Joint Staff Officers Guide AFSC Pub 1 -- 1997

Joint Organization and Chapter 2

Staff Functions

Joint Organization and Staff Functions

 

200. INTRODUCTION. Numerous governmental organizations are involved in the implementation of U.S. national security policy. This chapter focuses primarily on the organizations and agencies responsible for the planning and execution of military operations, their organizational structure, and their command relationships.

201. ORGANIZATION FOR NATIONAL SECURITY. Knowledge of relationships between elements of the national security structure is essential to understanding the role of joint staff organizations. Figure 2-1 illustrates the principal officials and organizations that make and execute national security decisions.

a. National Command Authorities (NCA)

(1) Constitutionally, the ultimate authority and responsibility for the national defense rests with the President.

(2) Since passage of the National Security Act of 1947, the President has used his Secretary of Defense as his principal assistant in all matters relating to the Department of Defense. The Secretary is responsible for the effective, efficient, and economical operation of the Department of Defense, and he has statutory authority, direction, and control over the military departments.

(3) The National Command Authorities (NCA) are the President and Secretary of Defense or persons acting lawfully in their stead. The term NCA is used to signify constitutional authority to direct the Armed Forces in their execution of military action. Both movement of troops and execution of military action must be directed by the NCA; by law, no one else in the chain of command has the authority to take such action except in self-defense.

b. National Security Council (NSC). The National Security Council was established by the National Security Act of 1947 as the principal forum to consider national security issues that require Presidential decision. Its membership now includes only four statutory members: the President, the Vice President, the Secretary of State, and the Secretary of Defense. The Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff (CJCS) and the Director of Central Intelligence serve as statutory advisers to the NSC. The history of the NSC and its organization are discussed in Chapter 5.

Figure 2-1

c. Department of Defense (DOD)

(1) History. The Joint Board of the Army and Navy was established in 1903 as the first attempt to use a regularly constituted agency to coordinate the actions of the Army and the Navy. Since the beginning of the nation, the single focus for coordination between the War Department and Navy Department has been the President. During the 1920s and 1930s, Congress made several fiscally motivated studies intended to reorganize the administrative branch of government. In fact, one such report of a joint Congressional committee in June 1924 recommended that a single Department of Defense be formed under one cabinet officer; no action was taken on the report. Interestingly, the most significant support for a single executive department responsible for national defense came from Congressional desires to limit the size of the executive departments during the Depression. In 1932 the House considered a bill that would have permitted the President to establish a Department of National Defense and, as the President saw fit, subject to approval of Congress, transfer and consolidate functions of executive departments. The establishment of a single defense department was rejected by the House, and the sweeping reorganization recommendations made by President Hoover were eventually rejected by a lame-duck Congress. During the period, opposition among the military appears to have been strong. The Joint Board of the Army and Navy accepted a staff report dated May 1933 and said, "The Joint Board is unable to recommend an organization for a Department of National Defense that would be more efficient or more economical than the present separate departmental organizations. In the opinion of the Board, amalgamation of the two Departments would be a grave error."

(2) The creation of a single executive department responsible for national defense was marked by indecision and, from some circles, open hostility. But World War II and its aftermath furnished the necessary impetus for unification of the military departments under a single cabinet-level secretary. Anticipating the needs of a peacetime military organization, an indepth review by Congressional, executive, and military groups began even before the end of the war. Overwhelmingly, the studies were influenced by parochial Service interests reflecting the opinions of experienced wartime military and civilian leaders with vastly different views of the postwar era. Issues that dominated the search for a consensus included retention of air power in the Navy, maintenance of a separate Marine Corps, and the form and substance of the new military department of the Air Force.

(3) National Security Act of 1947. The National Security Act of 1947 was monumental legislation. After almost 50 years that included wartime lessons beginning with the Spanish-American War, a modern military organization had come into existence: unified action of the Services was law, the powers of the Secretary of National Defense were identified but subject to broad interpretation, and the roles and missions of the military Services were defined by Executive Order, but would not be Congressionally stated until 1958. The act created the National Military Establishment (NME) under the leadership of a civilian secretary who was co-equal with the cabinet-level secretaries of the Army, Navy, and new Air Force.

(4) In 1949 the National Security Act was amended to change the name of the NME to Department of Defense and recognize it as an executive department. Further, it changed the alignment of the Services to military departments within DOD. The Reorganization Act of 1958 asserted the direction, authority, and control of the Secretary of Defense over the executive department and clarified the operational chain of command that runs from the President and Secretary of Defense to the combatant forces.

(5) DOD functions today are outlined in DOD Directive 5100.1 and illustrated in Figure 2-2. The Department of Defense is composed of the

Office of the Secretary,

Joint Chiefs of Staff,

Joint Staff,

defense agencies (16),

Department of Defense field activities (9),

Departments of the Army, Navy, and Air Force, and

unified (9) combatant commands.

Reference: DOD Directive 5100.1 Figure 2-2

(6) The role of the Secretary of Defense has changed since the position was established in 1947. Originally, the secretary had only general authority shared with the civilian secretaries of the military departments. In 1949 his position was strengthened with his appointment as head of an executive department, reduction of the role of military department secretaries, and his assumption of budgeting responsibilities. Today he is the principal assistant to the President for all matters relating to the Department of Defense. Moreover, the DOD Reorganization Act of 1986 makes clear his position in the operational chain of command. Figure 2-3 illustrates the organization that reports to the Secretary of Defense.

Figure 2-3

d. Military departments

(1) The military departments are separately organized, each under a civilian secretary who supervises the Service chief (or chiefs) in matters of a Service nature. Basically, their functions are as follows:

(2) The history of the military departments has been significantly altered by executive order and legislation since the National Security Act of 1947. Examples are the Key West Agreement of March 1948, which broadly clarified the roles and missions of the Services, and the Reorganization Act of 1958, which removed the military departments from the chain of command and clarified their support and administrative responsibilities.

 

202. ORIGINS OF THE JOINT CONCEPT

a. History before 1900. American history reflects the importance of joint operations. MacDonoughís operations on Lake Champlain were a vital factor in the ground campaigns of the War of 1812; the teamwork displayed by General Grant and Admiral Porter in the Vicksburg Campaign of 1863 stands as a fine early example of joint military planning and execution. However, instances of confusion and lack of coordinated, joint military action received public criticism in the Cuban campaign of the Spanish-American War (1898). By the turn of the century, advances in technology and the growing international involvement of the United States required greater cooperation between the military departments and the development of joint planning.

b. History through World War I. As a result of the performance of the U.S. military establishment in the Spanish-American War, a joint board composed of the professional heads of the Army and the Navy and the chief planner of each Service was established in 1903. The Joint Army and Navy Board was to be a continuing body that could plan for joint operations and resolve problems of common concern to the two Services. Unfortunately, the Joint Board accomplished little, because it could not originate ideas or enforce decisions, being limited to commenting on problems submitted to it by the secretaries of the two military departments. It was described as "a planning and deliberative body rather than a center of executive authority." As a result, it had little or no impact on the conduct of the first World War. Even as late as World War I, questions of seniority and command relationships between the Chief of Staff of the Army and American Expeditionary Forces in Europe were just being resolved.

c. History through World War II. After World War I, the two Service secretaries agreed to reestablish and revitalize the Joint Board. Membership was expanded to six: the chiefs of the two Services, their deputies, and the Chief of War Plans Division for the Army and Director of Plans Division for the Navy. More important, a working staff (named the Joint Planning Committee) made up of members of the plans divisions of both Service staffs was authorized. The new Joint Board could initiate recommendations on its own. Unfortunately, the 1919 board was given no more legal authority or responsibility than its 1903 predecessor; and, although its 1935 publication, Joint Action Board of the Army and Navy, gave some guidance for the unified operations of World War II, the board itself was not influential in the war. The board was officially disbanded in 1947.

