JFEC_Final

Service Intermediate-Level Colleges (JPME-1)
Request for Review of Draft “Stability in Joint Planner Education” Support Package.
Dear Education Leaders:
Based upon the U.S. Army Peacekeeping and Stability Operations Institute’s (PKSOI)
review of stability operations in joint planner education in 2014, we observed that your
JPME-1 programs provide excellent instruction in operational art, design and planning
with respect to the warfighting challenges in delivering decisive force through offensive
and defensive operations. However, as joint doctrine notes, planners must also be
skilled in how to integrate stability operations (SO) as the third essential part of
balanced operational approaches and integrated plans that both accomplish military
success and contribute to U.S. policy and strategy success.
In our capacity as the lead for Joint Proponency in Peace and Stability Operations,
the PKSOI has been tasked to support improvements in joint planner education with
respect to stability operations. At the February 15th
MECC, PKSOI committed to
providing a series of resources to the JPME partners at the JFEC:
 Proposed community learning objectives for including stability in joint planner education
 A concise set of key references for faculty instructors use in course design
 Lesson plans that explain the importance of stability in military and U.S. success and
methods for integrating stability into existing joint design and planning instruction.
 Case Studies that highlight the successful integration of stability into joint operations.
Attached are our coordinating drafts for the first three items, along with a description
of our ongoing case study development efforts, for your review and suggested
improvements as a JPME-1 partner. Our intent is to collaborate with the partner44
institutions to establish a community-accepted standard for stability operations learning
objectives, and to provide the resources required to fully integrate stability into
education for our future joint leaders and planners.
-2-
June 29, 2015
CARLISLE, PENNSYLVANIA 17013-5054
UNITED STATES ARMY WAR COLLEGE AND CARLISLE BARRACKS
REPLY TO
ATTENTION OF
DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY

Please review the attached resources and provide you recommendations for
changes and improvements by 1 Aug 15 for development of a final draft that will be
provided back for discussion in September. Discussions and comments are welcome
with the project lead (undersigned) via phone at (717) 245-3524 or electronically at
james.h.embrey.civ@mail.mil .
Respectfully,
James H. Embrey
Professor for Stability Operations
Peacekeeping and Stability Operations
Institute, USAWC
Enclosures: 5

29 June 2015
TO: Education Leaders, Service Intermediate-Level Colleges (JPME-1)
SUBJECT: Request for Review of Draft “Stability in Joint Planner Education” Support Package
Based upon our review of joint planner education in 2014, your JPME-1 programs provide
excellent instruction in operational art, design and planning with respect to the warfighting
challenges in delivering decisive force through offensive and defensive operations. However,
as joint doctrine notes, planners must also be skilled in how to integrate stability operations (SO)
as the third essential part of balanced operational approaches and integrated plans that both
accomplish military success and contribute to U.S. policy and strategy success.
In our capacity as the lead for Joint Proponency in Peace and Stability Operations, the
USAWC’s Peacekeeping and Stability Operations Institute (PKSOI) has been tasked to support
improvements in joint planner education with respect to stability operations. At the February 15
MECC, PKSOI committed to providing a series of resources to the JPME partners at the JFEC:
 Proposed community learning objectives for including stability in joint planner education
 A concise set of key references for faculty instructors use in course design
 Lesson plans that explain the importance of stability in military and U.S. success, and
methods for integrating stability into existing joint design and planning instruction.
 Case Studies that highlight the successful integration of stability into joint operations.
Attached is our coordinating draft of the first three items, along with a description of our ongoing
case study development efforts, for review and suggested improvements by the JPME-1
partners. Our intent is to collaborate with you to establish a community-accepted standard for
stability operations learning objectives, and to provide the resources required to fully integrate
stability into education for our future joint leaders and planners.
Please review the attached resources and provide you recommendations for changes and
improvements by 1 Aug 15 for development of a final draft that will be provided back for
discussion in September. Discussions and comments are welcome with the project lead
(undersigned) via phone at (717) 245-3524 or electronically at james.h.embrey.civ@mail.mil .
Respectfully,
James H. Embrey
Professor for Stability Operations
Peacekeeping and Stability Operations
Institute, USAWC
Enclosures: 5

Coordinating Draft (29 Jul 15)
Proposed Learning Objectives: Stability in Design and Planning for Joint Operations
As part joint proponency efforts, PKSOI proposes for consideration and approval by the JPME
community the following learning objectives for stability operations as part of joint design and
planning:
1. Understand the importance of stability operations in overall U.S. strategic success.
• U.S. and DoD policy guidance on stability and the role of military forces
• Integration into current Combatant Command strategy and operations
2. Analyze how stability is included into joint design and planning across the Range of
Military Operations.
• Joint Operating Concepts and Doctrine for SO – key missions, tasks and
capabilities
• Major mission sets across the ROMO – how stabilization efforts enable strategic
and operational success
• Operational design - how current principles apply to stability efforts across a
variety of joint operations (SC/SFA, FHA, PO, FID, COIN, and MCO’s)
• Including stability considerations and tasks into all phases of a joint operation
3. Analyze leader challenges in the “stabilize” aspects of joint operations through the use of
historical examples and case studies.
• Analyzing the OE and collaborating with partners to develop a shared
understanding with civilian partners focused on conflict analysis
• Developing unity of purpose with interagency and multinational partners
• Conducting design and planning – developing “stabilize” aspect of objectives,
mission/commander’s intent, and tasks
• Collaboration and Coordination with other JIIM elements during planning and
operations – operating with/alongside one another in a “shared space” to enable
host nation “stability” success
• Best Practices, challenges and pitfalls identified
Please forward comments/suggestions to Dr James Embrey, Professor for Stability Operations,
PKSOI, (717) 345-3524, james.h.embrey.civ@mail.mil

Coordinating Draft (28 Jun 15)
Top 20 References for Stability in Joint Operations: Suggested Resources for
Professional Military Educators
Current joint education provides excellent instruction in operational art, design and planning with
respect to warfighting challenges in delivering decisive force through offensive and defensive
operations. However, as joint doctrine notes, integrating stability operations (SO) is the third
essential part of a balanced operational approach and integrated plan that accomplishes military
success while contributing to broader U.S. policy and strategy success.
As part of its joint proponency support mission, the Peacekeeping and Stability Operations
Institute (PKSOI) has developed a short bibliography of references that can support JPME
course and faculty instructor preparation. The following reference presents what PKSOI
considers to be the “Top 20” references for use by educators and practitioners for use as a
“baseline” for developing a general understanding of SO and how best to integrate key
principles and considerations into design and planning. The list of references is divided into
categories according to JIIM and functional areas, providing the core resources (highlighted
below) that are accompanied in several cases by additional supplemental readings for additional
understanding.
This listing is not intended to be comprehensive, but rather a start point for those not familiar
with stability efforts to develop an appreciation for the role, contributions, principles and
practices for SO. For those desiring a more comprehensive bibliography, PKSOI’s Knowledge
Management Division maintains a wealth of unclassified and shareable readings, studies,
operational reports, techniques, and lessons learned that can be access through the Stability
Operations Lessons Learned Information Management System (SOLLIMS) at www.pksoi.org.
Finally, the best source for compiling a useful listing is by feedback and contributions from its
users. PKSOI appreciates and encourages recommendations for improving this listing, and for
increasing the depth, breadth and quality through direct comments (PoC’s below) or entry into
SOLLIMS. It is our intent to update and republish this “Top 20” listing on a recurring basis, so
feedback and improvements are key.
The following listing has been prepared by Mr Robert Kumpf, Research Associate, PKSOI with
the guidance and support of Mr Chris Browne, Knowledge Management Branch, PKSOI. For
suggested improvements and questions on additional resources, please contact the Stability
and Proponency Division, US Army Peacekeeping and Stability Operations Institute, at
www.pksoi.mil. PoC for future revision is Dr James Embrey, Professor of Stability Operations,
(717) 245-3524, james.h.embrey.civ@mail.mil.

Top 20 Core References for Stability Operations As of 28 Jun 15
Joint Operations
1. Stability Operations, Joint Publication 3-07, 29 September 2011. Stability operations
are “the various military missions, tasks, and activities conducted outside the US in coordination
with other government agencies to maintain or reestablish a safe and secure environment,
provide essential governmental services, emergency infrastructure reconstruction, and
humanitarian relief.” This JP provides guidance for the design, planning and conduct of stability
operations with interagency and multinational partners.
2. Stabilization, Security, Transition and Reconstruction Operations, Major Combat
Operations Joint Operating Concepts, December 2006. This JOC supplements the Stability
Operations JOC Version 2.0 (2004), and provides the broad, overarching concept of how the full
range of joint military support provided in foreign countries across the ROMO can play a key
role in enabling U.S. strategic success by supporting U.S. partners in a state or region under
severe stress or undergoing failure of its government and security institutions due to either a
natural or man-made disaster.
Supplemental References for Breadth and Depth:
- Security Cooperation, Joint Publication 3-20, Revised Draft #2, Publication Date
Pending. This publication will serve as the US Armed Forces’ guide to security
cooperation operations, as provided by the DoD through the Joint Staff. This JP will
provide most current information on SC planning, design and assessment that contribute
to stability among partner countries.
- Foreign Humanitarian Assistance, Joint Publication 3-29, 03 January 2014. FHA
consists of overseas DOD activities to directly relieve or reduce human suffering,
disease, hunger or privation. The JP focuses on military integration with other US and
multinational partners.
- Peace Operations, Joint Publication 3-07.3, 01 August 2012. These operations include
peacekeeping, peace building in post-conflict actions, peacemaking processes, conflict
prevention, and peace enforcement; chapter 1 focuses on design and planning.
- Foreign Internal Defense, Joint Publication 3-22, 12 July 2010. Focuses on activities
that support the host nation’s Internal Defense and Development Strategy with key
stabilizing aspects. Pending the publication of JP 3-20, this pub also contains Security
Cooperation as well.
- Counterinsurgency Operations, Joint Publication 3-24, 22 November 2013. Describes
comprehensive civ-mil efforts designed to simultaneously defeat and contain insurgency
and address root causes. Focus of chapter 3 is on fundamentals of integrating civilian
and joint operations to counter insurgencies.
- Civil-Military Operations, Joint Publication 3-57, 11 September 2013. Focuses on
activities by designated civil affairs or other military forces that establish, maintain,
influence, or exploit relationships with indigenous populations and institutions, to
reestablish or maintain stability.

