Military Engineers with Unity of Command: Why is This So Hard?

Abstract

Abstract : To fully optimize his limited engineering resources and better direct them to his critical needs, the Joint Force Commander (JFC) needs direct access to a single point of contact for engineering operations to better coordinate and integrate all engineer forces throughout military operations. Experience shows that both repositioning his engineer from under the J4 into a separate staff element, and then establishing an engineer functional component command or subordinate Joint Task Force (JTF) ensures more efficient and effective engineering support during joint operations. While joint doctrine allows the JFC latitude in placing engineer leadership within the JTF, most often tradition is followed and a small engineer staff is placed under the J4. Furthermore, in recent operations, unity of effort (necessitated by poor unity of command) appears to be lacking for engineering work. While all of the Services have engineer capabilities and joint doctrine discusses a Joint Engineer , we have not yet organized to maximize engineering efforts during joint operations. In this paper, my goal is to briefly explain current Service-engineer capabilities, describe the command and control (C2) organizations of engineers in recent operations and evaluate their success, illustrate four potential courses of action (including the status quo) and prove why combining two of the options is the best alternative.