 

203. ORIGINS OF THE JOINT CHIEFS OF STAFF

a. Soon after Pearl Harbor, President Roosevelt and Prime Minister Churchill, at the Arcadia Conference in Washington, established the Combined Chiefs of Staff as the supreme military body for strategic direction of the Anglo-American effort. But the United States in 1941 had no established agency to furnish U.S. input to such a committee. The British Chiefs of Staff Committee, on the other hand, had long been giving effective administrative coordination, tactical coordination, and strategic direction to British forces. The British committee had planning and intelligence staffs to coordinate the ongoing war effort as well as serve as a "corporate" body for giving military advice to the War Cabinet and the Prime Minister. The collective responsibility of the British committee was set by the Prime Minister in 1924 and given to each new member as a directive:

In addition to the functions of the Chiefs of Staff as advisers on questions of sea, land or air . . . each of the three Chiefs of Staff will have an individual and collective responsibility for advising on defense policy as a whole, the three constituting, as it were, a Super-Chief of a War Staff in Commission.

b. In response to the need for coordinated staff work, the concept described by Admiral Leahy as a "unified high command" was adopted by the United States in 1942; that group came to be known as the Joint U.S. Chiefs of Staff. This first Joint Chiefs of Staff worked throughout the war without legislative sanction or even formal Presidential definition, a role that President Roosevelt believed preserved the flexibility required to meet the needs of the war. The first members of the Joint U.S. Chiefs of Staff were the "opposite numbers" to the British Chiefs of Army, Navy, and Royal Air Force (an autonomous and co-equal military organization): Admiral William D. Leahy, President Rooseveltís special military adviser, with a title of Chief of Staff to the Commander in Chief of the Army and Navy; General George C. Marshall, Chief of Staff of the Army; Admiral Ernest J. King, Chief of Naval Operations and Commander in Chief of the U.S. Fleet; and General Henry H. Arnold, Deputy Army Chief of Staff for Air and Chief of the Army Air Corps. Each was promoted in December 1944 when the grades of General of the Army and Fleet Admiral of the United States Navy were established.

c. The Arcadia Conference also gave formal definition to the terms JOINT, "involving two or more Services of the same nation," and COMBINED, "applying to organizations, plans, and operations of two or more nations."

d. Under President Rooseveltís leadership, this new U.S. military body steadily grew in influence and became the primary agent in coordinating and giving strategic direction to the Army and Navy. In combination with the British Chiefs of Staff, it mapped and executed a broad strategic direction for both nations.

e. At the end of World War II, the continued need for a formal structure of joint command was apparent; the wartime Joint Chiefs of Staff offered a workable example. The first legislative step was the passage of the National Security Act of 1947. That legislation formally established the Joint Chiefs of Staff and laid the foundation for the series of legislative and executive changes that produced todayís defense organization. However, the road to a formal unified command organization was controversial. The debate over the most recent Congressional action, the 1986 DOD Reorganization Act, illustrates that controversy is alive even today. As seen in Figure 2-4, significant legislative changes and executive decisions have altered and refined the influence and position of the Joint Chiefs of Staff since 1947.

 

 

LEGISLATIVE CHANGES TO THE JCS

LEGISLATION

PROVISIONS

1947

National

Security Act

  • Designated Secretary of National Defense to exercise general authority, direction, and control
  • Created the National Military Establishment
  • Established U.S. Air Force
  • Established CIA and NSC
  • Established JCS as permanent agency
  • JCS became principal military advisers to President and Secretary of Defense
  • Established a legal basis for unified and specified commands

1948

Key West

Agreement

  • Confirmed JCS membersí function as executive agents for unified commands
  • Service roles defined

1949

Amendment

  • Military department heads lost cabinet rank and were removed from NSC
  • Renamed NME the Department of Defense
  • Created office of Chairman

1952

Amendment

  • Gave Commandant of the Marine Corps (CMC) co-equal status on JCS on Marine Corps issues

1953

Amendment

  • Removed JCS from executive agent status, i.e., handling day-to-day communications and supervision over unified commands

Established military departments as executive agents for unified commands

1958

Amendment

  • Gave Chairman a vote
  • Removed military department as executive agent

Joint Staff has no executive authority, but assists the Secretary of Defense in exercising direction over unified commands

1978

Amendment

  • Made CMC a full member of JCS

1986

Amendment

  • Designated Chairman principal military adviser
  • Transferred duties of corporate JCS to Chairman
  • Created position of Vice Chairman

Specified chain of command to run from President to Secretary of Defense to unified and specified combatant commanders

References: National Security Act of 1947, as amended; Figure 2-4

Reorganization of the National Security Organization,

Report of the CNO Select Panel, dated March 1985

204. THE JOINT CHIEFS OF STAFF TODAY

References: Title 10 United States Code (as amended)

DOD Directive 5100.1, "Functions of the Department of Defense and Its Major Components"

DOD Directive 5158.1, "Organization of the Joint Chiefs of Staff and Relationships with the Office of the Secretary of Defense"

Organization of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, Action Officer Orientation Handbook

a. Composition. The Joint Chiefs of Staff (JCS) consist of the Chairman, the Vice Chairman, the Chief of Staff of the Army, the Chief of Naval Operations, the Chief of Staff of the Air Force, and the Commandant of the Marine Corps. The collective body of the Joint Chiefs of Staff is headed by the Chairman (or the Vice Chairman in the Chairmanís absence), who sets the agenda and presides over JCS meetings. Responsibilities as members of the Joint Chiefs of Staff take precedence over duties as the chiefs of military Services.

b. Executive authority. The executive authority of the Joint Chiefs of Staff has been changed as different organizational approaches have been implemented.

(1) In World War II, the Joint U.S. Chiefs of Staff were executive agents for theater and area commanders. The original National Security Act of 1947 saw the Joint Chiefs of Staff as planners and advisers, not as commanders of combatant commands. Nevertheless, the 1948 Key West Agreement confirmed the then-current practice under which the Joint Chiefs of Staff served as executive agents for unified commands. This authority was reversed by Congress by a 1953 amendment to the National Security Act.

(2) Today, the Joint Chiefs of Staff have no executive authority to command combatant forces. The issue of executive authority was clearly resolved by the Goldwater-Nichols DOD Reorganization Act of 1986: "The Secretaries of the military departments shall assign all forces under their jurisdiction to unified and specified combatant commands to perform missions assigned to those commands. The Ďchain of commandí runs from the President to the Secretary of Defense; and from the Secretary of Defense to the commander of the combatant command."

c. Military advice. Today, by law, the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff is the principal military adviser to the President, National Security Council, (NSC) and Secretary of Defense. Members of the JCS may submit to the Chairman advice on an opinion in disagreement with, or in addition to, the advice presented by the Chairman. However, all JCS members are also, by law, military advisers, and they may respond with advice or opinions on a particular matter when the President, NSC, or Secretary of Defense requests such advice.

d. Immediate military staff. DOD Directive 5100.1 assigns the Joint Chiefs of Staff, supported by the Joint Staff, as the immediate military staff of the Secretary of Defense. This designation is not found in "title 10, United States Code" but the Directive is a clear statement that the Secretary of Defense will turn to the Joint Chiefs of Staff for staff support on military matters.

e. Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff (CJCS)

(1) The Goldwater-Nichols DOD Reorganization Act of 1986 identified the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff as the head of the Joint Chiefs of Staff and the senior ranking member of the Armed Forces. By law, the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff is now the principal military adviser to the President. As he considers appropriate, he may seek the advice of and consult with the other JCS members and combatant commanders. When he presents his advice, he shall present the advice or opinions of other JCS members and, as he considers appropriate, the range of military advice and opinions he has received.

