Question 1

What were the primary constraints that faced COMISAF in 2009? (Select all that apply)

Accepted Answer

Primary use of SIPRNET; the inability to speak to all mission partners simultaneously, if needed; and too few ad-hoc inter-connection points between national systems. Before the Afghanistan Mission Network, ISAF ran on four separate national and alliance networks while US formations defaulted to SIPRNet, which no coalition partner could reach. [Source: RAND Corporation RR-302, Lessons Learned from the Afghan Mission Network: Developing a Coalition Contingency Network (2014) — "Prior to the advent of the AMN, the regional commands, or RCs, and mission partners were using four primary networks: the Secret Internet Protocol Router Network (SIPRNet); Combined Enterprise Regional Information Exchange System–Global Cou" https://www.rand.org/content/dam/rand/pubs/research_reports/RR300/RR302/RAND_RR302.pdf]

Question 2

Why did COMISAF want to adopt a "share-to-win" mentality when it came to information?

Accepted Answer

Because there was increased risk when information was not shared — the net effect of the information-sharing limits in Afghanistan was increased risk to life, inefficient use of resources, and jeopardized mission accomplishment. Note: the doctrine and lessons-learned literature calls this same cultural shift “need to share”; “share-to-win” is the course's own phrasing. [Source: RAND Corporation RR-302, Lessons Learned from the Afghan Mission Network: Developing a Coalition Contingency Network (2014) — "ISAF participating nations had to ease prevailing “need-to-know” restrictions in order to substantiate a “need-to-share” culture." https://www.rand.org/content/dam/rand/pubs/research_reports/RR300/RR302/RAND_RR302.pdf]

Question 3

How does the Mission Partner Environment close the operational gap that commanders experienced using SIPRNET?

Accepted Answer

MPE users leverage key attributes of the Joint Information Environment (JIE) IT infrastructure, enterprise services and architectures to share information on a single security architecture. The MPE capability framework is inextricably linked to the JIE, which supplies the infrastructure, enterprise services and single security architecture that let a joint force commander stand up a coalition mission network instead of relying on SIPRNet. [Source: DoDI 8110.01, Mission Partner Environment (MPE) Information Sharing Capability Implementation for the DoD (25 November 2014), Enclosure 3 — "The JIE, which is composed of shared IT infrastructure, enterprise services, and a single security architecture, will support MP operations, exercises, and training." https://www.esd.whs.mil/Portals/54/Documents/DD/issuances/dodi/811001p.pdf]

Question 4

What should you consider when evaluating whether information should be shared? (Select all that apply)

Accepted Answer

What information can be shared, what information will be shared, and how the information will be shared. What can be shared is a foreign disclosure decision — the foreign disclosure officer is the release approval authority — and how it is shared has to protect the source. [Source: Center for Army Lessons Learned No. 25-1004, Commander and Staff Guide to the Mission Partner Environment (April 2025) — "The foreign disclosure officer is the approval authority for the release of military information to foreign government representatives." https://api.army.mil/e2/c/downloads/2025/04/29/59b51ef8/no-25-1004-commander-and-staff-guide-to-mission-partner-environment-apr-25.pdf]

Question 5

It is best to include the foreign disclosure officers (FDOs) in the planning process from the beginning.

Accepted Answer

True. The FDO is the approval authority for releasing military information to foreign government representatives, so FDOs must be involved early in the planning stages to determine the appropriate levels of classification, and the joint force J-2 should obtain FDO authorizations as soon as possible. [Source: JP 3-16, Multinational Operations (1 March 2019), Chapter VI — "The joint force J-2 should obtain the necessary authorizations from the foreign disclosure officers (FDOs) and designated intelligence disclosure officials from the CCMD J-2 or FDO as soon as possible." https://www.jcs.mil/Portals/36/Documents/Doctrine/pubs/jp3_16.pdf]

Question 6

What are the information sharing practices that comprise the MPE "Circle of Trust"? (Select all that apply)

Accepted Answer

Sharing practices that represent a significant shift from a "need to know" environment to a "share-to-win" culture; all partners share information equally within one releasability caveat for planning, situational awareness and execution; and there are no guards restricting data and information flows. Note: the Army's MPE handbook names the destination culture “need to share,” not “share to win.” [Source: DoD CIO, DoD Information Enterprise Architecture — Mission Partner Environment Lexicon, Version 1.0 (12 August 2016) — "The AMN is operated as a single security domain in order to facilitate information sharing between participating nations without security boundaries." https://dodcio.defense.gov/Portals/0/Documents/MPE-Lexicon_20160812_DISTRO.pdf]

Question 7

MPE closed the operational gap in command and control by leveraging the Global Command and Control Family of Systems.

