US Army Massively Revs Up Pacific War Preparations – Could the US Army Save Taiwan?
What about the US Army and Land Power in the Pacific?
·
By Kris Osborn, President, Center for Military Modernization
The Army is massively revving up force presence, wargaming and joint training operations in the Pacific theater in what could be seen as a clear, observable effort to counter, deter and limit China’s well known expansionist aims in the region.
When it comes to deterrence in the Pacific, much of the discussion is understandably focused on forward Naval power projection bringing sea-launched 5th-generation air assets, amphibious assault ships and the ability to quickly challenge or thwart any surprise Chinese moves on Taiwan. Clearly maritime forward presence and Naval response time would prove pivotal if not paradigm shifting in the event an immediate need to defend Taiwan emerges. Along with Naval presence, there is also an equivalent focus upon air power in the region to deter China in the form of Bomber Task Force patrols, B-52s and B-2s operating out of Guam and critical multi-national exercises such as US-Japanese-Korean F-35-driven Theater Sustainment Packages.
What about the US Army and Land Power in the Pacific? Upon initial consideration, it may seem counter-intuitive to consider placing large land-forces in the Pacific, given the geographical “expanse” and vast ocean areas known to exist in the region. However, US Army Pacific Commander Gen. Charles Flynn is working closely with the other US services to massively uptick “joint” training and “forward, multinational presence” in the Pacific theater.
With the rapid arrival of new applications of unmanned systems, long-distance precision fires and transport-layer data networking, the Pentagon is heavily emphasizing “Joint,” “multinational” deterrence based upon air-surface-undersea-land integration. This is now far more possible than it ever has been due to combat modernization breakthroughs with AI-enabled data processing, greater autonomy and “mesh” node networking across mass distances and a vastly improved ability to mobilize and deploy forces across the ocean.
The Army figures prominently with all of this, a key reason why US Army Pacific is working with other units and commands to establish the first-ever training center the Army has build outside of the US and Europe. It is called the Joint Pacific Multinational Readiness Center(JPMRC), and although the Army has been working with the Navy and Airforce on multi-domain task force training exercises in the Pacific in recent years, this new JPMRC is intended to support the US Army’s massively intensified training and war preparation efforts in the Pacific called “Operation Pathways,” according to Gen. Charles Flynn, Commanding General, US Army Pacific.
From a strategic and tactical perspective, there are many ways the Army could support, enable and sustain a networked, multi-domain combat force in the Pacific. There is clearly the possibility of force reinforcement, as US Army Black Hawk helicopters and even land artillery weapons have operated from US Navy ships in joint exercises. This kind of weapons application could greatly improve land-attack options in coastal and island areas and also extend deployment reach for reconnaissance, anti-submarine warfare and troop transport in potential “island hopping” warfare scenarios. Several years ago, the Army intensified training with efforts to place and test long-range land-fired weapons in critical forward positions in the Pacific, something which greatly reinforces Maritime combat power and precision-strike ability against enemy ships. Several years ago, one senior Army weapons developers told Warrior that, as long as breakthrough land-fired weapons were emerging and improving, there is no reason a land-fired weapon can’t destroy enemy targets at sea if stationed on islands, coastal areas or even Navy platforms at sea, the Army’s fast-growing arsenal of rockets, missiles and artillery could prove extremely impactful in a maritime or amphibious environment. This would be particularly true in the event of the Army’s Extended Range Cannon Artillery effort able to fire precision-guided 155mm rounds beyond distances of 62km, twice the reach of standard artillery. Perhaps enemy ships or formations are operating beyond the reach of traditional deck-launched 5-inch guns on destroyers and cruisers? Perhaps a target needs to be blanketed with precision artillery across a sphere of multiple targets such that a single Tomahawk might not prove sufficient, even if it is a modern Tactical Tomahawk able to hit moving targets.