Closing the GAP: Strategic Presence Through Embedded U.S. Military Advisors

Special Operations In An Isolationist Era

STRATEGY CENTRAL

For and By Practitioners

By CW5 Maurice "Duc" DuClos - June 26, 2025

The Global Advisor Program: Forward Presence at Fractional Cost, Strategic Influence Through Embedded Advisors

“Victory is not won by arms alone, but by the slow weaving of trust with those who fight beside you.”

                                            — Seven Pillars of Wisdom, T.E. Lawrence

“Partnership is our greatest weapon, turning allies into brothers and chaos into order.”

                                           — Operations Against Guerrilla Forces, Russell Volckmann

Abstract

Strategic competition between great powers creates critical presence gaps that undermine long-term American influence and early warning capabilities. While adversaries deploy networks of advisors to build persistent relationships and shape the development of partner nations, American engagement remains largely episodic and crisis-driven. The Global Advisor Program (GAP) provides a revolutionary approach to strategic presence by institutionalizing embedded U.S. military advisors, designated as Volckmann Advisors, within partner nation defense establishments.

Drawing from Russell Volckmann's successful World War II guerrilla campaign in the Philippines and building upon Lieutenant General Eric Wendt's 2011 strategic vision, the  Global Advisor Program addresses the institutional failures that prevented the original Volckmann Program from achieving lasting impact. By establishing a unified training and education pipeline at the Naval Postgraduate School that integrates Foreign Area Officer methodologies, Military Personnel Exchange Program infrastructure, and Special Operations Forces partnership expertise, GAP creates a scalable framework for persistent competition and crisis prevention.

The program's dual-use architecture enables Volckmann Advisors to shape outcomes during peacetime competition while providing critical force multiplication during potential conflicts. Through systematic cultural training, education, language proficiency development, and deliberate career management, GAP transforms sporadic advisory efforts into enduring strategic assets. Initial deployment of twenty Volckmann Advisors to Indo-Pacific and European theaters by 2027 would demonstrate proof of concept while establishing the foundation for global expansion.

Strategic competition demands presence that determines influence and relationships that shape outcomes. GAP provides America's asymmetric advantage: the ability to embed trust before crises emerge, multiply partner capabilities during conflicts, and maintain influence through principled partnership rather than coercive presence. Where strategic gaps exist, GAP fills them.

Introduction: The Strategic Imperative

Strategic competition unfolds through persistent competition for influence, access, and narrative control rather than episodic kinetic exchanges. Nations that maintain trusted relationships during peacetime possess decisive advantages when crises erupt. Yet America's approach to global engagement remains fundamentally episodic, arriving for exercises, departing after missions, and allowing relationships to atrophy between rotational deployments. This pattern creates strategic presence gaps that competitors exploit through their own embedded networks of advisors, economic integration, and persistent influence operations.

China's Belt and Road Initiative demonstrates the power of persistent presence. Through thousands of advisors, engineers, and officials integrated into partner nations’ infrastructure and governance systems, Beijing influences decision-making processes from within. Russia employs similar strategies through Wagner Group/Africa Corps operatives and military advisors across Africa and Eastern Europe, building influence through sustained engagement rather than episodic intervention. Meanwhile, American influence often relies on either U.S. unilateral basing or distant relationships managed through embassy channels and periodic training events, which lack the depth and resilience necessary for effective competition.

The Global Advisor Program closes this strategic gap through embedded Volckmann Advisors who live, work, and build trust within partner defense institutions. Named in honor of Colonel Russell Volckmann's World War II campaign in the Philippines, these advisors embody a proven principle: influence is earned through shared hardship and sustained presence, not imposed through superior firepower or transactional assistance. GAP transforms this historical insight into a modern strategic capability, providing America with the persistent presence necessary to compete effectively in today's complex and contested environment.

Where strategic presence gaps threaten American influence, GAP fills them. Where relationship-building requires sustained commitment, GAP provides it. Where competitors seek uncontested access to partner nations, GAP ensures American advisors are already embedded, trusted, and influential. In strategic competition defined by presence rather than force projection, GAP offers America's path to enduring advantage.

Historical Foundation: The Volckmann Legacy

The strategic logic underlying GAP derives from one of World War II's most successful advisory campaigns. When conventional defenses collapsed in the Philippines during 1942, U.S. Army Captain Russell Volckmann refused surrender orders and disappeared into the mountains of northern Luzon with local Filipino fighters. Over three years of occupation, he organized, trained, and led a guerrilla force exceeding 22,000 fighters, maintaining effective resistance against numerically superior Japanese forces without continuous American support or permanent infrastructure.

Volckmann's enduring success stemmed not from technological superiority or overwhelming firepower, but from embedded trust earned through shared hardship. He learned local languages, respected cultural traditions, and demonstrated American commitment through presence rather than promises. When liberation forces arrived in 1945, they found not scattered resistance cells but a disciplined, effective organization capable of providing intelligence, logistics support, and coordinated military action. The relationships Volckmann built under extreme conditions proved more durable than formal alliances negotiated in distant capitals.

This model of embedded influence caught the attention of contemporary strategic thinkers. Writing in 1951, Volckmann himself argued that "partnership is our greatest weapon, turning allies into brothers and chaos into order." His insights influenced counterinsurgency doctrine and special operations theory, but remained largely theoretical until Lieutenant General Eric Wendt's 2011 proposal to institutionalize embedded advisors through the "Volckmann Program."

