VANTAGE POINT
by Major General Charles W. Thomas
This April we held our annual G2/Commanders
Conference at Fort Huachuca, Arizona. The conference provided an
opportunity for exchanging ideas on current developments,
activities, and concerns across the Military Intelligence (MI)
Corps. We were fortunate to have representation from across Army
intelligence including Lieutenant General (LTG) Paul Menoher,
Deputy Chief of Staff for Intelligence, and several other MI
general officers. Additionally, LTG Don Holder, Commander, Combined
Arms Center, spoke to the conference and provided a Combat
Commander's perspective on the major issues with which we were
grappling. Because of the obvious MI community interest, Colonels
Ron Carter, DCSINT, USAREUR, and Joe Green, Commander, 205th MI
Brigade, gave updates on intelligence operations supporting
Operation JOINT ENDEAVOR in Bosnia. I feel that the conference was
one of the most productive in recent years. These are some key
issues that came to light
Training
We focused this year's conference on training issues. Of principal
concern was new systems training, especially the All-Source
Analysis System (ASAS). By implementing a new training strategy at
the Intel Center we are trying to produce a more "ASAS proficient"
officer, NCO, and soldier. However, each command, with its unique
challenges, modified architecture, and skilled professionals plays
a role in the ultimate success or failure of our battlefield
operating system (BOS). Much of that success is dependent on ASAS,
our flagship system. We want to, as part of the greater intel team,
incorporate the challenges met and good ideas generated from the
commands into our training strategies. Here at Fort Huachuca, we
recognize that, as the proponent for training and doctrine of the
BOS, we are ultimately responsible for concept, structure,
equipment and requirements development and fielding, and
coordination of efforts across the force. This was our message to
those attending the conference. We do not want to stifle good ideas
or initiative, merely harness it for the greater good of MI.
New Systems
Each of the MI TRADOC System Managers (TSMs) addressed the
conference attendees. Updates on capabilities, limitations, and new
developments for the systems were provided. Much interest centered
on the Unmanned Aerial Vehicle (UAV) Program. Since the demise of
the Hunter system, there has been concern over which UAV platform
would absorb the division/corps mission. It is agreed that UAV
support is needed at all levels from brigade through theater,
though the specific platform may differ. Theater-level support will
be provided by the Air Force-owned Predator UAV (medium altitude
endurance). Our plan is to access it for Army use through Forward
Control Elements (FCEs) that will be in place at division and
corps. A joint Tactical-variant UAV is scheduled for testing to
provide support at the brigade level. Fortunately, the operational
requirements set for the Tactical-variant offer near-Hunter
capability (in range, endurance, control, collection suite) and
help to bridge the gap between brigade-level support and Air
Force-controlled, theater-allocated Predator systems. Related to
the discussion of UAV support is the health of the 96U (UAV
Operator) military occupational specialty (MOS). Rest assured that,
in time, 96U will be in good shape. The UAV is recognized
throughout Army leadership as critical to our architecture for both
targeting and battle damage assessment. What needs to happen first
is the fielding of a well-tested and trust-worthy system that is
capable, durable, and proven. Regardless of the type of system
ultimately selected, a soldier operator/maintainer will be needed.
MOS 96Us, your future is bright!
MI Force Concerns
We are concerned with the "overgrading" of our enlisted MOSs. The
Vice Chief of Staff of the Army has directed that we bring our MOSs
into compliance with structure guidelines. With nearly every MI MOS
over the 47-percent NCO-ratio mandate, we are in the hot seat to
realign our MOSs. This will be a challenge for commanders. Many of
our quality soldiers will be frustrated by slowed promotion
opportunity over the next few years. We must do our best to
convince them to stay the course and wait out the various programs
that will help bring us in line. With natural attrition
(retirement, expiration of term of service), quality management
programs, early retirements, and voluntary separations, we should
be able to right ourselves within four years. Ultimately, the MI
force will benefit in the long run; those who wait it out will reap
the rewards.
The 97G MOS (Multidiscipline Counterintelligence Analyst) is
another MI force issue. The MOS is very small and badly overgraded.
After consulting MI leaders across the force, we are considering
eliminating the MOS. The functions of MDCI Analysis may be
integrated into other MOSs and an additional skill identifier (ASI)
awarded to those already trained. For units that have a great
reliance on the skills of the 97G, losing the MOS could pose
problems. I want to emphasize that we do not want to eliminate the
function or training. We are concerned because soldiers in that MOS
are frequently misused and lack effective career development.
What I have just discussed highlights the state of the MI Corps
today. These topics are just the tip of the iceberg. The leadership
of MI is dedicated to working together to overcome problems and
still provide the support combat commanders require. We work
collectively, crossing echelons and ranks to get the best solutions
to challenges. While we have problems, the fact is, our corps is
better than ever. MI is respected throughout the Army primarily
because of your hard work. I appreciate your dedication and
perseverance as you take on as you continue to meet and exceed
ever-increasing mission requirements with often diminishing
resources. The Intelligence Center is here to help. Let me know if
there is something we can do for you.
ALWAYS OUT FRONT!