Order from us for quality, customized work in due time of your choice.
Introduction
Operation Anaconda, conducted in the Shahikot Valley of Afghanistan in early March of 2002, was a battle fought in mountainous terrain under challenging conditions. American Special Operations Forces (SOF) decided to cooperate with Afghan forces and U.S. space power to achieve progress in Afghanistan. Executing plans for the combined fires concept of operations was the most challenging aspect. However, for modern military leaders, Operation Anaconda serves as a great example of how the images of Mission Command can be used to overcome unforeseen obstacles and ultimately realize their potential. This essay will not reflect the historical analysis of Anaconda but an analysis of principles of command unity, response to unpredictable events, plan formation, order management, the principle of intent conveying, and risk calculations.
Principle of Organization of Command Centers and Control Tactics
The first principle understood through the problems faced during Anaconda is the organization of command centers and control tactics. In Afghanistan, CENTCOM was forced to manage a complicated, expanding operation from a distance due to the changing nature of the conflict (Caruso, 2019). Carrying out the created plan necessitated striking the right balance between centralized control and decentralized authority. Central management and execution were still prevalent trends during the time of Anaconda, which lowered the efficiency of the whole process.
The principle of command unity with distinct lines of authority and accountability became an essential wartime principle. While the local commander must develop a solid battle strategy, they also need control over the participating forces to execute it. It can be separated and employed individually to deliver focused planning and direction to specific joint expeditionary warfare missions while reporting to the parent geographical command (Caruso, 2019). Leaders must be educated, trained, and equipped with the necessary abilities to integrate joint forces effectively. As a result, the principle that joint skills must be essential across all U.S. military endeavors was learned.
Principles of Preparation for Unpredictable Situations and Intent Clarifying
The goal achieved during the Anaconda Operation is that the mission outcomes demonstrated the need for combined forces to be adequately prepared for upcoming combat operations and unforeseen situations. There is also a necessity to plan multilateral operations with allies carefully. Joint forces must understand the ramifications of arming, training, and operating forces (Caruso, 2019). Thus, the example of the Anaconda showed that the armys foundations must be built for expeditionary operations as the utilization of entire brigades, notably independent brigades.
Principle of Intelligence Assessment and Plans
The ability to convey a clear intent is the third principle. The commanders informed all soldiers of the operations targeted goals, perceived difficulties, and expected opponent size. This information served as the most acceptable direction for achieving the desired goals. The fourth point understood through the operation is that accurate intelligence assessment, carefully crafted battle plans, and cooperatively created backup branches and adaptive strategies are essential for future combined combat operations involving mobile forces.
Principles of Orders, Rules, and Directions of Engagement, Evaluation of Risks
During Anaconda, when forces encountered intense enemy resistance, the complex hammer-and-anvil plan used by the United States and its allies had to be altered (Caruso, 2019). The American ground forces, which constituted several military formations, were exposed to counterattack and a possible defeat after the allied Afghan troops were driven off. The principle shows that for future operations, it is crucial to ensure that the emphasis on effects-based operations and swift, decisive actions is transferred into the geographic commands and their forward-deployed command structures well-equipped operational planning competencies.
The ability to take calculated risks is the fifth. The commanders used this principle to decentralize decision-making and give their troops more power. Throughout the period, they created opportunities and conducted intelligence collection. Anacondas final principle suggests that mission orders, rules of engagement, and associated fire limitations are necessary for U.S. joint forces in combat to provide clear direction. It also needed to exercise appropriate controls and give force commanders the independence and discretion to carry out their missions. In operation, enemy forces frequently engaged with U.S. Army soldiers in close action, and in the Shahikot Valley proper, hostile troops often mixed with Afghan civilian non-combatants (Caruso, 2019). It took careful planning to coordinate air and ground fires to targeting hostile mountain positions with fire. Theoretically, for future missions, commands can assist in explaining combat objectives and actions, offer a solid foundation for centralized planning and decentralized execution, and aid in integrating joint forces (Caruso, 2019). Mission-type instructions disadvantage lower levels such as discretionary authority at the expense of high-level command and control. As a result, fewer additional personnel will be needed to make timely decisions according to this empowerment.
Conclusion
In conclusion, each principle contributes to the achievement of the goals of the mission. Hence, careful planning must ensure the right resources are available to carry out all essential duties. Higher management should offer appropriate power for planning to achieve that goal and clarify the intention to soldiers, providing efficient communication. The U.S. military should thoroughly evaluate the joint ground and air planning cycle, principles, practices, and programs to guarantee that air operations are fully integrated with ground operations while addressing possible risks and ways of force support in the air and on the ground.
Reference
Caruso., D. (2019). Operation Anaconda. Americas first major battle in Afghanistan. The Oral History Review, 39, 334-336.
Order from us for quality, customized work in due time of your choice.