(2) The Goldwater-Nichols DOD Reorganization Act of 1986 also transferred to the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff the functions and responsibilities previously assigned to the corporate body of the Joint Chiefs of Staff. The broad functions of the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff are set forth in 10 USC 153 and detailed in DOD Directive 5100.1. They are summarized in Figure 2-5.

(3) 10 USC 162 requires the secretaries of the military departments to assign all forces under their jurisdiction to the combatant commands or the U.S. Element, NORAD, except those forces assigned to carry out the statutory functions of a secretary of a military department, or forces assigned to multinational peacekeeping organizations. Military department functions include recruiting, organizing, supplying, equipping, training, servicing, mobilizing, demobilizing, administering, maintaining, constructing, outfitting, and repairing. The chain of command to these combatant commands runs from the President to the Secretary of Defense directly to the commander of the combatant command. The Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff alone "functions within the chain of command by transmitting communications to the commanders of the combatant commands from the President and Secretary of Defense." That position is now clearly stated in DOD Directive 5100.1. The Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff does not exercise military command over any combatant forces; that issue was clarified in the 1953 amendment to the National Security Act of 1947.

References: DOD Reorganization Act of 1986 Figure 2-5

DOD Directive 5100.1

f. Vice Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff. The DOD Reorganization Act of 1986 created the position of Vice Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, who performs such duties as the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff may prescribe. By law, he is the second ranking member of the armed forces and replaces the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff in his absence or disability. Though he was not originally included as a member of the JCS, Section 911 of the National Defense Authorization Act of 1993 vested the Vice Chairman as a full voting member of the Joint Chiefs of Staff.

g. Military Service chiefs. The military Service chiefs are often said to "wear two hats." As members of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, they offer advice to the President, Secretary of Defense, and NSC. As the chiefs of the military Services, they are responsible to the secretary of the military department for management of the Services. By custom, the vice chiefs of the Services are delegated authority to act for their chiefs in most matters having to do with day-to-day operation of the Services. The duties of the Service chiefs as members of the Joint Chiefs of Staff take precedence over all their other duties.

 

205. ORGANIZATION OF THE JOINT CHIEFS OF STAFF

References: Joint Admin Pub 1.1, Organization and Functions of the Joint Staff

Title 10 United States Code (as amended)

DOD Directive 5100.1, "Functions of the Department of Defense and Its Major Components"

a. Joint Admin Pub 1.1, Organization and Functions of the Joint Staff, outlines the Joint Chiefs of Staff; Joint Staff; joint boards, commissions, and committees; National Defense University; defense agencies; and other supporting organizations.

b. Joint Chiefs of Staff (JCS). The composition and function of the Joint Chiefs of Staff were discussed in section 204. There are two groups that are not part of the Joint Staff that greatly assist the Joint Chiefs of Staff in the execution of their role.

(1) In the joint arena, a body of senior flag or general officers assists in resolving matters that do not require JCS corporate-body attention. Each Service chief appoints an operations deputy who works with the Director of the Joint Staff to form the subsidiary body known as the Operations Deputies of the Joint Chiefs of Staff or the OPSDEPs. The OPSDEPs are generally the three-star chiefs of operations for the Services: Army Deputy Chief of Staff (DCOS) for Operations and Plans; Navy Deputy Chief of Naval Operations (DCNO) for Plans, Policy, and Operations; Air Force DCOS for Plans and Operations; and Marine Corps DCOS for Plans, Policy, and Operations. They meet in sessions chaired by the Director of the Joint Staff to consider issues of lesser importance on behalf of the Joint Chiefs of Staff or to screen major issues before they reach the Joint Chiefs of Staff. With the exception of the Director, this body is not considered part of the Joint Staff.

(2) Similarly, there is a subsidiary body known as the Deputy Operations Deputies, JCS (DEPOPSDEPs), composed of a chairman, who is the Vice Director of the Joint Staff, and a two-star flag or general officer appointed by each Service chief. The DEPOPSDEPs are currently the Service directors of plans: Army Assistant Deputy COS (ADCOS) for Operations and Plans for Joint Affairs; Navy ADCNO for Plans, Policy, and Operations; Air Force Director of Plans; and Marine Corps Director of Plans. Issues come before the DEPOPSDEPs to be either settled at their level or forwarded to the OPSDEPs. Except for the Vice Director of the Joint Staff, the DEPOPSDEPs are not considered part of the Joint Staff.

(3) Matters come before these bodies under policies prescribed in Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Instruction (CJCSI) 5711.01. The Director of the Joint Staff is authorized to review and approve issues when there is no dispute between the Services, when the issue does not warrant JCS attention, when the proposed action is in conformance with CJCS policy, or when the issue has not been requested by a member of the Joint Chiefs of Staff.

c. Joint Staff

(1) The term "Joint Staff" was not specifically defined in the Reorganization Act of 1986, but the Act did restrict the staffís size to 1,627 military and civilian personnel. The restriction on size was repealed in the 1991 DOD Authorization Act. The staff includes personnel assigned or detailed to permanent duty on the Joint Staff, but does not include those assigned or detailed to the military departments. The staff is composed of approximately even numbers of officers from the Army, Navy and Marine Corps, and Air Force. In practice, the Marines make up about 20 percent of the number allocated to the Navy.

(2) Each amendment to the NSA of 1947 stated that the Joint Staff is not to operate or be organized to be an overall Armed Forces General Staff; therefore, it has no executive authority.

(3) The Joint Staff assists the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff with unified strategic direction of the combatant forces; unified operation of the combatant commands; and integration into an efficient team of land, naval, and air forces. Subject to the Chairmanís authority, direction, and control, the Joint Staff assists other members of the Joint Chiefs of Staff in carrying out their responsibilities.

(4) Figure 2-6 illustrates the history of the Joint Staff as the directorates, agencies, and staff members have varied with administrative and statutory demands. Organization of the Joint Staff is illustrated in Figure 2-7.

(5) The Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, after consultation with other JCS members and with the approval of the Secretary of Defense, selects the Director, Joint Staff to assist in managing the Joint Staff. By law, the direction of the Joint Staff rests exclusively with the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff. The Joint Staff also assists the other JCS members and the Vice Chairman in carrying out their responsibilities.

(6) The Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff manages the Joint Staff and the Director of the Joint Staff. The Joint Staff performs such duties as the Chairman prescribes.

d. Agencies of the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff

(1) Organizations reporting to CJCS. The diversity of offices within the Joint Staff and other organizations of the Joint Chiefs of Staff illustrates a wide range of functions and responsibilities. Among organizations reporting to the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff are the CJCS representatives to international negotiations, e.g., Mutual and Balanced Force Reductions (MBFR), Strategic Arms Reduction Talks (START), and activities involved with politico-military affairs and defense in the Western Hemisphere, e.g., U.S. representation to the United Nations Military Staff Committee and the Military Committee of NATO. Other activities include the National Defense University, the Joint Materiel Priorities and Allocations Board, and the Joint Transportation Board. Figure 2-8 illustrates the organizations that report to CJCS.