The Modern Volckmann Vision

Writing in Special Warfare, General Wendt proposed embedding Special Operations Forces with partner militaries before crises erupted, arguing that future Green Berets should prevent wars rather than merely fight them. His vision was strategically sound: small teams of culturally fluent advisors could achieve disproportionate effects by shaping partner capabilities, building institutional relationships, and providing early warning of emerging threats.

Initial deployments between 2011 and 2014 to Korea, Italy, Uganda, and Colombia demonstrated proof of concept, with embedded advisors facilitating strategic coordination and expanding American influence at minimal cost. In Korea, a Volckmann Operator embedded within the Republic of Korea Special Warfare Command proved instrumental in strengthening operational coordination and strategic influence. Over two years, his presence deepened relationships across ROK Special Forces brigades and expanded the U.S.-ROK SOF network in ways that continue to yield strategic access. His impact came not from any single operation, but from an enduring presence that built trust through daily interaction and shared professional challenges.

The program achieved formal recognition through the development of an Additional Skill Identifier (ASI) 2S for qualified operators, providing institutional acknowledgment of specialized expertise. Geographic Combatant Commands and interagency partners provided positive feedback, noting how small, culturally fluent teams delivered strategic effects disproportionate to their size while shaping partner capabilities and building trust in ways that large rotational forces could not achieve.

However, the original Volckmann Program failed to achieve institutional permanence despite these tactical successes. The post-9/11 strategic environment remained fundamentally oriented toward kinetic solutions and immediate crisis response rather than patient, persistent engagement. Even during the height of counterinsurgency efforts in Iraq and Afghanistan, institutional priorities emphasized rapid deployment cycles, time-sensitive targeting, and measurable short-term outputs over the slow relationship-building that characterizes effective advisory work. This hyper-focus on kinetic raids and direct action missions overshadowed investment in preventive efforts that might have mitigated future conflicts through sustained partnership development.

The program also lacked dedicated funding, clear career pathways, and organizational champions capable of defending it through budget cycles and leadership transitions. Participants faced uncertain promotion prospects, limited recognition in evaluations, and unclear guidance on how advisory assignments contributed to long-term advancement. Without institutional architecture to sustain it, even effective embedded advisors remained isolated within their branches, unable to build the repeatable expertise necessary for program expansion. The absence of talent tracking or specialized identifiers beyond the initial ASI left high-performing advisors professionally isolated, discouraging the best candidates from volunteering and making it impossible to build a systematic bench of experienced practitioners.

The strategic environment that constrained the original Volckmann Program has fundamentally shifted. Contemporary defense doctrine embraces integrated deterrence and persistent engagement, concepts that align directly with embedded advisory methodology. Strategic competition has replaced crisis response as the primary organizing principle for military planning, creating demand for exactly the kind of persistent presence that Volckmann Advisors provide. Most importantly, senior leadership now recognizes that influence in strategic competition is earned through relationships rather than demonstrations of force, a reality that makes embedded advisors essential rather than auxiliary.

GAP learns from the original program's institutional failures while preserving its strategic insights. By establishing a permanent organizational structure, dedicated career pathways, systematic training and education standards, GAP transforms episodic success into an enduring capability.

Strategic Framework: Competing Through Embedded Persistent Presence

Contemporary strategic competition unfolds across multiple domains simultaneously, requiring American responses that operate below the threshold of open conflict while maintaining readiness for potential escalation. Embedded Volckmann Advisors provide unique dual-use capabilities that maximize strategic return on investment while minimizing political and operational risks.

Competition Phase Advantages

During peacetime competition, Volckmann Advisors serve as strategic early warning systems embedded within partner nation defense establishments. Unlike intelligence collection that relies on technical means or human sources with divided loyalties, embedded advisors develop a comprehensive understanding of partner capabilities, leadership dynamics, and threat perceptions through daily interaction and shared professional experience. This access enables them to identify emerging instabilities, assess the reliability of partner nations, and recommend policy adjustments before crises escalate beyond diplomatic resolution.

Beyond early warning, embedded advisors serve as direct influence mechanisms, capable of shaping partner force development, strategic planning, and operational decision-making in real-time. Through persistent presence and trusted relationships, Volckmann Advisors can guide partner capability investments, recommend tactical adjustments, and influence institutional priorities in ways that align with American strategic interests while respecting partner sovereignty.

Equally critical is their role in human domain mapping, providing a detailed understanding of the complex social networks, personal relationships, and institutional dynamics that determine how partner forces actually function beyond formal organizational charts. Future conflicts will be won or lost based on understanding these human connections, as will current strategic competition for influence within partner societies. Volckmann Advisors map these relationships through sustained engagement, identifying key influencers, institutional friction points, and leverage opportunities that external observers cannot access.

Academic research demonstrates that military training relationships significantly influence the behavior of recipient nations, particularly when training emphasizes professional norms and institutional development. However, traditional training programs operate through episodic engagement, which limits the depth and durability of relationships. Volckmann Advisors transcends these limitations by maintaining a continuous presence that enables real-time influence over partner nation military development, strategic planning, and crisis response capabilities.

