Author Description

For approximately the past ten years, the Army has been engaged in large-scale counterinsurgency campaigns in Iraq and Afghanistan. These campaigns have forced the Army to reevaluate how it approaches its role in advising host nation forces. This reevaluation is evident in new doctrine addressing the Army's advising role and new organizational structures. The focus of much of this evolution has been on the Army's General Purpose Forces as compared to Special Operation Forces, which have intrinsically possessed the task of advising host nation forces. This renewed interest in the Army's role in advising has produced new doctrine. However, this doctrine gives limited guidance regarding specific advisory roles and which type of force has responsibility for these roles: General Purpose Forces or Special Operations Forces. This monograph proposes an advisory framework, called the Advisory Triad, to better understand advisory roles in large-scale counterinsurgencies. The Advisory Triad is composed of the following: The first leg of the triad is the Special Operations Advisory effort. This effort is US Special Operations Forces advising host nation SOF or equivalent force. The second leg of the Triad is the General Purpose Forces tactical effort. This effort is focused on advisory efforts at the tactical level, either assigned or supporting tactical commanders, usually division and below. These efforts take the form of military transition teams, mobile training teams, or efforts from the US that directly support training, advising and assisting of host nation tactical forces. The third leg in the Triad is the institutional advisory mission. This piece is usually accomplished by a security transition headquarters. Responsibilities include advising at the highest levels of the host nation military, advising on force structure, development, finance, education, and training. Additionally, this organization is responsible for synchronizing advisor efforts within the host nation