Stability Operation Across the Military Services
Army:
3. Stability, Army Doctrine Reference Publication 3-07, 31 August 2012. This source is
an in-depth reference guide to the army’s stability operations doctrine. This publication is useful
in understanding the army’s role as the major ground force component of the US military when
engaged in warfare and operations other than war.
4. Stability Operations, Army Techniques Publication 3-07.5, 31 August 2012. This
source is an in-depth techniques and procedures guide to the army’s stability operations. This
publication is useful in understanding the army’s role as the major ground force component of
the US military when engaged in stability operations and highlights the planning considerations
required for successful intervention.
Supplemental Army References for Breadth and Depth
- Stability, Army Doctrine Publication 3-07, 31 August 2012. This source is the basis of
US Army stability operations doctrine. This publication explains the Army’s role in
stability operations, including unique operational and planning considerations that are of
strategic interest.
- Stability Operations, Field Manual 3-07, 02 June 2014. This source is the US Army’s
field manual dealing with stability operations. This provided valuable insight into the
required planning, design and assessment tools needed for a successful stabilization
intervention.
- Army Support to Security Cooperation, Field Manual 3-22, 22 January 2013. This
source is the US Army’s field manual dealing with the army’s support for security
cooperation. This provided valuable insight into the required planning, design and
assessment tools needed for a successful security cooperation plan that fits hand-in-
glove with stability operations.
- “Developing an Army Strategy for Building Partner Capacity for Stability Operations”,
RAND Corporation Arroyo Center, 2010. This document provides empirical analysis of
the US Army’s capabilities (in 2007) to establish and maintain partnerships with foreign
military and government leadership in order to conduct successful stability operations.
This study, sponsored by DA G3, provides critical analysis of challenges faced by the
American military as well as important observations regarding planning and design of
army-led stability operations.
Naval/Marine Corps:
5. Maritime Stability Operations, Naval Warfare Publication 3-07, 25 May 2012. (NOTE:
This is also MCIP 3-33.02 and COMDTINST M3120.11 for the Marine Corps and Coast Guard,
respectively.) This source is the maritime element of the US stability operations plan, which
governs the US Navy, Coast Guard and Marine Corps. This provides perspectives on joint
maritime component operations that includes Navy-Marine efforts to enable maritime operations
that counter instability through security, FHA, and other efforts to enable joint and USG success.

Air Force:
6. Stability Operations, Air Force Policy Directive 10-43, 25 October 2013. This directive
outlines the Service’s stability operating guidelines as well as planning considerations as per
DODI 3000.05. The policy highlights that the Air Force will continue support all other military and
USG stability operations as per DOD directives.
US Government and Department of Defense Guidance:
7. Department of Defense Instruction 3000.05, Stability Operations, 16 September 2009.
This instruction sets DoD Policy for the services by emphasizing the importance of stability
operations to US policy and strategy success, and requiring military forces that ensure equal
emphasis on developing and maintain capabilities for stability operations that are equal to those
for combat operations. Joint forces are also to be prepared to conduct a broad range of
operations to stabilize either in support of other civilian agencies, or conduct efforts where
civilian capacity does not exist or cannot operate (due to security challenges) to maintain or
reestablish a safe and secure environment, provide essential governmental services,
emergency infrastructure reconstruction, and humanitarian relief.
Supplemental References for Breadth and Depth
- Security Sector Assistance Policy, Presidential Policy Directive 23, 05 April 2013.
Provides current POTUS guidance on strengthening the ability of the United States to
help allies and partner nations build their own security capacity, consistent with the
principles of good governance and rule of law – all key elements of stability operations.
- Irregular Warfare, Department of Defense Instruction 3000.07, 28 August 2014.
Irregular Warfare is defined as any operation that includes any relevant DoD activity and
operation such as counterterrorism; unconventional warfare; foreign internal defense;
counterinsurgency; and stability operations that, in the context of IW, involve establishing
or re-establishing order in a fragile state or territory.
- Mission Revolution by Jennifer Morrison Taw. New York: Columbia University Press,
2012. A former RAND analyst overviews the development of DoD and joint stability
operations capabilities over the past two decades in Chapters 1-3.
Interagency Core References
8. Guiding Principles for Stabilization and Reconstruction, USIP and PKSOI, 2009. This
guide was produced as the “informal interagency guidelines” for stability operations by the US
Army PKSOI and the US Institute for Peace. This provides an overview of the recurring
principles for US government success in the planning, design and assessment of stability
operations, based upon the analysis of a broad range of efforts over past decades.
9. 3D Planning Guide: Diplomacy, Development, Defense, 31 July 2012. This
collaborative framework developed by DOD, USAID and DOS presents the common elements
for planning amongst the 3D’s within an integrated USG effort. This publication provides
valuable insights into the differing planning considerations and processes across USG element.
This Guide is maintained in draft as a living document for continued discussion and
development of cooperation across agencies.

- Conflict Assessment Framework Version 2.0, USAID, June 2012. This document is the
USAID’s framework for assessing local conflict dynamics; valuable for situational
awareness with USAID, and in conflict transformation planning.
- Interagency Conflict Assessment Framework, Version 2.0, US Department of State,
2014. Conflict assessment framework developed for country team and general
interagency use as a follow-on to the original ICAF that provided the center-piece
analysis for the Interagency Management System’s “Whole of Government Planning”
process. Current version incorporates many aspects of the USAID CAF, but focuses
more on political and power group actor dynamics than the OE of conflict. Forms the
basis for Bureau of Conflict and Stabilization Operations at DoS.
- The Quest for Viable Peace, Chapter 3 (Advanced Political-Military Planning), US
Institute of Peace, 4th edition 2009. The book provides an interesting case study of U.S.
and multinational planning for the U.S and NATO led intervention into Kosovo in 1999.
As a Dep Asst Secretary of State, Mr Hawley played a key role in conducting “advanced
political-military planning,” for U.S. intervention planning in a JIIM environment which
included all major aspects of stability operations.
- America’s Role in Nation-Building: From Germany to Iraq, by James Dobbins. RAND
Corporation, 2003. This historical study conducted in conjunction with DOD examines
20th
Century US government reconstruction efforts from Germany to Afghanistan. This
work outlines the recurring considerations, challenges, and lessons learned across civ-
mil design and planning, with specific discussions of several of the stability functions
outlined in JP 3-07 and USIP’s Guiding Principles.
Multinational Operations:
10. UN Peacekeeping Operations Capstone Doctrine, United Nations, 2008. This
publication serves as the UN’s “capstone doctrine” regarding the reformation of UN
peacekeeping operations doctrine to better serve the current operational environment. This
doctrine now serves as the UN’s primary guideline for peacekeeping and stability operations
throughout the world.
11. Considerations for Mission Leadership in United Nations Peacekeeping Operations,
United Nations, 2010. This guidebook for civilian and military leaders in UN peacekeeping
operations, includes perspective on Integrated Planning, Assessment Tools, and Prioritization/
Sequencing.
12. Integrated Assessment and Planning Handbook, United Nations, December 2013.
This publication explains the UN’s integrated assessment and planning process for design and
planning from the strategic (UN, New York and Security Council) through Operational
(Integrated Mission Team for specific peacekeeping operations), and show how assessments,
design and planning work within a United Nations international peace operations construct.
This is the companion manual to JP 5-0, and is useful to joint planners in understanding the
approaches and methods when working with or alongside UN missions.

- UN Peacekeeping in Civil Wars by Lise Morje Howard. Cambridge, England: Cambridge
University Press, 2008. This publication is a balanced exploration of the history of
United Nations peacekeeping missions that highlights both the successes as well as the
challenges and failures of UN PK efforts. This source provides views of how UN efforts
are effective and provides insights where new planning, design and assessment tools for
future US -led peace operations can be developed.
- Designing Mandates and Capabilities for Future Peace Operations, International Forum
on the Challenges of Peace Operations. Stockholm, Sweden: Taberg Media Group,
2014. This publication offers valuable insight to the design and capabilities for future
peacekeeping and stability operations. Chapters 3 (policies and practices for UNPK) and
5 (assessment) are particularly valuable to operational and strategic planners.
- “Five Paradoxes of Peace Operations,” by Richard Gowan. Policy Briefing for the Zif
Center for International Peace Operations, September 2011. The German peace
operations institution Zif explores the paradoxical existence of organizations such as the
UN in regard to peacekeeping operations across five major topic areas and provides
insightful analysis of the issues facing global peacekeeping operations.
- “Peacekeeping under Strain: Coping with Evolving Contradictions,” by Tim Guildman.
Peace and Conflict Review. Volume 4, Issue 2. 2010. Offers commentary on recurring
challenges that face peacekeepers as part of stability operations, and provides insight
on how operations have been successful and unsuccessful due to competing national
interests, domestic and international political strains, and cultural misunderstandings.
- “The US Role in Contemporary Peace Operations: A Double Edged Sword?” by Ian
Johnstone and Ethan Corbin International Peacekeeping. London, England: Routledge
Publishing, 05 March 2008. This commentary explores the complicated task that US
leaders have to consider when planning for, designing and attempting to assess Peace
Operations as part of joint stability operations. It highlights the difficulties that the US
faces in the world we are able (and willing) to lead within the peacekeeping community
without unduly forcing our national interests upon our partners and the host nation.
- High- Level Independent Panel on Peace Operations: Uniting Our Strengths for Peace-
Politics, Partnerships and People, United Nations, 01 June 2015. Most current
assessment by the United Nations on the challenges and options for future international
peacekeeping. The Panel explores how the spread of violent extremism, overlaid onto
long-simmering local or regional conflicts and the growing aspirations of populations for
change, is placing pressure on governments and the international system to respond. As
UN peace operations struggle to achieve their objectives, the Panel concludes that
major changes are required to adapt and ensure their increased PK effectiveness and
appropriate use in future.
- Comprehensive Approach- EUCOM Planning Handbook Common Planning Framework,
US European Command, September 2012. Combatant Command J9 views on
employing a comprehensive approach to planning and operations among European
partners (particularly NATO). Includes design and planning considerations of joint
planners at the CCMD and JTF levels.

