Principles of Mission Command of Operation Anaconda

Introduction

It is inevitably clear that human life has various occasions of wars as human beings strive to survive. Because the attempt is somehow inherent in human desires and will, it is entirely agreeable that due to the increased will and desires of human beings, there is a likelihood of wars occurring. In most cases, wars are violent struggles between the participants within a dynamic environment. For wars to commence, there must be a formulation of ideas in mind, propagated by the individuals’ will to overtake an opponent’s will. Under normal circumstances, groups or individuals disagree regarding the ideologies of their aggressive force, and hence the view of war is introduced. When a war starts, it is beleaguered with death, violence, complexities, confusion, chaos, uncertainties and disorders. As one of the appropriate strategies to become victorious during the war, command control of combat is a very critical tool that a military group should use. During the war, the commander is responsible for planning and executing attacks whose aim is to achieve the overall success of the military mission. The commander must rely on the information given regardless of whether the information is adequately intelligent or not. The main idea of operation command is to sufficiently make appropriate plans to reduce uncertainties and chaos and thwart the enemies’ will to counterattack. This essay aims to validate how the seven principles of mission command were applied in the general operational environment of the Operation of Anaconda.

Principles of Mission Command

The back of any impression or idea requires the presence of a structure. The concept of mission command is based upon seven critical principles. These principles include shared understanding, risk acceptance, disciplined initiative, commanders’ intent, competence and mutual trust (Nilsson, 2020). Military experts argue that competence is the most important principle since it directly relates to the commander. Military forces gain competence through experience and knowledge. The forces gain more experience and knowledge through self-development, education, training, practical simulations and classwork. Competence is a vital principle, not only to the commander but also to the subordinate soldiers.

Al Qaeda and the Taliban, through their intense retaliation to the US soldiers’ attack, tested the American soldiers’ competence in the fight of Operation Anaconda (OA). Operation Anaconda was the US military attack on Al Qaeda and Taliban strongholds within the Shah-l Kot region. Some of the principles of mission command were vital to the victory of the American forces in coalition with other forces. General Franks Tommy led the attacks against Al Qaeda and the Taliban in 2002 and oversaw the attack on various forces.

1. Principle of Mutual Trust

Mutual trust refers to shared confidence and trust that must be evident in the entire chain of command. In this principle, subordinate military personnel gain the trust and confidence of their commanders by showing a high level of competence in garrison, combat, or training environments. (Anagnostaras, 2020). When the Tora Bora battle of OA began in 2001, the Afghanistan soldiers, who were great allies of the American soldiers, became dispirited and consequently retreated. The American soldier remained put in the war, believing and trusting in each other’s desire to fight back. The soldiers trusted each other’s confidence, the warrior ethos and morale. When the soldiers returned to their base from the battlefield at the end of the first-day fight, they realized that the enemy bullets had hit them. Such a circumstance built and demonstrated mutual trust among the soldiers.

2. Commander’s Intent

The principle of the commander’s intent during the OA was very concise and clear. Just a month before Operation Anaconda, Al Qaeda and the Taliban had gone through an array of defeats. They consequently withdrew their fight to Shahikot. They intended to eliminate Al Qaeda and the Taliban presence from Shahikot. Notably, the principle of the commander’s intent should always be a repetition of the reason behind the mission. It should rather be a broader concise, and clear general drive of the idea of the mission (Pearce et al., 2021). More precisely, the military mission never proceeds as planned, so the troops face many hard decisions to make. Inevitably, the commander’s intent principle is the foundation on which military soldiers should bank their decisions. It may also serve as an ethical Noncommissioned Officer Academy practice in case orders are lacking. In this case, the commander’s intent helps as the basis for undertaking steps in the absence of orders.

3. Principle of Shared Understanding

The principle of shared understanding is one of the difficult areas that a mission commander always faces in a military operation. Operation Anaconda established cooperation between countries’ special groups, large companies, military groups, and government agencies. The existence of mutual trust between the various entities should be encouraged in a military operation to share information and intelligence about the operation atmosphere (Kozina, 2019). For example, the early planning and organization stages of Operation Anaconda involved Generals Mikolashek, Franks, and Hagenbeck having different opinions and ideas during the planning stage. This is because the three military commanders shared the information, even though they were both in charge of their respective generalships. Moreover, the three generals had no grasp or command of their respective Special Operations Forces. Such applications limited the flow of shared information between various constituents in the battle.

4. Principle of Risk Acceptance

The principle of risk acceptance is undeniable in the case of Slabinski. Mental health, danger, death and physical injury are significant risks in any military action. In most cases, mission commanders undergo much training with various strategies to analyze risk factors to mitigate the risks. Irrespective of the mitigation, most of the risk originates from the commander to the soldiers on the battlefield. The soldiers should understand and accept the risk. Zabinski was very aware of the risks of returning to the area of initial contact. Before returning to base, Sabinski calculated the risk against himself and the team very well. He recognized that he would not return to see his son back at home. The risk was, however, worth the effort made to salvage his colleagues and complete the mission (Morgan et al., 2020).

