During Operation Husky, insufficient command and control (C2) contributed to the ineffective use of fires to support movement and maneuver. The three attributes of mission command: commander’s intent, mutual trust, and understanding will provide the evaluation criteria to illustrate that the Allies fell short in blending the art and science of C2, and other joint functions, between services in Husky. First, explanation will describe command and control, show the Sicily Campaign suffered from a poorly communicated commander’s intent and demonstrated mutual trust did not exist between subordinate commanders. Next, comments will expose how the previous deficiencies led to subordinate commanders’ deficits in operational understanding. Finally, explanation will show how …show more content…
Communicating the intent allows a “staff, subordinates, and supporting commanders to take steps to achieve the military end state without further orders, even when operations do not unfold as planned.” As previously stated, the Casablanca conference was the origin of ineffectual C2 during the invasion of Sicily. In fact, Operation Husky was a compromise between two nations with differing objectives and political aims. An agreement that on one hand saw the British place emphasis on Mediterranean operations, and on the other, saw Americans that favored a cross-channel invasion. Complicating things further was Russian demands and American politics of the Pacific. As a result, conflicting interests required the compromise. However, procedures undertaken to negotiate the agreement lacked a long-term vision, and thus a long-term strategy. Without a clear vision or strategy, General Eisenhower’s attempts to communicate a clear and concise commander’s intent were, at best, improbable. Subordinate commanders underneath Eisenhower never were conveyed a clear and concise explanation of Husky’s