Lt. Gen. Xavier Brunson, commanding general of I Corps and Joint Base Lewis-McChord, Washington, last spring released his vision for how I Corps operates as the U.S. Indo-Pacific Command’s operational U.S. Army headquarters.

Despite the creation of interior lines in the Indo-Pacific area of responsibility by employing land power below the level of armed conflict, a large contingent of I Corps forces remains at home station throughout a given year recovering, training and posturing for future missions. Massing combat power at decisive points begins before forces ever enter the theater. When the transition to crisis or conflict occurs, forces at home station must be ready to deploy at a scale potentially not seen by the U.S. Army in over 20 years.

This potential magnitude of deployment operations requires competencies that atrophied over two decades of focus on the global war on terrorism.

No Sanctuary

As the Army continues to pivot toward large-scale combat operations, a key aspect of multidomain operations complicating deployments is the understanding that the homeland is no longer a sanctuary. Adversaries, domestic disturbances and natural disasters will contest the deployment of U.S. forces. The Army’s existing official program for promoting deployment readiness, the Command Deployment Discipline Program, is insufficient to address the gap in competencies of deployment operations and the challenges of a contested homeland.

Army installations and formations need comprehensive deployment readiness programs that will educate soldiers and leaders, train the force and build deployment proficiency in preparation for the next major conflict.

I Corps’ answer to this problem, nesting with Brunson’s vision of how I Corps fights, is the I Corps Deployment Readiness Program, known as CDRP.

The Army has long had a troubled history preparing for future conflict. The early American mindset regarding a standing army impaired efforts to develop, maintain and prepare for land conflict. The Army has drawn criticism for being ill-prepared for the first battle of the next war, with deployment of Task Force Smith during the initial stages of the Korean War providing the most visible and disturbing example.

Changes Made

During the post-Vietnam War era, Army leaders made foundational changes to transform the Army into a force prepared for large-scale combat operations against the Soviet threat. A major component of this transformation was the Return of Forces to Germany series, which deployed large formations for exercises to Europe. These REFORGER exercises helped institutionalize deployment readiness, which permeated the force from senior leaders down to the lowest levels.

Being an expert soldier encompassed being an expert in how to rapidly move equipment and personnel from home station to conflict. The era’s focus on deployment readiness later manifested in the Army’s response to Iraqi aggression and malign behavior in operations Desert Shield, Desert Storm and Iraqi Freedom.

However, in the years following Operation Iraqi Freedom I, the Army engaged in predictable deployment cycles at brigade- and below-sized echelons. Soldiers and leaders focused on gaining competencies required to fight irregular threats. While certain deployment skills atrophied due to lack of relevance during predictable deployments, other skills withered due to contracted support for deployment functions, such as privately owned vehicle storage or barracks management.

As the Army emerged from two decades of such operations and sought to focus more on preparing for the next large-scale conflict, leadership noted a decline in skills that were once a hallmark of well-trained and disciplined units. The CDRP seeks to address these challenges through four lines of effort: Courage Ready, prepare-to-deploy support, the Deployment Tabletop Exercise and posturing for the transition to crisis and conflict.

Loading Up

The first CDRP line of effort is Courage Ready, which is the I Corps Deployment Readiness Exercise program. This program focuses on deployment readiness exercises aimed at battalion-sized elements for divisions, and company-sized elements for corps-enabling brigades. Courage Ready focuses on Level II deployment readiness exercises, which involve installation actions and rehearsals of loading equipment and personnel on transportation platforms. The heart of the Courage Ready program is the Courage Ready Assessment Team, consisting of deployment experts from I Corps staff and supporting agencies.

While the Courage Ready Assessment Team assesses Level II deployment readiness exercises against Department of the Army, U.S. Army Forces Command and I Corps standards, the most important feature the team brings involves its ability to teach, coach and mentor deploying units while sharing best practices across I Corps. Courage Ready requires major commands to complete a Level II deployment readiness exercise during a fiscal year. In addition to the Courage Ready deployment readiness exercises, I Corps places separate deployment readiness exercise requirements on units assuming a prepare-to-deploy mission.

Readiness Support

The second CDRP line of effort is prepare-to-deploy support. I Corps requires units assuming such a mission to complete a Level II deployment readiness exercise prior to mission assumption and quarterly while on a mission. During mission-assumption months when prepare-to-deploy units do not conduct a Level II deployment readiness exercise, I Corps requires these units to conduct a Level I deployment readiness exercise. A Level I deployment readiness exercise evaluates a unit’s ability to alert, assemble and conduct soldier readiness processing, meet Command Deployment Discipline Program requirements, and validate the unit’s deployment list of equipment. A Level II deployment readiness exercise includes all the Level I tasks, plus those noted above.