(2) Organizations reporting to the Secretary of Defense through CJCS. The combatant commanders have been directed by the Unified Command Plan and DOD Directive 5100.1 to communicate to the Secretary of Defense and President through the CJCS. Several defense agencies that report to the Secretary of Defense also support CJCS. CJCS has operational responsibilities for the Defense Information Systems Agency, the Defense Nuclear Agency, the Defense Logistics Agency, the Defense Intelligence Agency, and the National Imagery and Mapping Agency; and CJCS gives policy guidance and direction to other supporting organizations, including the Joint Tactical Command, Control, and Communications Agency, the Electromagnetic Compatibility Analysis Center, the Military Communications-Electronics Board, and the Joint Warfighting Center. Figure 2-9 illustrates the organizations that report to the Secretary of Defense through CJCS and those that, like the combat support agencies and activities, have functional relationships to the Joint Chiefs of Staff through CJCS.

EVOLUTION OF THE JOINT STAFF

LEGISLATION

OR DIRECTIVE

CHANGES

1947 National

Security Act

  • Limited size of Joint Staff to 100 officers
  • Organized Joint Staff into Strategic Plans, Intelligence, Logistic Plans (Joint Secretariat was not part of the Joint Staff)

1949

Amendment

  • Created office of Chairman
  • Limited size of Joint Staff to 100 officers

1953

Amendment

  • Assigned responsibility for managing Joint Staff to Chairman

1957

Amendment

  • Reorganized Joint Staff into Strategic Plans, Intelligence, Logistic Plans, Communications-Electronics, Subsidiary Activities, and Military Assistance Affairs

1958

Amendment

  • Limited Joint Staff to 400 officers
  • Reorganized Joint Staff to take planning and operational responsibilities; divided staff into Personnel, Intelligence, Operations, Logistics, Plans and Policy, Communications-Electronics
  • Chairman selects Director, Joint Staff, in consultation with JCS
  • Chairman manages Joint Staff on behalf of JCS

1963

Internal

Reorganization

  • Formalized position of Operations Deputies
  • Established position of Director, Joint Staff
  • Established NMCC outside Joint Staff
  • Disestablished Intelligence Directorate; transferred responsibilities to DIA

1964

Internal

Reorganization

  • Established Administrative Services Directorate
  • Term OJCS came into use to include Joint Staff and all agencies under the Joint Chiefs of Staff

1976 Internal

Reorganization

  • Disestablished J-1 and J-6, incorporating functions into J-5 and J-3

1979 Internal

Reorganization

  • Established Command, Control, and Communications Directorate

1981 Internal

Reorganization

  • Reestablished J-1 as Manpower and Personnel Directorate

1984 DOD

Authorization Act

  • Established Strategic Plans and Resource Analysis Agency (SPRAA)

1986 Goldwater-Nichols DOD

Reorganization Act

  • Created position of Vice Chairman
  • Resulted in the creation of J-7 and J-8 directorates
  • Limited Joint Staff to 1,627 military and civilian personnel

1991 Authorization Act

  • Numerical limit on Joint Staff repealed

1993 Authorization Act

  • Vice Chairman became full member of JCS

References: National Security Act of 1947, Title 10, U.S. Code, as amended; Figure 2-6

Joint Admin Pub 1.1, Organization and Functions of the Joint Staff

Reference: Joint Admin Pub 1.1, Organization and Functions of the Joint Staff Figure 2-7

Reference: Joint Admin Pub 1.1 Figure 2-8

Reference: adapted from Joint Admin Pub 1.1 Figure 2-9

206. COMBATANT COMMANDS

a. History

Reference: Staff Report to the Committee on Armed Services, United States

Senate, October 16, 1985, U.S. GPO, Washington, 1985

(1) The history of the current combatant command arrangement begins with the lessons learned in the Cuban campaign of the Spanish-American War. Between 1903 and 1942, the Joint Army and Navy Board sought cooperation between the Army and Navy, but accomplished little in the way of improving joint command. In effect, decisions on joint matters in dispute between the Services went to the level of the commander in chief. The President was the single "commander" who had a view of the entire military theater and authority over both the Army and Navy on-site commanders. Interestingly, one product of the Joint Board, an agreement on "mutual cooperation" in joint operations, was in effect at the time of the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor in December 1941. Early in World War II, General George C. Marshall, Army Chief of Staff, realized that a unified command arrangement, not mutual cooperation, had been made necessary because of the complexity of modern warfare.

(2) The experiences of World War II fully supported the theory and practice of unified command. Then, quite unlike today, the unified commanders reported to their executive agents on the Joint U.S. Chiefs of Staff. The executive agents have alternately been the military chiefs of Services (World War II and 1948) and the civilian secretaries of the military departments (1953-1958). Confusion rose from the understanding that the suppliers of the support and administration, the military departments, should also share in the direction of the forces in combat.

(3) As discussed earlier, the National Security Act (NSA) of 1947 was the first definitive legislative statement "to provide for the effective strategic direction of the armed forces and for their operation under unified control and for their integration into an efficient team of land, naval, and air forces." The act went on to say that it was the responsibility of the Joint Chiefs of Staff to "establish unified commands in strategic areas when such unified commands are in the interest of national security," and the President would establish unified and specified combatant commands to perform military missions. The military departments would assign forces to the combatant commands; the responsibility for their support and administration would be assigned by the Secretary of Defense to a military department. Forces not assigned would remain under the authority of the military department. Now, it was thought, the nation could make more effective use of its military resources.

b. Definitions. Unified and specified combatant commands were first described in the NSA of 1947. The statutory definition of the combatant commands has not changed since then.

Unified Combatant Command. A military command which has broad, continuing missions under a single commander and which is composed of forces from two or more military departments.

Specified Combatant Command. A military command which has broad, continuing missions and which is normally composed of forces from one military department.

By law, the term combatant command means a unified or specified command. The commander of a combatant command is designated commander in chief (CINC).

c. Chain of command. Congress intended in the Goldwater-Nichols DOD Reorganization Act of 1986 to clarify the command line to the combatant commanders and to preserve civilian control of the military. Goldwater-Nichols stated that the aoperational singlechain of command runs from the President to the Secretary of Defense to the combatant commanders. The act permitted the President to direct that communications between the President and the Secretary of Defense be transmitted through the CJCS. Under 10 USC 163, the Unified Command Plan directs that communications between the NCA and the combatant commander be transmitted through the CJCS. Further, by statute, the Secretary of Defense is permitted wide latitude to assign oversight responsibilities to CJCS in the Secretaryís control and coordination of the combatant commanders. This authority has been exercised in DOD Directive 5100.1 and other directives.exists with two distinct branches. The first branch runs from the President to the Secretary of Defense to the combatant commanders for missions and forces assigned to their commands; the second, used for purposes other than operational direction of forces assigned to the combatant commands, runs from the President through the Secretary of Defense to the Secretaries of the Military Departments, who exercise authority, direction and control through the individual Chiefs of the Services of their forces not specifically assigned to combatant commanders.

