Coupla points.
1. If State and/or the interagency are developing doctrine, then that's a major step in the right direction. In the past, when we talked about doctrine w/them they weren't very responsive. The general feeling was that doctrine was a military thing, too restrictive, too anti-intellectual (OK, that's a little editorializing).
2. As FM 3-07 was developed, the authors looked at State's reconstruction tasks, then distilled out what the military components might logically be. Therefore, the nesting was part of the original gameplan. Additionally, members of State, USAID and others got to take their cuts at 3-07, so that influence is also reflected.
Still, if State is moving forward with stability doctrine, then bless them. As they like to say, "I am cautiously optimistic."
Bookmarks