US Army is set to take on responsible for America's forcible entry missions...redesigning Airborne/Air Assault & developing a "Penetration Division"!

 via AUSA.org

The adoption of the Penetration Division, in concert with similar redesigns for airborne and air assault forces to better achieve rapid forcible entry, holds foundational implications for the U.S. Army as it modernizes for large-scale combat operations.

-----

 

As part of the effort to transform the Army’s order of battle—which had previously maximized brigade combat team (BCT) capability for wars in Iraq and Afghanistan—into an echeloned ground force that is optimized for high-intensity combat, the landpower institution is developing an MDO-capable formation called the Penetration Division. Representing the “sum of the Army’s thinking about large-scale combat operations,” as argued by the U.S. Army Combined Arms Center, the newly designed command will be uniquely empowered with an enhanced combined-arms armored profile to “conduct the joint force’s most demanding operations,” including breaching prepared defenses and leading contested gap-crossings against peer adversaries.2

This focus on developing a purpose-built formation with echeloned fires and reconnaissance capacity to shape deep areas and bridge the tactical and operational levels of war represents not only structural modernization, but a conceptual shift by the Army toward providing the MDO concept, at least in part, with the option of employing the penetration form of maneuver along with traditional flank or envelopment actions. Recognizing the requirement to defeat sophisticated adversary antiaccess/area denial (A2/AD) defenses in expeditionary settings, the new division provides the Army with a purpose-built, cross-domain capability to execute penetration attacks to dis-integrate (as opposed to flank and envelopment actions that isolate) in order to defeat an enemy in-depth—while avoiding the perils of attrition, exhaustion and culmination.3 

The adoption of the Penetration Division, in concert with similar redesigns for airborne and air assault forces to better achieve rapid forcible entry, and as a viable tactical instrument, thus holds foundational implications for both U.S. joint forces and coalition partners. Historically representing both a high risk and high reward endeavor that requires systemic integration and asymmetric advantages to enable success, the redesigned armored formation has the potential to empower, or conversely limit, the Army’s capacity to achieve decisive outcomes. As a new factor in the emerging MDO doctrine, it represents a continuance of an American way of war that prizes firepower and technology to avoid attrition and culmination.4 In this context, consideration of the design begins with understanding the theory and history behind the concept. 

Here.

Well.  If there is a void, then nature will fill it.  The US Marines have abandoned forcible entry so its only natural that the US Army will take on the role.