Showing posts from category security.
-
Failed States and Foreign Assistance
›August 28, 2007 // By Sean PeoplesA disorganized, inefficient foreign aid structure can wreak havoc on what the current administration refers to as “transformational diplomacy”—the attempt to build and nurture democratically elected governments. In our post-September 11thworld, failed states (also labeled “precarious states” or “weak states”) have garnered increasing attention as targets for transformational diplomacy. For the U.S., ensuring sustainable and well-governed states depends partially on doling out foreign aid as collateral for reliable partnerships. But nations with limited internal capacity and extreme poverty levels teeter on the edge of uncertainty, and inefficient allocation of aid can further destabilize states that are already vulnerable to becoming havens for nefarious activity.
In cooperation with The Fund for Peace, Foreign Policy magazine recently published its Failed State Index 2007, which ranks countries according to their likelihood of political, social and economic failure. Four out of the five poorest-performing countries—Sudan, Somalia, Zimbabwe, and Chad—are located in Africa. This year’s authors included a valuable section highlighting state stability and its connections to environmental sustainability.
Another excellent Failed State Index-related resource is an analysis by Population Action International (PAI), which drew on the Index to demonstrate that the lowest ranked failing states often had young age structures: “51% of countries with a very young age structure are ranked as critical or in danger by the Failed States Index.”
Many critics view integrating and harmonizing the delivery of aid as crucial to bolstering the stability of these vulnerable states. An excellent brief by the Center for Global Development’s Stewart Patrick critiques the U.S. government’s fragmented approach to engaging failed or failing states. Patrick recommends an “integrated approach that goes well beyond impressive military assets to include major investments in critical civilian capabilities.” Without these critical civilian capabilities, democratic institutions and local capacity cannot take root.
Stephen Browne of the International Trade Centre (ITC) in Geneva also addresses aid coordination in “Aid to Fragile States: Do Donors Help or Hinder?,” which examines Burma, Rwanda, and Zambia as case studies. Ratifying the Paris Declaration—a 2005 international agreement promoting the harmonization and alignment of global aid strategies—was an important step, but developed and developing nations still have much to do, according to Browne:There are agreements by a growing number of bilateral agencies to untie their assistance and mingle it more flexibly with that of others. But to be effective, aid needs to move a radical step beyond the adaptation of individual practices by donors to each other. In each instance, there should be complete alignment with the frameworks and management capacities of recipients. However, the principle of country alignment needs to be reaffirmed, especially in the context of recovery and rehabilitation.
U.S. foreign aid is frequently criticized for not being sensitive enough to recipient countries’ specific needs and on-the-ground conditions. Fortunately, the tools and resources to better understand these conditions are available. Judging from our current foreign aid structure, however, we have underutilized these tools and failed to integrate our knowledge and objectives with the realities of these countries. States fail due to numerous cumulative factors, but responsibly allocating foreign aid may help tip the scales toward improving the odds of success for states on the brink of failure.
Photo: Foreign Policy 2007. -
PODCAST – Trade, Aid, and Security
›July 26, 2007 // By Sean PeoplesCurrent approaches to trade and aid often fail to stem poverty, promote stability, or prevent conflict in the developing world. According to Trade, Aid and Security: An agenda for peace and development, existing policies are poorly designed and benefit rich countries, denying developing nations access to vital financial markets. Lifting people out of poverty requires a secure environment and effective trade and aid policies can promote the preconditions for peace and stability. Oli Brown, a project manager and policy researcher at the International Institute for Sustainable Development and one of the editors of Trade, Aid and Security, discusses current development strategies and the conditions for wider political and economic stability.
