Observations on the Operation of a Unified Command Legal Office

• Author: By Colonel Bland West
• Pages: 01

In January 1958, General Lucius D.

Clay was quoted by the Preas as having told the Senate Preparedness Subcommittee that "no future commsnder is going to fight a war with the weapons of one service." This statementwas madeagainst a backgroundof suggestions by other responsible and well-informed persons that ow defense forces be reorganized 90 m to provide more "unified commands," composed of land, sa,and air units. These views impliedly give recognition to the fact that the joint force' has time and again proved to be an effwtive device for getting something done better by utilizing the combined efforts of components of two or more of the Armed Forces, and they portend that more joint forces may come into being. m a t does this mean to Armed Forces lawyers, relatively few of whom have occupied a legal billet in a joint force? Nothing radical, if conditions remain generally as they are. Anyone qualified to hold a responsible position BB a command staff judge advocate or legal officer in his own service would have no real difficulty in filling an equivalent position in today's prototype of joint force. Opportunities for gaining experience in such a position are limited, however, as there currently are very few joint force legal offices and even fewer engaged in what might be termed the "general practice" of military law.

The specific type of joint force known as a "joint task force"2

~ J.4GC, U.

6. Army, Staff Judge Advante, Field Command, Armed Forces

Special Weapons Project. The observations mads hereinafter m e not official, but are the writer's own. For their techmeal asrirlance in preparation of this aitide, grateful acknowledgment IS made to the followmg member8 of the writer's office: Lieutenant Colonel James M. Stubba, WAF, Deputy Staff Judge Advocate, and Lieutenant Harland B. Cope, USb.

Assistant StPff Jvdse Aduaate.

Joint Aotion Armed Forors, FDI ll@-S/JAAF/AFM 1-1, Sep 1861, as changed par. 30201: ''b. Joint Force. This 18 a general term applied to a force bhich is eompassd a i significant elements of the Army, the Saw (Yarine Corps), and the Air Force, or aw two of there Sewiees, qper-ating under a ingle commander authorized ta exerclse umhed eammsnd or operational control over iueh joint forces."

Id. par. 30266: "A joint task force is a jam farce compared of assigned or attached element8 of the Arms, the Xmy (Marine Corps), and the Air Farce, OT of any two of thew Services, which is eanstitutad and so desig. mated by the Joint Chief? of She, by the commander of a specified COm. 21928 I

is usually do little concerned with administration that it8 legal affairs can be handled entirely or in major part by the legal offices of subordinate or supporting units. The only other type of joint force commonly defined in current doctrine is the "unified command."8

The commander of a unified command exercises "command"' (not merely operational contml) over the senice components which make up his force, and he has a very considerable reaponsibility for cwrdinating the logistic and administrative support of the component forces of the unified command. He also is authorized to "exercise diacipline of his entire command to the extent he deems necessary for military effectiveness.">

The principal unified commands in existence, such as our major joint force overseas commands, seem to fall within the descriptive orbit of the phrase "unified commands in strategic areas" used by the Congress in a statute pertaining to the Joint Chiefs of Staff.$ They operate an a plateau which, according to some thinking, inmnnd, by the commander of B uniFed command. or bi tile commai'dri ai an existing Joint task force."1 Id. par 30241: "I unifled eoixmand is a j a m force, under a aingie CO>I?- mander, whmh is composed of rigni4cant ariigiied 01 attached components ai t\o or more Services. and which is constituted and 30 designated bs the Joint Chiefs of Staff or bg n eoinmander of an mitinp unified corn-mand which W B ~

trtabiished bg the Joint Chiefs of Staff."

Par 302420 indicates that 8. unified eonmsnd nomaliy is required for the accomplishment of a ". . . , broad, eonfmxing mission requiring e m cution by significant farce3 of txw or more Senices and neeesiitating single strategic direction."1 Id. par. 3OPOla(l): ". . . . The authority vested I" ~n indii,idual of the

Armed Forces far the direction, raardination, and control of militalp forces."

5 Id. pal. BQL46e. Xo?e Ih iefsienee to the handlmg. of administration and dmipl matione of the Amed Farcon, par.

by component commanders.resaonaibilitv for the adminiatration and disciDline of oersonnel ai tu0

. .

