The U.S. military does not need a culture that encourages daring risk-taking, especially at senior levels. We may already be paying a price in Iraq for this new emphasis on boldness. In a post-invasion meeting discussing the planning and force structure for reconstruction and stability operations, Gen. Tommy Franks’ first slide for his field commanders read: “Take as much risk coming out as you took going in.” Such talk about accepting postwar risks alarmed retired Lt. Gen. Jay Garner of the Office of Reconstruction and Humanitarian Affairs, but it was too late for him to affect the course of events. The daring planning that helped bring swift success in major combat operations did not effectively deal with the aftermath, and contributed to the ongoing problems that continue to bedevil us in Iraq. Patton remains a fine role model for future leaders. Instead of promoting boldness, we should be advocating the aggressive exploitation of opportunities, with due concern to mitigate risks. The U.S. military still does not do well with systematic risk assessment, as was revealed in Iraq, and this is a fertile field for future research and doctrine development.

U.S. Northern Command supports civil authorities in protecting the homeland within the continental United States, Alaska, and U.S. territorial waters. To the north, east, and west, the framework for a coordinated defense of land, sea, and air domains with Canada is highly developed. To the south, however, the United States faces formidable hurdles to organizing a layered defense. Mexico is the key nation in the southern sector. Its full cooperation is vital but doubtful. While collaborating successfully on many law enforcement and security issues, the country is reluctant to integrate into a defense arrangement. The weight of history with Washington and an inward-looking concept of national security preclude close cooperation. The United States cannot protect its southern approach alone, however, and Mexico must somehow play a role. A Mexico that has a leading role in its own layered defense, in collaboration with Latin American and Caribbean states facing similar challenges, can be a strong force in executing a defense-in-depth. The right collaboration can be a powerful tool in achieving optimal solutions. To the extent that the concept of a Mexico–Caribbean Basin Surveillance System can be created over time, the United States will be increasingly safe.

In October 2005, forces from U.S. Southern Command traveled to Guatemala City, Guatemala, to support local authorities inspecting damage from Hurricane Stan. The command deployed a 58-person disaster response team and eight helicopters to the Central American nation as part of relief efforts. Among this team, and among those back in the United States facilitating the recovery assistance programs, were troops whose professional skills and long affiliation with Guatemala’s military, civilian and business leadership proved invaluable in helping the disaster-stricken region. They were members of the Arkansas National Guard helping their colleagues under the auspices of an international security cooperation effort known as the State Partnership Program (SPP). SPP activities focus the attention and resources of a very small part of the Department of Defense— a state National Guard—with a single country in support of shared U.S. and partner nation objectives. This concentrated focus allows for the development of long-term institutional relationships, lasting personal relationships, and a mechanism to catalyze a broad and expanding base of support from outside the Defense Department—in particular, state/local governments and private industry.