Can Canada provide a Divisional HQ?

[charlesm]

As posted in canda.com

http://www.canada.com/victoriatimescolonist/news/story.html?id=7d8f7b30-bc62-4f8e-a982-a87a02580403&k=70461


Terry Pedwell, Canadian Press
Published: Thursday, June 15, 2006
OTTAWA (CP) - Canada will boost its troop strength in Afghanistan should it take over command of NATO forces in the country as anticipated, says Defence Minister Gordon O'Connor.

O'Connor has told NATO that Canada wants to assume control of the International Security Assistance Force (ISAF) after it takes over operations in southern Afghanistan from the United States.

"Canada's interested in commanding ISAF in '08," O'Connor said Thursday after meeting with NATO Secretary General Jaap de Hoop Scheffer in Ottawa.

"Canada is more than able to command ISAF."

O'Connor said about 100 additional military personnel would be required for command operations, in addition to the 2,300 soldiers currently taking part in the Afghan mission.

NATO is to begin taking over military operations in and around violence-plagued Kandahar province by mid-summer when the U.S.-led Operation Enduring Freedom moves to a new phase.

NATO is expanding its force to 16,000 from 9,700 by late July, effectively doubling international troop numbers in the southern region which was the Taliban's heartland.

While it hasn't been decided which country will lead the force after next year, Canada is seen as the strongest contender for the job.

ISAF, which is controlled by NATO, now operates in a peace-building and reconstruction capacity in the Afghan capital, Kabul and areas north.

It will act more like a combat force if needed, however, in the southern regions, suggested de Hoop Scheffer.

"When NATO takes over in the course of this summer, you'll see of course those ISAF forces . . . busy in dealing with reconstruction and development," he said.

"But at the same time, the message to the spoilers, be it Taliban, be it drug lords, be it warlords, whatever, will be a very stern and strong message: 'You will be dealt with very robustly, if necessary."'

Canadian soldiers are among more than 10,000 Afghan and coalition forces which began a massive anti-Taliban operation across southern Afghanistan Thursday.

Dubbed Operation Mountain Thrust, it is the largest offensive since the 2001 invasion that toppled the former Taliban regime.

The offensive is part of a major push to squeeze Taliban fighters responsible for a spate of ambushes and suicide attacks against coalition forces and Afghan authorities in recent months.


  Is it just 100 more persons to move from a Brigade HQ to a Div HQ?

  Who would do it since we no longer have a Div HQ?

 

[Teddy Ruxpin]

We commanded ISAF AND a Brigade in Afghanistan in 2003/04.  Remember that HQ ISAF isn't 100% from one nation.  Instead, one nation provides the "lead" while the rest of NATO fills the "crisis establishment".  That is certainly the case here.

 

[GAP]

I would think that the command of ISAF would be a great experience and opportunity for the up and coming cadre of officers. This would allow Hillier and company to give the fast movers some operational experience. IMHO 

 

[geo]

well............. I guess we can send em Gen Leslie to lead the Division and he can take over as CDS when he's done

 

[Kat Stevens]

O'course we could. The only thing we have absolutely no shortage of in the army is staff officers...... :warstory:

 

[George Wallace]

We pretty much still have a DIV HQ down in Kingston.  It just has another name, one it took on after 1st Cdn Div was stood down.

 

[couchcommander]

The only thing we have absolutely no shortage of in the army is staff officers...... :warstory:

Heh, funny cause it's true.

What's the ratio of staff officer now compared to what it was 30 years ago again (I honestly don't remember, but I do remember reading a while back that during the 90's when the foces were downsizing the number of generals actually went up significantly)?

 

[Teddy Ruxpin]

Heh, funny cause it's true.

And you'd know how?

You're all dismally wrong.  We DO have a serious shortage of qualified staff officers and the new JTFHQs are severely undermanned as a result.  We're sending barely qualified people to staff positions that they don't have the experience or expertise to fill, merely because the people aren't there.  This is a disaster in the making. 

The idea that we have bloated HQs from which to draw staff is a dangerous myth that's been perpetuated even after the massive cuts in the mid-90s.  The Joint HQ was essentially broken up to help man CEFCOM - there's nothing even resembling a Div HQ anywhere in the Army now.

 

[geo]

the various JTF regional HQs have also stripped the competent & available reserve Junior staff officers & Senior NCOs from their units... creating some serious staffing problems for the summer Area Rank and trades schools.  While the CF is allegedly pushing to "grow itself" .... we're stripping away the resources needed to do the building with.

Interesting problem = isn't it?

 

[geo]

Hmmm.... anyone remember what Cdn Officer replaced Gen Hillier as 2IC of the American IIIrd Corp in Iraq?

Polish name if memory serves me well.............

 

[Teddy Ruxpin]

MGen (now LGen) Walt Natynczyk

 

[geo]

Yup............ that's the man.
well ....he's got experience as the Number 2 man of an Armoured Corps.
running a Division will be a snap.....

mind you, most area commanders are +/- division commanders already.
(Div = anything more than 1 Bde).....

 

[Michael Dorosh]

And you'd know how?

