Results 1 to 8 of 8

Thread: Strengthen Civilian Forces, Too

Hybrid View

Previous Post Previous Post   Next Post Next Post
  1. #1
    Small Wars Journal SWJED's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    Largo, Florida
    Posts
    3,989

    Default Strengthen Civilian Forces, Too

    18 February Washington Times commentary - Strengthen Civilian Forces, Too by Richard Lugar.

    American troops in Iraq and Afghanistan are foremost in our thoughts and prayers, but the U.S. military has been quietly fighting the war against terror in scores of other foreign countries. Since September 11, 2001, the number of military personnel and Defense Department activities in non-combat countries has soared.

    Finding, capturing and eliminating terrorists and their support networks are only part of the military's new mission. They have won new authority outside the traditional foreign aid framework to provide military training to foreign countries. Increasingly, the military is taking on roles once reserved for civilian agencies, such as building schools and clinics, drilling wells and conducting public information campaigns.

    A strong military response is necessary for the war against terrorism. When our foreign friends use our training and intelligence to round up global terrorists on their soil, it is clearly a mutual success. But over-reliance on the military also carries risks...

  2. #2
    Council Member Rob Thornton's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    Fort Leavenworth, KS
    Posts
    1,510

    Default

    He may just be trying to take a dfferent tack in generating interest in this problem. I agree with him, but he almost paints a picture that its the green suiters who covet the jobs he is describing. I wonder if increasing the OGAs budgets would provide for professionals willing to deploy to war zones in the numbers we require - The folks at State and USAID don't "enlist" and don't suffer UCMJ if they miss movement do they? I am by no means a fan of PMCs - but I'll say this about them, if you create a need they will fill it. If you tell Blackwater or one of the others that you want skilled techies and are willing to pay top dollar, you'll get what you pay for (and probably not much else outside the contract). The $$$ provides the incentive (and it will be pricey, and you will not necessarily get the representation of DoS interests through contracting either)- what provides the incentive for an enlarged DoS? Its not so much a matter of budgets I think - I think its a matter of willingness to deploy. If we are going to resource this from GS and FS types, then we need to do several things before we start taking money away from the folks (military) who are willing to do it in a harsh environment because we have no choice:

    1) When a guy or gal signs up for FS - they sign up for a commitment that may take them to bad places based on the needs of the country - you quit and you face criminal charges - we take oaths in the military and the people who send us places are well aware of it.

    2) Provide them the required training as part of their indoctrination training - they don't need their own schools, they could foot the bill and the cadre could come from the military (how important is it to us to have them do it?)

    3) Regular exchanges with the military: a TF or BCT gets ready to go, and their FS team goes through the deployment process with them. It would be pricey.

    These example recommendations are not meant to be prescriptive, but descriptive. You need a unified force to approach these complex problems in an expeditionary environment to fin holistic solutions. If you put to high test dogs inthe room without defined relationships - you will the type of friction that is counter productive. Sometimes it may be a military lead, sometimes a DoS lead.

    I guess my point is they seem to need to do some soul searching and maybe some organizational restructuring if we are going to ask them to be expeditionary.
    Last edited by Rob Thornton; 02-18-2007 at 03:28 PM.

  3. #3
    Council Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    The Land of The Morning Calm
    Posts
    177

    Default

    Time for a reality check on the civilian side of the government:

    Australia has more people in their diplomatic corps than we do. USAID has only 2,000 people, and only really 1,000 are available for deployment overseas world-wide. That means every country they have a project in they have people. USAID, as an organization, is shifting to what Rob described, but they just don't have the people. There is no movement right now to increase. The remainder of the state department has a personnel shortage as well. A lot of military people have written and opined about what state should do and how to do it. These articles are often researched, and make a lot of sense. The problem is that state ain't going to do it anytime soon. The state guys currently throw just enough action to keep the articles and thoughts appearing valid, but internally they are having many fights over how to do it.

  4. #4
    Council Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Good question. If anyone knows, would you please send me home?
    Posts
    15

    Default Strengthening civilian capabilities

    For what it's worth, there is movement on this.

    At the end of March (07) the Deputies approved the creation of an "interagency management structure" (IMS) for S&R missions; a civilian response system capable of supporting 3 concurrent missions (1 small like Haiti, 1 medium like Kosovo, and 1 large like Afghanistan). $50M has been allocated for a civilian cadre of 500 people to be recruited, trained, equipped, and organized for deployment in a year.

    We'll see, of course; there's a lot of daylight between words and actions. Right now the $50M is contingent on enabling legislation; S.613 (Lugar, Biden, Warner, Hagel) and H.R.1084 (Farr, Saxon). If/when that passes, the funds should flow and things should start happening very quickly.

    More to follow if there's interest...

  5. #5
    Council Member sgmgrumpy's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Ft Leavenworth Kansas
    Posts
    168

    Default

    Jimbo,

    Do those numbers reflect the amount of contracted USAID positions?

    I always see USAID has pre-solicitations for positions world wide on a daily basis in FBO.

  6. #6
    Council Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    The Land of The Morning Calm
    Posts
    177

    Default

    SGMGrumpy,

    Those figures do not include contract workers. AID has been successfully using contract workers over the years in standard developmental models. The problem that has creeped up in Iraq that is definately COIN centeric is the ability of the contracted folks to enable the IO themes and messages. When I was working at State, on of the DoS guys told me a war story about working in Karbala as a POLAD. At a meeting with local leaders the the USAID rep told the locals that he was not representative of the U.S. Government (the guy was a contartctor). This really caused a problem for the military and DoS guys tying to work with the locals. I hope this helps and wasn't too extraneous. I am goign to try and figure out how to warm up my house because it is cold here in Leavenworth.

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •