DOD Has Taken Steps to Establish Its Concept for Conducting Security Force Assistance, Including Broadly Defining the Term and Identifying Actions Needed to Plan for and Prepare Forces to Execute It

DOD has taken steps to establish its concept for conducting security force  assistance, including broadly defining the term and identifying actions  needed to plan for and prepare forces to execute security force  assistance activities. For example, DOD issued an instruction that broadly  defines security force assistance and outlines responsibilities for key  stakeholders. This effort identified tasks to address these gaps and called on DOD to  develop a document, referred to as the Lexicon Framework, to clarify the  term security force assistance and its relationship to other key terms. DOD Has Identified Tasks to Address Gaps in Implementing Security Force Assistance and Developed a Lexicon Framework Intended to Clarify the Meaning of Security Force Assistance

DOD conducted a capabilities-based assessment to identify gaps in key  areas of doctrine, organization, training, materiel, leadership and  education, personnel, and facilities, related to the implementation of  security force assistance across the department. In  November 2011, DOD published the Security Force Assistance Lexicon  Framework. Geographic Combatant Commands Face Challenges That Limit Their Ability to Plan for and Track Security Force Assistance as a Distinct Activity

The geographic combatant commands are conducting activities to build  partner nation capacity and capability, but face challenges planning for  and conducting security force assistance as a distinct activity, including  the following: (1) a lack of common understanding of security force  assistance which may limit their ability to plan for it as OSD intends; (2)  limitations in the system where security force assistance activities are to  be tracked; and (3) the ability to develop and execute long-term security  force assistance plans within existing legislative authorities. Notwithstanding DOD’s efforts to present security force assistance as a  distinct and potentially expansive activity beyond existing security  cooperation efforts, geographic combatant commands lack a common  understanding of security force assistance, and therefore some are  unclear as to the additional efforts that may be needed on their part to  meet the department’s intent for security force assistance and do not see  the value in distinguishing security force assistance from other security  cooperation activities. The plan does include information on the  need to develop partner nation capacity and capability. However, some geographic combatant command and service officials  familiar with the framework said that they found some of the distinctions  within the document to be confusing and others cited the need for  additional guidance that provides greater clarity on what is required to  plan for and conduct security force assistance as OSD intends. Our prior  work on key practices for successful organizational transformations  shows the necessity to communicate clear objectives for what is to be  achieved. Without additional clarification from OSD, the geographic  combatant commands will continue to lack a common understanding of  security force assistance, which may hinder the department in meeting its  strategic goals. These statutory authorities are specific in nature and some contain  limitations and restrictions on the types of activities that can be conducted  under these authorities. The Services Are Developing General Purpose Forces with Capabilities to Conduct Security Force Assistance to Meet Current Requirements but Lack Clarity on Future Requirements

The services are taking steps and investing resources to organize and  train general purpose forces that are capable of conducting security force  assistance and tracking uniformed military personnel with related  experience and training. As previously discussed, the department’s emphasis on security force  assistance is indicative of its expectation that the geographic combatant  commands will conduct more security force assistance activities, such as  organizing, training, and advising partner nation security forces to build  their capacity and capability, and officials stated that they expect  requirements for forces capable of conducting security force assistance  activities outside of Afghanistan to increase in the future. Recommendations for Executive Action

To instill a common understanding of security force assistance throughout  DOD and therefore better guide the geographic combatant commands’  and services’ efforts to plan for and prepare forces to execute security  force assistance, we recommend that the Secretary of Defense, in  consultation with the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, direct the  Assistant Secretary of Defense for Special Operations/Low Intensity  Conflict and the Chief of Staff, Joint Staff J-5, in their positions as  cochairs of the Security Force Assistance Steering Committee, to develop  or modify existing guidance that further defines the department’s intent for  security force assistance and what additional actions are required by the  geographic combatant commands to plan for and conduct security force  assistance beyond their existing security cooperation efforts. For  example, DOD could include more-specific direction as to how to  determine which activities should be considered security force assistance,  how they should be discussed in plans, and whether an increased level of  effort, such as increased scope, nature, or frequency of activities, is  required. Therefore, we  continue to believe that more specific guidance is necessary. To identify what steps the services have taken to organize and train  general purpose forces to be capable of conducting security force  assistance, and what challenges, if any, they face, we met with officials  from the U.S. Army, U.S. Marine Corps, U.S. Navy, and U.S. Air Force  who were responsible for implementing security force assistance within  each service, including officials from each service’s headquarters, force  providers and training commands, and other service organizations related  to security force assistance.
Why GAO Did This Study

