- Reaction score
- 146
- Points
- 710
A rather lengthy Torch post (note US Army brigade combat team coming to Kandahar and Herat as trainers):
Afstan: New US Marines, Army aviation, start arriving; US command structure changes?
http://toyoufromfailinghands.blogspot.com/2009/05/afstan-new-us-marines-army-aviation.html
End of post:
Mark
Ottawa
Afstan: New US Marines, Army aviation, start arriving; US command structure changes?
http://toyoufromfailinghands.blogspot.com/2009/05/afstan-new-us-marines-army-aviation.html
End of post:
...
Lt.-Gen. McKiernan is now double-hatted as ISAF commander (reporting to NATO HQ) and commander, United States Forces-Afghanistan (reporting to Centcom commander, Gen. Petraeus).
http://toyoufromfailinghands.blogspot.com/2009/03/more-unity-of-command-for-us-forces-in.html
That provides a bit of command unity, though hardly ideal.
http://toyoufromfailinghands.blogspot.com/2008/11/unity-of-command-in-afghanistan.html
Heaven knows how two American three-stars would affect the situation. If the second Lt.-Gen. is "day-to-day, committed to the fight -- an operational commander", would he be de facto in charge of both ISAF and USFOR-A? Would McKiernan keep ISAF with Rodriguez taking USFOR-A? In which case what about unity of command?
Moreover, would "a second commanding general with a large staff of officers", presumably as part of USFOR-A, in effect supplant ISAF as the real HQ for forces formally under NATO? All a bit confusin', must be a lot of buzzing going on at Brussels.
Update thought: Is there a corps headquarters under a three-star, in the Kabul area, of some sort in mind with charge of operations (cf. the Multi-National Corps - Iraq)? In Iraq the broader picture is the job of the four-star in command of the Multi-National Force - Iraq. But international operations in Iraq have one chain of command; those in Afstan have two, so the Iraqi model cannot be applied holus-bolus. Round holes and square pegs.
Mark
Ottawa