Roundtable on Proposed Civilian Reserve Corps

[MountainRunner]

Ken,
Are you suggesting they accidently left off "post-conflict"? Just forgot to mention a focus on transitioning societies from conflict? Also, USAID is developmental long-term, and not contigency dependent. S/CRS is a "Coordinating" office to bring the ground skills to bear.

Bronwen,
As far as Ambassador Dobbins' comments, to start, those were made in 2006. Just in 2007, CRS underwent change (maturation?) that weren't captured, for example, in the GAO report on Stabilization and Reconstruction (http://www.gao.gov/new.items/d0839.pdf) of Nov 2007. Included in the GAO report is a joint response by State, DoD, and USAID noting the shortcomings of the report mostly in the areas of recognizing the progress made in 2007. But more importantly, going back to his comments about transference to DoD, this is about returning R&S to a civilian-led operation.

I'm not entirely sure the 'nation-building' of the last decade has proven effect. I have Ambassador Dobbins books, seen his presentation on the subject, and have exchanged email with and as late as yesterday spoke to him on the phone about CRS. His comments in 2006 were of an entity shaping up then, not today. I won't speak for the Ambassador, but I don't think the comments of 2006 reflect his view, or concerns, of CRS today.

On the 'call-up', this isn't like what the SecStatewas about to do: force 'volunteers' for duty. The agencies would pre-designate who was a member of ARC and who was a member of SRC. This would not be an allotment to be distributed at call-up. Afterall, these people are going through training (constantly in ARC or periodically with SRC).
OTI would presumably be part of the S/CRS 'toolkit', as well as Commerce's and Agriculture's foreign offices, etc.

This discussion helps me with a follow post I'm doing. So I appreciate the questions.

Matt

[Ken White]

do things like that 'accidentally'...

Ken,
Are you suggesting they accidently left off "post-conflict"? Just forgot to mention a focus on transitioning societies from conflict? Also, USAID is developmental long-term, and not contigency dependent. S/CRS is a "Coordinating" office to bring the ground skills to bear.

Not at all. My point was that 'humanitarian aid' NOT the US Aid mandate, it is merely one of them. Yes, it is a developmental long term operation -- with the goal of aiding US Foreign Policy (conditions not applied). Aid was quite busy in Viet Nam and supplied a lot of folks to the PRTs. It has done the same elsewhere both during and post conflict. that is part of its job.

I understand what S/CRS is, just wanted to clarify that the US Aid mandate is a great deal more far reaching than was stated.

[LS]

These comments represent ~ONLY~ the personal opinion of the author - a long-time fan of SWJ - and do not in any way reflect the actual policy of anyone. In fact, if you ask around, most people will tell you that the author has difficulty discerning fact from fiction and policy from pizza sauce. He's not all that bright, but he's certainly happy!

Among the USG agencies that are or might be drawn into S&R missions, the capabilities and anticipated responsibilities overlap considerably. The Venn diagram would have circles with more overlap than not (and would depend on who was doing the drawing, and for which S&R mission). This won't change unless/until funding streams change. When there's serious money, for example, to support the Ministry of Health in Pineland because it's a critical-priority-country, there are going to be multiple agencies competing for the work.

The role of coordination - as highlighted by MountainRunner - is truly fundamental to the office. Think about the interagency as an orchestra, and the Coordinator as the Conductor. The conductor doesn't select the music to be performed; that's done by the Board of Directors. S/he doesn't recruit the musicians, direct what brand of trumpet or violin is to be used. S/he doesn't even get to decide who plays in a particular performance. S/he doesn’t print programmes, market the performance, or collect the money.

The conductor works from a musical score that articulates all the various elements of the piece being performed, and assures that each section contributes their part at the proper time, at the appropriate pace and volume, and makes sure that the overall performance of the orchestra truly is greater than the sum of its parts.

If, in rehearsals, the conductor feels there needs to be a stronger presence of bassoons (analogous to DDR, perhaps), then the conductor doesn't hire bassoonists; s/he merely calls for more bassoons. The Board approves (ornot) and section leads sort out who they'll be, where they'll sit, etc.

I don't mean to over-simplify S&R missions by this analogy. But it's been helpful among the interagency in assuaging fears that S/CRS is going to pull an “Al Haig” the next time a true S&R crisis rolls around.

S/CRS is only relevant when the Secretary of State – as empowered in NSPD-44 – calls upon them to take a particular role in planning and/or coordinating the whole-of-government approach to a specific S&R engagement. In the meantime, work proceeds apace on the interagency management system that would support such an engagement, and the structures (as alluded to by other posts above) to provide a robust and capable civilian corps to execute such engagements.

De Opresso Library!