The trust multiplier effect represents GAP's most significant competitive advantage. Unlike transactional relationships built on equipment transfers or training events, embedded advisors create relational capital that appreciates over time and survives leadership transitions. A Volckmann Advisor embedded with a battalion today builds relationships with officers who become brigade commanders tomorrow and generals within a decade. These relationships endure through political changes, regime transitions, and crisis periods, creating strategic assets that deliver influence across multiple contexts and timeframes.

Recent research on the effectiveness of foreign military training indicates that programs emphasizing relationship-building rather than simply transferring skills achieve more durable outcomes. Volckmann Advisors embody this principle by focusing on institutional integration rather than episodic instruction. Through sustained presence, they become trusted members of partner organizations rather than external consultants, enabling them to shape organizational culture, planning processes, and strategic decision-making in ways that temporary trainers cannot achieve.

Conflict Phase Force Multiplication

Should deterrence fail and strategic competition escalate toward open conflict, embedded Volckmann Advisors provide critical operational advantages that justify their peacetime investment. Their established relationships enable rapid coordination between American and partner forces, eliminating the relationship-building phase that typically delays coalition warfare effectiveness. Their deep understanding of partner capabilities, limitations, and operating procedures enables realistic operational planning that leverages actual rather than assumed partner contributions.

Historical analysis of coalition warfare demonstrates that effective multinational operations require extensive preparation, shared understanding, and established trust between partner forces. Traditional approaches to coalition building often operate through formal diplomatic channels and military-to-military exchanges, which frequently fail to foster the personal relationships necessary for effective coordination under stress. Volckmann Advisors build these relationships continuously, ensuring that coalition partnerships exist functionally rather than merely formally when conflicts begin.

The intelligence advantages provided by embedded advisors extend beyond traditional collection activities toward operational preparation of the environment. Through sustained presence, Volckmann Advisors develop a comprehensive understanding of local terrain, infrastructure, population dynamics, and logistical networks that proves invaluable during crisis response or conflict operations. This knowledge cannot be acquired through satellite imagery, signals intelligence, or brief reconnaissance missions, it requires the sustained observation and relationship-building that only embedded presence provides.

Cultural Fluency as Strategic Advantage

Modern strategic competition increasingly centers on narrative warfare, the contest for how local populations perceive competing powers and their respective partnerships. Traditional American engagement often appears transactional to foreign audiences: Americans arrive with equipment, conduct training, and depart according to predetermined schedules. Competitors exploit this pattern by portraying American partnerships as conditional assistance rather than genuine alliance.

Volckmann Advisors counters these narratives through demonstrated commitment. By sharing hardship, learning languages, and integrating into partner communities, they demonstrate that American partnership extends beyond immediate transactional interests. This cultural fluency becomes a decisive advantage in regions where personal relationships determine institutional trust and where authenticity of commitment influences strategic alignment.

The importance of cultural competence in military advisory relationships has been extensively documented through analyses of Vietnam-era programs, contemporary experiences in Afghanistan and Iraq, and the broader foreign military training literature. Successful advisors consistently demonstrate language proficiency, cultural sensitivity, and genuine respect for partner nation institutions. GAP systematizes these individual attributes into institutional capabilities, ensuring that cultural fluency becomes a program standard rather than a fortunate accident.

Institutional Architecture: Building Enduring Capability

GAP's institutional design addresses the organizational failures that prevented the original Volckmann Program from achieving permanent establishment. Rather than operating as an informal initiative dependent on individual champions, GAP creates a systematic architecture for selecting, training, and managing embedded advisors across their entire careers.

Leveraging Existing Capabilities: Integration Rather Than Innovation

The strength of GAP lies not in creating new capabilities from scratch, but in unifying and optimizing existing investments that currently operate in organizational isolation. The U.S. military already fields substantial advisory and partnership capabilities through multiple programs, representing significant financial investment and proven operational value. GAP proposes to serve as the institutional umbrella that coordinates these efforts while establishing common standards, shared training, education, and strategic coherence.

Current Advisory Infrastructure:

The Military Personnel Exchange Program (MPEP) represents America's most extensive embedded advisory network, with over 450 active positions globally. The Army maintains 156 exchange positions across 15 countries, the Air Force operates 87 billets in 14 countries, and the Navy sustains 208 international exchanges with 20 countries as well as 40 interservice billets. These exchanges embed American personnel directly within foreign military command structures, providing exactly the kind of sustained presence that GAP seeks to systematize.

The Foreign Area Officer (FAO) community represents the Department's most robust investment in regional expertise, with approximately 1,200 Army officers trained or qualifying in functional area specialization. FAOs possess advanced language proficiency, cultural competence, and regional knowledge acquired through extensive training, education and multiple overseas assignments. However, most FAO positions remain embassy-based or headquarters-focused, which limits their tactical integration with partner combat formations.

Special Operations Forces maintain globally distributed singleton advisors, liaisons, and resident trainers who provide persistent relationship-building and quiet influence across key regions. These operators frequently serve as the first indicators of changing partner behavior, leadership dynamics, or threat development. However, their effectiveness depends heavily on individual initiative rather than systematic preparation or institutional support.

GAP as Organizational Integrator:

Rather than displacing these proven capabilities, GAP would function as the strategic integrator that transforms fragmented efforts into a coherent capability. Current programs suffer from inconsistent selection criteria, disparate training standards, disconnected career management, and limited strategic coordination. GAP addresses these institutional gaps by providing unified standards while preserving program-specific strengths.

