By Ann Roosevelt
The Army’s annual Title 10 war game for the future force, Unified Quest 08 (UQ08), will have a national level guidance that officials from the Army Training and Doctrine Command (TRADOC), U.S. Special Operations Command (SOCOM) and U.S. Joint Forces Command (JFCOM) are working through right now.
National security strategy frameworks developed in a seminar this month will lead officials to that national level guidance for UQ08 and also provide the frame for strategic guidance for the integration of the national elements of power. Both will provide an overarching vision for the war game that will work to define approaches for the future.
The game, set around 2013, is expected by Army Chief of Staff Gen. George Casey to isolate and frame the issues around current and future forces to achieve and maintain persistent security in an era consistently defined as one of persistent conflict.
UQ08 would refine and clarify how the military contributes to and aids other elements of national power in damping conflict and promoting stability around the world, to inform senior military leaders as they make budget and program decisions and determine what forces look like and how they operate in the future.
The game is informed by senior leaders such as Army TRADOC Commander, Gen. Scott Wallace, who said this fall that national security is “inextricably linked” to global security- -which depends on the employment of other elements of national power, not just the military “because we know we can’t go it alone.”
Those other elements require not just U.S. military local security but local security. “These are valuable parts of our allies and our coalition partners; they are the police and military–folks we assist in developing capabilities to provide that local security so those other elements of power–not just the U.S.’s but their own internal elements of power–can thrive or at least be employed,” Wallace said.
Additionally, the game is informed by Defense Secretary Robert Gates, who said in a recent speech: “Arguably the most important military component in the war on terror is not the fighting we do ourselves, but how well we enable and empower our partners to defend and govern themselves.”
Under study are three strategies–a strategy of good governance, a strategy of global leaders and democracy, and a strategy of selective engagement–resulting from the Jan. 14- 17 Winter Strategy Seminar, which drew experts from government and academia to the Booz Allen Hamilton Conference Center in McLean, Va.
Separate panels worked out the strategies that looked at a variety of trends such as urbanization in a world characterized by complexity and adaptive challenges. The panels also took into account a recent Center for Strategic and International Studies commission report on Smart Power–the judicious use of hard power: military and economic might, and soft power: the ability to influence and persuade, as a vision for U.S. global engagement.
The goals of all three strategies showed overlap and similarity, such as more stability around the world, more credibility for the United States, strengthened international institutions and reliable access to global markets, information and resources.
The panels examined the ways and means to achieve their stated end states. For example, the good governance strategy would promote reliable access to global markets, information and resources by protecting global commons using the means of a strong and effective military.
The strategy of global leaders and democracy would achieve an end state of improving U.S. credibility by finding ways to strengthen soft power, using the means of having the right message, with the right actions, organizations, people and a robust feedback system.
A strategy of selective engagement aiming for stability would find ways to refurbish and upgrade deterrence processes for one thing, and achieve it by means of strategic ability– a capability for full spectrum intervention and improved international relations.
Among the strategies, selective engagement assumed the most risk because of its basis in the choice of when and how to involve the nation–the military or other areas of government. It also relies on international institutions that may have divergent goals from the United States or be led by other nations.
Panel discussions and observations agreed that knowledge and understanding of the problem to solve were vital. And the understanding must go beyond counting the number of trucks and tanks other militaries have. This understanding must go into non-military areas, social, economic, and cultural, to name three. On the path toward UQ08, analysts and planners will pull the needed nuggets from the Winter Strategy Seminar and incorporate them into coming events as well as the strategic guidance for UQ08.
An Operational Command Workshop is slated shortly followed by a SOCOM-sponsored Irregular Warfare Seminar, and then a Persistent Security Seminar, culminating in Unified Quest 08 in May at Carlisle Barracks, Pa.