10 July 2003
Excerpt: Franks Cites Integration of Forces, Weapons for Iraq Success
(Decisive combat operations have been completed in Iraq, Afghanistan)
(3920)
Army General Tommy Franks attributed the considerable success of
military operations in Iraq to the effective integration of coalition
ground forces, special operations forces (SOF), and precision weapons
systems that proved highly lethal for enemy forces, but also proved
non-lethal for most of the civilian population and the country's vital
infrastructure.
"This integration enabled conventional (air, ground, and sea) forces
to leverage SOF capabilities to deal effectively with asymmetric
threats and enable precision targeting simultaneously in the same
battle space," Franks said July 9 in testimony to the Senate Armed
Services Committee, which is examining the lessons learned from
operations in Afghanistan and Iraq. Franks stepped down this month as
commander of the U.S. Central Command (CENTCOM), which was responsible
for operations in both countries.
Franks said that while security does continue to improve in Iraq,
there are portions of the country that are dangerous and will remain
so for some time. He said the term "stability operations" does not
mean that combat operations have ended.
"Military forces are still required to set conditions that enable
progress," Franks said. "As we move forward, the composition and size
of our forces will change to match emerging requirements."
He said that currently 19 coalition countries are providing support to
military operations in Iraq, and deployments are pending for an
additional 19 countries.
"Underlying all security functions is the need to continue
humanitarian assistance and the conduct of civil-military operations
to improve the quality of life for the Iraqi people," Franks said. "In
this regard, our regional allies have been invaluable. Neighboring
nations have provided hospitals, medical supplies, water, food, and
expertise in beginning the rebuilding process."
Franks said coalition forces in Afghanistan have been effective in
denying former Taliban and al-Qaida forces sanctuary while also
disrupting their ability to plan, target, rehearse and execute
operations. He said the key is aggressive combat patrolling from
secure fire bases and forward operating bases, in order to promote
stability, enhance the legitimacy of the Interim Transitional
Government of Afghanistan, and prevent the re-emergence of terrorism.
"Our efforts in Afghanistan have given the Afghan people a chance to
break the chain of violence, civil war, and poverty that many have
endured their entire lives," he said.
Following are excerpts from Franks' prepared remarks:
(The following abbreviations and acronyms are used in the excerpts:
-- SOF: special operations forces.
-- C4I: command, control, communications, computers and intelligence.
-- C2: command and control.
-- OIF: Operation Iraqi Freedom.
-- ID: identification.
-- FOB: forward operating base.
-- ITGA: Interim Transitional Government of Afghanistan.
-- OEF: Operation Enduring Freedom.
-- DoD/CIA: Department of Defense and the Central Intelligence Agency.
-- FY03: fiscal year 2003.
-- $908M: $908,000,000.
-- FMF: foreign military financing.
-- GWOT: global war on terrorism.
-- WMD: weapons of mass destruction.
-- USCENTCOM: U.S. Central Command.)
(begin excerpt)
STATEMENT OF GENERAL TOMMY R. FRANKS
FORMER COMMANDER
U.S. CENTRAL COMMAND
BEFORE THE SENATE ARMED SERVICES COMMITTEE
July 9, 2003
OPERATION IRAQI FREEDOM -- LESSONS LEARNED
Decisive combat in Iraq saw a maturing of joint force operations in
many ways. Some capabilities reached new performance levels. From a
Joint Integration perspective, our experience in OPERATIONS Southern
and Northern Watch, and Enduring Freedom helped to develop a joint
culture in our headquarters and in our components. These operations
helped to improve joint interoperability and improve our joint C4I
networks as joint force synergy was taken to new levels of
sophistication. Our forces were able to achieve their operational
objectives by integrating ground maneuver, special operations,
precision lethal fires and non-lethal effects. We saw for the first
time integration of forces rather than deconfliction of forces. This
integration enabled conventional (air, ground, and sea) forces to
leverage SOF capabilities to deal effectively with asymmetric threats
and enable precision targeting simultaneously in the same battle
space. Likewise, Special Operators were able to use conventional
forces to enhance and enable special missions. Operational fires
spearheaded our ground maneuver, as our forces sustained the momentum
of the offense while defeating enemy formations in open, complex, and
urban terrain.
We saw jointness, precision munitions, C2, equipment readiness, state
of training of the troops, and Coalition support as clear "winners"
during OIF.