Immediate Implementation Advantages:

This integration approach offers significant advantages for the rapid implementation of GAP. Existing personnel already possess operational experience, established relationships, and proven effectiveness that would serve as the foundation for program expansion. Current funding streams, basing arrangements, and diplomatic agreements provide the infrastructure necessary for immediate scaling rather than lengthy development timelines.

Partner nations already familiar with American exchange officers, FAOs, and SOF liaisons would understand GAP's purpose and value, reducing diplomatic friction that might accompany entirely new initiatives. The integration model also provides political advantages by demonstrating fiscal responsibility through optimization of existing investments rather than requesting additional resources during constrained budget environments.

Enhanced Effectiveness Through Coordination:

GAP's coordinating function would dramatically enhance current program effectiveness through systematic lesson sharing, standardized training, education, and strategic alignment. Exchange officers would benefit from FAO cultural preparation, FAOs would gain tactical integration experience from SOF methodologies, and SOF advisors would receive systematic language training and cultural education. This cross-pollination would create more capable advisors while building institutional knowledge that currently dissipates with personnel rotations.

Strategic coordination would ensure that embedded advisors complement each other rather than compete, eliminating duplicated efforts while maximizing coverage of critical partner relationships. Theater campaign plans would incorporate advisor activities as integral rather than auxiliary capabilities, ensuring that embedded presence supports broader strategic objectives rather than operating in isolation.

Organizational Structure and Location

GAP would operate as a joint capability colocated at the Naval Postgraduate School (NPS) in Monterey, California, with dedicated command authority and independent funding streams. This positioning provides multiple strategic advantages that existing military education institutions cannot replicate. NPS already maintains the Global Center for Security Cooperation, which coordinates international education providers and facilitates security cooperation activities across consortium institutions. GAP would leverage this existing infrastructure while maintaining operational independence necessary for specialized advisory training and education.

The co-location in the Monterey area with the Defense Language Institute Foreign Language Center (DLIFLC) enables integrated language training that represents GAP's most critical capability requirement. Unlike traditional military education, which treats language as an additional skill, GAP embeds language proficiency within every aspect of advisor preparation. This integration reflects the reality that embedded advisors cannot achieve influence without linguistic competence and that cultural understanding emerges through language mastery rather than academic instruction alone.

NPS's academic resources provide access to regional studies expertise, strategic research capabilities, and policy analysis that traditional training centers and educational institutions lack. The Departments of National Security Affairs and Defense Analysis offer graduate-level instruction in strategic competition, regional affairs, and civil-military relations, directly supporting advisor preparation. However, GAP would maintain its own curriculum and standards, rather than merely adding advisory components to existing academic programs.

The institutional independence required for GAP's success necessitates a dedicated command structurethat prevents subordination to competing organizational priorities. While housed at NPS, GAP would operate with its own funding lines, personnel management authorities, and mission-specific standards. This structure ensures that advisor training remains focused on operational requirements rather than academic objectives, and that career management reflects advisory specialization rather than traditional branch advancement patterns.

Selection and Development Pipeline

GAP's selection process targets mid-career officers, warrant officers, and senior non-commissioned officers who demonstrate a strong aptitude for cross-cultural engagement and have proven leadership skills in complex and ambiguous environments. Unlike traditional military education, which emphasizes academic credentials, GAP prioritizes cultural intelligence, relationship-building capabilities, and personal resilience necessary for extended overseas assignments in potentially isolated conditions.

The selection methodology draws from Foreign Area Officer assessment techniques while incorporating Special Operations Forces evaluation standards adapted for advisory roles. Candidates undergo psychological evaluation designed to identify individuals capable of maintaining effectiveness during extended cultural immersion, linguistic assessment to determine language learning aptitude, and scenario-based exercises that evaluate decision-making under cultural ambiguity.

Phase One: Foundation Training and Education (Six Months)

Initial training emphasizes language immersion through a partnership with DLIFLC, necessitating candidates to achieve professional proficiency in target region languages before advancing to specialized instruction. This standard reflects the reality that embedded advisors must communicate technical concepts, grasp cultural nuances, and foster personal relationships, which require advanced linguistic capabilities rather than simply basic conversational skills.

Regional studies instruction offers a comprehensive understanding of the target area’s history, politics, economics, and security dynamics through intensive seminar-based learning that emphasizes analytical thinking over information memorization. This instruction integrates perspectives from multiple disciplines, anthropology, political science, economics, and military history, to develop a holistic understanding of regional complexity.

Advisory methodology education introduces systematic approaches to influence, negotiation, and relationship building derived from diplomatic practice, business consulting, and military leadership doctrine. This instruction emphasizes practical techniques for building trust with foreign counterparts, managing cross-cultural misunderstandings, and maintaining effectiveness during extended isolation from American support networks.

Phase Two: Practical Application (Three Months)

Advanced education employs scenario-based exercises using partner nation military officers as role-playing counterparts, enabling candidates to practice advisory techniques in realistic cultural contexts while building actual relationships that may prove valuable during deployment. These exercises emphasize problem-solving under cultural constraints, communication through interpreters, and decision-making when American and partner priorities diverge.

Mentorship programs pair candidates with experienced GAP alumni who provide practical guidance on managing advisory relationships, maintaining personal resilience during cultural immersion, and integrating with American embassy and military command structures. This mentorship continues throughout deployment, ensuring that new advisors maintain connection with institutional expertise and lessons learned from previous assignments.