(1) The commanders of combatant commands exercise combatant command (command authority) (COCOM) of assigned forces and are directly responsible to the NCA for the performance of assigned missions and the preparedness of their commands. Combatant commanders prescribe the chain of command within their commands and designate the appropriate level of command authority to be exercised by subordinate commanders.

(2) The military departments operate under the authority, direction and control of the Secretary of Defense. This branch of the chain includes all military forces within the respective Service not specifically assigned to commanders of combatant commands, and is separate and distinct from the branch of the chain of command that exists within a combatant command.

Under 10 USC 163, the Unified Command Plan directs that communications between the NCA and the combatant commanders are transmitted through the CJCS. Further, by statute, the Secretary of Defense is permitted wide latitude to assign oversight responsibilities to CJCS in the Secretaryís control and coordination of the combatant commanders. This authority has been exercised in DOD Directive 5100.1 and other directives.

d. Command Authority

References: Title 10, United States Code (as amended)

DOD Directive 5100.1, "Functions of the Department of Defense and Its Major Components"

Joint Pub 0-2, Unified Action Armed Forces (UNAAF)

(1) The effective use of the nationís armed forces requires a unity of effort in the operation of diverse military resources. It also requires coordination among government departments and agencies within the executive branch, between the executive and legislative branches, nongovernmental organizations, and among nations in any alliance or coalition. The President, as advised by the National Security Council, is responsible for the national strategic unity of effort. The Secretary of Defense, supported by the combatant commanders, the Secretaries of the military departments, the Chiefs of Staff of the Services and the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, is responsible to the President for the national military unity of effort for creating, supporting, and employing military capabilities.

(2) The Goldwater-Nichols Reorganization Act of 1986 made the combatant commanders accountable to the NCA for performing their assigned missions. With this accountability came the assignment of all authority, direction, and control that Congress considered necessary to execute the responsibilities of the combatant commanders. The act defined the command authority of the combatant commander as the authority to

(3) This authority is termed defined as "combatant command (command authority)" and, subject to the direction of the President and the Secretary of Defense, resides only in the combatant commander. Combatant command (command authority) (COCOM) is the command authority over assigned forces vested in the CINCs by 10 USC 164, and is not transferable. It is defined in Joint Pub 0-2, Unified Action Armed Forces (UNAAF):

"COCOM is the command authority over assigned forces vested only in the commanders of combatant commands by title 10, US Code, Section 164, or as directed by the President in the Unified Command Plan (UCP), and cannot be delegated or transferred. COCOM is the authority of a combatant commander to perform those functions of command over assigned forces involving organizing and employing commands and forces, assigning tasks, designating objectives, and giving authoritative direction over all aspects of military operations, joint training (or in the case of USSOCOM, training of assigned forces), and logistics necessary to accomplish the missions assigned to the command. COCOM should be exercised through the commanders of subordinate organization. Normally, this authority is exercised through component commanders. COCOM provides full authority to organize and employ commands and forces as the combatant commander considers necessary to accomplish assigned missions."

(4) COCOM is a concept that is not shared with other echelons of command. Combatant commanders exercise COCOM through component commanders, subordinate unified commanders, commanders of joint task forces, and other subordinate commanders.

(5) In the past, directive authority for logistics has been an issue for contention. Much of this may have been resolved by the more definitive statement on the subject in the February 1995 edition of UNAAF:

(6) Operational control (OPCON) is another level of authority used frequently in the execution of joint military operations. OPCON is authority delegated to echelons below the combatant commander. Normally, this is authority exercised through component commanders and the commanders of established subordinate commands. Limitations on OPCON as well as additional authority not normally included in OPCON can be specified by a delegating commander. OPCON is defined in UNAAF:

"OPCON is the command authority which may be exercised by commanders at any echelon at or below the level of combatant command and can be delegated or transferred. OPCON is inherent in COCOM and is the authority to perform those functions of command over subordinate forces involving organizing and employing commands and forces, assigning tasks, designating objectives, and giving authoritative direction necessary to accomplish the mission. OPCON includes authoritative direction over all aspects of military operations and joint training necessary to accomplish missions assigned to the command. It should be exercised through the commanders of subordinate organizations; normally, this authority is exercised through subordinate joint force commanders and Service and/or functional component commanders. OPCON normally provides full authority to organize commands and forces and employ those forces as the commander in operational control considers necessary to accomplish assigned missions. It does not, in and of itself, include authoritative direction for logistics or matters of administration, discipline, internal organization, or unit training. These elements of COCOM must be specifically delegated by the combatant commander. OPCON does include the authority to delineate functional responsibilities and geographic joint operations areas of subordinate joint force commanders."

(7) The term tactical control (TACON) is used in execution of operations. TACON is the command authority over assigned or attached forces or commands, or military capability or forces made available for tasking, that is limited to the detailed and usually local direction and control of movements or maneuvers necessary to accomplish assigned missions or tasks. TACON may be delegated to and exercised by commanders at any echelon at or below the level of combatant command. TACON is inherent in OPCON.

(8) Support is a command authority. A support relationship is established by a superior commander between subordinate commands when one organization should aid, protect, complement, or sustain another force. Support may be exercised by commanders at any echelon at or below the level of combatant command. This includes the NCA designating a support relationship between combatant commanders as well as within a combatant command. The designation of supporting relationships is important as it conveys priorities to commanders and staffs who are planning or executing joint operations. The support command relationship is, by design, a somewhat vague but very flexible arrangement. The establishing authority (the common superior commander) is responsible for ensuring that both the supported and supporting commander understand the degree of authority the supported commander is granted.

e. Other authorities. Other authorities outside the command relations delineated above are described below.

(1) Administrative control (ADCON) is the direction or exercise of authority over subordinate or other organizations in respect to administration and support, including organization of Service forces, control of resources and equipment, personnel management, unit logistics, individual and unit training, readiness, mobilization, demobilization, and discipline and other matters not included in the operational missions of the subordinate or other organizations. ADCON is synonymous with administration and support responsibilities identified in Title 10 USC. This is the authority necessary to fulfill military department statutory responsibilities for administration and support. ADCON may be delegated to and exercised by commanders of Service forces assigned to a combatant commander at any echelon at or below the level of Service component command. ADCON is subject to the command authority of combatant commanders.

(2) Coordinating Authority. Coordinating authority may be exercised by commanders or individuals at any echelon at or below the level of combatant command. Coordinating authority is the authority delegated to a commander or individual for coordinating specific functions and activities involving forces of two or more military departments or two or more forces of the same Service. The commander or individual has the authority to require consultation between the agencies involved but does not have the authority to compel agreement. The common task to be coordinated will be specified in the establishing directive without disturbing the normal organizational relationships in other matters. Coordinating authority is a consultation relationship between commanders, not an authority by which command may be exercised. It is more applicable to planning and similar activities than to operations. Coordinating authority is not in any way tied to force assignment. Assignment of coordinating authority is based on the missions and capabilities of the commands or organizations involved.

(3) Direct Liaison Authorized. DIRLAUTH is authority granted by a commander (any level) to a subordinate to directly consult or coordinate an action with a command or agency within or outside of the granting command. DIRLAUTH is more applicable to planning than operations and always carries with it the requirement of keeping the commander granting DIRLAUTH informed. DIRLAUTH is a coordination relationship, not an authority through which command may be exercised.

f.e Role of CJCS. The role of CJCS in the chain of command of the combatant commands is threefold.

