March 15, 2017

Combatant Commands in an era of multi-domain battle

By Lauren Fish

The U.S. military is currently adapting to a new era of conflict. Senior military leaders, including Army Chief of Staff Gen. Mark Milley, have focused heavily on improving readiness, and Deputy Secretary of Defense Bob Work has led the charge in developing the capabilities and recruiting the personnel necessary to maintain an advantage during rapid change. The multi-domain battle concept articulates future combined arms operations. In doing so, it prepares forces for the increased jointness required to achieve effects across multiple domains, including new ones such as cyber. Doctrinal innovation also often galvanizes organizational innovation. The philosophical underpinnings of multi-domain battle should be used to design a new combatant command structure. 

Advanced technology is rapidly changing the operating environment. Technology breaks down traditional barriers and extends range: cyberattacks and electronic warfare have physical impact. Previously unchallenged domains, such as air, are now vulnerable to short-range threats from the ground, as well as advanced anti-access/area denial equipment. Multi-domain battle creates opportunity in one domain using the capabilities of others, including nontraditional domains such as cyber and space. The vision has been embraced by Pacific Command Commander Adm. Harry Harris, who has sought to operationalize its interdisciplinary and creative thinking. 

By coordinating cross-domain capabilities against a clearly defined problem set, Pacific Command demonstrates how the U.S. military should fight in the future. Through a mission-oriented combatant command structure, the U.S. military can apply this thinking more broadly. 

Read the full article at Defense News.

  • Commentary
    • Foreign Policy
    • September 14, 2023
    Why There Are No Game-Changing Weapons for Ukraine

    Germany has become the second-biggest contributor of military aid to Ukraine after the United States, but you wouldn’t know it by following the debate in Berlin. In a replay o...

    By Franz-Stefan Gady

  • Commentary
    • The Messenger
    • September 13, 2023
    To Avoid AI Catastrophes, We Must Think Smaller

    These incidents are not theoretical, nor are they projections of long-term dangers; rather, these AI tools are already presenting tangible threats to individual health and wel...

    By Josh Wallin

  • Commentary
    • Breaking Defense
    • September 7, 2023
    For Replicator to Work, the Pentagon Needs to Directly Help with Production

    Today’s innovation ecosystem alone cannot achieve the necessary production scale, especially for the less commercially viable classes of systems relevant in the Indo-Pacific....

    By Andrew Metrick

  • Commentary
    • Sharper
    • August 23, 2023
    Sharper: Campaigning and the National Defense Strategy

    The United States faces the unprecedented challenge of simultaneously deterring large-scale conventional aggression by two nuclear-armed powers while also managing other threa...

    By Philip Sheers, Molly Campbell & Anna Pederson

View All Reports View All Articles & Multimedia