-
AFRICOM and Environmental Security
›General William E. Ward was recently chosen to lead AFRICOM, the new U.S. military command in Africa currently in its pre-implementation stage. If Ward and AFRICOM are to succeed in promoting peace and stability in Africa, the military must stop viewing security as consisting of conventional, state-to-state relationships and adopt a more flexible “human security” concept. This model views security as “freedom from want” and “freedom from fear,” and includes economic, food, health, personal, community, environmental, and political sub-components. Developing a robust environmental security engagement strategy would be one of the most constructive ways for AFRICOM to implement a human security approach.
The greatest challenge for this nascent command is expanding its tool bag beyond conventional military strategies to include programs that promote the health and security of Africans. Military planners are skilled at determining the number of brigade combat teams, battle carrier groups, and air wings needed for conventional security challenges. But security in Africa depends heavily on non-military factors that fall outside the traditional purview of the armed forces. For AFRICOM to be successful, it must approach security as a mutually beneficial proposition, not a zero-sum game. Most African governments view the Department of Defense’s attempt to adopt a more nuanced approach to security in Africa with guarded optimism. They would certainly welcome environmental partnerships with AFRICOM as a way to promote political and economic stability through sustainable ecological practices, according to discussions held with Amina Salum Ali, the African Union’s ambassador to the U.S.
One of the top security concerns of African leaders—and one that is little-appreciated in U.S. security circles—is the impact of environment on stability and security. The ongoing misery in Darfur, which is partially rooted in conflicts over land and water use, is one tragic example of this link. On a positive note, UN Environment Programme (UNEP) researchers recently discovered water there that may well prove to be a source of resolution. That said, numerous reports—such as the one by the CNA Corporation’s Military Advisory Board—indicate that climate change and environmental catastrophes will continue to be a source of instability in Africa. Unfortunately, the continent most affected by environmental shock is also the least capable of mitigating its effects. AFRICOM must develop an engagement strategy that works with host governments, international membership organizations, NGOs, and other U.S. governmental agencies to find solutions to Africa’s environmental challenges.
The first, and most obvious, advantage of an environmental security strategy is its potential to build nontraditional alliances. Numerous organizations, from UNEP to the World Wildlife Fund, are actively working in Africa in this arena. AFRICOM could benefit significantly from the years of on-the-ground experience that these groups possess. What remains uncertain is the willingness of these civilian organizations to partner with the new command.
A second advantage of an environmental security strategy is that it allows the U.S. military to engage constructively with host governments and regional economic communities. Using AFRICOM to train African militaries on emergency disaster response, for instance, encourages those militaries to work under the mandate of civilian authority and fosters long-term democratic governance.
The idea of environmental security as a military engagement strategy is not new. When General Anthony Zinni was head of Central Command in central Africa, he devoted an entire section to environmental engagement programs, establishing a strong track record of success. Given that environmental concerns are intertwined with a host of other pressing problems in Africa, a coherent environmental security strategy would pay dividends on multiple levels.
Shannon Beebe is a senior Africa analyst at the Department of the Army. The opinions expressed in this article are solely his own and do not reflect the positions of the Department of Defense or the Department of the Army.
-
A Word of Caution on Climate Change and “Refugees”
›July 18, 2007 // By Geoffrey D. DabelkoScholars, policy analysts, and even military officers are breaking down climate change’s impacts into what they hope are more manageable topics for examination. The migration that climate change could cause is one such topic. For instance, the Center for American Progress recently posted a piece entitled “Climate Refugees: Global Warming will Spur Migration.” The International Peace Academy analyzed “Climate Change and Conflict: The Migration Link” in a May 2007 Coping With Crisis working paper. Climate change-induced migration also figured prominently in the security perspective offered by the CNA Corporation’s Military Advisory Board in its “National Security and the Threat of Climate Change.”
-
Women, By the Numbers
›June 21, 2007 // By Gib ClarkeThe breadth and depth of statistics available on the WomanStats Project, a new online resource for statistics on women’s security, lends strength to the website’s claim that it is “the most comprehensive compilation of information on the status of women in the world.”