5. Principle of Discipline Initiative

The principle of discipline initiative refers to a situation in which the junior subordinate military officers should demonstrate initiative guided by the controls of the commander’s intent to realize the desired outcome. Alternatively, disciplined initiative means a situation in which the subordinates follow the commanders’ orders and instructions and adhere to the outlaid plan to achieve the desired outcome. It mainly occurs when the enemy is unexpectedly resistant, contrary to the earlier plans, and hence the enemy poses severe threats to the troop (Tolman, 2020). A critical look at Operation Anaconda reveals that discipline initiative was evident when the American soldiers, in conjunction with cooperative Afghan soldiers, adjusted their troops when they realized that the fight at the Valley was more intense than was earlier predicted. The U.S. soldiers, through their commander, had to order more air bomb aircraft to counter the unexpectedly strong Taliban and Al Qaeda militia.

6. The Principle of Mission Orders

The principle of mission orders requires orders to restrict to the area of the subordinate. Orders should incorporate all that the junior military aide should know to conduct the mission. The orders should also be simple and easy to understand. They should be developed to ensemble the understanding and intelligence of the recipient. The principle also demands that the given orders should succinctly reveal the commander’s intent, the mission and the task organization of the troop (Milkovich, 2018). During the combat, the U.S. military command was forced to adapt their early proposed mission plan to suit the new unfolding realities. The swift and advanced plan creation showed that the army leadership was proficient and followed the mission orders. The principle of mission orders showed that the enduring directives from the command were clear, unified, and to be adhered to. The U.S. military team strictly adhered to provided orders, despite experiencing some considerable changes and tactical failures.

7. The Principle of Competence

Technically and tactically, competent subordinates, teams, and commanders are the fundamental basis of operative mission command. Troop’s ability to execute a mission using mission command relates to the soldier’s competence. The subordinate soldiers and the commanders attain the level of competence to do an assigned order to the required standards by undergoing training, assignment experience, professional development and education. The fact that the U.S. teams managed to adapt plans for the mission and execute them quickly showed a high level of competence. They also adjusted their tactics and employed necessary strategies to suit the enemies’ ongoing tactical changes.

Conclusion

Operation Anaconda is one of the numerous wars that anyone can learn and study based on its inestimable circumstances and contingencies. For a long time, command and control have progressed into a well-calculated structured philosophy now called mission command. The seven principles of command prove to be very much applicable in every military war. From past military battles to future combats, evolutionary power has evidently developed. No greater force can hurl actions compared to the power of war. Without the will and mind of man, war cannot occur. The inherent desire to promote and survive or enact ideas on others’ will always have the possibility of war. War is sometimes a necessary evil to combat an invasive or ideological evil will. The necessary evil of war always needs a great mission commander. The commanders are responsible for directing and controlling the subordinate military personnel. The commander should use various principles of mission command that act as guiding principles against the actions of the army officers while fighting the enemy. The command principles were instrumental in Operation Anaconda, which occurred between the US military officers and the Afghan militia groups – Al Qaeda and the Taliban.

References

Anagnostaras, G. (2020). The Common European Asylum System: Balancing Mutual Trust Against Fundamental Rights Protection. German Law Journal, 21(6), 1180-1197. https://doi.org/10.1017/glj.2020.72

Kozina, A. (2019). The culture of military school: The example of the dr. Franjo Tudjman Croatian defence academy. Connections: The Quarterly Journal, 18(3-4), pp. 45–63. https://repozitorij.vojni.unizg.hr/en/islandora/object/vojni:436

Milkovich, N. D. (2018). AirLand Battle Redux: Evolutions of Air-Ground Integration from the Gulf War to Operation Iraqi Freedom. US Army School for Advanced Military Studies Fort Leavenworth United States.

Morgan, F. E., Boudreaux, B., Lohn, A. J., Ashby, M., Curriden, C., Klima, K., & Grossman, D. (2020). Military applications of artificial intelligence: ethical concerns in an uncertain world. RAND PROJECT AIR FORCE SANTA MONICA CA SANTA MONICA United States. https://apps.dtic.mil/sti/pdfs/AD1097313.pdf

Nilsson, N. (2020). Practising mission command for future battlefield challenges: the case of the Swedish army. Defence Studies, 20(4), 436–452. https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/pdf/10.1080/14702436.2020.1828870

Pearce, A. P., Naumann, D. N., & O’Reilly, D. (2021). Mission command: applying military leadership principles to the SARS-CoV-2 (COVID-19) crisis. BMJ Mil Health, 167(1), 3–4.

Tolman, M. S. (2020). Mission Command: A Senior Enlisted Leader’s Perspective. NCO Journal, 1-4.