Pre-deployment preparation includes country-specific briefings, relationship mapping with key partner nation personnel, and coordination with Geographic Combatant Command staffs to ensure that advisor activities align with theater campaign plans and diplomatic objectives. This preparation phase prevents the isolation that often undermines individual advisor effectiveness and ensures that embedded presence contributes to broader strategic objectives.

Career Development and Institutional Permanence

GAP's long-term viability requires institutional career support that makes advisory assignments attractive to high-potential personnel rather than career-limiting detours from traditional advancement pathways. This necessitates formal recognition through Additional Skill Identifiers (ASIs), functional area designations similar to the Foreign Area Officer community, and promotion tracking that demonstrates advisory experience enhances rather than impedes advancement opportunities.

Professional Recognition and Advancement

The Army's Foreign Area Officer program provides the model for GAP career management, with a formal functional area designation (similar to FA48), structured promotion pathways, and senior-level positions reserved for qualified specialists. GAP would establish comparable recognition across all services, ensuring that Volckmann Advisors receive credit for specialized expertise while maintaining eligibility for conventional leadership positions.

Rotational assignments balance operational advisory tours with strategic-level positions that utilize embedded experience for broader organizational benefits. Typical career progression includes two- to three-year advisory deployments followed by strategic assignments at Theater Special Operations Commands, Geographic Combatant Commands, or policy positions within the Office of the Secretary of Defense. This rotation ensures that embedded experience informs strategic planning while offering advisors career development opportunities akin to traditional military specialties.

Senior leadership pathways include command positions within GAP structure, senior fellowship programs at civilian academic institutions, and flag or general officer advancement that demonstrates organizational commitment to advisory expertise. Without visible senior leader representation, GAP risks being perceived as a specialized capability rather than a pathway to institutional influence.

Institutional Memory and Continuous Improvement

GAP's effectiveness depends on systematic capture and application of lessons learned from advisor experiences across multiple deployments and partner nations. Unlike ad hoc advisory efforts that lose institutional memory with each personnel rotation, GAP creates persistent organizational learning through structured after-action processes, alumni networks, and research partnerships with academic institutions.

Annual conferences bring together current and former advisors to share experiences, identify best practices, and recommend program improvements based on operational experience. These gatherings serve multiple functions: maintaining esprit de corps among geographically dispersed personnel, facilitating cross-regional learning that enhances advisor effectiveness, and providing institutional leadership with feedback necessary for continuous program refinement.

Research partnerships with NPS faculty and external academic institutions enable systematic analysis of advisor effectiveness, partner nation feedback, and comparative assessment of GAP outcomes versus traditional engagement mechanisms. This research capability ensures that program evolution reflects empirical evidence rather than anecdotal impressions, while contributing to broader understanding of advisory relationships and strategic competition dynamics.

Implementation Strategy: From Concept to Capability

GAP implementation requires systematic approach that addresses organizational resistance, resource constraints, and operational risks while demonstrating early success that builds institutional momentum for program expansion. The phased implementation strategy balances ambitious strategic objectives with realistic timelines and resource requirements.

Phase One: Foundation Building (Months 1-12)

Institutional Assessment and Stakeholder Engagement

Implementation begins with comprehensive DOTMLPF-P (Doctrine, Organization, Training, Materiel, Leadership and Education, Personnel, Facilities, and Policy) analysis that catalogs existing advisory capabilities across services and identifies gaps that GAP would address. This assessment provides baseline understanding of current programs while establishing metrics for measuring GAP's additive value.

Stakeholder engagement targets Geographic Combatant Commands, service headquarters, and interagency partners to build coalition supporting GAP establishment. This outreach emphasizes GAP's complementary rather than competitive relationship with existing programs, demonstrating how embedded advisors enhance rather than replace current engagement mechanisms.

Congressional engagement focuses on the defense authorization and appropriations committees, emphasizing the cost-effectiveness of GAP compared to traditional forward presence methods and its alignment with strategic competition priorities established in recent National Defense Strategy guidance. This engagement establishes the political foundation necessary for sustained funding and institutional support.

Curriculum Development and Initial Recruitment

Curriculum development leverages existing NPS and DLIFLC capabilities while establishing GAP-specific standards for advisor preparation. Initial course design emphasizes proven methodologies from Foreign Area Officer training, Special Operations Forces qualification courses, and diplomatic preparation programs adapted for military advisory requirements.

Recruitment targets high-performing mid-career personnel across services, emphasizing voluntary selection rather than directed assignment to ensure participant motivation and program quality. Initial cohort size (approximately twenty candidates) enables intensive instruction and individual attention while providing sufficient numbers for meaningful operational deployment.

Partner nation coordination identifies willing hosts for pilot advisory deployments, focusing on allies and partners with established security cooperation relationships and demonstrated interest in expanded American engagement. Initial deployments concentrate on Indo-Pacific and European theaters where strategic competition is most intense and where early success would demonstrate GAP's strategic value.

Phase Two: Proof of Concept (Months 13-24)

Initial Training, Education and Deployment

The first GAP cohort undergoes a complete training and education pipeline, serving as proof of concept for curriculum effectiveness and institutional processes. Intensive monitoring and evaluation during this phase provide lessons learned necessary for program refinement and expansion planning.