You're all dismally wrong.  We DO have a serious shortage of qualified staff officers and the new JTFHQs are severely undermanned as a result.  We're sending barely qualified people to staff positions that they don't have the experience or expertise to fill, merely because the people aren't there.  This is a disaster in the making. 

The idea that we have bloated HQs from which to draw staff is a dangerous myth that's been perpetuated even after the massive cuts in the mid-90s.  The Joint HQ was essentially broken up to help man CEFCOM - there's nothing even resembling a Div HQ anywhere in the Army now.

There wasn't in 1914, either...dare I bring up the Militia Myth? 

 

[couchcommander]

And you'd know how?

CBC told me! They're never wrong!

The idea that we have bloated HQs from which to draw staff is a dangerous myth that's been perpetuated even after the massive cuts in the mid-90s.  The Joint HQ was essentially broken up to help man CEFCOM - there's nothing even resembling a Div HQ anywhere in the Army now.

Hrm... well maybe only occasionally

*edit* Seriously though, it was a while back, maybe 2000 that CBC did a small bit saying that the number of general officers in the army had actually increased from historical levels despite the fall in the number of troops. I take it they were wrong in this?

 

[Teddy Ruxpin]

There's a difference between a general and a "staff officer", although the terms are not mutually exclusive.  A staff officer can be of any rank (including - recently - senior NCOs).

Canada has had a higher percentage of generals than other nations for quite a long time.  After the media got hold of it in the mid-90s, the number of generals was reduced, but (partially) because we allocate general officers to Allied and International HQs, the numbers are still high.

As part of the "HQs are evil" drive in 1996/7, Army Area HQs were reduced by 50% even though responsibilities have increased - particularly with the standup of the new JTF HQs and the new operational commands.  Further, as geo points out, personnel needed for the staff are generally more experienced and senior and are also required at the units and schools.

The result?  A feeding frenzy as everyone goes after the same limited pool of talent.  Ideally, staff officers are more senior, with significant field/operational experience.  They almost have to be to be effective, as they'll do the actual planning of operations at anything above the tactical level.  Indeed, in some armies (the German springs to mind) being selected as a staff officer is considered to be an honour and reflective of one's abilities.  Such is not the case in Canada...

 

[Centurian1985]

Such is not the case in Canada...

I would have agreed 100% ten years ago, but I have seen this changing, especially since 2002.  Slowly, but changing...

 

[Kat Stevens]

you guys did notice my little smiley-helmet-head-clear-the-decks-for-action guy, didn't you?

 

[pbi]

I second Teddy's points. Canada has alreday provided the backbone for ISAF once before: ISAF V. I got there just after ISAF VI took over, and was employed as the ISAF LO to CJTF76 Although ISAF VI was a disgraceful shower of ****, ISAF V was very well remembered by the US CJTF. The Dep Comd of CJTF76 commented to me that when "Rick Hillier and the Canadians" were running ISAF "a least it had a backbone". As Teddy pointed out, we would fill the key positions and provide the structural stuff like the Sig Sqn, but there will be allied officers and WOs/NCOs as well. We are more than capable of doing this: we already have a good cadre of  officers with command and senior staff experience from Afghanistan, including Gen Leslie, Devlin, Semianiw and others.

As far as I know, the Div HQ "morphed" into the "CF Joint Ops Group" a while ago, and has since been pretty well picked over to man the new Op HQs. I don't know what is left but whatever it is is certainly not a "div HQ". And, anyway, ISAF is not a deployable tactical HQ: it is a static regional HQ that has some mobile elements under its command. It would be great if we had a Div HQ to form the backbone of the HQ, but as long as the HQ staff can be gathered together and trained as a team early enough, and there is a strong COS with good staff branch heads, it should work.

MGen Natynczyk was not really "the" Deputy Comd of  the Corps in Iraq: he was the DComd for Support. US major formations usually have two DComd: one for Ops and one for support. Still, it was a huge job: he commanded a force of several brigades worth of MPs, Engineers, CSS, Sigs, etc, with the very difficult task of keeping everything moving and shooting all around Iraq. His CSS troops were very often the targets of attacks, and his MPs fought a lot of engagements in their force protection role. He gave us an excellent presentation here at CFC last year. I believe MGen Matt McDonald (also Armoured-former Comd 2 CMBG) is down there in the Corps billet now.

Teddy is right about the staff officer shortage. This has been developing for several years now (even after we slashed the Army Area HQs) and HQs have been running on very weakly manned establishmens for a while. It shows. In order to fill the billets of the new Op HQs (CANCOM, CEFCOM, CANOSCOM, CANSOFCOM) and the new regional JTFHQs, we are short around 700 staff. While you can certainly employ "any" officer in some staff positions, the really key slots require experienced folks with staff training such as the Army delivers at Kingston, or the CF delivers here at CFC. I can assure you that an effective, capable staff, well-led by a strong COS, makes a huge difference to a commander. I've seen excellent staffs and shyte staffs: the former can make things easy for everybody-the latter just makes it all hell.

Cheers

 

[George Wallace]

Hillier, Natynczyk, and Macdonald all left the RCD and went to Ft Hood one after the other in the late 90's and early 2000's.  Macdonald is in Brussels (or just returning from there).

 

[Teddy Ruxpin]

I believe it is BGen Peter Devlin down south right now, but will stand corrected.