Accepted Answer

False. MPE closed the command and control gap by leveraging the Joint Information Environment — its shared IT infrastructure, enterprise services and single security architecture — not the Global Command and Control System Family of Systems. [Source: DoDI 8110.01, Mission Partner Environment (MPE) Information Sharing Capability Implementation for the DoD (25 November 2014), Enclosure 3 — "The JIE, which is composed of shared IT infrastructure, enterprise services, and a single security architecture, will support MP operations, exercises, and training." https://www.esd.whs.mil/Portals/54/Documents/DD/issuances/dodi/811001p.pdf]

Question 8

The Joint Information Environment provides a(n) ______ to improve global communications for DoD.

Accepted Answer

Single level security architecture is the answer the course key expects. Note: DoD CIO's MPE Lexicon and DoDI 8110.01 both define the JIE as shared IT infrastructure, enterprise services and a “single security architecture” — the doctrinal phrase is single security architecture, with no “level” in it. “Single security level” belongs to the definition of the MPE mission network, not to the JIE. [Source: DoDI 8110.01 (25 November 2014), Glossary Part II — Definitions — "JIE. A secure joint information environment composed of shared IT infrastructure, enterprise services, and a single security architecture to achieve full spectrum superiority, improve mission effectiveness, increase security, and improve IT" https://www.esd.whs.mil/Portals/54/Documents/DD/issuances/dodi/811001p.pdf]

Question 9

When conducting operational planning you must: (Select all that apply)

Accepted Answer

Identify the strategic direction and operational environment, define the problem, and develop an operational approach. Note: JP 5-0 words the first two as understand the strategic direction and understand the operational environment; the answers to those three questions are what produce the operational approach. [Source: JP 5-0, Joint Operation Planning (11 August 2011), Chapter III — "It is essential that commanders, through a dialogue with their staffs, planning teams, initiative groups, and any other relevant sources of information, first gain an understanding of the operational environment and define the problem facin" https://edocs.nps.edu/dodpubs/topic/jointpubs/JP5/JP5-0_110811.pdf]

Question 10

The JIE single security architecture closes a military communication gap by allowing all partners access to a common mission network.

Accepted Answer

True. The JIE is the IT capability and infrastructure that lets a joint force commander establish an MPE for coalition operations, putting all network users on a common mission network separate from their own national networks — which is exactly what the Afghanistan Mission Network did. [Source: Martin M. Westphal and Thomas C. Lang, “Conducting Operations in a Mission Partner Environment,” Joint Force Quarterly 74 (NDU Press, 1 July 2014) — "AMN put all network users on a common mission network separate from its own national networks to achieve ISAF operational priorities and objectives." https://ndupress.ndu.edu/Media/News/News-Article-View/Article/577527/conducting-operations-in-a-mission-partner-environment/]

Question 11

Why do we need to shift multinational operations off the US SIPRNET?

Accepted Answer

Because SIPRNET constrained the commander's ability to combine and tailor Allied and coalition forces to realize their full warfighting potential. Relying on SIPRNet produced a command and control structure that gave commanders little to no ability to combine US and non-US formations in the same battlespace, and SIPRNET is meant solely for US-specific communication and tasks not suitable for a multinational information-sharing environment. (Joint Force Quarterly words it “full combat potential.”) [Source: JP 3-16, Multinational Operations (1 March 2019), Chapter VI — "US forces should expect to use SIPRNET solely for US-specific communication and tasks not suitable for execution in a multination information-sharing environment." https://www.jcs.mil/Portals/36/Documents/Doctrine/pubs/jp3_16.pdf]

Question 12

Before moving to the Afghanistan Mission Network, the national stand-alone network configuration in Afghanistan met all the operational needs of the Commander, International Security Assistance Force (COMISAF).

Accepted Answer

False. In 2008 commanders noted that coalition forces in Afghanistan could not effectively communicate and share commander's guidance, mission information and critical intelligence, because the networks supporting the operation were nation-specific and not oriented to coalition data sharing; using those separate networks resulted in fragmented mission command. [Source: RAND Corporation RR-302, Lessons Learned from the Afghan Mission Network: Developing a Coalition Contingency Network (2014) — "Prior to the advent of the AMN, the regional commands, or RCs, and mission partners were using four primary networks: the Secret Internet Protocol Router Network (SIPRNet); Combined Enterprise Regional Information Exchange System–Global Cou" https://www.rand.org/content/dam/rand/pubs/research_reports/RR300/RR302/RAND_RR302.pdf]

Question 13

Leveraging the JIE infrastructure allows commanders to ______ and ______ in a single security domain

Accepted Answer

Train and operate. DoDI 8110.01 states that the JIE — shared IT infrastructure, enterprise services and a single security architecture — supports mission partner operations, exercises and training, and that mission networks are implemented using a single security domain to ensure the uninhibited flow of information. [Source: DoDI 8110.01, Mission Partner Environment (MPE) Information Sharing Capability Implementation for the DoD (25 November 2014), Enclosure 3 — "Mission networks will be implemented using a single security domain to ensure the uninhibited flow of information and improve interoperability between MPs." https://www.esd.whs.mil/Portals/54/Documents/DD/issuances/dodi/811001p.pdf]

mission partner

Know questions we're missing?

Study these as flashcards