That said, we also identified a number of areas which require
additional work. Fratricide prevention suffered from a lack of
standardized combat identification. Units in theater arrived with
seven different combat ID systems, and our commanders were forced to
overcome these shortcomings "on the fly". Deployment planning and
execution were cumbersome, and need to be improved to meet the
operational demands of the 21st Century. And, Coalition information
sharing must be improved at all levels. Finally, human intelligence
and communications bandwidth are also areas which will require
continuing focus.
OPERATION ENDURING FREEDOM -- LESSONS LEARNED
In Afghanistan, Coalition forces continue to deny anti-coalition
elements sanctuary while disrupting their ability to plan, target,
rehearse and execute operations. This is accomplished through active
combat patrolling from secure fire bases and forward operating bases
(FOB) in order to promote stability, enhance the legitimacy of the
Interim Transitional Government of Afghanistan (ITGA), and prevent the
re-emergence of terrorism.
During OEF, we saw a number of functional areas and capabilities that
reached new levels of performance. In some areas, improvements were
made prior to Operation Iraqi Freedom. For example the DoD/CIA synergy
which worked well during OEF was built upon the integration of liaison
officers in each of our headquarters which facilitated teamwork and
paid great dividends in Iraq.
Also, we continued to leverage coalition strengths as new Coalition
members were added. "The mission determines the Coalition; the
Coalition does not determine the mission."
Advanced technologies employed during OEF were also critical. The
command and control of air, ground, naval, and SOF from 7,000 miles
away was a unique experience in warfare as our forces achieved
unprecedented real time situational awareness and C2 connectivity. We
learned that precision-guided munitions represent a force multiplier.
Low collateral damage during both OEF and OIF was a fundamental factor
in achieving our objectives. Early in OEF we saw the need for an
unmanned sensor-to-shooter capability to support time-sensitive
targeting (TST). The armed Predator demonstrates great potential and
will be a high payoff system in the future. Blue Force Tracking and
enhanced C4I systems increase lethality and decrease response time,
and also represent transformational technologies. We will continue
with development of Global Hawk as an unmanned, high-altitude, long
loiter time, beyond line-of-sight multi-sensor UAV, and will work to
incorporate laser designation and delivery of precision weaponry from
that platform.
The integrated common operating picture (COP) was a very powerful
tool. Tracking systems were previously Service unique. Workarounds
were developed for OIF, but there is a need to develop one integrated,
user-friendly, C4I architecture that captures blue and red air, ground
and maritime forces.
Strategic lift and tanker aircraft availability were stretched during
OEF and OIF. These forces are critical to rapid future force
projection and we must enhance this vital capability in the years
ahead.
Combined and joint training of our forces was also a key factor during
OEF and was carried over into OIF. Our military forces are the
best-prepared forces in the world and I thank the members of Congress
for providing assets and funding to train these wonderful fighting men
and women to give them every possible advantage.
Finally, our ability to take action in OEF was predicated on
"Strategic Anchors," one of which was "Cooperative Security"
relationships, which paid high dividends in basing, staging and over
flight rights during recent crisis.
Regional Concerns
Iraq
Although security continues to improve, portions of Iraq are now, and
will remain for some time, dangerous. The term "stability operations"
does not infer that combat actions have ended. Military forces are
still required to set conditions that enable progress. As we move
forward, the composition and size of our forces will change to match
emerging requirements. Factors that influence our force mix will
include Coalition force contributions, threat, and success in fielding
Iraqi police forces, security, and the New Iraqi Army.
Integration of Coalition forces is a major near-term effort. The
United Kingdom and Poland are committed to leading Divisions in
Southern Iraq, and many partner nations have offered forces to fill
those units. Deployment of those forces has already begun. We continue
discussions with India and Pakistan. At this moment, 19 Coalition
partners are on the ground in support of military operations in Iraq,
with deployment pending for 19 additional countries. An additional 11
nations are conducting military to military discussions with respect
to possibly deploying forces to Iraq in support of stability and
security operations.
At this point some 35,000 police have been hired. This fills about
half of the requirement nationwide. Throughout the country, many of
these law enforcement officers are conducting joint patrols with U.S.
military forces, and we will ultimately transition responsibility for
security and stability to the Iraqis. In the near-term, we must build
upon the momentum we have generated in this area.
