2. TACTICALLY:
The “Fusion Warfare” integrated doctrine will be principally driven through two vehicles, the military specific battle doctrine (fed by the other CRF Pillar disciplines noted), and the generally non-military based geographic influence countering/partnering Strategic Wooing Plans (SWOOPs - see Part 11), all employing the OODA Loop decision making process.
a) Militarily: Create the Fusion Warfare “MULI-PLEX (or “”FLEX-PLEX”) Battle Doctrine:
Adopt and create what the Analyst will coin a “MULTI-PLEX (or “FLEX-PLEX”) Military Battle Doctrine”.
Note: Alternatively, the actual “military specific battle doctrine” might too be just as easily called “Fusion Warfare”, the 2 generational (7th versus 5th) successor to “Maneuver Warfare”. Just like “New York” State has a “New York” City, “Fusion War” as a strategy can also have a tactical (military only) “Fusion War” component, as it fuses together sea, air, land, space, cyber and special forces.
In support of a “Fusion Warfare” global environment and specifically as respects military/battle operations (recall strategic “Fusion Warfare” also includes non-military specific pieces such as strategic partnering/economic/political et al), create a new “MULTI-PLEX (FLEX-PLEX) Engagement Doctrine” doctrine to successfully engage that new complex and integrated multiple force global threat environment.
Meaning “MULTIple” (or FLEX-ible) forces (Multiple diverse and currently segmented Army, Navy/Marines, Air Force, Space, Special/CIA paramilitary, intelligence, information, and asymmetric services, etc.), integrated to optimally address and engage the new “ComPLEX” global threat environment.
In other words, Cold War I was based upon “one” dimension/threat 4th/5th Generation Warfare (5GW) based “Maneuver Warfare”. Cold War II requires an altogether new “Fusion Warfare Military Battle Order Doctrine” be built – an advanced “Multi-Plex (Flex-Plex) Engagement Doctrine” to address the “multi” dimension, evolving, mutating superpower military and/or terror threat(s).
In doing so, the U.S.WEAST should dust off (more likely, start from scratch) shelved Cold War I contingency plans (including adding new and rapidly changing asymmetric parameters) and comprehensively upgrading and/or re-engineering them to reflect the new China (and Russia) Fusion Warfare “integrated economic/military” threat reality, coupled with the growing global terror threat.
That is, create and adopt a new, innovative and integrated Cold War II Fusion Warfare Military/Intelligence Doctrine embracing Conventional, Irregular and Asymmetric warfare et al capabilities. In other words, a comprehensive “MULTI-PLEX (or FLEX-PLEX) Engagement Doctrine”.
Bottom line, “Multi (FLEX)-Plex” Military Doctrine becomes a subset of the entire Fusion Warfare Doctrine.
b) Non-Militarily
Integrate and implement political and economic driven SWOOP Plans – See coming Part 11.
B) CEASE Joint PRC/U.S. Military Cooperation/Exercises et al:
Immediately cease conducting and terminate planning any joint U.S./PLA military “cooperation” and/or exercises.
The Nov. 5, 2007 Associated Press release regarding the meeting and agreements between Defense Secretary Robert Gates and Chinese Defense Minister Cao Gangchuan is a very disturbing development and another example of China’s “carrot for expertise” strategy. That from the standpoint of the U.S. naiveté in not only still not recognizing it, but too taking the carrot, while the Chinese get new access to U.S. sensitive military insights/expertise/infrastructure. The carrot this time being an offer by the Chinese government to help the U.S. in discussions with Iran on the nuclear issue.
Next Page 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7
(Note: You can view every article as one long page if you sign up as an Advocate Member, or higher).