While many may view these requirements as implied tasks, the atrophy in deployment readiness competencies, coupled with myriad competing requirements placed on Army formations, necessitates making these specified tasks to help ensure readiness.

For large prepare-to-deploy missions or missions involving short deployment timelines, I Corps issues orders to synchronize deploying units and installation support. For such complex deployment operations, I Corps also may conduct preparation activities such as confirmation briefs, back briefs, rehearsals and tabletop exercises to ensure unit and installation readiness. Integration of installation support and deploying units is the focus of the next aspect of CDRP: the Deployment Tabletop Exercise.

Tabletop Exercise

The I Corps Deployment Tabletop Exercise is planned and executed over the course of a fiscal year with I Corps leadership, staff, installation agencies and major subordinate commands. It consists of a large-scale deployment scenario that satisfies annual Department of the Army requirements for deployment readiness. The Deployment Tabletop Exercise provides a means for I Corps to conduct formal analysis of its deployment standard operating procedures and Installation Deployment Support Plan.

Several events occur throughout the fiscal year and precede the Deployment Tabletop Exercise itself, enabling continuous organizational learning for deployment operations. The Deployment Tabletop Exercise cycle for a given fiscal year begins with the deployment operations order, which details the plan for how the installation and deploying units will move equipment and personnel according to DoD-required timelines. The plan may align with an existing operational plan, or it may follow a constructive scenario designed to stress certain aspects of deployment operations per command guidance.

As units complete their supporting plans, I Corps conducts a Deployment Tabletop Exercise command-and-control rehearsal. This rehearsal requires units and the installation to validate the communications architecture supporting deployment operations. I Corps then rehearses key supporting events, such as issuing an alert, rapid decision-making and synchronization events, deployment battle rhythm events and reporting.

Following the command-and-control rehearsal, I Corps conducts the Deployment Tabletop Exercise, where the installation and commands analyze deployment plans, identify friction points and rehearse responses to contingencies such as adversary actions, domestic threats or natural disasters.

Preparing for Transition

In January 2023, I Corps aligned an installation deployment readiness exercise on Joint Base Lewis-McChord with the annual Deployment Tabletop Exercise. The corps codifies the outputs of the exercise in revisions to the standard operating procedures, which is the major output of the Deployment Tabletop Exercise series. While the first three CDRP lines of effort focus on deployment operations from home station, these lines of effort do not directly support transitions from competition to crisis or conflict for forces already forward in theater. The CDRP posture line of effort addresses these challenges.

I Corps employs forces extensively during a given fiscal year to achieve operational and strategic objectives, placing combat-credible forces west of the international date line for operations during competition. But transitioning from competition to crisis requires additional preparation by units and installation support agencies. Logistical constraints, fiscal stewardship and diplomatic agreements with partners and allies throughout the Indo-Pacific area of operations may preclude I Corps forces from being ideally postured for crisis and conflict.

Specific examples include possible restrictions on articles of war, limitations on certain activities during competition, or limits on the number of deployed personnel to a given country. The CDRP posture line of efforts seek to mitigate the inherent risk during transition to crisis and conflict through prestaging required equipment and preparing rear detachments to support forward-deployed forces.

Regaining Proficiency

Over two decades of largely predictable brigade- and below-sized deployments, the Army lost proficiency in planning, executing and supporting deployments for large-scale combat operations. NCOs and junior to midgrade officers have lost competencies that were once an integral part of the black boot Army during the Cold War era.

The Army’s existing institutional program, the Command Deployment Discipline Program, is insufficient to address this capability gap. Units must develop commander-driven comprehensive programs to address this problem. Deployment readiness programs should rehearse and evaluate actions from the small-unit level through the actions of divisions and corps.

With commander emphasis, rehearsals and relentless preparation, the Army will be prepared to deploy for the next large-scale ground conflict, massing combat power at required decisive points and securing victory.

* * *

Lt. Col. Alex Bedard is the deputy future operations director for I Corps, Joint Base Lewis-McChord, Washington. Commissioned as an infantry officer, he graduated from the U.S. Military Academy, West Point, New York, in 2006. He has two master’s degrees: one in kinesiology from the University of Virginia, and one in military operations from the School of Advanced Military Studies, U.S. Army Command and General Staff College.

Maj. Sharon Wheelock is the lead planner for the Deployment Readiness Program, Future Operations Section, I Corps. Commissioned as an aviator, she has a master’s in military operations from the School of Advanced Military Studies.