(Pam) 525-3-0, The Army Capstone Concept - Federation of ...

21
TRADOC Pam 525-3-0
(3) The future force will have to employ combinations of defeat and stability
mechanisms to produce physical and psychological effects and accomplish the mission in all
forms of operations other than operations of short duration with limited objectives and planned
withdrawal (such as raids).
d. Integrate joint capabilities. At
increasingly lower echelons, Army
leaders must be able to integrate the
actions, activities, and capabilities of joint
assets into operational campaigns. Joint
Implication
Army forces must be interoperable with and achieve unity
of effort with joint, interagency, intergovernmental,
multinational, and private sector partners.
capabilities consist of the complementary and reinforcing effects that the capabilities of one
service offer to the forces of other services. Joint capabilities make Army forces more effective
than they would be otherwise. For instance, the Army’s close combat capability is
complementary with joint fires and precision strike capabilities of the U.S. Air Force and the
U.S. Navy. Exposure to air and naval precision fires can compel enemy forces to disperse and
make them vulnerable to the Army’s close combat capability. Similarly, land forces can operate
to ensure freedom of movement and action in the aerospace and maritime domains. Army forces
possess the capability to seize key terrain—terrain where enemy forces might emplace air
defense, antisatellite, or antiship missiles—to destroy enemy air and sea defenses and then
transition to area security operations to prevent the enemy’s use of critical areas or facilities. 32
Complementary joint force capabilities—acting in concert with other services—defeat enemy
forces by turning enemy countermeasures into vulnerabilities and preempting enemy action.
e. Cooperate with partners. Army leaders must also seek to integrate the activities of
interagency, intergovernmental, multinational, and private sector partners into Army operations.
Army leaders must facilitate unity of effort despite diverse cultures and interests.
(1) Unity of effort. Unity of effort consists of the coordination and cooperation among
joint partners, interagency elements, coalition partners, and indigenous forces and leaders toward
common objectives, even if the participants are not part of the same command or organization.
Achieving unity of effort will depend on partners developing a mutual understanding of the
environment and a common commitment to solutions that address both the causes of conflict and
the sources of enemy strength. While it is difficult to imagine U.S. Army forces conducting
operations that do not require cooperation with key allies, coalition partners, or indigenous
forces, a lack of congruence in interests can limit the degree of unity of effort and require Army
forces to assume greater responsibility for operations to ensure an outcome consistent with
policy goals. Additionally, when operating with local forces in a contingency environment,
indigenous force effectiveness may be limited due to capability or lack of legitimacy. Achieving
unity of effort will require Army leaders to have a high degree of cultural understanding and
social skills to mediate and collaborate with diverse partners to help direct efforts toward mission
accomplishment.
(2) Interagency cooperation. As Army forces conduct operations in close coordination
with a variety of other U.S. government agencies, leaders must integrate Army and interagency
capabilities to achieve specific operational objectives. Interagency cooperation should seek to