Introduction
The case study offered here thoroughly analyses the circumstances that led to Operation Anaconda and the aftermath. US special operations forces (SOF) opted to coordinate with US space power and sympathetic Afghan forces to achieve early achievement in Afghanistan. It implied that operations for combined fires would be difficult to follow. Operation Anaconda is a promising paradigm for army leaders to use Mission Command concepts to overcome unexpected hurdles and achieve their dreams. The goal of this study is to provide a comprehensive examination of the six Mission Command principles and how they relate to Operation Anaconda.
Mission Command Principles
Mission command is based on unifying battle functions to enhance efficiency. The strategy is based on six principles that enable individuals in control of operations to make sound choices and involve their audience. The actions and consequences of Operation Anaconda taught future troops, commanders, and brigade valuable lessons. The initial point was that preparedness was essential for any battle to succeed. The second situation is the significance of Mission Command concepts. As stated in the research study, the new setting and challenge motivated the commanders to form cohesive teams based on mutual trust. It is the initial mission command concept. Owing to the enemy’s might and a lack of necessary equipment, the commanders, joined several troops and squadron to assist with the entire practice. Soldiers from the United States collaborated with friendly forces.
The result was a level of trust and understanding throughout the activity (Perry & Kassing, 2015). During two weeks of this mission, American soldiers and allied forces were heavily attacked by their adversaries. Luckily, they survived because they were brave, and their superiors constantly supplied necessary orders and recommendations. They formed cohesive teams that finally provided the desired outcomes.
The capacity to communicate a specific intent is indeed the third principle. Throughout the operation, leaders kept all soldiers aware of the intended goals, perceived impediments, and anticipated opponent size. This expertise served as the most excellent guidance for achieving the desired results. Although the current intelligence level was inadequate to forecast the specific quantity and position of the adversary, the commanders were eager to deliver the finest information about the overall mission’s goal. Because the established robust plans and security camera technologies did not stop the enemy position surprises, the commanders maintained clear and provided evidence-based instructions throughout the procedure.
The first provisions that were brought were eventually depleted. Resupply, therefore, became an issue. Almost all of the units could not seek good meals and consequently went without food for several days in some cases. Historical data from World War II support the discovery (Fleri et al. 2003). Because of logistical issues, the Marines on Guadalcanal could not eat for lengthy periods. Obtaining the enemy’s meals became an essential element of several men’s diets throughout this war.
The capacity to use professional judgment is the fourth principle. The leaders urged them to maintain discipline and concentrate on the larger purpose or mission because the warriors were from several forces. They coordinated according to the established control chain to promptly handle any new issues. The principle of discipline guided the entire procedure. To address the prevailing problems, the followers respected directions, engaged each other, and collaborated as a group.
The capacity to use operational orders is the sixth principle. Those in command welcomed this trait throughout the operation to guarantee that all soldiers and combatants responded quickly to the clearly stated requirements. The ultimate goal was to eliminate the adversary while avoiding murdering civilians. After the actions of several combat forces became apparent to the adversary during Operation Enduring Freedom in the Arab World, new institutions were activated.
The willingness to tolerate appropriate risk is the last one. The commanders adopted this idea to redistribute decision-making procedures and elevate their employees (Richemond-Barak, 2018). Throughout the period, they created opportunities and gathered intelligence. Regrettably, the example does not specify if the commanders applied risk assessment and analysis principles to limit any bad results. It was the cause they could not find alternative civilians.
Nutritional considerations in permission preparation are sometimes disregarded. When planning for a mission, units are usually preoccupied with rehearsing, maintenance of equipment, and rigorous inspections. Sleep is frequently prioritized over overeating, but when troops prepare for bed, they are generally apprehensive and have problems falling asleep. It might result in the force being exhausted and nutritionally unprepared at the start of the operation. The initial 24 hours on the field are the most difficult. Well before the rest schedule can be executed, operational knowledge must be obtained, movement to a camp must be done, gun artillery cannons must be developed, and a lot more should be handled.
Conclusion
The preceding discussion described Operation Anaconda as a combat endeavor with flaws without necessarily failing. It was feasible because the commanders used Mission Command concepts to achieve favorable results. Unfortunately, they did not recognize possible threats and put in place strong countermeasures. Future commanders ought to carefully examine this situation to establish superior ideologies that will eventually increase performance.
References
Richemond-Barak, D. (2018). Underground warfare. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
Fleri, E. M., Howard, C. E., Hukill, J., & Searle, T. R. (2003). Operation Anaconda case study. Maxwell, AL: College of Aerospace Doctrine.
Perry, W. L., & Kassing, D. (2015). Toppling the Taliban: Air-ground operations in Afghanistan, October 2001-June 2002. Santa Monica, CA: RAND Corporation.