Creation of the New Iraqi Army is moving forward. The plan envisions
three divisions located near Mosul, Baghdad, and Basrah to provide
territorial defense and conduct stability operations. In the first
year, the goal is to field approximately nine battalions. Initially,
Iraqi forces will focus on performing security functions at fixed
sites, convoy security, and border control. As it develops, this force
will work with Coalition forces to contribute to stability and
security throughout Iraq.
Underlying all security functions is the need to continue humanitarian
assistance and the conduct of civil-military operations to improve the
quality of life for the Iraqi people. In this regard, our regional
allies have been invaluable. Neighboring nations have provided
hospitals, medical supplies, water, food, and expertise in beginning
the rebuilding process. The fact that there has been no humanitarian
disaster in Iraq; no widespread outbreak of disease, hunger, refugees
or displaced persons; or any of the other predicted consequences of
war is due, in large part, to the generosity of our allies. The CPA
and Coalition forces will continue to work in concert with
international and non-governmental agencies to reverse the result of
years of neglect by a brutal regime.
Afghanistan
Our efforts in Afghanistan have given the Afghan people a chance to
break the chain of violence, civil war, and poverty that many have
endured their entire lives. Our Coalition has made considerable
progress over the last 18 months, but much remains to be done. The
average Afghan now enjoys basic freedoms, a higher quality of life,
and prospects for a better future. A Loya Jirga to ratify a new
Constitution will be held this fall and national elections are
scheduled for next summer. President Karzai's transitional government
continues to develop as he works to expand its authority beyond Kabul.
Security and stability are the keys to President Karzai's success.
Since 1 May, our primary focus has shifted to stability operations. A
stable and secure environment enables reconstruction. U.S.
Civil-Military Operations forces have completed more than 150 projects
and nearly 300 more are underway. To date, these projects have
improved drinking water, medical care, transportation, communications,
irrigation, and agriculture throughout the country. To further our
reconstruction efforts and to help foster stability, Provincial
Reconstruction Teams (PRT) are working in Bamian, Konduz, and Gardez.
A fourth U.K. led team will soon deploy to Mazar-e-Sharif, and other
PRTs are being planned for future deployments to additional provinces.
A critical step toward stability in Afghanistan is building the
Afghanistan National Army (ANA). The United States is leading this
effort, supported by five Coalition partners. To date, three brigades
of professional Afghan soldiers have been fielded; we project ANA
strength of approximately 8,500 soldiers by December 03.
Horn of Africa
Several countries in the Horn of Africa responded positively to
President Bush's call for support against worldwide terrorism.
However, these states are challenged to conduct successful
antiterrorism campaigns. Over 21 million people remain at risk of
starvation in the region. Long-term conflicts have intensified the
debilitating effects of natural disasters, especially drought. This
forces the dislocation of affected populations seeking food, medical
care, and safety. Existing governments find difficulty meeting the
needs of their populations, creating an environment hospitable to
terrorist cells and trans-national threats.
USCENTCOM has addressed these issues by standing up a Combined Joint
Task Force in Djibouti. This Task Force provides a forward presence;
trains counter-terrorism forces; and supervises a number of
humanitarian assistance efforts to enhance security, improve public
health and combat famine. These initiatives are key elements of our
Security Cooperation strategy. Close cooperation with interagency and
international aid organizations facilitates a regional approach to the
humanitarian effort and maximizes the effects of our efforts.
The Horn will require a long-term commitment of resources to achieve
stability, thereby setting conditions that will make it less
hospitable to terrorists.
Iran
Iran has long pursued a goal of regional hegemony through
modernization of a regionally capable military force, the development
of weapons of mass destruction (WMD), and the use and promotion of
terrorism as an instrument of foreign policy.
Tehran perceives itself encircled by the United States. The enmity and
abiding mistrust of the U.S. government is implacable among Iran's
ruling hard-liners furthering security concerns. Iran's principal
security objectives remain unaltered with the fall of Baghdad, namely
the survival of the Islamic state and the preservation of Iranian
independence, with the secondary goal of expanding Iranian influence
in the Persian Gulf, Central Asia, and the broader Islamic world.
Iran's national security policies appear focused on maintaining
political stability and internal security, expanding diplomatic and
economic relations, establishing WMD and long-range missile forces
backed up by unconventional warfare capabilities and maintaining a
robust terrorism apparatus.
Shifts in regional security relationships are expected as a result of
the formation of a stable and productive post-war Iraq. Of course,
those realignments and perturbations extend beyond Iraq's borders and
will be of concern to Iran. Following the ouster of the Saddam regime
in Iraq, Iran has mounted an increasingly sophisticated and
multi-faceted influence campaign that will prove persistent in its
focus to create an anti-Coalition, predominantly anti-U.S., sentiment
among Iraqis.
