Call us now:

+123 456 7890

Rack FP – Force Posture & Stationing

Aisle F — Force Structure

Library:  Main Page — Professional Development (A) — Defense Enterprise (E) — Force Structure (F) — Modernization (M) — Personnel (P) — Readiness (R) — Special Enterprises (S) — Resource Management (X) — References (Z)

Force Structure (F):  Force Strategy & Planning (FA) — Concepts and Doctrine (FC) — Force Development (FD) — Manning the Force (FM) — Organizing and Equipping the Force (FO) — Force Posture & Stationing (FP) — Roles and Missions (FR)

Disclaimer: The inclusion of resources here is for informational, historical, and research purposes only and is provided as a service for US Army War College faculty, students, and graduates to support their educational and professional requirements. These may include outdated or superseded materials. The inclusion of these materials does not constitute endorsement by the U.S. Army War College, the U.S. Army, or Department of Defense.

Where do we put everything? Military organizations at all echelons need to establish a footprint. This rack provides resources that explore force posture and stationing decisions, along with real property issues and other constraints. It also provides resources about systematic reviews to adjust the posture such as Base Realignment and Closure commissions (BRAC).

Shelf FP.00 — General

This shelf contains general resources on posture, stationing, real property and facilities management, and other infrastructure concerns.

Faculty Publications:
Laws, Policies, Memos, and Regulations (sorted by regulation number):
Strategies and Reports:
Commentaries (inclusion does not represent endorsement):

Shelf FP.BR — Base Realignment & Closure (BRAC)

BRAC refers to a series of efforts, largely following the Cold War, to optimize the U.S. force posture within the United States. There have been several Congressionally-mandated rounds of BRAC conducted over the years. A BRAC commission evaluates the real property owned or utilized by the Department of Defense and determines how much of it is ‘excess,’ or underutilized. The commission then determines which bases to close or consolidate and recommends realignment of the tenant units to other bases. Once approved by Congress, the closures and moves are programmed and executed.

BRACs have been touted as a significant cost saver, allowing the movement of funds to other priorities such as readiness or modernization, but the supposed cost savings are disputed. In particular, the 2005 BRAC is alleged to not have produced the proposed cost savings due to unforeseen costs of moving and closing the bases. Moreover, Congressional members increasingly saw maintaining bases in their districts as vital interests for their constituents. Hence, despite DoD calls for more BRACs since 2005, none have been allowed by Congress since.

Faculty Publications:
  • None.
Laws, Policies, Memos, and Regulations (sorted by regulation number):
  • None.
Strategies and Reports:
Commentaries (inclusion does not represent endorsement):
  • None.

Shelf FP.GP — Global Posture Reviews

Global posture reviews serves an equivalent purpose as BRACs (see FP.BC above) but for locations outside the U.S. Global posture reviews are more complicated than BRAC because the U.S. global footprint draws from bi-lateral agreements with other nations. These agreements not only provide the ability to station or rotate forces in partner territories, they also provide the framework for potential future stationing or military activities. Agreements include so-called warm- and cold-basing whereby the U.S. gains access to a host capability under certain conditions — warm-basing refers to continuous immediate access to the capability with possibly a small cadre of U.S. personnel at or near the location, while cold-basing refers to access on an as-needed basis in which the U.S. has no standing presence nearby and would have to open the facility when needed.

Changes to global force posture tend to be slow and difficult, often incurring higher costs than anticipated. Environmental clean-up, restoration, and negotiations with local works councils (particularly in locations with significant U.S. presence) can cause delays and add costs.

Faculty Publications:
  • Bradford, Bob. Global Posture – An Overview, August 2021. Available on request.
Laws, Policies, Memos, and Regulations (sorted by regulation number):
  • None.
Strategies and Reports:
Commentaries (inclusion does not represent endorsement):

Title image credit:  Map of U.S. Army Garrison-Grafenwoehr via the 41st Field Artillery webpage, public domain.

Force Structure (F):  Force Strategy & Planning (FA) — Concepts and Doctrine (FC) — Force Development (FD) — Manning the Force (FM) — Organizing and Equipping the Force (FO) — Force Posture & Stationing (FP) — Roles and Missions (FR)

Library:  Main Page — Professional Development (A) — Defense Enterprise (E) — Force Structure (F) — Modernization (M) — Personnel (P) — Readiness (R) — Special Enterprises (S) — Resource Management (X) — References (Z)