Initial deployments focus on strategic-level advisory roles that maximize visibility and influence while minimizing operational risks. Early assignments emphasize relationship building and institutional integration rather than crisis response, enabling advisors to establish credibility and trust before facing operational challenges.

Baseline assessment establishes metrics for measuring advisor effectiveness, partner satisfaction, and strategic outcomes that GAP contributes to broader theater objectives. These metrics provide empirical foundation for program evaluation and expansion justification.

Organizational Learning and Refinement

Systematic collection of lessons learned from initial deployments enables rapid program refinement based on operational experience rather than theoretical assumptions. Regular feedback sessions with deployed advisors, partner nation officials, and Geographic Combatant Command staffs identify necessary adjustments to training and education curriculum, selection criteria, and operational employment guidelines.

Preliminary assessment of strategic outcomes begins evaluation of GAP's contribution to strategic competition objectives, relationship building with key partners, and early warning capability development. While definitive assessment requires longer timelines, initial indicators provide a foundation for program expansion decisions.

Phase Three: Expansion and Integration (Months 25-36)

Program Scaling and Service Integration

Successful proof of concept enables expansion to 40-60 advisors annually across all Geographic Combatant Commands, with service integration that embeds GAP within formal military education and career development pipelines. This expansion requires formal service agreements, dedicated funding streams, and personnel management integration.

Institutional integration includes GAP representation at senior military education institutions, advisor expertise input into strategic planning processes, and formal recognition of embedded advisory capability within joint doctrine and service-specific strategy documents.

Strategic Assessment and Future Planning

Comprehensive program evaluation after three years of operation provides definitive assessment of GAP's strategic value, operational effectiveness, and institutional integration success. This evaluation considers advisor effectiveness measurements, partner nation feedback, strategic competition outcomes, and cost-benefit analysis compared to alternative engagement mechanisms.

Future planning addresses program expansion to full operational capability, integration with allied and partner nation advisory programs, and adaptation to emerging strategic competition requirements in space, cyber, and other non-traditional domains.

Expected Outcomes and Strategic Benefits

GAP's strategic value manifests through measurable improvements in American competitive position that compound over time and across multiple operational contexts. Unlike traditional engagement mechanisms that produce episodic effects, embedded advisors generate cumulative strategic advantages requiring systematic assessment methodologies.

Assessment Framework and Success Indicators

Institutional Integration Metrics

Success measurement begins with quantifying advisor integration depth within partner defense establishments. Key indicators include advisor participation in partner strategic planning sessions, inclusion in sensitive operational briefings, and consultation frequency during crisis decision-making. Assessment tracks progression from external consultant status to trusted internal advisor positions, measuring integration through partner-initiated contact frequency and scope of responsibilities assigned.

Partnership Resilience During Transitions

GAP effectiveness requires measurement of relationship continuity through partner nation leadership changes, government transitions, and policy shifts. Traditional engagement mechanisms often reset with each personnel change, requiring extensive relationship rebuilding. Assessment methodology tracks advisor relationship maintenance through political transitions, measuring cooperation consistency across multiple leadership cycles and institutional memory preservation.

Operational Coordination Efficiency

Crisis response effectiveness measurement compares coordination timelines between GAP-supported partnerships and traditional relationships. Metrics include initial contact establishment speed, information sharing accuracy, and decision-making synchronization during regional emergencies. Assessment evaluates advisor-facilitated coordination against baseline requirements for establishing operational partnerships without pre-existing relationships.

Competitive Position Analysis

Regional Influence Assessment

Systematic evaluation tracks American influence trends in GAP-supported regions compared to areas relying on episodic engagement. Metrics include partner nation policy alignment during international disputes, cooperation levels in multilateral forums, and resistance to competitor influence operations. Assessment methodology measures influence durability during periods of reduced American attention or competing priorities.

Cost-Effectiveness Evaluation

Comparative analysis measures GAP investment efficiency against alternative engagement mechanisms. Assessment includes cost-per-advisor versus large unit deployments, relationship maintenance expenses, and strategic access costs. Evaluation framework tracks return on investment through prevented crises, enhanced cooperation agreements, and competitor access denial.

Innovation and Adaptation Measurement

Program effectiveness requires continuous assessment of institutional learning and adaptation capacity. Metrics evaluate the integration of lessons learned, the evolution of training and education curricula, and the refinement of operational methodologies based on field experience. Assessment tracks program responsiveness to changing strategic competition requirements and the incorporation of partner nation feedback.

Risk Management and Strategic Mitigation

GAP implementation requires comprehensive risk management that addresses operational security, political sensitivities, and institutional challenges while maintaining program effectiveness and strategic credibility. Successful risk mitigation enables program expansion while preventing incidents that could undermine political support or partner nation cooperation.

Operational Security and Personnel Safety

Threat Assessment and Mitigation Protocols

Embedded advisor safety requires continuous threat assessment that evaluates political stability, criminal activity, terrorist presence, and conventional conflict risks within deployment areas. Unlike traditional military deployments with organic security capabilities, individual advisors depend on host nation protection and diplomatic security resources that may prove inadequate during crisis periods.

Risk mitigation protocols include comprehensive threat briefings before deployment, regular security assessments throughout assignment periods, and predetermined evacuation procedures for various threat scenarios. Communication security measures ensure that advisors maintain contact with American authorities while protecting sensitive information from hostile intelligence services.