- Capability Development in Support of Comprehensive Approaches: Transforming
International Civil- Military Interactions, NATO, December 2011. This NATO publication
explores the ever-changing world of international civil- military interaction in an effort to
develop comprehensive approaches to joint operations. This is a useful design template
for joint stability ops planning within a “comprehensive approach.”
Stability Functions – References for Each Sector:
Security Function:
13. Security Force Assistance Planner’s Guide, JCIFSA, 14 February 2008. (Revised
Draft available, dated May 2014). This is a valuable handbook for joint planners as it includes
both SFA and security sector reform. The current (2008) version is being revised with improved
tools for planning, situational awareness and baseline assessment considerations.
14. The American Military Advisor: Dealing with Senior Foreign Officials in the Islamic
World, PKSOI and USAWC Strategic Studies Institute, August 2008. This short monograph
written by a career Foreign Service Officer describes the roles and challenges for US military
advisors, specifically in Islamic countries. It includes valuable insights into cross-cultural
understanding, leadership, character and intellectual ability in those who serve as military
advisors to foreign leaders.
Supplemental Security References for Breadth and Depth
- Protection of Civilians Military Reference Guide, PKSOI, January 2013. Protection of
Civilians must be considered and integrated during all military operations, including
peace support ops and major combat ops during armed conflict. Civilians are protected
persons under international law, and parties to a conflict have a legal obligation to
protect civilians from the conflicts effects. This is a vital consideration for joint stability
ops planners when considering operational design.
- Special Report: The Link between DDR and SSR in Conflict-Affected Countries, USIP,
May 2010. This special report explains the links between DDR and SSR in regard to
post-conflict operations, and highlights the importance of both as they complement each
other in stopping violent conflict and preventing its return. Key sections discuss the
challenges in implementing the two systems as well as recommendations
implementation and success in future operations.
Governance Function:
15. Transitional Governance: From Bullets to Ballots, USIP, July 2003. Effective
transitional governance is one of the most formidable challenges facing stabilization missions in
war-torn, failed states. Peace can be sustained only when power is attained through political
rather than violent means and when government institutions are legitimate. Key for planners are
their analysis of challenges and imperative for civ-mil efforts during future operations.
16. Handbook for Military Support to Governance, Elections and Media, JFCOM, 11
February 2010. Prior to the publication by JFCOM of a series of stability function handbooks,
the last comprehensive guide to military governance and transitional military authority was written
in 1943. The Handbook was developed for use in Iraq and Afghanistan, and analyzes the
challenges and efforts that joint forces are involved in as they rebuild governance and media

institutions, support election preparations, and provide advisors to national ministries and
legislative committees. As with the other 4 handbooks in the series, it provides pre-doctrinal
techniques and procedures for joint force planning and support to build legitimate governance
and media. (Note: this Handbook is currently being maintained/updated for use by PKSOI)
Supplemental Governance References for Breadth and Depth
- Decentralization and Democratic Local Governance Programming Handbook, USAID,
May 2000. This older handbook is still a very useful, practical guide for country-level
planners who must develop decentralized and democratic local governance. Drawing on
15 years of USAID experience in post-Cold War democracy promotion and on four
decades of municipal development work, it provides a conceptual framework, guidance
for successful program development strategies, developing entry points and tactics for
design and implementation, and mission monitoring and evaluation.
- “Guide to Rebuilding Governance in Stability Operations: A Role for the Military?”
PKSOI, June 2009. This guide examines an intervening force’s role in creating a
functional state that can deliver services effectively, is responsive and accountable to its
citizens, and capable of assuring security. For each of these three areas, the guide
summarizes key issues, trade-offs, and options for military planners on the restoration
and rebuilding of government. Its recommendations are drawn from both from theory
and the experiences of military and civilian practitioners in a variety of missions.
- “Establishing Good Governance in Fragile States through Reconstruction Projects:
Lessons from Iraq”. Global Economy and Development at Brookings. Working Paper 56,
January 2013. This publication highlights the lessons learned from post- conflict Iraq in
regard to the establishment of good, legitimate governance through reconstruction
projects. This source highlights what went well and what failed miserably in Iraq; it also
highlights the need for clear, intensive communications between donors and host
government officials as well as the need for clear planning and design by the US
government.
- The Government Assistance Center: A Vehicle for Transitioning to the Host
Government, PKSOI, May 2011. This paper provides a new approach to developing
legitimate governance through creating “government assistance centers” which are the
nexus between governance assistance, rule of law development, and security sector
reform within host nation assistance programs for the USG in an effort to build partner
institutional capacity and transition efforts to a sovereign and stable host nation.
Humanitarian Assistance and Providing Emergency Essential Services:
17. Handbook for Military Assistance to Essential Services and Critical Infrastructure,
JFCOM, 02 February 2010. This handbook outlines and provides approaches for planning
and restoring services essential to sustain human life during stability operations (water,
sanitation, transportation, medical, etc.), and the required physical and systems infrastructure
needed to deliver such services. It provides analysis of joint force considerations and
responsibilities in working alongside USAID, NGO and multinational actors, and provides
planners insights on working with civil affairs and sustainment forces that are coordinating and
supporting emergency services and restoration of critical infrastructure missions. (Note: this
Handbook is currently being maintained/updated for use by PKSOI)

18. “Guidelines for Relations between US Armed Forces and Non-Governmental
Humanitarian Organizations in Hostile or Potentially Hostile Environments,” by USIP and
the DOD, 2007. These mutual developed guidelines by USIP, DoD and INTERACTION (as the
representative of the U.S. humanitarian NGO community) are intended to facilitate interaction
between DoD and U.S. based humanitarian relief efforts in hostile or potentially hostile environments.
(For the purposes of these guidelines, such organizations are referred to as Non-Governmental
Humanitarian Organizations, or NGHOs.) While the guidelines were developed between the
Department of Defense (DOD) and Interaction, DOD intends to observe these guidelines in its
dealings with the broader humanitarian assistance community.
Supplemental Governance References for Breadth and Depth
- USAID Field Operations Guide, September 2005. The FOG contains information on
general responsibilities for disaster responders, formats and reference material for
assessing and reporting on populations at risk, Disaster Assistance Response Teams
(DART) organization and duty checklists, descriptions of OFDA stockpile commodities,
general information related to disaster activities, information on working with the military
in the field, and a glossary of acronyms and terms used by OFDA and other
organizations with which OFDA works.
- ‘Minimum Standards in Humanitarian Response,” UN Sphere Project, United Nations,
2011. The UN Humanitarian Charter and minimum standards reflect the determination
of international and humanitarian agencies to improve both effectiveness of assistance
through a practical framework for accountability. These are essential in dealing with
response to humanitarian crises by establishing minimum-essential, common standards
across responding agencies to preserve and safeguard populations affected by disaster.
Rule of Law and Civil Security/Policing:
19. Rule of Law Handbook, US Army Judge Advocate General, 2011. This Army Judge
Advocate General’s (JAG) is a useful cross-service guide to assessing, developing and
supporting rule of law efforts during integrated civil-military operations. It outlines ROL
requirements and challenges as a basis for joint support civil capacity development.
Supplemental Rule of Law References for Breadth and Depth
- Handbook for Military Support to Rule of Law and Security Sector Reform, JFCOM, 13
June 2011. This handbook provides considerations and planning approaches for
military support to rule of law development and security sector reform in post-conflict
situations. Chapter 1 (Introduction and Overview), provides “Current Military Guidance to
ROL Support” and integration into “Unified Actions”; Chapter III (Planning) provides key
aspects of assessing and developing RoL support in joint stability operations. (Note: this
Handbook is currently being maintained/updated for use by PKSOI)
- "Legal, Judicial and Administrative Reforms in Post-Conflict Societies: Beyond the Rule
of Law Template." Journal of Conflict & Security Law 12, no. 1, Spring 2007. 65-93. This
resource highlights the legal, judicial and administrative reforms necessary to construct
successful post-conflict societies. This is a valuable source of information for joint
planners who will need to consider ROL in their operational planning.

- United Nations Rule of Law Index. Website:
www.un.org/en/ruleoflaw/index.shtml, Accessed 18 June 2015. Recurring
assessment of international rule of law efforts, to include peacekeeping missions.
Provides information on UN international rule of law publications.
Economic Stabilization:
20. “Handbook for Military Support to Economic Stabilization,” JFCOM, 27 February
2010. This handbook outlines the key concepts, principles and practices underlying joint force
support to economic development. It addresses conducting a comprehensive economic
assessment, employment and business generation, trade, agriculture, financial sector
development and regulation, and legal transformation. It also discusses integration of short-term
military efforts with USAID and other international partner economic recovery and development
operations. (Note: this Handbook is currently being maintained/updated for use by PKSOI)
Supplemental Rule of Law References for Breadth and Depth
- A Guide to Economic Growth in Post-Conflict Countries, United States Agency for
International Development, January 2009. This publication serves as the USAID’s
guide to post-conflict economic development in war-torn regions. This guide is critical
for the understanding of USAID operations, pay special attention to Chapter IV
(Prioritizing and Timing) and Chapter IV (Infrastructure) as these chapters give
insight to joint planners regarding USAID’s priorities and the mission that will most
likely involve US military elements, respectively.

