Revitalizing Military War Fighting Education

By Chester B Cabalza

Blogger's Notes:
Commentary of an Academic 
(Copyright @ 2017 by Chester B Cabalza. All Rights Reserved).

Photo from Pitz Defense Analysis

The delay in the shift resolution on how to contain the jihadi terrorism in the Marawi siege is a “wake up call” for the defense sector to constantly train and educate the military. The current dilemma is not a precedence of urban rebellion but a continuation of series of attacks by the enemies of the state. Cases in point are the 1995 Ipil massacre, the 2013 Zamboanga standoff, and other numerous attacks of the New People’s Army in town centers across the country.

The challenges of this type of fighting can be gleaned from contemporary events. Fighting in urban and built up areas will become more prevalent in the future if not addressed now.  More than that, myriad of soldiers and military officers felt short of the reorientation that the military’s principal duty is to fight war and to win it by hook or by crook. It cannot be denied that the Military Operations in Urban Terrain (MOUT) which calls for a turnkey live training solution away from archaic guerilla war fighting replicates tactical complexities unique to urban terrain. It is a combat conducted in urban areas which is different from combat in the open at both the operational and tactical level.

Plebes at the Philippine Military Academy should reset the warrior culture that was once deemphasized in their curriculum. The warrior culture will prepare our soldiers, airmen, sailors and marines in striving to increase their proficiency in war fighting and leadership skills to protect and secure the country. Although part of their training and education calls for Military Operations Other than War (MOOTW) as supporting competencies which is also their call to duty. The law provides reserve units to participate in disaster relief operations, humanitarian assistance, support to civil authorities, support to counter drugs and counter terrorism, peacekeeping and peace enforcement. MOOTW focuses on deterring war, resolving conflict, promoting peace, and supporting civil authorities in response to domestic crises.     

Integration of military education should be tempered to both MOUT and MOOTW anchored on the principal duty to fight wars and the secondary mission to become peace builders. If existing in the programs and curriculum, then it should be adequately enhanced. This is a strategy of optimizing all military educational resources by establishing competency standards, aligning curriculum content and harmonizing organizational structures to enhance system harmony, thereby, improving military achievements. Integration of military education helps improve the delivery of military training and education that, in turn, helps generate quality elite graduates in all military institutions who are better prepared to meet contemporary security challenges.

In the more advanced courses such as the Command and General Staff College and the National Defense College of the Philippines, emphasis on education must elevate the core competency of decision-making. Courses must be designed to improve and sharpen the way senior officers make decisions on operational decision-making to quell urban rebellion. The professionalization of the military through the establishment of such military schools of higher education reflects the foundation to secure the country required to transform it through broad competencies. In the end, while the AFP supports peace efforts of the government, the AFP must also be focused on its preparedness to fight and win. And this is the primordial function of the armed forces.