Emergency response procedures address medical emergencies, natural disasters, political instability, and direct threats to advisor safety through coordination with embassy personnel, Geographic Combatant Command staffs, and special operations forces capable of emergency extraction if required.

Information Security and Counterintelligence

Embedded advisors represent attractive targets for hostile intelligence services seeking access to American military capabilities, strategic planning, and technological information. Comprehensive counterintelligence training prepares advisors to recognize recruitment attempts, resist interrogation if captured, and protect sensitive information through operational security practices.

Communication security assumes that all advisor communications may be intercepted by hostile intelligence services or partner nation security agencies. Secure communication protocols enable necessary coordination with American authorities while minimizing exposure of sensitive information that could compromise operational security or strategic planning.

Digital security training addresses cyber threats to advisor personal and professional devices, recognizing that embedded advisors may face sophisticated technical exploitation attempts designed to access American networks through advisor credentials and access.

Political and Diplomatic Risk Management

Host Nation Sensitivity and Cultural Competence

Partner nation sovereignty concerns require careful balance between advisor effectiveness and respect for host nation autonomy. Advisors must influence partner behavior while avoiding appearance of American control or conditional assistance that could trigger nationalist resistance or political exploitation by anti-American elements.

Cultural preparation addresses local customs, political sensitivities, and social expectations that affect advisor credibility and effectiveness. Comprehensive cultural education reduces risks of inadvertent offense while enabling advisors to navigate complex social and political environments successfully.

Government coordination ensures that advisor activities align with host nation political priorities and legal requirements while maintaining American strategic objectives. Formal agreements establish advisor roles, limitations, and expectations that prevent misunderstandings and political conflicts.

American Domestic and Congressional Concerns

Congressional oversight requires regular reporting on advisor activities, safety measures, and strategic outcomes that demonstrate program effectiveness while addressing legitimate concerns about overseas commitments and personnel risks. Transparent reporting builds political support while protecting operational security requirements.

Public affairs strategy proactively addresses potential criticism of advisor programs through emphasis on partnership rather than unilateral action, cost-effectiveness compared to traditional forward presence, and alignment with strategic competition requirements established through bipartisan congressional action.

Interagency coordination prevents conflicts between military advisor activities and diplomatic or intelligence community operations through regular consultation and shared understanding of respective roles and limitations.

Institutional Risk Mitigation

Career Development and Personnel Retention

Advisor career viability requires demonstration that embedded assignments enhance rather than limit advancement opportunities within traditional military career patterns. Statistical tracking of advisor promotion rates, command opportunities, and senior leadership advancement provides empirical evidence of career benefits while identifying necessary adjustments to personnel management policies.

Family support programs address unique challenges of extended overseas assignments, including education opportunities for military children, spousal employment assistance, and community support networks that reduce family stress and enhance retention.

Professional development during advisor assignments maintains advisor currency in conventional military capabilities while building specialized expertise that enhances rather than replaces traditional military competence.

Program Sustainability and Institutional Support

Bipartisan political support requires demonstrated strategic value that transcends partisan political cycles and addresses enduring American strategic interests rather than temporary policy preferences. Regular strategic assessments provide empirical evidence of program contributions to strategic competition objectives while identifying necessary adaptations to changing strategic environments.

Allied coordination explores potential integration with partner nation advisory programs, burden-sharing arrangements, and multilateral advisory training and education that reduce American resource requirements while enhancing program effectiveness through international cooperation.

Budget diversification reduces dependence on single funding sources by integrating advisor costs within broader security cooperation budgets, Geographic Combatant Command operation and maintenance accounts, and joint training and education funding streams.

Conclusion: Strategic Presence Through Partnership

The Global Advisor Program represents more than military education reform or organizational restructuring; it embodies a strategic philosophy that recognizes relationship building as America's asymmetric advantage in global competition. While competitors may match American military technology, economic resources, or diplomatic influence, they cannot replicate the trust that emerges from sustained, respectful partnership demonstrated through shared hardship and mutual commitment.

GAP advisors succeed not by occupying foreign territory but by earning access to foreign trust. They achieve influence not by imposing American solutions but by amplifying partner capabilities. Most importantly, they provide security not by arriving during crises but by preventing crises through persistent presence that enables early intervention before instabilities escalate beyond diplomatic resolution.

The Strategic Imperative for Immediate Action

Contemporary strategic competition demands immediate implementation of persistent presence capabilities that enable American influence during peacetime rather than reaction during crises. China's Belt and Road Initiative, Russia's gray zone activities, and Iran's proxy networks all demonstrate the strategic value of embedded influence that shapes partner nation development from within rather than external pressure applied from distant capitals.

America possesses unique advantages in this competition that GAP would systematically exploit. Democratic values inspire partnership rather than demanding submission, creating foundation for genuine cooperation rather than coercive compliance. Military professionalism earns respect rather than fear, enabling advisors to build institutional relationships based on mutual benefit rather than intimidation. Cultural adaptability facilitates authentic relationship building rather than surface-level engagement that competitors exploit as evidence of American insincerity.

However, these advantages remain latent until activated through systematic implementation. Individual advisor success stories provide anecdotal evidence of embedded effectiveness, but strategic competition requires institutional capability that operates across multiple theaters simultaneously while maintaining consistent standards and strategic coordination.

