I'm the Brigade Economic Development Officer for Task Force Stryker in Southern Afghanistan and I've done Zero Economic Development. I was sent to the University of Washington by the Brigade Commander for 6 months to learn about how to start small businesses in preparation for deployment to Iraq.

We are here now in Afghanistan and I spend most of my time focused on stabilization, which isn't taught in any of our officer courses or NCOES.

The COIN Academy in Camp Julien just had their inaugural Stability course in early November.

Stabilization, Development and Economics are linear processes in my mind. If the area does not have persistent security and the population's grievances are not addressed, then don't even worry about Development or "Economics."

I hate when USAID from Kabul comes down and talks about GDP. What does GDP have to do with anything in a remote village in Southern Afghanistan where they think the Russians are back?

Assuming that we get good at stabilization and start looking at development- that is a dangerous road for the military to take because we do not have the program management skills necessary for big development. If you mean development in terms of building a small well then perhaps we do...but I'd argue that we cannot even really build a well then QA/QC it.

Also building wells are stupid because it lowers the water table but that's a diffferent story.

The only other uses that my training has helped with is making sure CERP and/or other projects do not cause inflation in the economy or a rise in commodity prices like gravel and other construction material.

Anyways- fiscal discipline on the part of the military isn't good enough as other instruments of national power have programs which have budgets that I get the feeling "have to be expended" by a certain time. Which is bad. And it's really bad if you concentrate in only two Provinces and spend $240+ Million in the next 10 months.