Lesson # ______ Date (Hours of Instruction)
Lesson Authors: Faculty Instructor
Lesson ___: Stability in Joint Operations and Their Role in US Strategic Success
Mode: Seminar
We will strengthen U.S. and international capacity to prevent conflict among and within
states…. Within state, the nexus of weak governance and widespread grievance allows
extremism to take root, violent non-state actors to rise up, and conflict to overtake state
structures. To meet these challenges, we will continue to work with partners and
through multilateral organizations to address the root causes of conflict before they
erupt and to contain and resolve them when they do.”
National Security Strategy, 2015
“Stability operations are a core U.S. military mission that the DoD shall be prepared to
conduct and with proficiency equivalent to combat operations…. [DoD shall be prepared
to} conduct stability activities throughout all phases of conflict and across the range of
military operations, including in combat and non-combat environments … [that] may
range from small-scale, short duration to large-scale, long duration.”
DoD Instruction 3000.05, 16 Sep 09
[The] United States will emphasize non-military means and military-to-military
cooperation to address instability …. [and] be ready to conduct limited
counterinsurgency and other stability operations if required, operating alongside
coalition forces wherever possible. Accordingly, [they] will retain and continue to refine
the lessons learned, expertise, and specialized capabilities that have been developed
over the past ten years….
Defense Strategic Guidance, 2012
“Repeating an Afghanistan or an Iraq … is probably unlikely in the foreseeable future.
What is likely though, even a certainty, is the need to work with and through local
governments to avoid the next insurgency, to rescue the next failing state, or to head off
the next humanitarian disaster….”
Former SecDef Robert M. Gates
_________________________________
1. Introduction. The purpose of this lesson is to present the integral principles and
concepts that guide joint efforts to maintain or regain stability in areas of strategic
interest to the United States.
“Stability Operations,” i.e. integrated civilian and military operations to stabilize in
countries and areas according to strategic direction provided by U.S. senior leaders, are
not new. In fact, they have been an embedded and essential part of wars and conflicts
where the United States have sought to ensure that the results of military operations to

deter or defeat adversaries can enable “conflict winning” changes in political, economic,
and security conditions that sustain strategic success and prevent the return of future
conflicts. However, the continued focus on short-term “decisive” operations has tended
to obscure the point that sustainable success is not only in defeating the adversary’s
military capabilities or removing violent threats, but also in conducting operations to
stabilize and transform political and security conditions for long-term US success.
Recent experiences in Iraq, Afghanistan, and Africa have reinforced that we must
balance short term actions to defeat with long term success in stability. Additionally, our
experience over the last decade of increasing global security challenges have shown
that the military must take an active role in designing, planning and conducting
integrated civil-military action in areas dominated by violence and instability; our ability
during contingency operations to conduct effective, enhanced interagency coordination
have been critical to conducting focused military operations with capable, tailored forces
that can establish essential conditions as well as enable interagency and multinational
efforts essential to overall mission success. As such, we must be able to design and
plan joint operations across the Range of Military Operations to both employ “decisive
force” to defeat enemies and adversaries who threaten the U.S. and our allies, but also
to employ “decisive forces,” that can accomplish and enable our strategic success even
without the conduct of combat operations.
This lesson provides the essential context for understanding why and how stability
efforts are integrated into joint operations where strategic direction requires U.S. military
operations to accomplish tasks beyond military defeat and destruction of our enemies.
Additionally, the key points of this lesson provide the strategic and operational “so what”
that illustrate why design and planning for the stability aspects of a joint operation are
essential to ensuring the advantages gained by military operations can readily be
combined with civilian efforts (by the USG, multinational partners and the host nation) to
transform the conflict and attain lasting change in governance, security and economic
areas that enable U.S. strategic success across the ROMO.
By the conclusion of this lesson, our goal is to ensure your understanding of 1) the
importance of maintaining, retaining and restoring stability in U.S. policy and strategy
abroad, 2) why joint operations in conflict environments must include a balance of
offense, defense and stability tasks that continue dynamically throughout all phases of a
campaign/operation, and 3) how planning accomplished through integrated civil-military
collaboration and cooperation are essential to synchronize and incorporate the
elements of national power for overall US success.
2. Learning Objectives. To enable students to:
a. Understand U.S. policy and strategy that direct civilian and military efforts in
stability operations.
b. Understand how joint operations to stabilize are key elements of joint
effectiveness across the ROMO.

c. Analyze the key elements of joint operating concepts and doctrine for stability
operations, and how these form the core principles behind integrated civilian
– military design and planning.
3. Student Requirements.
a. Tasks.
(1) Complete the required readings
(2) Be prepared to discuss the points to consider and assigned readings.
(3) Participate and contribute during assigned presentations/small group work
b. Required Readings.
(1) REVIEW (if already covered in the course)
a. Joint Publication (JP) 3-0, “Joint Operations,” 11 Aug 11; Chapter I,
Joint Fundamentals, pp 2-5; Chapter V, Joint Operations Across
the Range of Military Operations (ROMO), pp 4-5, 35- 41, 50, and
59-64.
b. JP 5-0, Joint Operations Planning,” Chapter III, Operational Art and
Design, pp 13-15 and 28-31.
(2) Strategic Guidance:
a. National Security Strategy, February 2015, pp 9-11, 20, and 22-23.
https://www.whitehouse.govhttps://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/defau
lt/files/docs/2015_national_security_strategy.pdf
b. Defense Strategy Guidance, “Sustaining U.S. Global Leadership:
Priorities for 21st
Century Defense,” January, 2012. pp i – ii, and pp
4-6. Accessed at
http://www.defense.gov/news/Defense_Strategic_Guidance.pdf
(3) Theater Campaign Strategy for Combatant Commands (students will read
one of the following based upon instructor guidance):
a. Commander’s Posture Statement, United States Central
Command, 5 Mar 2015. Accessed at
http://www.centcom.mil/en/about-centcom-en/commanders-
posture-statement-en

b. “Fact Sheet: USPACOM Strategy,” United State Pacific Command.
Accessed at
http://www.pacom.mil/AboutUSPACOM/USPACOMStrategy.aspx
c. US AFRICOM Brief, United States Africa Command, 2014. Review
slides 9 – 11 on Instability and Theater Campaign Concept.
Accessed at
http://www..africom.mil%2Fnewsroom%2Fdocument%2F23774%2
Fafricom-command-brief-2014&ei=yRqPVZnnOcWs-
QHWjo44&usg=AFQjCNEST6GziFeo4zKYkHirrP2g0pmiAA
(4) DoD Instruction 3000.05, “Stability Operations,” Office of the
Undersecretary for Defense (Policy), 16 Sep 09, pp 1-3.
(5) Joint Publications:
a. “Military Support to Stabilization, Security, Transition, and
Reconstruction Operations Joint Operations Concept,” Version 2.0,
December 2006, read pp i – vi, and scan pp vii – x.
b. JP 3-07, Stability Operations, 29 September 2011, Executive
Summary, pp vii – xi; Chapter I, read pp 1- 9 and 13-22, scan the
remainder.
4. Supplemental Readings. For depth and breadth on policy, strategy and
operations:
a. Taw, Jennifer Morrison. Mission Revolution. New York, NY: Columbia
University Press, 2012. Analysis by a former RAND analyst that
overviews the development of DoD and joint stability operations
capabilities over the past two decades (Chapters 1-3).
b. Guiding Principles for Stabilization and Reconstruction, USIP and PKSOI,
2009. This was produced as the “informal interagency guidelines” for
stability operations by the US Army PKSOI and the US Institute for Peace.
This provides an overview of the recurring principles for US government
success in the planning, design and assessment of stability operations,
based upon the analysis of a broad range of efforts over past decades.
c. 3D Planning Guide: Diplomacy, Development, Defense, USAID, DoS and
DOD, 31 July 2012 (Draft). This collaborative framework developed by
DOD, USAID and DOS presents the common elements for planning
amongst the 3D’s within an integrated USG effort. This publication
provides valuable insights into the differing planning considerations and
processes across USG element. This Guide is maintained in draft as a

living document for continued discussion and development of cooperation
across agencies.
d. Considerations for Mission Leadership in United Nations Peacekeeping
Operations, United Nations, 2010. This guidebook for civilian and military
leaders in UN peacekeeping operations, includes perspectives on
Integrated Planning, Assessment Tools, and Prioritization/ Sequencing
e. Joint Operations Across the ROMO:
1) Foreign Humanitarian Assistance, Joint Publication 3-29, 03 January
2014. FHA consists of overseas DOD activities to directly relieve or
reduce human suffering, disease, hunger or privation. The JP focuses
on military integration with other US and multinational partners.
2) Peace Operations, Joint Publication 3-07.3, 01 August 2012. These
operations include peacekeeping, peace building in post-conflict
actions, peacemaking processes, conflict prevention, and peace
enforcement; chapter 1 focuses on design and planning.
3) Foreign Internal Defense, Joint Publication 3-22, 12 July 2010.
Focuses on activities that support the host nation’s Internal Defense
and Development Strategy with key stabilizing aspects. Pending the
publication of JP 3-20, this pub also contains Security Cooperation as
well.
4) Counterinsurgency Operations, Joint Publication 3-24, 22 November
2013. Comprehensive civ-mil efforts designed to simultaneously
defeat and contain insurgency and address root causes. Focus of
chapter 3 is on fundamentals of integrating civilian and joint operations
to counter insurgencies.
5) Civil- Military Operations, Joint Publication 3-57, 11 September 2013.
Focuses on activities by designated civil affairs or other military forces
that establish, maintain, influence, or exploit relationships with
indigenous populations and institutions, to reestablish or maintain
stability.
4. Points to Consider.
a. How do military stability operations play a major role in supporting USG policy
and strategy success?
b. Why are stability operations undertaken across the ROMO and how do a
variety of joint operations (Foreign Humanitarian Assistance, Peace Ops, etc)

accomplish activities that support the success of the Combatant
Commander’s Theater Strategy?
c. How do joint forces integrate their efforts with Interagency and international
community partners in stability operations to ensure USG success?
d. How are stability considerations a key part of joint operations principles,
precepts and planning?
5. Relationship to Joint Professional Military Education (JPME) Learning Areas.
This lesson supports accomplishment of the following JPME-1 learning areas at the
Service Intermediate-Level College Level:
a. Learning Area 1, d.
b. Learning Area 2, a, b. c
c. Learning Area 3, a, b, c, d, g
d. Learning Area 4, a, b
e. Learning Area 6, a, d.
6. Relationship to institutional Learning Objectives (ILOs), Enduring and Special
Themes.
(TBD within Local/Service guidance)