Implementation Timeline: Closing the GAP

The Department of Defense should initiate comprehensive DOTMLPF-P assessment immediately, enabling prototype training and education pipeline deployment of the first Volckmann Advisor cohort to Indo-Pacific and European theaters by early 2027. This aggressive timeline reflects strategic competition urgency while allowing sufficient preparation for sustainable program establishment.

Immediate Actions Required (Next 90 Days):

·       Formal DOTMLPF-P assessment initiation through appropriate service and joint staff channels

·       Stakeholder engagement with Geographic Combatant Commands, service headquarters, and interagency partners

·       Initial coordination with Naval Postgraduate School and Defense Language Institute leadership

·       Congressional notification and preliminary resource identification

Near-Term Objectives (Months 4-12):

·       Curriculum development and instructor recruitment

·       Initial candidate selection and recruitment

·       Partner nation coordination for pilot deployments

·       Formal program establishment and command structure implementation

Operational Timeline (Months 13-24):

·       First cohort training, education and certification

·       Initial deployments to priority theater locations

·       Baseline assessment and lessons learned collection

·       Program refinement based on operational experience

This timeline enables rapid capability development while ensuring thorough preparation that maximizes success probability and minimizes operational risks. Delayed implementation provides competitors additional time to consolidate influence while denying America the persistent presence necessary for effective strategic competition.

Call to Strategic Action

Strategic leaders across the defense community must champion GAP immediately through their professional networks, planning processes, and resource allocation decisions. Share the proposal through service colleges, war colleges, and professional associations while advocating for its consideration within strategic planning and program development processes.

For centuries, great powers have deployed trusted emissaries to forge coalitions before conflict erupted. Medieval kingdoms exchanged princes as hostages to guarantee treaty compliance. Renaissance city-states embedded ambassadors within foreign courts to shape policy from within. Modern strategic competition demands similar embedded presence, but adapted for democratic values and professional military relationships rather than dynastic politics.

Where there exists a GAP in American strategic presence, GAP fills it. Where there exists a GAP in trusted partnerships, GAP builds them. Where there exists a GAP in competitive advantage, GAP closes it.

The Volckmann legacy awaits modern implementation through systematic institutionalization rather than individual heroism. Strategic competition demands a persistent presence rather than episodic intervention. The Global Advisor Program provides a mechanism to transform American engagement from crisis response to crisis prevention through embedded partnerships that shape outcomes before competitors recognize opportunities.

GAP: Embedding influence today, securing victory tomorrow.

References

1.    Mike Anderson, "Military Advisors, Service Strategies, and Great Power Competition," Journal of Strategic Security 16, no. 1 (2023): 19-34.

2.    U.S. Department of Defense, Military and Security Developments Involving the People's Republic of China 2024 (Washington, DC: Department of Defense, 2024).

3.    Russell W. Volckmann, Operations Against Guerrilla Forces, U.S. Army Field Manual 31-20 (Washington, DC: Department of the Army, 1951).

4.    Russell W. Volckmann, We Remained: Three Years Behind Enemy Lines in the Philippines (New York: W.W. Norton, 1954); Mike Guardia, American Guerrilla: The Forgotten Heroics of Russell W. Volckmann(Havertown, PA: Casemate, 2010).

5.    Eric Wendt, "The Green Beret Volckmann Program: Maximizing the Prevent Strategy," Special Warfare24, no. 3 (July-September 2011): 10-16.

6.    Theodore McLauchlin, Lee JM Seymour, and Simon Pierre Boulanger Martel, "Tracking the rise of United States foreign military training: IMTAD-USA, a new dataset and research agenda," Journal of Peace Research 59, no. 2 (2022): 271-285.

7.    Jessica Stanton, "Soldiers' Dilemma: Foreign Military Training and Liberal Norm Conflict," International Security 46, no. 4 (Spring 2022): 48-94.

8.    Gerald Cannon Hickey, The American Military Advisor and His Foreign Counterpart: The Case of Vietnam, RAND Corporation Research Memorandum RM-4482-ARPA (Santa Monica, CA: RAND Corporation, 1965).

9.    Naval Postgraduate School, "Global Center for Security Cooperation, DLI Sign Historic Collaboration," January 30, 2019.

10. Defense Language Institute Foreign Language Center, "About Us," accessed March 2025, https://www.dliflc.edu/about/.

11. Naval Postgraduate School, Department of National Security Affairs, "Welcome," accessed March 2025, https://nps.edu/web/nsa.

12. U.S. Army Human Resources Command, "Functional Area 48 (FAO) Program," https://www.hrc.army.mil/content/Functional%20Area%2048%20(FAO).

13. U.S. Department of Defense, Summary of the 2022 National Defense Strategy of the United States of America (Washington, DC: Department of Defense, 2022).

About the Author

CW5 Maurice "Duc" DuClos currently serves as a Guest Lecturer at the Naval Postgraduate School (NPS) in Monterey, California. His professional background includes various positions at the United States Special Operations Command (USSOCOM) Joint Special Operations University (JSOU), the U.S. Army John F. Kennedy Special Warfare Center and School (USAJFKSWCS), 1st Special Forces Group (Airborne), and 2/75th Ranger Battalion.

His research interests focus on irregular and unconventional warfare, resistance to occupation, strategic competition, the effectiveness of security cooperation, and military advisory relationships in contested and denied environments.

The views expressed are those of the author and do not reflect the official position of the United States Special Operations Command, Joint Special Operations University, the Naval Postgraduate School, or the Department of Defense.