| Welcome to Philippines Defense Forces Forum. We hope you enjoy your visit. You're currently viewing our forum as a guest. This means you are limited to certain areas of the board and there are some features you can't use. If you join our community, you'll be able to access member-only sections, and use many member-only features such as customizing your profile, sending personal messages, and voting in polls. Registration is simple, fast, and completely free. Join our community! If you're already a member please log in to your account to access all of our features: |
- Pages:
- 1
- 2
| DND Wants to Reduce Number of Military Battalions | |
|---|---|
| Tweet Topic Started: Jan 2 2012, 03:57 PM (1,356 Views) | |
| ni84 | Jan 2 2012, 03:57 PM Post #1 |
 
|
DND Wants to Reduce Number of Military Battalions MANILA, Philippines - The Department of National Defense (DND) wants to reduce the number of infantry and marine battalions in the next few years as the military moves towards enhancing its territorial defense capability. The restructuring program would channel resources to priority areas like boosting maritime security and territorial defense to enforce the country’s sovereign rights at the Kalayaan Island Group. “Our territorial defense needs for this planning period will essentially be met by our forces that are engaged in internal security operations in priority regions and our units in non-priority regions,” the DND said in a planning guidance issued to the military. Documents obtained by The STAR show that the Army infantry battalions would be reduced to 81 this year from 85 in 2011. The number of active duty battalions would be slashed gradually in the succeeding years until it reaches 54 in 2018. The number of infantry brigade headquarters would be cut to 27 this year from 31 last year. It would be reduced further in the succeeding years until it reaches 18 in 2015. On the other hand, the number of infantry divisions would be reduced to nine this year from 10 last year. The number of divisions would be down to six by 2015. The DND plan, however, seeks to form two battalions for Rapid Deployment Forces by 2015. It also wants to create one infantry battalion for peacekeeping operations this year. DND said the personnel and equipment from the units to be deactivated would be reapplied to other priorities like filling up the needs of remaining forces. The marine battalions would also be reduced to 10 this year from 12 last year. Only nine marine battalions would be retained in 2013. However, a marine battalion would be formed and would undergo retraining this year while another one would be created for peacekeeping tasks next year. Even the military’s elite forces would be covered by the restructuring plan. The four active duty combat groups would be reduced to two this year and would be deactivated in 2013. On the other hand, the Special Operations Combat Support Group would be abolished in 2013. The DND plan, however, called for the creation of a ground-based air defense system group next year. The DND has asked the military to submit a plan to ensure the smooth implementation of the restructuring program. The DND planning guidance listed as the top resource priority the improvement of the country’s maritime security and territorial defense capabilities. The DND also plans to streamline the armed forces’ civil-military operations (CMO) battalions, which conduct development projects in areas of conflict. The 10 CMO battalions would be reduced gradually until these are abolished in 2017. The Armed Forces’ National Development Support Command, which works with private groups to provide basic services, would be scrapped this year. http://pdff.sytes.net/index.php?act=Post&CODE=00&f=3 |
|
We shall not fail or falter; we shall not weaken or tire...Give us the tools and we will finish the job. Sir Winston Churchill, BBC radio broadcast, 1941 We'll settle this the old navy way: first guy to die, loses. President Thomas 'Tug' Benson, Hot Shots! Part Deux  Raketnye voyska strategicheskogo naznacheniya Rossiyskoy Federatsii 15,000 nukes and enough for another 40,000 | |
 |
 
|
| pachador | Jan 3 2012, 05:28 AM Post #2 |
|
this is the same plan as they had in the 1990s. the big mistake they made in the 1990s was to decrease the CAFGU which resulted in the bouncing back and growth of the NPA in the late 1990s. in the remote areas, the CAFGU is always needed. the bonus is that the CAFGU will be part of the active reserves of the AFP . the other components of the plan in the 1990s was to increase the active ready reserves to replace the deactivated units. Not sure, if that is still the plan today. On the other hand, the reduction in batallions may not necessarily mean a reduction in manpower strength. Hopefully, what the AFP meant was that the men and equipment from the dissolved battaliions will merely be transferred to the remaining battalions thereby increasing the number of men per batallion. if you read the news, you will notice AFP batallions with only 300 men more or less while Philippine Army divisions are only 4,000 to 6,000 men(if my memory is correct) It should be pointed ot though that there are 2 practical advantages to having many understrength or "paper" units namely: 1.) in times of mobilization, it is in theory easier to enlarge the army since there are already many 'paper' or understrength units that just needs to be filled-up with men. As a matter of fact, there are countries that adopt this concept, and in the philippine case, before martial law, the philippine army consisted only of 1 regular division and 3 "training" or understrength divisions which were rapidly filled-up when martial law was declared. 2.) if the army plans to concentrate on assymetric warfare after the PAF and PN have been annihilated by the invader, then, smaller units such as smaller batallions, companies, etc are better since they are more maneuverable and easier to disperse as is the case with guerilla units which are smaller by their very nature. The main disdvantage of having many paper or understrength units is bigger adminstrative overhead and too many high ranking officers commanding understrength units which translate into higher costs. In summary, there are pros and cons. |
|
|
|
| spearhead | Jan 3 2012, 09:27 AM Post #3 |
DoctorNO, Your Neutral Observer.
