There is already a half-assed attempt to tie all 3 services
together, a.k.a Joint Svc. Yes, Joint is considered a seperate
branch/service set apart from the other 3 services commonly known
(i.e. AF, Army, Navy). Do we see some semblance of unified command
and resources? Sometimes yes, sometimes no. The 3 services are VERY
VERY protective over their assets, manpower, real estate.
Going back to your question, are there advantages of having a
seperate chain of command for our SF? i would say there IS a need,
seeing the current climate of (terrorists threat, asymmetrical
warfare, urban conflict etc. etc.). But seeing the size of our
operations plus the physical size of our country, i don't think we
SPECIFICALLY need an organization or branch specially for the
SF.
I think this idea of having a SOC stems from the US model. Judging
from the assets and sizes of their SF elements, perhaps it is
needed. Memory fails me, but US has what? 2 Airborne Div, 3 Ranger
Div, Delta, SEAL, Green Berets, Naval elements for support, Air
elements, etc. etc. so you would need 1 X 4 Star to tie these in
and make them work. In the Singapore context, do we even have
enough ppl to make up a so-called Div? And how we gonna justify a
BG heading this? So no BG as the head, then how? Put in a COL
instead and he gets brushed aside by your other Div Comds, Fleet
Comd, etc. who are generally BGs. End of the day, exercise in
futility and we end up with more confusion.
I wouldn't be surprised if something gets formalized to deal with
the threats i mentioned previously, but i doubt it would comprise
solely of SF elements.
Comments?