(1) As stated, communications between the NCA and the combatant commanders pass through CJCS. The DOD Reorganization Act permits the President to establish this communications chain of command; DOD Directive 5100.1 of 25 September 1987 directs it. With this communications responsibility come the myriad duties associated with assisting the President and Secretary of Defense in the direction and control of the combatant commanders: strategic direction, strategic planning, and contingency planning and preparedness.

(2) Oversight of the activities of combatant commands in matters dealing with the statutory responsibility of the Secretary of Defense falls to CJCS. This includes recommending changes in assignment of functions, roles, and missions to achieve maximum effectiveness of the armed forces.

(3) CJCS is the spokesman for the combatant commanders, including comments on the summary and analysis of requirements, programs, and budget.

g. Assignment and Transfer of Forces. All Service forces (except as noted 10 USC 162) are assigned to combatant commands by the Secretary of Defense "Forces for Unified Commands" memorandum. A force assigned or attached to a combatant command may be transferred from that command only as directed by the Secretary of Defense and under procedures prescribed by the Secretary of Defense and approved by the President. Establishing authorities for subordinate unified commands and joint task forces may direct the assignment or attachment of their forces to those subordinate commands as appropriate.

(1) Forces, not command relationships, are transferred between commands. When forces are transferred, the command relationship the gaining commander will exercise (and the losing commander will relinquish) over those forces must be specified.

(2) The combatant commander exercises combatant command (command authority) (COCOM) over forces assigned or reassigned by the NCA. Subordinate joint force commanders (JFCs) will exercise OPCON over assigned or reassigned forces. Forces are assigned or reassigned when the transfer of forces will be permanent or for an unknown period of time, or when the broadest level of command and control is required or desired. OPCON of assigned forces is inherent in COCOM and may be delegated within the combatant command by the commander in chief of the combatant command (CINC) or between combatant commands by the Secretary of Defense.

(3) The combatant commander normally exercises OPCON over forces attached by the NCA. Forces are attached when the transfer of forces will be temporary. Establishing authorities for subordinate unified commands and joint task forces will normally direct the delegation of OPCON over forces attached to those subordinate commands.

(4) In accordance with the "Forces for Unified Commands" and the Unified Command Plan, all forces operating within the geographic areas assigned to a combatant command will be assigned or attached to and under the command of the commander of that command, except as otherwise directed by the President or the Secretary of Defense. Forces assigned to perform the mission of the military department, i.e. recruit, supply, equip, maintain, etc., are not required to be assigned to a combatant command, unless otherwise directed by the Secretary of Defense. Forces directed by the President or the Secretary of Defense may conduct operations from or within any geographic areas as required for accomplishing assigned tasks, as mutually agreed by the commanders concerned or as directed by the President or Secretary of Defense. Transient forces do not come under the chain of command of the area commander solely by their movement across area of responsibility (AOR)/joint operations area (JOA) boundaries.

h. Organization Relationships

References: Unified Command Plan

(1) The unified command structure is flexible, and changes as required to accommodate evolving U.S. national security needs. The Unified Command Plan (UCP) is the document that establishes the combatant commands. It is approved by the President, published by the CJCS, and addressed to the commanders of combatant commands. The UCP identifies geographic areas of responsibility, assigns primary tasks, defines authority of the commanders, establishes command relationships, and gives guidance on the exercise of combatant command. Figure 2-10 illustrates the current unified combatant command relationships.

(2) Five combatant commanders have geographic area responsibilities. These combatant commanders are each assigned an area of responsibility (AOR) by the Unified Command Plan (UCP) and are responsible for all operations within their designated areas: U.S. Atlantic Command, U.S. Central Command, U.S. European Command, U.S. Pacific Command, and U.S. Southern Command.

(3) The CINCs of the remaining combatant commands have worldwide functional responsibilities not bounded by geography: U.S. Space Command, U.S. Special Operations Command, U.S. Strategic Command, and U.S. Transportation Command.

(4) General responsibilities of the CINCs are spelled out in the UCP.

(5) Charts of the command relationships of the combatant commands and selected multinational commands are shown on the following pages. The combatant command charts show major subordinate organizations and, where applicable, indicate formal associations with multinational or binational commands, because some commanders serve in more than one capacity. All CINC positions are nominative (i.e., they can be held by an officer from any Service), although most are typically affiliated with one or two Services.

i. Summary charts. Figures 2-11 and 2-12 summarize the basic differences found in UNAAF between combatant commands and their subordinates.

Reference: adapted from UCP Figure 2-10

 

SUMMARY OF JOINT ORGANIZATIONS

Unified

Combatant Command

Subordinate

Unified Command

Establishing

Authority

President through the Secretary of Defense with advice & assistance of CJCS

Unified commander, when authorized by CJCS

Mission

Criteria

Any combination of the following, with significant forces of two or more military departments involved:

  • A large-scale operation requiring positive control of tactical execution by a large and complex force
  • A large geographic or functional area requiring single responsibility for effective coordination of the operations therein
  • Common utilization of limited logistic means
  • Conduct operations on a continuing basis per criteria of a unified command
  • Commanderís

    Responsibilities

    • Plan and conduct military operations in response to crises, including the security of the command and protection of the United States, its possessions and bases against attack or hostile incursion
    • Maintain the preparedness of the command to carry out missions assigned to the command
    • Carry out assigned missions, tasks, responsibilities
    • Assign tasks to, and direct coordination among, the subordinate commands to ensure unity of effort in the accomplishment of the assigned missions
    • Communicate directly with the Chiefs of the Services, the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, the Secretary of Defense, and subordinate elements
    • Keep the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff promptly advised of significant events and incidents that occur in the functional or geographic area of responsibility, particularly incidents that could create national or international repercussions
  • Responsibilities similar to the unified commanderís
  • Forces

    • Significant forces of two or more military departments
  • Significant assigned or attached forces of two or more Services
  • Authority

    of the

    Commander

    Combatant command (command authority), i.e.,

    • Authoritative direction for logistics/joint training
    • Prescribe chain of command; select commanders & staff
    • Organize commands/forces; employ forces
    • Assign command functions
    • Coordinate/approve admin & support
    • In the event of a major emergency in the AOR requiring the use of all available forces, may assume temporary OPCON of all forces in the assigned AOR
    • In an unusual situation, may exercise COCOM directly of subordinate elements
  • Similar to unified command within the assigned area of responsibility, except authorized only operational control
  • Notes

    • Combatant command (command authority) through components, subordinate unified commands, joint task forces, attaching elements of one force to another, and directly to specific operational forces
    • Commanderís staff: key staff positions represented by Services assigned, balanced by composition of forces & character of operations

    Exercises Operational Control through

    - components

    - joint task forces
    - attaching elements of one force to another
    - directly to specific
    operational forces

    Reference: JOINT Pub 0-2, UNAAF Figure 2-11

    SUMMARY OF JOINT ORGANIZATIONS (contíd.)

