End State

1. Planning Methodologies End State End State historical examples JointDesign Methodology Korea 1950: While U.S. operational objectives had been met in restoring sovereignty of Republic of Korea, the President, Dr. SyngmanRhee, had an agenda of his own. He aspired for unification of Korea under his rule. U.S. planners contemplated the destruction of the NKPA, Dr. Rhee was formulating plans for South Korean political aims. He had publicly stated his desire to unify Korea under his terms. U.S. ground forces fighting under GEN MacArthur's command gave Dr. Rhee the tool to achieve his aims. UN forces continued to pursue military objectives beyond approval from U.S. National Command Authority and China became involved therefore forcing U.S. to back out. ADP 3-0: Set of desired future conditions the commander wants to exist when an operation ends. It is included in the commander’s planning guidance. A clearly defined end state promotes unity of effort; facilitates integration, synchronization, and discipline initiative, helps mitigate risk. JP 3-0: Set of required conditions that defines achievement of all military objectives. It normally represents a point in time and/or circumstances beyond which the President does not require the military instrument of national power as the primary means to achieve remaining national objectives. Military Decision Making Process The military decision-making process is an iterative planning methodology to understand the situation and mission, develop a course of action, and produce an operation plan or order. Haiti 1994: Despite changing strategic policy goals before and after the deployment of U.S. forces, the clearer military end state and measurable steps to achieve stability yielded useful results. These results reduced threats to U.S. interests and facilitated a successful transition to a U.N. force. The operation also proved that effective military planning could handle even as serious an event as a change in the initial environment from non-permissive to semi-permissive. With the implementation of a well thought out plan that included international support through United Nations ISO Haiti, the U.S. protected their interests without assuming blame if end result was not attained. JP 5-0: Future planners must also look for opportunities or unforeseen challenges that suggest that the current mission may require revision and that a different operational approach may be required to achieve the desired end state. They should also look for indicators that the desired end state is not achievable or no longer desirable. Subsequently, these circumstances may result in a reframing of the problem and the development or execution of a branch plan or new COA. Troop Leading Procedures Step 8 – Supervise and Refine the Plan. To ensure sequence of actions are nested with the end state visualized at the beginning of planning. Otherwise – Reframe the problem. MAJ Carattini, Merbin/merbin.carattini@us.army.mil/ Seminar 4