Nation-Building Elevated

[Surferbeetle]

OK, but...

a.) What's the policy?
b.) Why and how will we use violence or threat of violence to make it happen?
c.) Do we understand how the use of threaten use of violence in support of policy may change the policy?

Wilf,

We have discussed the inseparable trinity of security, governance, and economics across a number of threads here at SWC. The Venn diagram for these three individual components always intersects, although I would anticipate that there would be appreciable differences in the amounts of intersection when comparing models of Haiti with Afghanistan – shorthand – the spectrum of looting/civil unrest to combat.

What are your preferences as to the location to be examined in this experiment? Open source information concerning Haiti is certainly easier to find than for Afghanistan, there are more speakers/readers of French on this board than Pashto, and we would have a better chance of plugging into actual on the ground information about Haiti generated by CA/CAG and NGO’s than in Afghanistan.

Whatever location we develop a consensus on, as to doctrine I will appreciate your analysis via CvC and other references that you may suggest.

As to your three questions, be the security SME and help us to find the right path…

As to doctrine and some other points, and recognizing that we are a herd of cats (but with situational awareness of what the others are saying or trying to say), I'd suggest adopting a few of Evans Carlson's precepts:

1. As to doctrine: "don't obey, think"

2. As to "lead": "ability, knowledge and character"

3. As to everything: "work together" (gung ho).

Mike,

Glad to see that you and I are on the same page. It seems that we all use a variety of approaches depending upon situation (METT-TC) and I too would like to try a decentralized network approach to working on this project without the traditional hierarchy. The marketplace/competition of ideas to identify the best way forward is a SWC technique that makes for interesting conversations if nothing else.

In urban studies, the original downtown-centric model log ago gave away to various distributed models as a result of communication/transportation resources that unlocked the walkability constraint. This is more regional than classical cities, and more sophisticated (yet distributed) in its connections and associations built to support dynamic and shifting opportunities/competitive advantages. Oil spot or city-based are confusing---more like MA's linking islands where and when you can.

My version of targeting places we can be successful with least effort and most underlying potential (rather than just accidental involvement in places of high conflict) would look at factors like whether there is a big batch of grads in the pipeline before expanding industry. If not, focus more on hand-skill and traditional activities (farming, roadwork, tertiary stuff). Try to find some pattern out of potential areas that can allow prioritization to underlying strategies of encirclement of bad areas.

Steve,

Will showcasing urban planning concepts for this experiment include gravity analysis, using KML language & Google Earth, and civilian GIS capabilities?

A semi-successful SWC Prototype/Proof of Concept built upon easily accessible data would be probably be at least an interesting footnote or paragraph in a book. Wherever we end up geographically focusing upon I suspect it will help in some way towards roughing out a TTP – CA CIM TTP are not where they need to be. This is an interesting website. What are your thoughts about focusing upon water for the project? Agriculture, deforestation, stormwater runoff, water & wastewater treatment seem to have many intersections among planning, law, anthropology, development, engineering, and security…

Let say, in a full virtual world: it's the field that will decide what is applicable or not. (Me too I want a super grade, below army marshal, marechal d'armee en francais dans le texte, I'm against)

This is what I was thinking about talking about decision making system. For me this is not limited to use of violence as I integrate non military action in the scope of security (with a big holistic "S"). And as I see security as a cross cutting issue in a context as Astan (cf; the Do No Harm approach).

The intersection between military and civilian efforts sometimes reminds me of the Edge Effect in ecology…lots of things going on, many opportunities to make a difference. What are your thoughts about the balanced scorecard?

Steve