The inaugural session set the tone. Filip Grzegorzewski, Head of SG.STRAT.4, stood firm in his address: “Strategic communication is not a luxury in security operations. It is a frontline function.” With Kirsi Henriksson, Deputy Head CivOpsHQ,  and Maj. Gen. Gábor Horváth, Deputy Director General EUMS, echoing the critical intersection of field action and strategic messaging, the stakes were clear — the EU's credibility as a global security provider hinges as much on narrative clarity as on boots on the ground.

What followed was a revealing back-and-forth between planning and realities. By exploring real events, theory met grit. Leïla Boutroy recounted counter-FIMI efforts in francophone Africa. Lieutenant Colonel Carla Morais shared tactical realities in Mozambique. The PPIO group discussions that followed — sorted by region — gave Brussels ears to the ground.

The narrative-building workshop in the afternoon saw a shift in mood. A lecture room transformed in several story labs. Field officers paired with SG.STRAT.2 and SG.STRAT.4 staff to sculpt narratives from operational data. They didn’t always agree. But they learned to co-author.

By Friday, the tone sharpened toward solutions. Communication coordination emerged as a recurring challenge. EU Delegations —  the political helm — were identified as an anchor for the messaging in the field. A poignant observation shared was that Missions must echo EU values, but they also need breathing room for local nuance. Coherence must not come at the cost of credibility.

The digital best practices workshop made clear that digital is no longer secondary — it’s strategic. A brief but rich exchange with the Spokesperson’s office highlighted practical bridges between mission press units and Brussels’ media machinery. The seminar closed with a discussion on the FIMI Handbook, a compact yet powerful tool. Improvisation within the FIMI framework was encouraged — field-driven adaptation, guided by centralized clarity. As Jacob Tamm, deputy head of SG.STRAT.4,  offered his closing remarks, the room was no longer divided between field and Brussels. It was a single ecosystem — occasionally tense, but undeniably interconnected.

The message was clear: From the Sahel to Kyiv, from Rafah to Yerevan, missions and operations need Brussels for strategic direction, but Brussels needs the field to stay grounded, credible, and effective in an increasingly contested information space.