Just as complex is deciphering Iran's dual-track foreign policy and
often contradictory public statements. Iran's efforts to promote
itself as a responsible member nation of the international community
are in direct contrast with its long-standing covert and public
support to radical resistance groups and terrorists as well as its
failure to meet its Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty (NPT) and
International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) obligations.
The Iranian regime's proclivity for violence through terrorism, in
concert with its past support of terrorism and an established pattern
of developing nuclear and other WMD and missile programs, will
continue to be of concern.
Gulf States
Transnational terrorists remain throughout the Gulf region. Violent,
anti-Western ideology appeals to some segments of the populace, due in
part to the increasing failure of regional governments to meet the
basic needs of the people. As populations increase, regional
governments struggle to provide adequate education, housing,
infrastructure, and jobs. Closed political systems are only just
beginning to reform. Regional politics and long-standing, hard-line
stances concerning the Palestinian-Israeli situation exacerbate
regional instability.
However, there are also hopeful signs. Many of the Gulf countries are
moving toward a more representational government. Bahrain and Qatar
have begun municipal elections; Oman continues working toward opening
its economy and political system; and Saudi Arabia has begun efforts
to change the educational system, privatize state industries, and open
a domestic dialogue on other needed social reforms. Substantive
improvements will require a long-term, determined effort.
The Gulf States have stepped up their antiterrorism efforts in
response to 9/11 and the may attacks in Saudi Arabia. On-going efforts
include increasing law enforcement, stemming the flow of illegal
financial support, tracking personnel movements, and monitoring
terrorist activities. While their cooperation is extensive, these
governments continue to prefer working behind the scenes.
Militarily, the Gulf States continue to perceive a long-term threat
from Iran. In a show of support for Operation IRAQI FREEDOM (OIF), the
Gulf States, for the first time, deployed the Peninsula Shield force
in defense of Kuwait. Outstanding OIF basing and access support from
the Gulf States demonstrates tangible results of our active security
cooperation programs. They understand that our "footprint" in the
region is likely to change, and each state continues to advocate
security cooperation with the United States.
While most citizens are relieved that the Iraqi regime has been
removed, opinions differ on Coalition activities and what type of
Iraqi society will eventually emerge. Regional governments are looking
to the CPA to ensure Iraq does not become segmented. Gulf leaders look
forward to lucrative trade and economic relations with a rebuilt Iraq.
South and Central Asia
Pakistan's support has been fundamental to our success in Operation
ENDURING FREEDOM. President Musharraf has committed substantial
national resources against terrorism to include arresting a number of
al-Qaida leaders, freezing the financial accounts of known terrorists
and banning fundraising to support Kashmiri militancy. He has pursued
these actions despite ongoing tensions with India and significant
domestic pressure, and he continues on a path toward democracy and
sustained economic development. The United States has expressed
gratitude and solidified his political position by lifting sanctions
and granting economic assistance. CENTCOM will continue to support our
mil-to-mil relationship and build closer security cooperation with
Pakistan.
The Central Asian States remain dedicated partners in the global war
on terrorism. Each country declared its support for the U.S.
immediately after the attacks of 9/11. All offered to host U.S.
personnel and equipment. Bases established in the Central Asian states
have been critical to the success of our operations in Afghanistan.
The defeat of the Taliban and the removal of al-Qaida from Afghanistan
have enabled the Central Asian states to refocus their attention on
internal development. We will continue working with our Central Asian
partners to prevent the resurgence of terrorism, and the Department of
State and the Bureau of Customs and Border Protection will continue to
improve their capacity to secure their borders against the flow of
illegal narcotics.
WMD Proliferation
The proliferation of technologies related to weapons of mass
destruction (WMD) and long-range delivery systems continues to be a
significant concern in the Central Region. As some nations and
international extremist groups pursue chemical, biological,
radiological, and nuclear capabilities, some regional allies will seek
to offset such threats by pursuing strategic weapons of their own,
thus perpetuating the proliferation cycle. Security cooperation is our
best hedge against this possibility.
Iran continues to pursue WMD. Its nuclear programs are under the
continuing scrutiny of the International Atomic Energy Agency, and its
chemical weapons stockpile and probable biological weapons program are
of concern.