Stability in Joint Operations and Their Role in US Strategic Success
FACULTY INSTRUCTOR LESSON GUIDE AND TIME SCHEDULE
Version 3, 28 Jun 15
1. Faculty Instructor Overview: The purpose of this lesson is to present the integral
principles and concepts that guide joint efforts to maintain or regain stability in areas of
strategic interest to the United States. Given our students’ extended experience in Iraq
and Afghanistan, they should already have a depth and breadth of understanding on the
challenges of establishing effective security, along with an appreciation that military
efforts alone cannot create sustainable conditions for the host nation to gain and
maintain stable governance and economic conditions that endure past our deployments.
With much counterinsurgency experience already, the goal of this lesson is to expand
student appreciation of how current and future military operations to “stabilize” are an
integral part of joint operations conducted across the entire Range of Military Operations
(ROMO), and an essential element of all phases of operations and campaigns. In all,
just as in combat operations, stability operations are an essential element in conflict
environments of creating and securing the favorable policy outcomes that frame the
operational approach for operations and campaigns. In all, while threatening or using
force can defeat adversaries and eliminate threats, stability operations enable the
“strategic so-what” set forth in Strategic Direction to ensure conflict conditions are
transformed that end violent conflict and effect the desired political change.
2. Lesson Objectives and Focus: Learning Objectives for this module are designed
to enable students to:
a. Understand U.S. policy and strategy that direct civilian and military efforts in
stability operations.
b. Understand how joint operations to stabilize are key elements of joint
effectiveness across the ROMO.
c. Analyze the key elements of joint operating concepts and doctrine for stability
operations, and how these form the core principles behind integrated civilian
– military design and planning.
Through a combination of instructor and student presentations and classroom
discussion, success in this lesson would be that students fully comprehend:
1) The importance of maintaining, retaining and restoring stability in U.S. policy
and strategy abroad,
2) Why joint operations in conflict environments must include a balance of
offense, defense and stability tasks that continue dynamically throughout all phases of a
campaign/operation, and

3) How design and planning accomplished through integrated civil-military
collaboration are essential to synchronize and incorporate the elements of national
power for overall US success.
3. Lesson Notes and Presentation: As noted many times over the last decade of war,
U.S. military capabilities alone cannot create the conditions necessary for states and
regions to prevent conflict as well as ensure order and stability in recovering from armed
conflict. Stability operations by joint forces are an integral part of joint operations
conducted across ROMO from security cooperation through contingency and major
operations that accomplish the Combatant Commander’s Campaign Strategy. In
conjunction with offensive and defensive operations designed to defeat adversaries,
stability operations – with military and civilian activities integrated and synchronized
throughout the pre-conflict, conflict, and post-conflict periods - are essential for creating
and securing the favorable policy outcomes specified by Strategic Direction for the use
of military forces.
Stability operations, i.e. integrated civilian and military operations to stabilize countries
and areas according to strategic direction provided by U.S. senior leaders, are not new.
In fact, they have been an embedded and essential part of wars and conflicts where the
United States have sought to ensure that the results of military operations to deter or
defeat adversaries can enable “conflict winning” changes in political, economic, and
security conditions that sustain strategic success and prevent the return of future
conflicts. However, the continued focus on short-term “decisive” operations has tended
to obscure the point that sustainable success is not only in defeating the adversary’s
military capabilities or removing violent threats, but also in conducting operations to
stabilize and transform the political and security conditions that support and enable
long-term US success.
Recent experiences in Iraq, Afghanistan, and Africa have reinforced that we must
balance short term actions to defeat with long term success in stability. Additionally, our
experience over the last decade of increasing global security challenges have shown
that the military must take an active role in designing, planning and conducting
integrated civil-military action in areas dominated by violence and instability; our ability
during contingency operations to conduct effective, enhanced interagency coordination
have been critical to conducting focused military operations with capable, tailored forces
that can establish essential conditions as well as enable interagency and multinational
efforts essential to overall mission success. As such, we must be able to design and
plan joint operations across the Range of Military Operations to both employ “decisive
force” to defeat enemies and adversaries who threaten the U.S. and our allies, but also
to employ “decisive forces,” that can accomplish and enable our strategic success even
without the conduct of combat operations.
This lesson provides the essential context for understanding why and how stability
efforts are integrated into joint operations where strategic direction requires U.S. military
operations to accomplish tasks beyond military defeat and destruction of our enemies.
Additionally, the key points of this lesson provide the strategic and operational “so what”
that enable students to understand why design and planning for the stability aspects of

a joint operation are essential to maintain the advantages gained by military operations
can readily be combined with civilian efforts (by the USG, multinational partners and the
host nation) to transform the conflict and attain lasting change in governance, security
and economic areas that enable U.S. strategic success across the ROMO.
4. Suggestions on Lesson Presentation: The lesson flows across three parts that
build upon one another by framing the importance of stability to enduring U.S. interests
abroad, followed by developing student understanding of the joint operating concept
and doctrine for stability. These lay the foundation for student discussions and analysis
of the principles underlying design and planning for a broad range of operations by the
joint force, from ongoing shaping as part of the Combatant Commanders “theater
strategy” through contingency operations that retain or restore stability. (NOTE: a slide
deck to support presentation of each of these parts is provided at Tab _TBP_ )
This lesson is proposed as a combination of instructor presentation/facilitated
discussion and student presentations for depth/breadth beyond the core lesson
readings. Therefore, it is essential that students complete all readings in order to
actively engage in discussion and achieve learning objectives. For those experienced in
COIN in recent years, this lesson can provide the strategic context for many of their
prior efforts; however, we cannot allow the discussion to dwell on past experiences and
frustrations with interagency partnering – building upon and moving past these
experiences to future efforts and solutions will be key. The proposed presentations will
provide a lot of background and context, but we need to make sure
discussions/critiques focus on joint challenges in design and planning along with
interagency partners to achieve and maintain stability across host nation government
and security efforts.
Part 1: Students will examine how “stability” is a focus of U.S. policy and
strategy around which Country Teams and Combatant Commands conduct ongoing
‘stabilization” efforts through engagement, development and cooperation programs
amongst our allies and partners. After course administration announcements, FI
covers the learning objectives and talks through an overview of the lesson flow/key
points. The FI then takes then reviews the joint definition of stability operations along
with a discussion of the key elements that support and enable USG civilian programs to
develop legitimate governance and its supporting institutions.
 Begin with (or review if already covered in the course) the inter-relationship of
Ends – Ways – Means construct as it applies to stability operations (slide
provided). Key point here is to emphasize the relationship of:
o Maintaining or restoring “stability” as a policy objective (Ends) for ongoing
USG efforts abroad through country-team efforts in steady-state and crisis
o Developing and implementing strategies for “stabilization” (Ways) on how
best to accomplish integrated civilian-military efforts in the long-term, and
o Conducting planned, purposeful efforts to “stabilize” (Means) through
integrated civilian programs and military operations.

 Discussion then transition how stability is a continuing, ongoing policy interest for
the U.S. government by discussing the key elements of stability included in the
National Security Strategy (NSS) and Defense Strategic Guidance which
emphasizes “Providing a Stabilizing Presence,” “Conduct of Stability and
Counterinsurgency Operations,” and “Conduct Humanitarian, Disaster Relief and
Other Operations.” Also, take time to clarify the most prevalent misperception
that “we will no long do stability operations” that arises out of the statement about
“not sizing for major post conflict operations”: the guidance notes that the
probability (for now) is low that the U.S. will engage in large-scale, major post-
conflict operations based on our mission – fatigue from the last decade, but it
does not say that joint forces should not anticipate, design and prepare for such
stability operations where the strategic and operational needs exist.
 Discussion should then transition to DoD Instruction 3000.05 that emphasizes
the Department’s support to USG efforts by 1) outlining SO importance and
defining of how the department’s senior civilian leadership envisions the need to
maintain balanced capabilities, i.e. “ proficiency equivalent to combat operations”;
2) recognizing that shortfalls will exist in civilian expeditionary capacity for
stabilization efforts (given the stand-down of the Civilian Response Corps and
Department of State’s leadership of the Interagency Management System under
NSPD-44), and that military forces must be prepared to fill these capacity gaps in
conflict environments where civilians cannot operate due to security concerns or
lack sufficient numbers/capabilities, and 3) designates several capabilities areas
where military forces must be prepared to fill gaps until USG, multinational or
host nation capacity is sufficient for them to assume the lead (with or without
continued military support).
 Discuss how the Theater Strategy of the Combatant Commands support USG
efforts through “Shaping” operations focused on “Stability” efforts through
Engagement, Security Cooperation, and Deterrence (JP 3-0, pp I-11, V-18).
Instructor will designate a CCMD theater strategy of their choice for students to
examine (suggestion made in the sample directive provided), and lead
discussion on how joint efforts to maintain stability are accomplished, and how
these “Phase Zero” efforts then set the stage for stability efforts planned as part
of crisis response, contingency (“named”) operations when needed to retain or
restore stability within key regions/countries.
Part 2: Students will then examine stability joint operating concepts and
doctrine for conducting operations to “stabilize” through integrated JIIM action. The
focus for this section will be on comprehending why and how joint force capabilities are
employed to “stabilize” to accomplish joint force commander intent for mission success.
 Provide a brief overview of the JOC’s for Stability (Version 2, 2004) and Military
Support to Stabilization, Security, Transition, and Reconstruction Operations
(Version 2, 2006) that describe how future JFC’s accomplish stability as part of
joint operations within a military campaign/operation (slide provided). Although
these concepts are undergoing review and potential update in 2016 by the joint

