Military Review English Edition January-February 2015 | Página 120

Operation Atlantic Resolve.9 According to
Breedlove, a company-sized contingent of airborne
infantry in each of the four countries would hardly
be an obstacle against the “force of about 40,000”
Russian troops massed on the Ukraine border at
the time.10
However, that was not the point. Ground
forces deployed in support of Operation Atlantic
Resolve to achieve a tactical objective and, perhaps
more importantly, a communication objective.
USAREUR’s coupling of the desired tactical and
information end-states of the operation offers a
model for applying communication strategy to
future operations.
The presence of U.S. boots on the ground was
the core tactical condition intended to signal U.S.
commitment to NATO’s Article 5 obligations and
of itself would have no trouble generating headlines.11 Lacking proper context though, the move
could have resulted in disaster if it was “erroneously
perceived as a precursor to violence, a unilateral U.S.
effort, or provocative to the Russians,” according to
Col. Rumi Nielson-Green, the USAREUR public
affairs officer at the time.12 As the designated Army
Service Component Command for Europe, it would
be USAREUR’s responsibility to fulfill the troop
deployment and Nielson-Green’s public affairs office
charged with framing the activity in the appropriate

light. The success or failure of Operation Atlantic
Resolve would hinge on aggressive, timely communication efforts. Specifically, this meant facilitating media coverage, ensuring transparency to the
American public, and combating misinformation.
The emphasis on communication was clear at the
highest level of both U.S. and partner governments.
In announcing the deployment from the Pentagon
briefing room, Department of Defense spokesman
Rear Adm. John Kirby spoke not in terms of military maneuver, but of messaging. “I think the message is … that the United States takes seriously our
obligations under Article 5 of the NATO alliance,”
Kirby assessed.13
Furthermore, the news of the deployment broke
deliberately ahead of the official announcement.
Poland’s minister of defense, Tomasz Siemoniak,
walked into the offices of the Washington Post and
revealed part of the U.S. plan following a meeting
at the Pentagon with U.S. Defense Secretary Chuck
Hagel.14

Formulating a Communication
Strategy
USAREUR public affairs personnel noted the
signals from leadership and planned accordingly.
“Public affairs is decisive to this operation,” read the
primary bullet point in the public affairs portion of

3. (U) EXECUTION.
(U)COMMANDERS INTENT
(1) (U) PURPOSE: TO ASSURE ALLIES OF U.S. COMMITMENT AND DEMONSTRATED RESOLVE
TO SUPPORT THE BALTIC STATES AND POLAND.
(2) (U) KEY TASKS
(2A) (U) DEPLOY ONE (1) COMPANY EACH INTO POLAND AND THE BALTICS.
(2B) (U) ESTABLISH INITIAL COMMAND AND CONTROL NODE.
(2C) (U) CONDUCT PUBLIC AFFAIRS ACTIVITIES.
(2D) (U) INTEGRATE INTO THE EUCOM PERSISTENT PRESENCE PLAN IN BALTICS AND
POLAND.
(3) (U) END STATE. U.S. DEMONSTRATES ITS AIRBORNE CAPABILITY AND RESOLVE
TO DEFEND NATO ALLIES AND PARTNER NATIONS. THE U.S. IS PREPARED FOR FUTURE
TRAINING, EXERCISES, AND OPERATIONS. KEY AUDIENCES ARE INFORMED OF U.S.
COMMITMENT TO OUR ALLIES AND PARTNER NATIONS WITHOUT PROVOKING UNDESIRED
RUSSIAN RESPONSE.

Figure 1. USAREUR Atlantic Resolve Operation Order Commander’s Intent
118

January-February 2015  MILITARY REVIEW