With the U.S. Army no longer committed to combat deployments familiar to so many who participated in the global war on terrorism, most unit deployments now are rotations in support of combatant commands around the globe. While my experience comes from a unique mission leading NATO Forward Land Forces Battle Group-Poland, I have learned some lessons that are broadly applicable to many units as they prepare for rotational deployments to Europe or elsewhere.

Before my rotation to Poland as commander of the 2nd Battalion, 69th Armor Regiment, 2nd Armored Brigade Combat Team, 3rd Infantry Division, which assumed command for NATO Forward Land Forces Battle Group-Poland in September 2023, my only deployment experiences were in Iraq and Afghanistan. This, coupled with the 3rd Infantry Division’s “fight tonight” culture, led me to view the battalion’s deployment  through the same lens—and with the same severity—as a combat mission with life-or-death consequences.

However, the operational environment in Europe is different from the once hotly contested terrain of Iraq and Afghanistan, even in the Suwalki Gap of far eastern Poland.

Had I done a more nuanced analysis of the 3rd Infantry Division’s mission statement, I would have perceived this difference: Rather than fighting tonight, the 3rd Infantry Division’s mission and leaders spoke of “assurance and deterrence” and “with indicators and warnings, fighting as directed.”

In the contemporary European operating environment, Army senior leaders discuss assurance and deterrence along a spectrum of intensity, with assurance falling closer to “competition” and deterrence landing closer to “crisis,” as outlined in Field Manual 3-0: Operations. U.S. Army missions in Europe both assure allies and deter adversaries, and training activities are communicating a sense of preparedness in the competition space, rather than a sense of escalation toward the crisis space.

The first two months of 2nd Battalion’s deployment were tumultuous and, at times, frustrating as I drove the unit at an unsustainable operational tempo. It was not until a conversation with a senior leader that my faulty perspective became apparent, and it became clear to me that we were operating on the assurance end of the spectrum.

As I wrestled with how to correct course and adjust the training calendar, I found it helpful to view the battalion’s rotational deployment experience through a new lens, that of “readiness and rewards.”

Perspective Matters

There is a narrative in the European Theater that units on rotational deployment should build readiness while deployed, returning to home station at a higher level of readiness than when they left. The cynical response to this is that it is impossible to improve readiness while competing with other nations for training time and space. This response is not unfounded. In my experience in northeastern Poland, the battle group’s forward operating site provided live-fire ranges for numerous Polish army units, all of which held training priority over visiting NATO units.

Here, too, perspective matters. It seems that many officers (myself included) speak of readiness with a vision of rotations at the National Training Center at Fort Irwin, California. There, brigade-sized formations maneuver across dozens, if not hundreds, of kilometers over multiple days. If such a training event is the definition of success, the cynics are correct; there is no place in the European Theater that an American brigade can accomplish such training, at least not without disrupting other NATO units.

However, as Army Field Manual 7-0: Training states, soldiers must “fight to train,” and seek opportunities within the constraints of circumstances and environments. As long as soldiers remain aggressive in the training space—and intelligent in the maintenance space—units can increase readiness while deployed.

As I assumed command of NATO Forward Land Forces Battle Group-Poland, I struggled to envision how to train 10 companies, batteries and troops from four nations on five different deployment cycles to the proficiency level required to win in a National Training Center-like training event. However, as I worked with my staff and subordinate commanders to develop training guidance, I remembered that our primary mission was to build interoperability with allies and partners.

While the battle group could not pursue a battalion-level training and certification event, it was decided to train each company-level formation to achieve a “T” (Trained) rating in most of its mission-essential tasks. While I never had the opportunity to maneuver the battle group against a live opposing force, my unit was able to develop training events that integrated nearly every element of the battle group. Thus, we created unique training opportunities for soldiers that they will remember for years.

Although most U.S. Army rotational battalions will not be integrated into a NATO battle group, they will train with NATO allies, and they must tailor their training to the unique constraints and opportunities presented by their local environment.

Rewarding Experiences

While U.S. Army rotational deployments demand that soldiers demonstrate, if not increase, readiness, they also provide unique opportunities for personal and professional rewards.

Perhaps the most obvious source of personal reward is the opportunity to explore new places and cultures. The Army already has paid for the soldier to deploy to a new continent. Once there, traveling around Europe is significantly easier and cheaper than if the soldier had come on their own from the United States. In my unit, many soldiers brought their tourist passports with them, and they were able to travel to many other European countries.

While it is nice to have the opportunity to discover new cultures, some soldiers find this daunting and will not exercise this option on their own. Leaders of 2nd Battalion found there are multiple ways to create simple trips and excursions with little overhead effort for the chain of command. The U.S. Army’s Morale, Welfare and Recreation offices offer numerous sightseeing trips where soldiers simply pay an upfront cost to go on a semiguided tour or enjoy a recreational experience. Other organizations, such as the Polish National Foundation, provide cultural immersion opportunities free of cost to U.S. and NATO soldiers.

Finally, capitalism is alive and well in Europe, and the battle group was able to coordinate MWR-like excursions using local travel agencies.

Professional Events

Beyond the off-duty rewards in a new theater, professional rewards abound. Although the battle group initially developed a deployment “campaign plan” to mirror the progression of training back home, the local environment was geared more toward collective live-fire events than the situational training exercises the battle group had planned.

As a maneuver commander, I prefer situational training to live-fire training, but the local conditions did not support those opportunities.

Instead, by tailoring training events to maximize available resources, the battle group was able to create some truly unique live-fire events, including multinational tank and infantry fighting vehicle stress shoots and combined arms live-fire exercises incorporating Croatian artillery, Romanian air defense, British reconnaissance and American breaching.

As the military faces its current recruiting challenge, ensuring that soldiers have personally and professionally enriching experiences is a matter of national importance. While Army rotational deployments separate soldiers from their families for an extended time, leaders have ample opportunities to make these deployments positive experiences through meaningful and memorable training.

Act Accordingly

The Army’s modern-day deployments are different from global war on terrorism-era combat deployments to the Middle East in notable ways. The Army is not on the crisis or conflict end of the spectrum of violence. Conceptualizing today’s deployments as combat deployments carries risks, including unintentional escalation at the strategic level, and burnout or low morale at the tactical level.

Rather than viewing rotational deployments as having the same life-or-death consequences as missions in Iraq and Afghanistan, an accurate vision of assurance and deterrence operations will lead to better outcomes for soldiers and units. Framing the Army perspective of contemporary missions through the lens of “readiness and rewards” allows leaders to develop meaningful training events while creating personal and professional memories for soldiers.

To maximize both readiness and rewards, leaders must have a clear understanding of the unique constraints and opportunities presented by their environment and tailor their training plans accordingly.

Lt. Col. Timothy Decker is a student at the U.S. Army War College, Carlisle Barracks, Pennsylvania. Previously, he was commander of the 2nd Battalion, 69th Armor Regiment, 2nd Armored Brigade Combat Team, 3rd Infantry Division, Fort Stewart, Georgia, serving as commander of NATO Forward Land Forces Battle Group-Poland. He deployed twice to Afghanistan and twice to Iraq. He graduated from the U.S. Military Academy at West Point, New York, in 2003, and has an MBA from Kansas State University.