proponent, they still provide relevant, overarching concepts for operations across
a continuum from peace to crisis/conflict that assist partner nations that are
“under severe stress or [who have] collapsed due to either natural or manmade
disaster” because, quite simply, the problems of instability have not changed.
The JOC also provides a vision for the student on the strategic problem, central
idea behind, and operational “cases” where joint operations will take place to
advance U.S. interests. (SO JOC, Executive Summary, and SSTRO JOC, pp i -
v). Interesting point to highlight, is most of the current and potential contingency
operations for the joint force fall within these categories, many of which do not
involve direct combat ops. Also, many of the cases posited in 2004 in the SO
JOC anticipated the threats we are facing today, such as widespread challenges
to governance and stability in Libya, and the current ISIL threat which concept
developers saw (amazingly enough) as the “most likely” case for future threats to
stability and human security by 2014.
 Based upon this operational context, students will then analyze the doctrine set
forward in Chapter 1 of JP 3-07 “Stability Operations” that highlight the principles
for joint operations to “stabilize.” Key here is to highlight that stability ops are not
a specialized set of operations (planned by civilians, conducted by CA forces,
etc), but an integral part of joint operations (as described in JP 3-0) just the same
as offense and defense; thus, our focus is that we conduct joint operations with
specific activities and tasks that are designed and planned to “stabilize.”
o Review of points from JP 3-0 that outline SO as a “broad series of
operations” rather than a specific type (such as NEO) conducted across
the ROMO (JP 3-0, Chapter II and III). Also highlight that it is not just a
phase (IV) of joint ops, but a part of all phases of a joint operation
o Review the set of principles and precepts guide the stability aspects of
joint operations. For example, the “Principles of Joint Operations” and
“Precepts” (JP 3-0, pp I – 2 to 3, and JP 3-07, pp I -14 to 18) apply, and
highlight how some of these (Unity, Legitimacy, Perseverance, etc) are
especially important in stability efforts. Also highlight how several of the
Common Operating Precepts are key in stability areas as well.
o Building upon this discussion, then highlight the key principles from JP 3-
07 that link back to ensuring military operations accomplish and support
USG success, such as “Enable Political Settlements” and ” Maintaining
Legitimacy” that apply across civilian and military efforts.
o Finally, highlight how several stability ops concepts are integrated with
other joint processes. For example, conducting conflict analysis and
collaborating with Country Team civilian counterparts involved in conflict
analysis (such as USAID’s Conflict Assessment Framework) can improve
the clarity and utility of the Intelligence functions/Staff’s JIPOE and
PMESII analysis. Also, maintaining a focus ensuring “conflict
transformation” occurs (so that governance and security reform challenges
are addressed) and on starting with the host nation’s needs and capacity
to change in mind ensure that military forces are contributing to overall
success, and informs when conflict termination is possible (without
disabling USG long-term success).

Part 3: Finally, students will discuss and analyze how these concepts apply to
joint operations conducted across a variety of operations across the ROMO, and
not just as a follow-on to major combat operation in post-conflict (“Phase IV”). In the
final part of the lesson, the FI will lead the discussion on how joint operations balance
offense, defense and stability components across all phases, and how missions across
the ROMO include “various military missions, tasks and activities conducted … in
coordination with other elements of national power” to accomplish and support key
efforts to “stabilize.”
 Begin with a review of the military operations that joint forces must accomplish
across the ROMO from peace to war, and highlight that the definition of “stability
operations” is different – that it is “an umbrella term” for a variety of joint efforts
that build and/or reinforce partner capacity during ongoing “shape” efforts as part
of the combatant commander’s theater strategy, and as elements of mission
success in some (but not all) of the joint operations listed. The slide provided will
support this discussion, with highlights on the types of operations involving
stability tasks/activities. (JP 3-0, pp V-4 to 5, 35 – 38)
 Continue the discussion on the three major areas of focus for joint efforts to
“stabilize” across the ROMO – 1) to “maintain stability” during ongoing operations
to accomplish shaping as part of the theater strategy; 2) to “retain stability” as
part of integrated civilian-military efforts where governance and security
institutions are becoming fragile or potentially failing, and 3) to “restore stability”
where state failure has caused the loss of governance, services and security
areas formerly under its control. (NOTE: Slides supplied supports this
discussion.)
 Use the slides to discuss the these three areas across the ROMO and stability
activities/tasks highlighted in the various mission sets; challenge the students to
analyze how military efforts might support USG goals with respect to the host
nation, and defeat or neutralize threats by adversaries, both traditional and
irregular.
Lesson Summary and Transition: Conclude the lesson with a review of the major
learning points for the lesson, and highlight the key contributions that the joint military
action make to US strategic success, supported through the Combatant Commander’s
regional efforts. Suggest that instructors use the “5 Points” slide to summarize the key
points on how the Ends-Ways-Means are linked from national down to
operational/tactical levels to shape and ensure a more stable international environment
through supporting and enabling security success by our key partners abroad.
4. Readings and Potential Student Presentations: Required readings are focused
to give the students an understanding of the stability aspects of joint design and
planning elements, principles and processes, and how military and civilian efforts must
be brought together as an integrated effort for joint and overall U.S. mission success.

 If this is taught as a stand-alone lesson, have the students review the key
elements of JP 3-0 and JP 5-0 that then set up how stability is an embedded part
of joint operations, and utilizes the same principles, precepts, and processes as
all other parts of joint operations. This then sets the stage for discussions of how
best to integrate stability considerations and activities into these standing
processes, and not conducting a separate stability ops planning process.
 Several readings illustrate how stability and stabilization are key elements of US
policy and strategy as outlined in the initial discussion on ensuring the balance of
End-Way-Means. The selected portions of the NSS and DSG highlight the
importance of maintaining or restoring stability as a key element of USG policy
and strategy. In turn, this importance then set up the discussion of DODI 3000.05
on why stability is required to be of equal emphasis and importance to combat
operations. Finally, the short excerpts of the key elements of our various
Combatant Commands show how the national policy/strategy emphasis on
stability is integrated into the various Theater Campaign Strategies.
 The cornerstone readings for this lesson are DoD Instruction 3000.05, “Stability
Operations”, and JP 3-07, “Stability Operations.
o The DoD instruction highlights that stability operations are of major
importance to U.S. strategic success, and that DoD sees the success of
these efforts of equal importance for design, planning and operations as
our traditional core competencies of delivering decisive force. Therefore,
to think in terms of assuming risk or handing these functions off to other
civilian agencies while we focus on just a safe and secure environment
does not meet DoD guidance.
o JP 3-07 illustrates the key concepts and principles behind stability
operations, and how these are integrated into design and planning
(Lesson 2) for integration by civilian and military participants. It also
highlights and reinforces the discussion of joint operations that accomplish
major efforts to stabilize across the ROMO.
Potential Student Presentations: If desired, in support Part 3 of the lesson the FI
can assign a series of student presentations that focuses on how a variety of
operations are focused on joint activities to “stabilize.” Students can be assigned to
review the “executive summary” for a number of missions such as FHA, peace
operations, FID, etc, and provide a brief summary for each of 1) the definition/focus
of the type of operation, 2) the key operating and planning principles, and 3) their
analysis of how these operations support the GCC’s efforts to maintain or retain
stability. Each presentation should be no more than 10 minutes, and are intended to
familiarize students with the broad range of capabilities and contributions that the
joint force makes to ongoing USG stability efforts abroad.

5. Suggested Time Schedule (for presentation as a stand-alone lesson): the following
schedule is based upon a 3 hour (180 minute) instruction period.
Start – 50 min. After course admin, the Faculty Instructor (FI) overviews the lesson,
and then leads the discussion of stability as a key element of US
ends – ways – means as accomplished through the
interrelationship of policy, strategy and operations that accomplish
our goals and objectives worldwide. The FI then leads the
discussion of stability as a focus on national policy and strategy,
and how the guidance by DoDI 3000.05 is intended to ensure
adequate military capabilities to meet diverse U.S. requirement for
both military force and responsive forces to meet U.S. need.
Finally, discuss how strategic direction is incorporated into theater
strategies by the combatant commands to ensure proactive
regional stabilization efforts over time.
50-60 min Class break; transition to part 2
60-110 min Conduct Lesson Part 2; focus on the discussion of how joint
principles, precepts and elements of design include stability
considerations, followed by a discussion of the unique aspects of
stability that are balanced with offense and defense to accomplish
overall mission success.
110 -120 min Class break; transition to part 3
120 - 170 min Conduct Lesson Part 3, with a focus on how joint operations
accomplish efforts to stabilize across the ROMO; integrate optional
student presentations on 4-5 of the operations if desired, or FI can
lead discussion of the key principles/planning considerations for
each of these operations that pertain to stability operations.
170 -180 min Lesson synthesis of how stability is integrated into policy, strategy
and operations to achieve both joint and US objectives; preview
next lesson in curriculum
6. Options – EMBEDDING PARTS INTO OTHER LESSON???

