The Army’s new and vital model for generating forces to meet current demands around the world is an “evolving system” of people, equipment, education and training, Gen. Dan McNeill told a standing-room only crowd on the second day of the AUSA Annual Meeting Oct. 4. “Everybody is a stakeholder,” he said.
McNeill, commanding general of Forces Command, served as leader of the five-member panel, which included Gen. Benjamin Griffin, commanding general Army Materiel Command; Lt. Gen. William Wallace, commanding general Combined Arms Center and Fort Leavenworth; Lt. Gen. James R. Helmly, chief of the Army Reserve; Lt. Gen. Steve H. Blum, chief of the National Guard Bureau; and Lt. Gen. Clyde Vaughn, director, Army National Guard. Grace Parker served as panel moderator.
McNeill, providing a historical context for changes in force generation during the past two years, said that the system being implemented is “not a time-based but an event oriented” model that is designed to correct force generation in a “protracted war,” as in Iraq and Afghanistan. Ultimately the model is designed to improve the predictability of available forces and is three-pronged and graduated, with individuals moving from a “Reset/Training” pool to a “Ready” pool to an “Available” pool.
“Everybody fits into one of these pools,” said McNeill. Brigade based, the system represents constant movement within the brigade but longer tours within the brigade for individual soldiers, which will benefit the mission in the long run and will provide greater stability for military families. McNeill envisions 12 to 16 active brigade combat teams and two to four citizen-soldier brigade combat teams.
“My job is to support the forces,” explained Griffin. Within the new model, seven sub-commands fall directly under Griffin’s command: Chemical Materials; Tank-Automotive and Armaments; Army Field Support; Aviation and Missiles; Communications-Electronics; Research, Development and Engineering; and U.S. Army Security Assistance. He described the system as a series of “life-cycle management commands [that are] soldier focused.”
“Are we there?” Gen. Griffin asked rhetorically. “No. Are we getting there? Yes.”
Committed to the success of the brigade-based force generation, Griffin said that he “intend[s] to use all the resources available to sustain the force,” much of which will take place in the continental United States. “Our motto,” Griffin said, is “Faster, Quicker, Less Bureaucratic.” In addition, he noted, the model is ultimately a joint effort among other services, civilian contractors, and the Army.
Wallace called the impact of the new model on professional military education and training “profound.” Both training and education cycles must adapt to support the new Army Force Generation. Wallace said he has already reviewed and altered a number of education and training programs to make them more efficiently in line with the new model, including smaller classes and quicker class turn around. Among the challenges that lie ahead, Griffin said, is making sure that the model is in effect in all training/educational venues.
Helmly said the new model represents a shift from “tiered resourcing to robustness.”
“We do not have a balanced force,” Helmly said describing the Army Reserve Command. “We are a complementary specialized force.” To work within the new model, Helmly said, “we must decentralize mobilization of forces.” The system, he said, is not that way now. To accomplish that, he noted, the Army must reduce “overstructure.”
“Today we find ourselves in a situation” that doesn’t regenerate leaders, said Vaughn. The force structure of the Army National Guard must be a full-spectrum force within the new model, he said. Among the goals of the Guard now are 100 percent authorized end strength, reduced mobilization time, and minimal cross-leveling.