DOD is emphasizing security force assistance (e.g., efforts to train, equip, and advise partner nation forces) as a distinct activity to build the capacity and capability of partner nation forces. In anticipation of its growing importance, DOD has identified the need to strengthen and institutionalize security force assistance capabilities within its general purpose forces. Accordingly, a committee report accompanying the Fiscal Year 2012 National Defense Authorization Act directed GAO to report on DODs plans. GAO evaluated: (1) the extent to which DOD has established its concept for conducting security force assistance, including defining the term and identifying actions needed to plan for and prepare forces to execute it; (2) the extent to which the geographic combatant commands have taken steps to plan for and conduct security force assistance, and what challenges, if any, they face; and (3) what steps the services have taken to organize and train general purpose forces capable of conducting security force assistance, and what challenges, if any, they face. GAO reviewed relevant documents, and interviewed officials from combatant commands, the services, and other DOD organizations.

What GAO Found

The Department of Defense (DOD) has taken steps to establish its concept for conducting security force assistance, including broadly defining the term and identifying actions needed to plan for and prepare forces to execute these activities. For example, in October 2010, the department issued an instruction that broadly defines security force assistance and outlines responsibilities for key stakeholders, including the geographic combatant commands and military services. DOD also identified gaps in key areas of doctrine, organization, and training related to the implementation of security force assistance and tasks needed to address those gaps. The tasks include reviewing joint and service-level doctrine to incorporate security force assistance as needed and developing measures to assess progress in partner nations. Citing a need to clarify the definition of security force assistance beyond the DOD Instruction, DOD published a document referred to as a Lexicon Framework in November 2011 that included information to describe how security force assistance relates to other existing terms, such as security cooperation.
The geographic combatant commands conduct activities to build partner nation capacity and capability, but face challenges planning for and tracking security force assistance as a distinct activity. Notwithstanding DODs efforts to present security force assistance as a distinct and potentially expansive activity and clarify its terminology, the commands lack a common understanding of security force assistance, and therefore some were unclear as to what additional actions were needed to meet DODs intent. Specifically, officials interviewed generally viewed it as a recharacterization of some existing activities, but had different interpretations of what types of activities should be considered security force assistance. Further, some command officials stated that they were not clear as to the intent of DODs increased focus on security force assistance and whether any related adjustments should be made in their plans and scope or level of activities. As a result, they do not currently distinguish security force assistance from other security cooperation activities in their plans. DOD intended the Lexicon Framework to provide greater clarity on the meaning of security force assistance and its relationship to security cooperation and other related terms. However, some officials said that they found the distinctions to be confusing and others believed that additional guidance was needed. GAOs prior work on key practices for successful organizational transformations states the necessity to communicate clear objectives for what is to be achieved. Without additional clarification, the geographic combatant commands will continue to lack a common understanding, which may hinder the departments ability to meet its strategic goals. Moreover, the system that the commands are directed to use to track security force assistance activities does not include a specific data field to identify those activities. The commands also face challenges planning for and executing long-term, sustained security force assistance plans within existing statutory authorities, which contain some limitations on the types of activities that can be conducted.
The services are taking steps and investing resources to organize and train general purpose forces capable of conducting security force assistance based on current requirements. For example, to conduct activities with partner nation security forces, the Army and the Air Force are aligning certain units to geographic regions, and the Marine Corps has created tailored task forces. However, the services face certain challenges. Due to a lack of clarity on how DODs increased emphasis on security force assistance will affect future requirements, they are uncertain whether their current efforts are sufficient or whether additional capabilities will be required. Further, services face challenges in tracking personnel with security force assistance training and experience, particularly in identifying the attributes to track.

What GAO Recommends

GAO recommends DOD clarify its intent for security force assistance, including how combatant commands should adjust their current planning efforts and provide a means to track activities. DOD partially concurred, stating that recent guidance addresses planning requirements. GAO continues to believe that more specific direction is needed.