The amount of information on the website is staggering: it includes 110 countries (a total of 172 will be available soon) and 243 variables, providing a wide-ranging analysis of women’s global security situation. The variables fall under nine themes, including physical security, which covers health and violence; economic security; and maternal security, which includes topics such as maternal and infant health care and availability of family planning.
Fortunately, the WomanStats database is not only large, it is also easy to use. The interface is simple, allowing the user to sort by country, variable, year of data collection or publication, and data source. The tables that display the results of users’ data queries are easy to view and print. And the data and variables are presented in a much more comprehensive fashion than they are in many other data sources. Both official and unofficial estimates are available, as is more qualitative information, such as the existence of laws related to the statistics (for example, whether a country engages in forced sterilization or child bearing, or whether women are allowed to hold public office).
In addition to providing data tables, the site allows many of the variables to be mapped using Geographic Information Systems (GIS). Three sample GIS maps are currently available; color-coded by nation, they display levels of women’s physical security, trafficking of women, and sex ratios (revealing countries with disproportionately large numbers of male children).
WomanStats is coordinated by five principal investigators from three universities: Brigham Young University (BYU), the University of Minnesota-Duluth, and the University of California at Santa Barbara. One of the principal investigators, Valerie Hudson of BYU, contributed an article—”Missing Women and Bare Branches: Gender Balance and Conflict”—to the Environmental Change and Security Program Report 11.
I encourage you to explore this excellent—and free—resource. If you have any comments or questions about it, WomanStats notes that it is an evolving project and will seek to incorporate user recommendations (and additional data!). -
Climate and Security Meets YouTube
›June 20, 2007 // By Geoffrey D. DabelkoYou can now watch commentary from some of the 11 retired U.S. generals and admirals who contributed to National Security and the Threat of Climate Change, a report that is one of the more recent voices on the links between climate and security. A seven-minute video on YouTube features interview clips, press conference footage, and narrated background on the CNA Corp’s Military Advisory Board. If you would like longer versions, you can watch Generals Sullivan and Ward and Admiral Truly testify before the Senate Foreign Relations Committee; or watch Generals Wald, Kern, and Farrell present the report for the Environmental Change and Security Program (ECSP) at the Woodrow Wilson Center.
One of the recommendations of these 11 retired flag officers is for the National Intelligence Council to produce a government-wide National Intelligence Estimate (NIE) to assess climate’s threats from a U.S. national security perspective. Legislation calling for a NIE has been contentious on the Hill, with some Republicans on the House Intelligence Committee claiming precious time could not be wasted on such investigations in the midst of the war on terror.
Representative Edward J. Markey (D.-Mass.), who is chair of the House Select Committee on Energy Independence and Global Warming, has a different view. In this video from the House floor he favorably cites the CNA report and defends the allocation of intelligence community resources to climate assessments.
And a final climate and security video recommendation, again from an ECSP meeting. Although the NSF-funded research is still in progress, initial results from Marc Levy (CIESIN), Charles Vörösmarty (University of New Hampshire), and Nils Petter Gleditsch (PRIO) on drought’s connections to violent conflict in sub-Saharan Africa indicate a statistically significant relationship. A substantive meeting summary gives you more details on their use of geo-referenced rainfall data and newly coded conflict data to provide the largely elusive quantitative evidence for these linkages. -
Persian Gulf to the “New Gulf”: New Book Takes New Approach to U.S. Energy Relationships
›May 29, 2007 // By Sean PeoplesAs Americans grow increasingly uneasy with our reliance on oil imports from the Middle East, a new region in Africa—the Gulf of Guinea—is emerging as a pivotal oil exporter. An ambitious new book, Oil and Terrorism in the New Gulf, written by James J. F. Forest and Matthew V. Sousa, focuses on this region of Africa and highlights the U.S. strategic interest in its oil-producing countries: Angola, Cameroon, Chad, Congo, Equatorial Guinea, Gabon, Nigeria, and the island nations of Príncipe and São Tomé. This “New Gulf” not only provides the U.S. with a new oil supply, but also affords a chance to reframe our energy relationships.
