Military Review English Edition January-February 2015 | Page 121

ATLANTIC RESOLVE

(Photo by Sgt. Daniel Cole, U.S. Army Europe PAO)

Soldiers with U.S. Army Europe’s 173rd Airborne Brigade meet Latvian soldiers after a 24 April 2014 ceremony commemorating the start
of new multinational exercises. A company-sized contingent of paratroopers deployed to Latvia in support of Operation Atlantic Resolve.
The multinational training fulfills the USAREUR strategic objective of preserving and enhancing NATO interoperability and demonstrates
U.S. commitment to its NATO allies.

the staff estimate briefed to Lt. Gen. Campbell in the
initial planning stages, according to Lt. Col. Craig
Childs.15 Childs, a member of Nielson-Green’s staff
and a primary contributor to the estimate, recalled,
“At first I don’t think the staff agreed with the notion
that public affairs activities belonged in the commander’s intent paragraph” of the operation order.
Campbell was on board with the concept, though.
“One of the most important things we did was
acknowledge early on that there was going to be a
heavy public affairs component to it, and get the capabilities we needed on the ground in the Baltics and
Poland,” said Campbell of his guidance to the staff
in the planning stages.16 The operation order would
have to make clear that tactical and communication
objectives would go hand-in-hand, ensuring the actions and words of the operation were in synch.
Just a few years ago, this would have been a
novel concept. Dennis Murphy with the U.S.
Army War College Center for Strategic Leadership
MILITARY REVIEW  January-February 2015

thought so when he advocated for a similar compulsory function to be added to the operational
planning process. “Having a clearly stated information end state to accompany the traditional
military end state,” Murphy wrote in a 2009 article for Parameters, would compel commanders to
consider their communication strategy in operations.17 According to Joint Doctrine Note 2-13,
Commander’s Communication Synchronization,
published in 2013, this is now a part of joint planning operations.18 Yet no such planning mechanism
exists in Army doctrine.
As Nielson-Green wrote in a 2011 article for
Military Review though, a doctrinal change would
only work as a “starting point.”19 Effective communication strategy means that leaders “weigh
the effects of their actions against effects on the
population or adversary perception and train their
troops to think likewise,” the 14-year Army public
affairs veteran asserted in her analysis. Five years
119