Peace & Stability Journal Peace & Stability Journal Volume 6, Issue 2 | Page 23

country cycle. Having a step in the planning process focused on Major Ian J. Townsend is curthe creation and validation (as further country planning cycles rently an operational/strategic are conducted) of the best possible Measures of Effectiveness planner focused on security (MOEs) is essential for determining progress along lines of cooperation at United States effort, and reinforces the continuous monitoring of conditions Army South, Fort Sam Housin the assessments process.6 As Army South conducts additon, Texas. He holds a BA from tional assessment process cycles, MOEs evolve into a more Texas A&M University and comprehensive and finite product. These refined MOEs more is a recent Advanced Securiaccurately measure whether the command is truly achieving ty Cooperation fellow at the their Security Cooperation objectives. Of course, these meaAsia-Pacific Center for Security surements are inherently subjective and intuitive; measuring Studies, Honolulu, Hawaii. MAJ Townsend commanded the whether the planned actions are the correct actions is arguably 545th Military Police Company, 1st Cavalry Division during one of the most difficult things our Army does. Army South’s Operation Iraqi Freedom II and later served on a 101st Airability to convey the intent of MOEs has helped focus the analborne Division rendezvous in Afghanistan. ysis on improving partner nation capability. As the command’s process to monitor security cooperation progress evolves, it should become one of the senior sub-processes in the command. Notes: Thus, exponentially increasing the understanding of our partner 1 United States Army South is the landpower service componations and their armies for all leaders and planners. nent command for United States Southern Command (USSOUTHCOM) whose region encompasses the 31 countries This article established that Army South needed to change and 15 dependencies and areas of special sovereignty of Latin how it was conducting security cooperation planning. The America south of Mexico. unit could not definitively articulate why activities were being 2 Michael Hartmayer and John Hansen, “Security Cooperation conducted, or how the activities were building partner capacity in Support of Theater Strategy,” Military Review, ( January-Febin the region. It highlights how the unit’s leadership fostered ruary 2013), the process that drives the critical task of planning. Through (21 April 2015) Lieutenant Colonels (Retired) Hartmayer and this change, the level of discussion of the entire command has risen to the strategic level. Furthermore, it has allowed the Army Hansen offer in their article an additional method of conductService Component Command (ASCC) commander to express ing security cooperation planning, the Army’s targeting methodology (decide, detect, deliver, and assess). They state, “(It) is a his concepts and vision on the CCDR and ambassadors in the region more effectively. These changes set the conditions for the time-tested model that can serve as a foundation upon which to better management and execution of accurate security coopera- base the process. The creativity of the service component comtion activity and mission essential tasks achieve the Command’s mander and staff is the only limit on the development of theater - or service - specific security cooperation planning models or desired end states. methods.” 3 Michael Hartmayer and John Hansen, “Security Cooperation All military commands are susceptible to swarming, but in Support of Theater Strategy,” Military Review, ( January-Febthrough evolution in staff design and documentation of a core ruary 2013), http://usacac.army.mil/CAC2/MilitaryReview/ process, swarming can be overcome. Security cooperation Archives/English/MilitaryReview_20130228_art007.pdf planning in military organizations can always be improved. 4 John P. Kotter and Dan S. Cohen, Heart of Change (Boston: Improvement is not rapid; and requires deliberate planning of Harvard Business Review Press, 2002) viii. Empowering action the security cooperation planning process. All organizations is step five of the eight-step process for leading change. will have fits and starts as they work through the process of 5 The Army South G3 Plans branch evolved into the ACoS G5 change. There will always be gaps in information and capabildirectorate in January 2015 through a commander directed ities that require solutions. The material offered in this article headquarters reorganization due much in part to the initial about processes, procedural changes, and security cooperation successes achieved by the command’s modifications of processes practices give commanders, staffs, and partner nations ideas to and procedures as explained in this article. spur change. This author hopes the lessons and examples from 6 The Joint Staff. Joint Publication 5-0, Joint Operation PlanArmy South will help inspire other commands to begin their ning. Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office, own organizational introspection and to expand their vision on 2011. See Appendix D, Assessments. change. In doing so, your unit may begin or improve upon its own evolution from the swarm. 21