Lesson # ______ Date (Hours of Instruction)
Lesson Authors: Faculty Instructor
Lesson ___: Design and Planning for Stability in Joint Operations
Mode: Seminar
“Stability operations are a core U.S. military mission that the DoD shall be prepared to
conduct and with proficiency equivalent to combat operations…. [DoD shall be prepared
to} conduct stability activities throughout all phases of conflict and across the range of
military operations, including in combat and non-combat environments … [that] may
range from small-scale, short duration to large-scale, long duration.”
DoD Instruction 3000.05, 16 Sep 09
“In practice, immediate responsibility for conquered or liberated territory devolves upon
the military commander on the ground. It remains there until other agencies of the
government, international organizations and host government assume that
responsibility. Again, this often means that the military commander as the person
controlling the key resources will have to continue exercising the responsibility long after
the State Department and other agencies have arrived and begun to function.
John T. Fishel, in Liberation, Occupation and Rescue:
War Termination and Desert Storm, 1992.
1. Introduction. The purpose of this lesson is to understand how military efforts to
“stabilize” are integrated into joint design and planning process. Key here is that stability
is not planned for as a separate or specialized operation; just like offense and defense
are developed to defeat enemy efforts, stability is an embedded part of joint planning
that focuses on accomplishing or supporting interagency efforts to establish sustainable
political and security conditions that accomplish U.S. strategic ends.
As outlined previously, stability operations are an integral part of joint operations
conducted across the Range of Military Operations (ROMO), ranging from security
cooperation through crisis/contingency to major operations that continuously accomplish
the Combatant Commander’s Campaign Strategy. In each of these cases, military
actions are designed and synchronized with civilian plans and programs to ensure
partner national and multinational/coalition success during pre-conflict, conflict, and
post-conflict periods. As commanders and their staffs conduct operational design, they
employ the same principles and processes used for analyzing the need for and
integration of other joint functions and actions. For example, in utilizing the principles of
operational design, planners seek to analyze the Operating Environment (OE) in order
to understand not just the enemy, but to also integrate “conflict analysis” (conducted by
civilian agencies such as DoS and USAID) that reveal the reasons behind the ongoing
conflict threatening host nation stability. In turn, this OE analysis delineates decisive

points that inform the development of “lines of effort” that (just like Lines of Operations)
orient coordinated civil-military actions in time, space and purpose to ensure overall
mission success. Additionally, some Principles are especially important in designing
efforts to stabilize, such as ensuring unity (between JIIM actors), legitimacy (for host
nation government as well as our mission), restraint (for careful and disciplined action)
and perseverance (to achieve conflict transformation over time).
This same approach for integrating stability considerations applies during the
conduct of the JFC’s Joint Operations Planning Process (JOPP). As the planning staff
employs the operational approach directed by the commander, they include stability
considerations into mission analysis, COA development and war-gaming in order to
ensure that offense and defense operations against enemies and adversaries. These
efforts ensure that joint activities and tasks set the conditions to strengthen host nation
legitimacy and enable “conflict transformation” through complementary changes in
political, economic, and security conditions that enable sustainable, stable conditions
that enable the transition back to or continued success of civilian programs (without
continued military ops). In joint operations where combat and delivering force may not
be the primary focus, effectively employing stability considerations during JOPP to
define security, control and support tasks required to support U.S. disaster response,
peace operations, and foreign internal defense are key elements developing a suitable,
feasible and acceptable plan for joint support to enable civilian success. Finally,
whenever the JOPP produces a detailed, 5 phase plan (as outlined in JP 5-0), preparing
for and conducting operations to stabilize are included across all phases of the
operation, and not just confined to Phase IV. In doing so, planners ensure that
collaboration and coordination with interagency partners are focused effectively,
strengthening host nation capacity and leadership in key areas over the course of the
operation, and that joint force capabilities are requested and ready to execute
operations to stabilize at essential events where instability may arise.
Finally, while joint forces provide the security upon which stability can be built,
they also lead efforts across a number of other stability sector where civilian capacity is
not available or cannot operate due to security conditions. Once conditions are set,
these same forces provide supporting capabilities (as requested) that are essential for
these civilian agencies success across sectors. Joint force planners must understand
the goals, tasks and actors working across each of these sectors to anticipate and
conduct leading or supporting efforts effectively. Through the use of a short table-top
exercise (TTX), workgroups will brief the seminar (class) on their analysis of the key
factors for success in their assigned “stability function” and present their views on how
to integrate success in their sector with those of others as part of an integrated USG
approach.
By the conclusion of this lesson, our goal is to ensure that you understand 1) how
stability principles and considerations are integrated into operational design and
planning 2) how the JOPP can employed to ensure a balance of offensive, defense and
stability efforts across all phases of a campaign/operation, and 3) the key elements of

how the 5 stability functions (and associated civilian-led “sectors”) can be integrated for
civil-military effectiveness for overall US mission success.
2. Learning Objectives. To enable students to:
a. Understand how operational design principles for stability are used in the
development of an operational approach for joint operations.
b. Analyze how stability planning concepts can be applied during the Joint
Operations Planning Process (JOPP) to develop the stability activities and tasks
required across the 5 phases of a joint operation.
c. Analyze the key elements of the 5 stability functions outlined in JP 3-07,
and how staffs can develop plans to accomplish tasks and activities that contribute to
USG success in transforming and eliminating the underlying problems that cause violent
conflict and undermine legitimate governance.
d. Understand how conflict analysis conducted by interagency partners can
be linked with ongoing JIPOE analysis of the conditions within the operational
environment to support design and planning.
3. Student Requirements.
a. Tasks.
1) Complete the required readings
2) Be prepared to discuss the points to consider and assigned readings.
3) Participate and contribute during assigned presentations/small group work
b. Required Readings.
1) Review (if already covered in the course) Joint Publication (JP) 5-0, “Joint
Operation Planning,” 11 Aug 11; sections on Operational Design, pp III 1 –
18, and 28 – 31, and the JOPP, Chapter IV.
2) DoD Instruction 3000.05, “Stability Operations”, Office of the Undersecretary
for Defense (Policy), 16 Sep 09, pp 1-3
3) JP 3-07, “Stability Operations,” 29 Sep 11, Chapter II on “Design and
Planning,” pp II-1 to 32 and Chapter III on “Stability Functions,” pp 1-3.

4) Scan your individual Service Doctrine for considerations in stability planning
(Example - for Army: Army Doctrinal Reference Publications (ADRP) 3-07,
Stability, 13 Feb 14, Chapter 4, “Planning”.
5) “Integrating Civilian Agencies in Stability Operations, RAND Rpt MG801,
2009, pp 91 – 110.
6) Table Top Exercise: Integrating Stability Into Joint Design and Planning.
a. Read Exercise Directive and review slide deck (Template for brief)
b. Complete Readings for your assigned workgroup from JP 3-07,
Stability Operations, Chapter III, “”Stability Operations Functions”:
i. Security: pp 4-17
ii. Humanitarian Assistance: pp 18-27
iii. Economics and Infrastructure: pp 28-40
iv. Rule of Law (and Policing): pp 41-47
v. Governance and Participation: pp 47-59
4. Supplemental Readings. For depth and breadth on design and planning:
a. Guiding Principles for Stabilization and Reconstruction, USIP and PKSOI,
2009. This was produced as the “informal interagency guidelines” for stability
operations by the US Army PKSOI and the US Institute for Peace. This provides an
overview of the recurring principles for US government success in the planning, design
and assessment of stability operations, based upon the analysis of a broad range of
efforts over past decades.
b. 3D Planning Guide: Diplomacy, Development, Defense, USAID, DoS and
DOD, 31 July 2012 (Draft). This collaborative framework developed by DOD, USAID
and DOS presents the common elements for planning amongst the 3D’s within an
integrated USG effort. This publication provides valuable insights into the differing
planning considerations and processes across USG elements. This Guide is maintained
in draft as a living document for continued discussion and development of cooperation
across agencies.
c. Considerations for Mission Leadership in United Nations Peacekeeping
Operations, United Nations, 2010. This guidebook for civilian and military leaders in UN
peacekeeping operations, includes perspectives on Integrated Planning, Assessment
Tools, and Prioritization/ Sequencing.
d. Conflict Assessment Framework Version 2.0, USAID, June 2012. This
document is the USAID’s framework for assessing local conflict dynamics; valuable for
situational awareness with USAID, and in conflict transformation planning.

e. Joint Operations; each of the following manuals has a chapter on “planning”:
1. Foreign Humanitarian Assistance, Joint Publication 3-29, 2014.
2. Peace Operations, Joint Publication 3-07.3, 2012.
3. Foreign Internal Defense, Joint Publication 3-22, 2010
4. Counterinsurgency Operations, Joint Publication 3-24, 2013.
5. Civil- Military Operations, Joint Publication 3-57, 2013.
e. Security Function:
1. Security Force Assistance Planner’s Guide, JCIFSA, 14 February 2008.
(Revised Draft available, dated May 2014). This is a valuable handbook for joint
planners as it includes both SFA and security sector reform. The current (2008)
version is being revised with improved tools for planning, situational awareness
and baseline assessment considerations.
2. The American Military Advisor: Dealing with Senior Foreign Officials in the
Islamic World, PKSOI and US Army War College SSI, August 2008. This
monograph written by a career Foreign Service Officer describes the roles and
challenges for US military advisors, specifically in Islamic countries. It includes
valuable insights into cross-cultural understanding, leadership, character and
intellectual ability in those who serve as military advisors to foreign leaders.
f. Governance Function:
1. Transitional Governance: From Bullets to Ballots, USIP, July 2003. Effective
transitional governance is one of the most formidable challenges facing stabilization
missions in war-torn, failed states. Peace can be sustained only when power is attained
through political rather than violent means and when government institutions are
legitimate. Key to understanding civ-mil integration and conflict transformation.
2. Handbook for Military Support to Governance, Elections and Media, JFCOM, 11
February 2010. The Handbook was developed for use in Iraq and Afghanistan, and
analyzes the challenges and efforts that joint forces face in efforts to rebuild governance
and media institutions, support election preparations, and provide advisors to national
ministries and legislative committees.
g. Humanitarian Assistance Function:
1. Handbook for Military Assistance to Essential Services and Critical
Infrastructure, JFCOM, 02 February 2010. Provides analysis of joint force