DI more Sen-leei on a eingie eommander. che &oneibility of this cam. mander is iimired EO the foilowing mattera but l a paramount t h e r m (1) hlilitary effeotiveness of his command (2) Furtherance of his ~ i i i b ~ i ~ i i . (3) Reiatianahip of hi8 command with the Armed Form of athen naiionalitiea or with Ciriliani.

UNIFIED COMMAND LEGAL OFFICE

hibits preoccupation with the details of such mundane matters as administration of military justice or personnel administration (and thus the tri-service ramifications of personnel law). The high-level unified command may have a legal office in its headquarters, but it will also have major subardinate uni-service commands with legal officers engaged in the "general practice" of military law who can provide most of the legal services required throughout the unified command, leaving the headquarters or joint staff legal office free to concentrate on the particular services required of it by the supreme commander (e.g., in the fieid of international law).

On the other hand, it has been demonstrated that the unified command whieh is made up of comparatively amail uni-service components topped by a truly integrated joint staff can be well serviced by a single legal office on the joint staff level engaged in the "general practice." Should more unified commands of this dexription be activated, whether to handle tactical or technical or other types of missions, it seems inevitable that they would create an increased number of billets for what might be termed "joint force lawyers."

In any event, whatever the future holds, it is believed that there are enough unique angles to the business of operating a joint force legal office to deserve examination.

First, however, a frame of reference will be fixed by describing with some exactness a joint force to be used as a model for discussion; &., a unified command of the type last mentioned above, but one which is completely fictional.

We will call this imaginary unified command the Air Foxes Miaslie Command, abbreviated AFXC, supposedly organized pursuant to order of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, with the Chief of Staff of the Army designated as Executive Agent for the JCS in exercising control over AFMC.' AFMC w u activated on the same day that an equally flctional civilian agency, the Ballistic Missile Commission (BMC), established by an imaginary act of Congress, became operational. BMC was established to develop to the production stage all the types of miasiles needed by the Department of Defense for the defense of our country.

The mission of AFMC is threefold: (a) io inform BMC of DOD missile requirements and to contribute militam know-how to the research and development of auch missiles and assist in their test- "6. Ssmice Component Commandma. All mattern of administration and discipline whieh do not affect the responsibilities of this commander as indicated above are handled by the Service component eommander throueh their awn Service chain of command."0 10 U B.C. 141 (lei2 ed., SUPP. VI.

1 See Joint Aotim Awed Fmcas, op. ctt. mprn note 1, para. 30121-30226, *GO ZTOZB 3

for discussion ai executive agents far the JCS.

YILITARY LAW REVIEW

ing; (b) to operate a school to provide training in various nontactical aspects of military mimiles; and (c) to operate depots for the storage of a DOD reserve stock of missiles and their maintenance and modification.

The Army, Nary, and Air Force participate in AFMC on about an equal basis, and the Marine Corps on a relatively minor scale. Commander, AFMC, is a two-star general or the equivalent flag officer, the command changing every two years and rotating through the Army, Navy, and Air Force. There are three deputy eommanders, brigadier generals or equivalent, one each for the Army, Navy, and Air Force.

The AF3K joint staff is organized as sham in Figure 1. The staff members are drawn from ail service components and are assigned generally on the basis of ability and without regard to the uniform wom8

Two of the deputy commanders wear second hats as commanders of service components to which are assigned all members of their respective services in AFMC. For example, assuming that the Commander, AFMC, currently is a rear admiral, his Army deputy will be the Commanding General, United Statea Army Element, AFIIIC, and his Air Force deputy will be the commander, ..-._th W A F Special Reporting Wing. Commander, AFMC, will himself wear a second hat as Senior Naval Officer and exercise service-wise command over all Nary and Marine Corps personnel in AFMC. His Nary deputy will serve as his executive offcer in service matters, and subordinate to them will be a captain (USN) in command of the AFMC Navai Administrative Unit. Each time the command of AFMC shifts ta another service, one deputy commander will gain a command and another loge his (absorbed by new Commander, AFMC) ,

AFhlC has nine satellite bases known as Site Alpha, Site Beta, Site Gamma, etc. Headquarters AFMC is a tenant on Site Alpha, which is located in a Midwestern state. The remaining altw are scattered throughout the United States.

As AFMC is organized on a functional basis, its sites are exempt from the control of commanders of any areas in which such sites happen ta be located (e.p., CG, Fifth U. 9.

Army), However, as is

3 Id. par. 30302:

"h. The commander of a unified farce shall...