As debate intensifies over reorganizing U.S. Cyber Command (USCYBERCOM) or establishing a separate military cyber service, this senior leader perspective argues that structural change should not precede rigorous problem definition and analysis. Drawing on extensive experience commanding joint cyber and intelligence organizations, the author contends that current discussions risk focusing on organizational form rather than mission clarity, readiness baselines, and resource alignment. The article examines unresolved questions about what constitutes “cyber” within the Joint Force, how cyber capabilities are integrated across domains, and how readiness should be measured in a force engaged in continuous competition. It highlights gaps in data regarding manning, training pipelines, and force-generation overhead, cautioning against reorganization without evidence-based assessment. The piece proposes a disciplined, data-driven framework to evaluate mission requirements, readiness, and force design before pursuing major institutional change. It concludes that meaningful improvement in U.S. cyber operational effectiveness depends on answering fundamental questions first—rather than accepting years of disruption from premature structural reform.
READ THE FULL ARTICLE HERE