In South Asia, the missile and nuclear race between Pakistan and India
is also troubling. Both states continue to develop advanced missiles
and the risk of miscalculation leading to escalation remains of
concern.
We face a severe threat in the potential for chemical, biological,
radiological or, less likely, nuclear attacks by terrorists. Documents
found (during the exploitation of suspect WMD sites in Afghanistan)
indicated the al-Qaida terrorist network had explored methods for
producing toxins and was seeking to establish a biological warfare
capability. Terrorists will continue to seek WMD capabilities as their
need for more sensational attacks intensifies. The extensive press
coverage of the October 2001 anthrax mail attacks highlighted U.S.
vulnerabilities and exacerbated an already dangerous situation in the
Central Region, where many extremists are based and exploring such
capabilities.
Terrorism and Counterterrorism
Over the past year, the global war on terrorism has been marked by
major achievements. Multiple terrorist operations sponsored by
al-Qaida and affiliated extremists have been disrupted; and many
terrorists, including high-ranking operational planners, have been
captured. A1-Qaida has proven unable to reestablish the extensive
training infrastructure it had earlier instituted in Afghanistan. The
dispersal of its leaders and cadre from Afghanistan continues to
impede al-Qaida's ability to accomplish timely and secure
communications exchanges.
Nevertheless, al-Qaida has responded to our counter-terrorism
initiatives; in this context, several lesser-known personalities have
emerged and this has translated into strikes such as the May 2003
bombings of multiple housing complexes in Riyadh. So far, these
attacks have focused on "soft" targets; however, al-Qaida retains an
interest in striking larger, more spectacular targets.
Counterterrorism operations against al-Qaida, U.S. victories in Iraq
and Afghanistan, and the persistent conflict between Israel and the
Palestinians have generated pressure throughout the USCENTCOM AOR.
Jihadist groups and disgruntled individuals constitute another
important source of potential terrorist threats. Given this setting,
we are constantly working to identify vulnerabilities and refine our
force protection measures.
Security Cooperation Overview
Our success in gaining basing, staging and over-flight rights for
ENDURING FREEDOM and IRAQI FREEDOM and our influence in the region are
directly related to an active security cooperation program.
USCENTCOM's program builds relationships that promote U.S. interests,
build allied and friendly nations' military capabilities, and provide
U.S. forces with access and en route infrastructure. Prosecution of
the GWOT requires continued fiscal and political investment in these
vital programs. I would like to highlight a few dividends of our
approach.
The FY03 supplemental appropriation of $908M in FMF is currently
enabling the training of a professional Afghan National Army and
allowing Pakistan to restore its military forces. Additionally,
longstanding partners such as Jordan are increasing their
interoperability through FMF-funded purchases. Continued investment in
security assistance allows USCENTCOM to improve the capabilities of
friendly nations by enabling them to provide for their own security.
International Military Education and Training (IMET) remains a
low-cost, high-pay off investment that helps shape the security
environment. Courses offered under IMET provide military members of
regional states an opportunity to attend courses in U.S. military
institutions such as Command and Staff Colleges and Senior Service
Schools. IMET participation by students from the Central Region
supports congressionally-mandated initiatives: providing exposure to
the U.S. concepts of military professionalism, respect for human
rights, and subordination to civilian authority. The Counter Terrorism
Fellowship, a new DoD appropriation, enables us to provide flexible
course offerings to several nations who are key partners in the GWOT.
Conclusion
The global war on terrorism is underway. The precision, determination,
and expertise of our military forces and our Coalition partners
brought about the liberation of Afghanistan and Iraq in lightning
speed with minimum bloodshed. However, these two nations have only
taken only the first steps toward freedom, and United States and our
Coalition partners must be there to support the whole journey.
While we have accomplished much, the potential for terrorist acts and
other setbacks remains very real. Afghanistan has a new government, a
new army, and with Coalition support the nation is making great
strides towards long term stability. In Iraq, Saddam Hussein's regime
was destroyed and regime supporters are being rooted out. Our focus
has changed from military destruction of a regime to providing
security and humanitarian assistance to the Iraqi people, while
helping to establish a representative form of government. Decisive
combat operations have been completed, but much work remains.
(end excerpt)
(Distributed by the Bureau of International Information Programs, U.S.
Department of State. Web site: http://usinfo.state.gov)
|
NEWSLETTER
|
|
Join the GlobalSecurity.org mailing list
|
|
|