    Combatant

    Commanderís Service Component Command

    Functional

    Component Command

    Joint Task Force

    Establishing

    Authority

     

    Combatant commander, and commanders of subunified commands and JTFs

    • Secretary of Defense
    • Combatant commander
    • Subordinate unified command
    • Existing JTF

    Mission

    Criteria

       
    • Specific limited objective
    • Does not require centralized control of logistics
    • Requires close integration of effort
    • Requires coordination of local defense of subordinate area

    Commanderís

    Responsibilities

    • Recommend proper employment of forces
    • Accomplish operational missions
    • Select units for assignment to subordinate forces
    • Conduct joint training
    • Inform CINC of proposed changes in logistics support
    • Under crisis action or wartime, implement CINCís logistics directives
    • Develop program and budget requests that comply with CINCís guidance
    • Inform CINC of program and budget decisions that affect planning
    • General functions: internal administration and discipline, training, logistics functions, intelligence
    • Furnish force data to support assigned missions
  • Recommend proper employment of forces
  • Accomplish assigned operational missions
  • Conduct joint training
  • Recommend proper employment of assigned forces
  • Accomplish assigned operational missions
  • Jointly train assigned forces
  • Forces

    • All Service forces, such as individuals, units, detach-ments, organization, and installations under the com-mand assigned to the unified command
  • Normally, but not necessarily, forces of two or more military departments
  • Assigned forces of two or more military departments on a significant scale
  • Assigned by establishing authority
  • Authority

    of the

    Commander

    • Internal administration and discipline
    • Training of Service forces
    • Logistics, except as other-wise directed by the CINC
    • Service intelligence matters
  • As determined by the designating commander
  • Exercises OPCON over assigned & normally over attached forces
  • Notes

    • Commander is senior officer of Service assigned to a combatant command and qualified for command
  • Performs operational missions of long or short duration
  • Commander designated by establishing authority may be Service component commander with concur-rence of JFC
  • JTF is dissolved when purpose has been achieved
  • Commander may be a component commander selected with concurrence of CINC
  • Reference: JOINT Pub 0-2, UNAAF Figure 2-12

    Figure 2-13

    Figure 2-14

    Figure 2-15

    Figure 2-16

    Figure 2-17

    Figure 2-18

    Figure 2-19

    Figure 2-20

    Figure 2-21

    Figure 2-22

    Figure 2-23

    Figure 2-24

    207. A JOINT STAFF

    Reference: Joint Pub 0-2, Unified Action Armed Forces (UNAAF)

    a. Introduction. As shown in the summary of Service functions and staff history in Chapter 1, each of the military Services has developed a different concept of how its staff should be organized. However, the fundamental staff concept is consistent among all Services: the commander has a staff, a group of assistants, that is not in the operational chain of command. Joint commanders choose a staff system that satisfies their needs, one that can be used effectively by officers from the different Services who make up their staffs. The concept of the joint staff is seen throughout the combatant commands. The basic organization is seen in combatant commands, joint task forces, component commands, and joint agencies.

    b. Definition. A joint staff is defined in Joint Pub 1-02 as the staff of a commander of a unified or specified command, subordinate unified command, joint task force, or subordinate functional component (when a functional component command will employ forces from more than one Military Department), which includes members from the several Services comprising the force. These members should be assigned in such a manner as to ensure that the commander understands the tactics, techniques, capabilities, needs and limitations of the component parts of the force. Positions on the staff should be divided so that Service representation and influence generally reflect the Service composition of the force.

    c. Principles. Joint Pub 1-02 outlines the principles and doctrine that govern joint activities and the performance of the Armed Forces.

    (1) Members of the joint staff are responsible to the joint force commander.

    (2) The joint force commander should ensure that the recommendation of any member of the staff receives consideration.

    (3) Authority to act in the name of the commander is specifically prescribed.

    (4) Orders and directives to subordinate units are issued in the name of the commander and, generally, to the next subordinate command, rather than directly to elements of that subordinate command.

    (5) Authorization is generally given to communicate directly between appropriate staff officers of other commands to expedite execution of orders and directives and to promote teamwork between commands.

    (6) Each staff division must coordinate its action and planning with the other staff divisions.

    (7) The joint force commander is authorized to organize the staff and assign responsibilities to ensure unity of effort and accomplishment of assigned missions.

    d. Staffing. The establishing authority of a joint activity provides for the furnishing of necessary staff personnel. As on any staff, the number of people should be kept to the minimum and matched to the assigned task. Staff members should be detailed for sufficiently long periods to gain and use the required experience. The officers on the joint staff must be competent to advise the commander in areas concerning their respective Services.

    e. Organization. Figure 2-25 illustrates the broad functional subdivisions of a typical joint staff organization that are outlined in Joint Pub 1-02. The commanderís staff is broadly categorized into personal staff, special staff, and general or joint staff divisions.

    (1) The personal staff group is directly responsible to the commander. It includes any assistants needed to handle matters requiring close personal control by the commander. The commanderís aide or aide-de-camp, legal advisor, public affairs adviser, inspector general, and political affairs adviser (or international affairs adviser) are generally on the commanderís personal staff.

    (2) The chief of staff (COS) is the principal staff officer who coordinates and directs the work of the staff divisions. For internal administrative matters, the COS may be assisted by a secretary of the joint staff. In addition, some staffs have deputy chiefs of staff to assist the COS.

    (3) The special staff group assists the commander and the joint staff with technical, administrative, or tactical matters, e.g., comptroller, facility engineering, medical, weather, quartermaster, and transportation affairs. The special staff is usually small, with experts found on the component command staffs or within the joint staff divisions.

    (4) The principal functional divisions or directorates of the commanderís staff are known as general or joint staff. The function of the joint staff is to execute the responsibilities of the commander, e.g., developing policy, preparing and coordinating plans, and overseeing all functions assigned to the commander. Depending on the staff, the staff subdivision may be headed by an assistant chief of staff or director. The joint staff may also be known as a coordinating staff group, executive staff group, or supervisory staff group. The CINC or joint force commander has the authority and latitude to establish the staff organization required to fulfill the commandís responsibilities.

    Figure 2-25

    A more detailed description of the basic functions of the principal joint staff divisions is shown in Figure 2-26.

    Nontraditional divisions are also found in many commands.

    FUNCTIONS OF JOINT STAFF DIVISIONS

    DIRECTORATE OR

    DIVISION

    RESPONSIBILITIES

    Manpower and

    Personnel

    (J-1)

    • Manage manpower
    • Formulate personnel policies
    • Supervise administration of personnel, including civilians and prisoners of war

    Intelligence

    (J-2)

    • Ensure availability of sound intelligence on area and enemy locations, activities, and capabilities
    • Direct intelligence efforts on proper enemy items of interest
    • Ensure adequate intelligence coverage and response
    • Disclose enemy capabilities and intentions

    Operations

    (J-3)

    • Assist in direction and control of operations
    • Plan, coordinate, and integrate operations

    Logistics

    (J-4)

    • Formulate logistics plans
    • Coordinate and supervise supply, maintenance, repair, evacuation, transportation, construction, and related logistics matters
    • Ensure effective logistics support for all forces in the command

    Plans and Policy

    (J-5)

    • Assist commander in long-range or future planning
    • Prepare campaign and operation plans
    • Prepare estimates of the situation
    • Functions may be included in operations directorate

    Command, Control,

    Communications, and

    Computers

    or

    Communications-

    Electronics and Automated

    Systems (J-6)

    • Assist commander with responsibilities for communications-electronics and automated data systems
    • Prepare communications and data systems plans to support operational and strategic concepts
    • Furnish communications to exercise command in mission execution
    • Functions may be included in operations directorate or in the special staff

    Special Staff

    • Give technical, administrative, and tactical advice
    • Prepare parts of plans, estimates, and orders
    • Coordinate and supervise staff activities
    • Special staff may be included as branches of directorates

    Personal Staff

    • Responsible directly to the commander
    • Special matters over which the commander chooses to exercise close personal control
    • Usually includes the political adviser