considerations and responsibilities in working alongside USAID, NGO and
multinational actors, in providing emergency services and critical infrastructure.
2. “Guidelines for Relations between US Armed Forces and Non-Governmental
Humanitarian Organizations in Hostile or Potentially Hostile Environments,” by
USIP and the DOD, 2007. These mutual developed guidelines by USIP, DoD and
INTERACTION (as the representative of the U.S. humanitarian NGO community)
are intended to facilitate interaction between DoD and U.S. based humanitarian relief
efforts in hostile or potentially hostile environments.
h. Rule of Law Function: Rule of Law Handbook, US Army Judge Advocate
General, 2011. This is a useful cross-service guide to assessing, developing and
supporting rule of law efforts during integrated civil-military operations. It outlines
ROL requirements and challenges as a basis for joint planning for utilizing
military forces to support civil capacity development.
i. Economic Stabilization Function: “Handbook for Military Support to Economic
Stabilization,” JFCOM, 27 February 2010. This handbook outlines the key
concepts, principles and practices underlying joint force support to economic
development. It addresses conducting a comprehensive economic assessment,
employment and business generation, trade, agriculture, financial sector
development and regulation, and legal transformation. It also discusses
integration of short-term military efforts with USAID and other international
partner economic recovery and development operations.
4. Points to Consider/For Discussion:
a. As the commander and staff develop the operational approach to
defeating adversaries, what are the challenges and potential actions that must be taken
to stabilize (i.e. establish local, sustainable conditions) through effective security, control
and support efforts by joint forces?
b. As we develop our military plans for stabilizing, what are the
corresponding civilian tasks undertaken by Country Team to stabilize and build partner
capacity across governance, economic and security to create sustainable, stable
conditions as a basis for future long-term reconstruction and development?
c. How do actions and activities for theater security cooperation during
“phase “0” set the stage for success in stability operations throughout future operations?
d. Based upon the operational approach, how does the joint force deploy,
develop and employ required stability capabilities over the course of the operation? Are
there areas where conventional and existing capabilities must be supplemented by new,
tailored capabilities?

e. While we normally focus on stability as a part of post-combat operations,
how do some of the principles and approaches outlined here apply to planning for
stability in joint operations that may not involve combat in a crisis environment (per DoD
3000.05)?
5. Relationship to Joint Professional Military Education (JPME) Learning Areas.
This lesson supports accomplishment of the following JPME-1 learning areas at the
Service Intermediate-Level College Level:
a. Learning Area 2, a, b. c
b. Learning Area 3, a, e, f
c. Learning Area 4, b, f, h
d. Learning Area 6, b, d
6. Relationship to institutional Learning Objectives (ILOs), Enduring and Special
Themes.
(TBD within Local/Service guidance)

LESSON _____ IN CLASS EXERCISE Date (Times)
Lesson Author: _____
TABLE TOP EXERCISE: “INTEGRATING STABILITY IN JOINT DESIGN AND
PLANNING”
Lead Instructor: ________
Mode: In Class Exercise
1. Introduction: One of the most important things in developing the stability aspects of
both the operational approach and plan is to “start with the end in mind” - with a
reasonably clear understanding between military and interagency partners of how we
collectively define “success” across the stability sectors/functions and how these efforts
interrelate with one another to achieve mission success in maintaining or restoring
stability. This table top exercise (TTX) emphasizes the strategic and operational
importance of starting with a workable picture of what joint operations are planned to
achieve as part of a collaborative and integrated effort with interagency counterparts at
the Country Team level, and how we will include these efforts into the operations
phases to attain joint and U.S. mission accomplishment over time.
Today’s exercise will center on developing an operational approach for
integrating each of five stability functions across the 5 phases of a notional operations
plan. The exercise builds upon class discussions of the key elements of how to
integrate stability into design and planning, and provides participants an opportunity to
analyze and discuss how joint military activities across the five functions - security,
humanitarian assistance, economics and infrastructure, rule of law/policing, and
governance and participation – are developed and employed over the course of a joint
operation. Finally, participants will briefly analyze how success in any one area (such
as security) cannot ensure overall success, and how each of these functions both
supports and is supported by progress and success in other areas.
2. Conduct of the Exercise. Prior to class, class members will form into 5 groups that
will each focus on analyzing and preparing presentations on their assigned stability
function area according to the format provided. During class, groups will brief their
analysis and how efforts in their areas can be integrated into the phases of the
operational plan. The exercise will conclude with an instructor led discussion of how
these areas relate to one another to achieve overall mission success in stabilizing
conditions within the JOA, and the practical challenges of integrating military and civilian
efforts.
a. Part 1 - Preparation for the Exercise: Prior to the class meeting, assigned
groups will complete both the core readings for the lesson and their assigned
reading for their function in preparation for meeting with other group members to
conduct analysis. Workgroups will analyze different stability sectors with respect to
the following factors:

1) Operational Success: For the assigned sector, how do you define
“success”? What are our objectives, and are there potential differences in
civilian and military views that must be accounted for and reduced/mitigated
over time?
2) Necessary Conditions: In achieving success in a given sector, we will see
certain conditions evolving as we transform the environment of violent conflict
into one of sustainable stability. What are the general conditions that will be in
place when we have achieved our desired objectives? What are the visible
indicators that our mission is succeeding for a given sector?
3) Assessments: Within a functional area, there are many ways of determining
the progress that we are making and whether our actions (along with those of
others working in the same area) are working together or along-side one
another to achieve conflict transformation that not only ends but prevents the
return of violent conflict. While there are many possible indicators, what are
the top 5 criteria that we should assess, and what we should be looking at in
terms of key events, changes, etc, in order to “see” success occurring over
time?
4) Anticipated Challenges: What are the top 2-3 challenges anticipated in the
given sector for achieving and assessing success?
Workgroups will provide their analysis using the slide deck provided, and post the
results to the course portal/website NLT ___(DTG)___. Prior to class, each
group should review the briefs by other groups in order to develop views (for
classroom discussion) on how their assigned function can work in conjunction
with others for overall success.
b. Part 2 - In Class Table Top Exercise: Following discussions on stability in
operational design and planning, each workgroup will lead the class through an
analysis and discussion of their assigned “stability sector”; each group will have 15
minutes to present an overview of their assigned sector, to include questions and
discussion. Groups should utilize the key points from the assigned readings (below),
but are also encouraged to provide class members other readings/points that
expand upon the required readings.
c. Exercise Wrap-up: We will conclude the class with a discussion of the potential
challenges of integrating our joint military efforts into the Country Team’s stability
sectors as part of the U.S. overall strategic framework within a JIIM environment.
The seminar will also discuss the challenges of accurately interpreting and reporting
success across the broad range of stability sectors.
3. Learning Objectives.
a. Analyze the key elements of success across the stability functions, and develop
an understanding of how these elements can be combined into the operational
approach for the joint operation.

b. Analyze how operations and activities across each of the stability functions are
included and integrated into each phase of a (notional) joint operations plan.
c. Analyze the challenges of assessing success, and consider how intelligence and
information efforts must be focused to constantly assess and provide analysis on
accomplishing desired outcomes (measures of effectiveness).
d. Evaluate the challenges of collaborating and integrating military efforts with
interagency/Country Team and multinational efforts in a complex operating
environment.
4. Required Readings. Participants wil complete the required “common readings,” and
specific readings based upon group assignments shown below:
a. Read Exercise Directive and review slide deck (Template for 3 slide brief)
b. Complete Readings for your assigned workgroup from JP 3-07, Stability
Operations, Chapter III, “”Stability Operations Functions”:
Group 1 - Security: pp 4-17
Group 2 - Humanitarian Assistance: pp 18-27
Group 3 - Economics and Infrastructure: pp 28-40
Group 4 - Rule of Law (and Policing): pp 41-47
Group 5 - Governance and Participation: pp 47-59
5. Points to Consider:
a. What are the objectives and challenges of restoring legitimate, effective
governance and security in a conflict environment over time? How do efforts in other
functional areas support success in these areas?
b. How does success in each of the sectors depend upon progress in other areas to
provide sustainable success?
c. What are the challenges of assessing success in each of the sectors? Are we
focused on changing the environment, or on measuring how hard we are working?
d. Are we working towards the same ends as the host nation? What are the
challenges of ensuring we are working towards mutual ends that are acceptable,
supportable and sustainable for the institutions whose success we are attempting to
enable?

De elopi g the Operatio al Approa h: _ Fu tio ___
Necessary Conditions: endstates that must
e in pla e at su ess ?
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
If at the o lusio of our efforts e took a pi ture of su ess, hat ould it look like/ hat ould e i it?
O er ti e, hat ill e look for /ho ill e k o e are ei g effe ti e i uildi g to ard o erall su ess ?
Objectives - success in this stability function? Why is this critical to mission success?
Assessing Success: what will we be looking
for in these areas to indicate success?
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.

Key Tasks and Linkages
Relationship to Other Sectors (Supported by? Supporting to?)
- Civil Security: ?
- Governance?
- Economics?
- Social Well-Being?
Ho do our efforts relate to those of the other se tors? Ho are e oth supporti g to others efforts, hile e
are supported/enabled in our sector by others efforts?
Key Tasks (Top 5)
-
-
-
-
-
What are the joint tasks/activities that are critical to overall strategic and operational success?

Challenges, Partner and Adversaries
• Challenge 1
• Challenge 2:
• Challenge 3:
What will stand in our way of achieving our objectives/mission? Whose efforts must we overcome, and whose
support (across the interagency/international community) are key to obtain to give us a arked ad a tage ?
Which is the
most
dangerous?
Why?

JFEC_Final

Recommended

Recommended

More Related Content

Similar to JFEC_Final

Similar to JFEC_Final (20)

JFEC_Final