ELMENDORF-RICHARDSON JOINT BASE, Alaska (AP) – The US military is ready to rebuild its forces in Alaska to better prepare for future conflicts in cold weather, and is expected to replace the larger, heavily equipped Stryker Brigade. in a state with a more mobile infantry unit more suitable for ice battle, according to army leaders.
Army Secretary Christine Warmouth said she expects to make a final decision soon to change troops in Alaska, saying she is likely to turn the Stryker unit, which uses heavy, eight-wheeled vehicles, into an infantry brigade.
“I think the goal of the Alaska Army is much more at the moment to create a formation capable of extremely cold weather,” which could be used in Europe or the Indo-Pacific, Warmouth told the Associated Press on a recent trip to Alaska. to meet with senior commanders and troops. “We are trying to get to a place where we have Arctic-capable forces – forces that can survive and operate in this environment.”
The United States has long viewed the Arctic as a growing zone of competition with Russia and China, especially as climate change leads to higher temperatures and opens sea lanes for longer periods of time. But officials have acknowledged that the United States is lagging behind these nations. Russia has taken steps to increase its military presence there, and China sees the region as economically valuable for shipping and natural resources.
The changes in the military were considered long before US tensions with Russia escalated following its invasion of Ukraine.
Under the army’s new plan, the 1st Stryker Brigade, the 25th Infantry Division, now based in Alaska, will be converted into a light infantry brigade. In combination with the combat team of the 4th Infantry Brigade of the division, the two units will become the 11th Airborne Division, based in Alaska. And large Stryker vehicles that are a little older will be replaced by other vehicles that are more suitable for icy and snowy terrain, Wormuth said.
The greater focus on the Cold War includes a move to conduct large-scale training exercises for Alaska-based troops in their home state, in the weather conditions they would face in battle in the Arctic. Troops were due to go to the Joint Training Center in Fort Polk, Louisiana, in March, but army leaders decided to detain them in Alaska so they could train in the cold temperatures and frozen terrain they would encounter in any cold. battle for time.
“I think it really makes sense to train forces in the Arctic to use them,” Warmouth said after spending two days at the still-snow-covered base. “If we’re going to have a ground force in Alaska, that’s what they need to be able to do. They cannot get this experience by going to the Mojave Desert or Fort Polk.
Last year, during an initial test, Pacific-based forces stayed in Hawaii for their planned exercises at the National Training Center in the Mojave Desert in California. Commanders said they have learned from these first two moves as they try to recreate conditions and relocate staff and equipment from well-established training centers to more remote locations.
During a visit to the Elmendorf-Richardson Joint Base, Warmouth met with commanders who called the training shift a success. Major General Brian Eifler, commander of the U.S. Army in Alaska, said the benefits outweighed all the disadvantages created by the need to build training infrastructure in the far north.
“You get the best of both worlds without losing too much,” Eifler said. “We got a lot more than we thought.
Eifler said that although there were not as many training observers or civilian role players as there would be in one of the training centers, the trainers who came were able to learn more about Arctic meteorological operations.
In addition, Eifler said, the change avoids expensive and time-consuming transportation of vehicles, weapons and other equipment to Louisiana and back. The lengthy process of packing and sending before and after training exercises in Louisiana or California often forces troops to be without their weapons systems and other equipment for weeks.
During briefings at the Alaska base, commanders said the training included large-scale combat operations in extreme weather conditions in what they called “the most challenging environment on earth.” They said 10,000 soldiers – including the Canadian Army and Air Force – took part in the exercise.
But they said the exercise also highlighted the need for better cold-weather vehicles, including those that can carry Arctic infantry.
General Joseph Martin, the deputy army chief who was in Alaska this year, said the service was investigating which would be the best type of vehicle for troops. “Is the striker the right vehicle for an Arctic warrior?” In the winter, you need vehicles that can drive on snow, “he said.
In addition, he said, the vehicle should be able to run during spring or summer thaws, when the ground turns to mud.
As Wormuth concluded her visit, she speculated that the decision for the Stryker Brigade would move forward soon. Any final decision will require approval from Defense Minister Lloyd Austin.
“If you’re going to make big equipment moves and things like that, summer is a very important window because it’s much easier to move vehicles than it is to do it in the middle of winter,” she said.
And in talks with members of Congress, including during a hearing this week, she made it clear that the change would not reduce the number of troops in Alaska. Instead, she said that while the infantry brigade would be smaller, the army would compensate for that loss by increasing the size and capabilities of the staff.
More broadly, she spoke with Alaska commanders about the potential need for more change as the U.S. military’s Arctic strategy develops.
The United States, Warmouth said, has opposed actions to militarize the Arctic, even as Russia expands its military presence and base there. But, she said, “will this way of thinking continue given what the Russians are doing in Ukraine? Or will this be reconsidered? Will this create a window for us to think about things differently? “
Commanders said there were questions about whether one of the Pentagon’s combat teams – such as the European Command or the Northern Command, based in Colorado – should take full ownership of the Arctic and the US military role there. Wormuth said the issue needed further discussion and any decision could be years from now.
Add Comment