    Reference: Joint Pub 0-2, UNAAF Figure 2-26

     

    f. Variations in joint staff divisions. The commander may organize the staff as necessary to carry out duties and responsibilities. Many combatant commands have taken advantage of this flexibility as illustrated in the internal staff diagrams on Figures 2-13 through 2-24. For example, EUCOM, CENTCOM, and PACOM have consolidated the security assistance function with J-4; TRANSCOM and STRATCOM have consolidated the J-3 and J-4 functions.

    g. Terminology. Joint Pub 1-02, The Dictionary of Military and Associated Terms, uses the term "general staff" to describe the divisions explained above. While there is consistency in the functional subdivisions of a staff into personnel, intelligence, operations, logistics, planning, etc., the staff designations vary between Services and with the size of organization supported. The Army and Marine Corps may use G-1, G-2, G-3, G-4 to identify personnel, intelligence, operations, and logistics staff divisions; the Navy may use N-1, N-2, N-3, etc.; and the Air Force uses letter designations. Figure 2-27 illustrates just some of the possible staff designations.

    h. History. Joint staffs are organized on the conventional staff model. The advent of extensive joint operations during World War II and the institution of the unified command structure after the war posed the question of which type of staff organization would be best suited to such commands. For a variety of reasons, the general staff organization adapted by General Pershing from the French in World War I and developed by the Army and Marine Corps evolved as the model for the U.S. joint staff. This is reasonable, because joint operations nearly always include ground forces, and a majority of the joint staff will be familiar with the concept. The term joint staff or conventional staff is used in lieu of general staff to avoid confusion with the General Staff, a unique organizational concept. The General Staff is a senior, professional military staff with command authority used in some foreign military organizations. Such an arrangement was expressly forbidden in the creation of the U.S. military establishment in 1947 and has been excluded in every legislative change since.

    U.S. STAFF DESIGNATIONS

     

    PERSONNEL

    INTELLIGENCE

    OPERATIONS

    LOGISTICS

    PLANNING

    COMMUNICATIONS

    ARMY

    COMPONENT HQ

    DCS

    Personnel

    DCS

    Intelligence

    DCS

    Operations

    and

    Plans

    DCS

    Logistics

    DCS

    Engineer

    DCS

    Resource Management

     

    DCS

    Communications-

    Electronics

    DCS

    Systems

    Automation

    ARMY

    DIVISION HQ

    ACOS

    Personnel

    (G1)

    ACOS

    Intelligence

    (G2)

    ACOS

    Operations

    (G3)

    ACOS

    Logistics

    (G4)

       

    AIR FORCE

    COMPONENT

    HQ

    DCS

    Personnel

    (DP)

    DCS

    Intelligence

    (IN)

    DCS

    Operations

    (DO)

    DCS

    Logistics

    (LG)

    DCS

    Plans

    (XP)

    DCS

    Communications

    Systems (SC)

    AIR FORCE

    WING

    included in Support Group (SPTGP)

    as

    MSSG/MSF

    included in

    OPG as

    OSS/IN

    Operations

    Group (OPG)

    Logistics

    Group (LG)

    included in

    DO and LG

    as

    DOX & LGX

    AMC

    XP in ACC

    OG as OSS/DOX & LG as LGS/LGX

    Communications

    Group (CG)

    or

    included in

    SPTGP as CS

    NAVY

    COMPONENT

    HQ

    ACOS

    Administration

    (N1)

    ACOS

    Intelligence

    (N2)

    ACOS

    Operations

    (N3)

    ACOS

    Logistics

    (N4)

    ACOS

    Plans

    (N5)

    ACOS

    Communications

    (N6)

    ABBREVIATIONS: DCS - DEPUTY CHIEF OF STAFF Figure 2-27

    ACOS - ASSISTANT CHIEF OF STAFF

    References: ARMY FM 101-5, Staff Organization and Operations

    AIR FORCE Publication 53-21, USAF Staff Organization Chartbook

    NAVY NWP 11, Naval Operational Planning Figure 2-24

     

    208. RELATIONSHIPS BETWEEN JOINT STAFFS

    a. Intrastaff relationships. Each joint staff division coordinates its actions and planning with the other divisions. Information on progress and problems is shared regularly throughout the staff. As issues or problems come to the attention of a commander, a single joint staff division is assigned primary responsibility for the action. That division assumes responsibility for coordinating the work among the other divisions and agencies within the headquarters.

    b. Interstaff relationships. A commander may authorize staff officers to communicate directly with the staff officers of subordinate commands for coordination. When formal orders and directives are issued, however, they are issued in the name of the commander to the commander of the subordinate command--not directly to elements of that command. There are restrictions on the command authority of a combatant commander that affect the relationship of the joint staff with the subordinate commanders. The combatant commander is primarily concerned with broad operational matters and, in general, leaves problems associated with administration and support mainly to the component commands. On the other hand, with COCOM, the combatant commander has directive authority to accomplish the mission. By law, directive authority covers all aspects of military operations, joint training, and logistics. UNAAF contains definitive guidance on logistics, since the Services are assigned by law the primary responsibility for that support.

    c. A joint staff assists the commander in the exercise of command. The functions that relate to joint operations will be discussed in more detail in the following chapters.

     

    209. COMBINED COMMANDS

    a. A combined command is a force under a single commander that is composed of sizable assigned or attached elements of two or more allied nations.

    b. The organizational principles already discussed have equal validity when applied to combined commands. The concepts of command authority and the responsibilities of combatant commanders are generally applicable to combined commanders. However, since combined commands are binational or multinational, their missions and responsibilities (including command responsibilities) must be established and assigned to conform to binational or multinational agreements. Organizational questions about combined commands are often more difficult to answer than national organizational questions. The primary source of difficulty is the lack of precedent and an absence of combined doctrine. Normally, a combined command operates under the terms of a treaty, alliance, or bilateral agreement between or among the nations concerned. The North American Aerospace Defense Command (NORAD), Combined Forces Command Korea (CFC), and Allied Command Europe (ACE) are examples of multinational commands.

     

    210. NATURE OF COMBINED STAFF DUTY. The normal types of staff problems are magnified on a combined staff. There are psychological and sociological problems created by differences in customs, religions, and standards of living. These factors point to the need for a different mental approach to combined staff duty. Just after the Allied Forces Southern Europe had been formally established in August 1951, Admiral Carney as CINCSOUTH wrote the following memorandum to his staff:

    "To those of you who have only worked in the framework of your own particular Service, and thus have not been exposed to the necessary give and take of unification, much that you see will appear to be lacking in order and logic; to those of you who have not had previous experience in inter-Allied dealings, the modus operandi may appear even more obscure. Working within the framework of oneís own Service is a simple matter because the Service procedures have been long established and all of oneís colleagues speak the same language and are guided by the same indoctrination. Joint efforts, be they on the staff or in the field, invariably require mutual adjustments; these adjustments may be radical but with people of good will and good spirit the Services can truly work as a team.

    When inter-Allied factors are superimposed, the effects are frequently unpredictable. Politics are politics the world over and many times we encounter difficulties and objections which are illogical from the military standpoint but which stem from political factors that are very real to the officeholders, the voters, and the taxpayers of the countries concerned. It is to be expected that we will frequently encounter problems of obscure and puzzling origin, and an awareness of the probability should help to foster the patience and flexibility necessary."

    This memorandum, written more than four decades ago, demonstrates the timelessness of certain principles relating to the human element of organizations. The advice is as good today as it was then.

    Figure 2-28