to 1876 Centennial Campaign: Sheridan's War Against the Sioux and Cheyenne Native American on Indian Hunting Grounds by Progressive Management
Cover of the book Fermilab Radiological Control Program Manual: ALARA, Radioactive Material Control, Waste Management, Dosimetry, Monitoring, Exposure, Health Support, Surveys, Accelerators by Progressive Management
Cover of the book U.S. Marines in Battle: The Battle of An-Nasiriyah, Iraq and An-Nasiriyah on the Eve of War - March 23 to April 2, 2003, Task Force Tarawa, PFC Jessica Lynch, Ambush Alley by Progressive Management
Cover of the book China Policies and Controversies: U.S. Military Papers - PLA, Deception, Maritime Quest, Navy, Taiwan Arms Sales, Turkey and China, plus 2014 U.S. Intelligence Threat Assessment by Progressive Management
Cover of the book Air Force Leadership Study: The Need for Deliberate Development - Leadership Concepts for Air Force Officers, Changes in Personnel and Education Policy by Progressive Management
Cover of the book A Fit, Fighting Force: The Air Force Nursing Services Chronology - Highlights and Turning Points, From World War II and Its Aftermath to the New Century by Progressive Management
Cover of the book Orienting Our Sights on the Future: Opportunities and Challenges of the Arab Revolts by Progressive Management
Cover of the book Pakistan: Federal Research Study and Country Profile with Comprehensive Information, History, and Analysis - Politics, Economy, Military, Islamabad by Progressive Management
Cover of the book 21st Century Peacekeeping and Stability Operations Institute (PKSOI) Papers - Mass Atrocity Prevention and Response Options (MAPRO): A Policy Planning Handbook - Stopping Genocide by Progressive Management
Cover of the book NASA's Space Shuttle Program: Astronaut Oral Histories (Set 4) - Richards, Ride, Ross, Seddon, Shaw, Shriver, Spring, Sullivan, Thagard, Truly, van Hoften, Walker - Columbia, Challenger Accidents by Progressive Management
Cover of the book With the I Marine Expeditionary Force in Desert Shield and Desert Storm: U.S. Marines in the Persian Gulf, 1990-1991 - Gulf War, Iraq, Kuwait, Warfighting, Psychological Warfare, Deception by Progressive Management
Cover of the book A Pattern for Joint Operations: World War II Close Air Support, North Africa - Weapons, Doctrine, Aircraft, Planning, TORCH Landings, Offensive Against Tunisia, Kasserine and a New Look by Progressive Management
Cover of the book Who Should Call The Shots? Resolving Friction in the Targeting Process: Clausewitz, Clinton, Cohen, Wesley Clark, Colin Powell, Vietnam, Kosovo, Iraq, Gulf War by Progressive Management
We use our own "cookies" and third party cookies to improve services and to see statistical information. By using this website, you agree to our Privacy Policy