How does Command and Control and Intelligence help the JFC and staff integrate, synchronize and direct joint operations?
Joint Force Commands seek to utilize the full spectrum of abilities and strengths that our military possesses across the entire range of the battlefield. Therefore, JFCs typically focus their efforts in particular types of operations and hold back in others. Thus major operation and campaign tactics must utilize the correct balance between offense, defense and stability operations at all points in planning. It is crucial that planning for stability operations be initiated when joint operation planning begins and not to allow a simple focus on offense and defense obfuscate planning. JFCs must possess a strategic long view and anticipate the switch from combat operations (whether offensive or defensive) to the end of joint operations and the reinstitution of civilian control. A myopic focus on planning offensive and defensive operations in the "dominate" phase may risk development of further plans for the "stabilize" and "enable civil authority" phases and ultimately weaken the entire joint operation. JFCs must ensure that even during combat operations that there will be a need to establish security and provide humanitarian support as the enemy is displaced and territory taken.
Major operations and campaigns, whether or not they involve large-scale ground combat, normally will include some level of both offense and defense. Although defense may be the stronger force posture, the offense is normally decisive in combat. Further, protection includes certain defensive measures that are required throughout each joint operation or campaign phase. The relationship between offense and defense, then, is a complementary one. Offensive land operations are combat operations conducted to defeat and destroy enemy land forces and seize terrain, resources and population centers. Offensive land operations impose the commander's will on the enemy. Against a capable, adaptive enemy, the offense is the most direct and sure means of seizing, retaining, and exploiting the initiative to achieve decisive results. Executing offensive land operations compels the enemy to react, creating or revealing weakness that the entire attacking joint force can exploit. Successful ground offensive operations place tremendous pressure on defenders, creating a cycle of deterioration that can lead to their disintegration.
At the operational and strategic level of war, the military must be capable of deploying and fighting to gain access to geographic areas controlled by hostile forces. Forcible entry is the seizing and holding of a military lodgment in the face of armed opposition. Forcible entry operations are normally joint in nature and range in scope from an operation designed as an initial phase of a campaign or major operation to a coup de main in which the decisive results are accomplished in one swift stroke. Armed Forces of the United States maintain three primary forcible entry capabilities or options. These are amphibious assault, airborne assault, and air assault. Local air and/or maritime superiority are essential for the duration of the entry operation. JFCs typically seek to attain more comprehensive control of the potential operating environment, permitting as many such options as possible to frustrate opposing defense planning.
Stability operations cannot occur if significant enemy forces directly threaten or attack the local populace. Offensive land control operations destroy or isolate the enemy so stability operations can proceed by denying enemy forces the opportunity to seize additional terrain, moving them out of population centers of gravity (COGs), and forcing enemy forces to defend. In short, the entire offensive, defensive and stability spectrum of joint operations requires meticulous command, control and intelligence to properly achieve mission objectives.
2) Compare and contrast the MDMP with the JOPP.
To understand the significance and impact the JFHQ transformation process has had on operational planning, a comparison of the old and new planning formats is necessary. Although they both appear to be similar in format and content, they are significantly different. The Army planning process (called MDMP) is a planning model that establishes procedures for analyzing a mission, developing, analyzing, and comparing courses of action against criteria of success and each other, selecting the optimum course of action, and producing a plan or order. The MDMP applies across the spectrum of conflict and range of military operations. Commanders with an assigned staff use the MDMP to organize their planning activities, share a common understanding of the mission and commander's intent, and develop effective plans and orders.