Mutinational Command Structure

468 Words2 Pages
DISCUSSION PAPER SUBJECT: Recommend multinational command structure with command relationships for coalition forces to defend Azerbaijan. 1. ISSUE: Develop and justify a multinational command structure with command relationships for coalition to defend Azerbaijan. 2. RECOMMENDATION: Recommend a lead nation command structure with U.S. in the lead because of the overwhelming contribution of U.S. forces and the vast experience the U.S. has in leading multinational coalitions. 3. DIAGRAM: See Attached 4. JUSTIFICATIONS: A. Constraints. a. First are the cultural barriers along with the differences in language that will make it very difficult to understanding what each side is conveying to reach the necessary goals in establishing a coalition. b. The country’s that are involved will have different national interests that will create obstacles. c. If each country operated under individual C2 functions it will be difficult to achieve a unified command. d. The ability to form strong relationships of trust, mutual cooperation and understanding take time and testing. B. Advantages. a. The U.S. as the lead nation command will have a smaller headquarters element which improves command structure and minimizes issues. b. The majority of forces will be U.S forces which will allow better C2 and utilization of major military assets. c. Turkey and Great Britain have formed coalitions with the U.S. in the past and are our allies. d. There will be stronger unity of effort and support due to cooperative agreement on structure. C. Disadvantages. a. The U.S. as the lead nation may become the focal point and detract from the coalition partnership. b. Subordinate nations in the coalition may feel neglected or overlooked. c. Due to language barriers, it will be more difficult to communicate to our coalition

More about Mutinational Command Structure

Open Document