Oil consumption is on the rise, with the United States leading the pack at nearly 25 percent of aggregate global oil use. Meanwhile, rapid industrialization and economic growth in India and China continues to push demand even higher. The Gulf of Guinea region is vying to meet the demand.
This book asks a critical question: how will the New Gulf cope with growing demand for oil in the face of pervasive poverty, weak governance, and corruption? The crux of the problem: stability in this region is an obstacle. According to the authors, stability is contingent on a calculated foreign policy framework, and the United States’ ability to learn from its mistakes in its quest for Middle East oil:Our continued support for undemocratic regimes, coupled with our willingness to do virtually anything to maintain open and reliable access to the oil resources of the Middle East, has produced increasing animosity throughout the region that will take years of hard work to reverse.
The authors advocate building energy relationships that avoid the Middle East model—a model beset by “shortsighted U.S. interests rather than long-term, fundamental U.S. values.” Instead, they say, America’s energy relationship with the New Gulf should be stable and cooperative, and built off a clear framework that promotes three, integrated priorities:- 1. Human security
- Economic development
- Democratization
-
Saving the World
›What’s wrong with the world today? A whole lot. War in Iraq, poverty in rural America, malaria in Africa, global warming…the list is endless. But the editors of Foreign Policy think they have a way to solve these problems and more. The magazine’s new cover story, “21 Ways to Save the World,” is a collection of short essays on a wide range of global issues by some of the world’s leading thinkers.
Besides the interesting topics and the authors’ engaging styles, I like this series because it forces journalists and scholars—both of whom usually write about problems—to write about solutions. This shift is important because policymakers often get stumped when they hear that issues like high fertility and pollution are concerns of national security—what can they do about these seemingly insurmountable problems?
Most of the dilemmas and solutions presented in the article will be familiar to the informed reader. Amy Myers Jaffe extols the virtues of electricity. Seth Berkeley is optimistic about an AIDS vaccine. Jeffrey Sachs calls for malaria intervention. But some of the proposed solutions will be a tough sell for the policy audience.
For example, as he does elsewhere, Nicholas Eberstadt draws attention to the astonishingly high mortality of Russians—males in particular. He argues that if the United States intervenes, the benefits would be two-fold: humanitarian gains through Russian lives saved, and also political dividends in the form of a strengthened Russian democracy. But increased foreign aid for Russia’s health crisis will likely be a bitter pill for American politicians to swallow for a couple of reasons: First, there are still too many people occupying important government posts who got their first taste of power during the Cold War. For these folks, Russia is still the big bad bear and they may not be too keen on taking action to strengthen the Russian state. And for policymakers who are more humanitarian-minded, Eberstadt’s argument is still a hard sell because there’s simply no room for another needy state. Thanks to relentless campaigning by celebrities like Bono and philanthropists like Bill and Melinda Gates, the U.S. government is finally attempting to gain traction in Africa and see the deplorable conditions there as both a humanitarian and security concern (AFRICOM is the most recent example of the United States trying to get ahead of the problem). Now they have to save Russia, too?
This gets at the larger issue with the collection of essays. While the editors of FP are noble in their aim to tackle all of the world’s troubles, I fear that policymakers will just continue to be overwhelmed by the magnitude of problems and the multitude of solutions—the deer-in-headlights response. Thomas Homer-Dixon is correct when he writes that problems are complex, systems are complex, and solutions must be complex. With so many problems of equal importance—in an environment where everyone has their issue—and so many solutions of equal viability, how are policymakers ever to choose?
Jennifer Dabbs Sciubba is a doctoral candidate in the Department of Government and Politics at the University of Maryland, and a consultant to Policy Planning in the Office of the Under Secretary of Defense for Policy at the U.S. Department of Defense.