  ![]](http://z1.ifrm.com/static/1/pip_r.png)
|
I think they are finally going to focus on quality and not quantity. This is gonna be a good move. |
"Men of War must learn the art of numbers or he will not know how to array his troops." - Plato  
| |
|
|
|
| ni84 | Jan 3 2012, 04:29 PM Post #4 |
|
I think they should reduce officer in the armed services, those who are not deserving. Too many officers. It's ok to reduce, when there is no internal threat. But when we have both external and internal threat is a bad idea FOR NOW. It's not a good idea YET. |
|
We shall not fail or falter; we shall not weaken or tire...Give us the tools and we will finish the job. Sir Winston Churchill, BBC radio broadcast, 1941 We'll settle this the old navy way: first guy to die, loses. President Thomas 'Tug' Benson, Hot Shots! Part Deux Raketnye voyska strategicheskogo naznacheniya Rossiyskoy Federatsii 15,000 nukes and enough for another 40,000 | |
|
|
|
| Analyst | Jan 3 2012, 08:39 PM Post #5 |
Member
|
Force restructure. Less units=Less officers so it means they might have to sack officers who are not deserving. |
If you don't want a modern and capable AFP, you might want to get the f*ck off the Philippines because you don't deserve to be a Filipino that's why!
| |
|
|
|
| markniraq | Jan 3 2012, 09:13 PM Post #6 |
|
Member
|
In actuality I think its a ploy to get rid of the majority of senior officers/leadership....in anticipation of force restructure, reforming... re-train/re-orient the combat power in anticipation of the future spectrum of war.... GMA didn't listen to that wisdom...Thats why her weakness enabled the military generals to virtually "run loose"... divided the ranks and military organizations....allowed for military adventurism....Maybe PNoy will realize this endeavor.....Good Luck !!!! Just my own humble opinion and thinking out loud. |
| "You Have Never Lived...Till You Have almost Died...For Those Who Fight For It.. Life has a Special Meaning the Protected will Never Know" | |
|
|
|
| Hitman | Jan 3 2012, 09:38 PM Post #7 |
Member
|
this is better because it will result to less officers. the present system has too many officers, too many generals. they need more NCOs who are the brunt of infantry units. this will also strengthen and readiness of the reservists. |
|
|
|
| spearhead | Jan 3 2012, 09:59 PM Post #8 |
|
DoctorNO, Your Neutral Observer.
|
They are also probably anticipating the transfer of responsibilities for COIN to the PNP-SAF, perhaps still with some help from AFP's counter-terrorrist units in upcoming years. Another anticipation here is the government's diplomacy with the bangsamoro and MNLF peace talks. Well as long as the AFP and PNP would privide their 100% training and 100% complete gearups for their special units to fight and arrest these terrorrists through the hardest warfare of house-to-house combat. Right now it seems like the AFP troops are not that still effective in the battlefield without the help of dedicated attack-helicopters that could operate at both day or night missions to pickup their targets easier. |
|
"Men of War must learn the art of numbers or he will not know how to array his troops." - Plato
| |
|
|
|
| Tsukiyomi | Jan 5 2012, 01:17 AM Post #9 |
|
Member
|
Agreed...less officers. |
|
|
|
| Hitman | Jan 7 2012, 09:17 PM Post #10 |
|
Member
|
too many officers and no logistics. lol. |
|
|
|
| 1 user reading this topic (1 Guest and 0 Anonymous) | |
|
|
| Go to Next Page | |
| « Previous Topic · General Military and Law Enforcement · Next Topic » |
- Pages:
- 1
- 2
2:47 PM Jul 13