DOCSLIB.ORG

Constructive Friction Or Petty Turf Wars? Organisational Resistance to the Integration of Defence, Diplomacy and Development

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Constructive Friction Or Petty Turf Wars? Organisational Resistance to the Integration of Defence, Diplomacy and Development European Security and Defence Forum Workshop 2: New Transnational Security Challenges and Responses Constructive Friction or Petty Turf Wars? Organisational Resistance to the Integration of Defence, Diplomacy and Development Andrea Baumann D.Phil candidate, University of Oxford 11 November 2009 This paper was presented at the European Security and Defence Forum (ESDF) organized by Chatham House. Chatham House is not responsible for the content of this paper. The views expressed in this document are the sole responsibility of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the view of Chatham House, its staff, associates or Council. Chatham House is independent and owes no allegiance to any government or to any political body. It does not take institutional positions on policy issues. This document is issued on the understanding that if any extract is used, the author(s)/ speaker(s) and Chatham House should be credited, preferably with the date of the publication or details of the event. Where this document refers to or reports statements made by speakers at an event every effort has been made to provide a fair representation of their views and opinions, but the ultimate responsibility for accuracy lies with this document’s author(s). The published text of speeches and presentations may differ from delivery. ESDF Workshop 2: Constructive Friction or Petty Turf Wars? INTRODUCTION The risk of state failure and the multiple sources of instability associated with it – the availability of ‘ungoverned space’ for criminal and terrorist elements, generations of unemployed and uneducated youth, low economic growth as well as wider regional repercussions – have come to be perceived as major security challenges in the twenty-first century. It is widely agreed that interventions in states emerging from (or threatening to descend into) violent conflict require a blend of expertise from a variety of institutional actors both military and non-military. Consequently, several Western nations have sought to design frameworks for the coordinated application of military power, development assets and diplomatic engagement. In both national and multilateral forums, a policy consensus has formed around the need for ‘comprehensiveness’ at the conceptual level and ‘integration’ at the practical level. The paper takes the United Kingdom’s experience in pursuing a ‘Comprehensive Approach’ in Afghanistan as the basis for a critical examination of the assumptions that have informed the policy discourse in the area of ‘stabilisation’. It challenges the view that hard and soft instruments of state power can simply be combined to form a hybrid type of ‘smart power’. 1 Instead, the organisations behind the labels of defence, diplomacy and development are conceptualised as repositories of specialised professional identities and cultures. In doing so, the paper offers a new perspective on obstacles to integration and the motivations behind individual organisations’ seeming unwillingness or inability to commit to an integrated approach. This endeavour proceeds in two stages. The first part of the paper outlines a three- layer framework for the analysis of obstacles to coordination, and introduces the notion of organisational cultures as key to the understanding of practical coordination problems. The second part critically examines the nature of recent policy recommendations in light of the British experience in Afghanistan over the past three years. 2 1 Hillary Clinton, in her confirmation hearing before the Senate to become the next U.S. Secretary of State, has advocated that ‘We must use what has been called smart power – the full range of tools at our disposal. With smart power, diplomacy will be the vanguard of foreign policy.’ in Philippe Naughton, ‘Hillary Clinton says “smart power” will restore American leadership’, Times Online , 13 January 2009. The term ‘smart power’ has been coined by Professor Joseph S. Nye of the Kennedy School of Government, Harvard University and promoted at various occasions. See for instance transcript of a statement before the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, 24 April 2008 <http://foreign.senate.gov/testimony/2008/NyeTestimony080424a.pdf>. 2 A generic reference system has been adopted to account for information obtained in confidential interviews with officials from the British military, the Ministry of Defence (MOD), the Foreign and Commonwealth Office (FCO), and the Department for International Development (DFID) and external consultants between November 2007 and January 2010. This system is employed with a view to solving the trade-off between credibility and access to data in favour of www.chathamhouse.org.uk 2 ESDF Workshop 2: Constructive Friction or Petty Turf Wars? The term ‘stabilisation’ has come to describe both the overarching goal of recent interventions and the way to achieve it. It has gradually found its way into development policy, national security strategies and military doctrine on both sides of the Atlantic.3 While the concept of stabilisation has gained prominence across these different policy spheres, it has remained sufficiently vague to offer a platform for a variety of different organisational discourses. Labels used by practitioners and policy-makers as shorthand for more complex processes have an enabling effect in that they convey a sense of shared understanding and purpose and thereby create the grounds for common action. 4 Through frequent use, however, they tend to become self- evident to a point at which they risk constraining thinking, stifling critical evaluation and suggesting a false sense of harmony by glossing over potential disagreements or inconsistencies. Hence, umbrella terms like ‘stabilisation’ or ‘stability operations’ to some extent obscure the profound differences in terms of priorities, sequencing, trade-offs, and expectations among the various organisations and individuals who are tasked with translating them into practice. ‘Stabilisation’ can be interpreted in a developmental logic as building the basis for longer term development; in a political logic guided by the need to establish a stable and legitimate regime for donor nations to interact with; or in a force protection logic aimed at fostering a supportive environment for troops that find themselves fighting an insurgency and eventually allowing for their timely withdrawal. In particular (but not exclusively) with regard to the latter, stabilisation partly and implicitly fulfils the role of an exit strategy. In situations where a military presence on the ground is required, the ‘stabilisation’ phase implies an institutional tension between ‘partner nation’ and ‘intervening force’ for troop-contributing nations. Due to the difficulty (or impossibility) of controlling or managing local perceptions effectively, this tension between ‘intruder’ and ‘partner’ is arguably true for both military and civilian actors intervening in foreign societies and cultures. The new stabilisation agenda can thus be seen as a discourse that is contested among different groups who compete for definitional power and the most efficient way to understanding the problem at hand. The categories used are those of ‘civil servant’ with an indication of organisational affiliation (FCO or DFID); and ‘military officer’ regardless of rank or service. 3 See for instance U.S. Army Field Manual 3-07 ‘Stability Operations’ (October 2008); US Agency for International Development, Fragile States Strategy (January 2005) ; UK Ministry of Defence (Development, Concepts and Doctrine Centre) Joint Doctrine Publication 3-40 ‘Security and Stabilisation: The Military Contribution’ (December 2008); UK Department for International Development, 2009 White Paper (June 2009). 4 Roland Paris offers an analysis of this process in his critique of the human security paradigm. See Roland Paris, 'Human Security: Paradigm Shift or Hot Air?' International Security , vol. 26, no. 2, 2001. www.chathamhouse.org.uk 3 ESDF Workshop 2: Constructive Friction or Petty Turf Wars? ownership. 5 ‘Stabilisation’ is not a value-free description of how Western states go about confronting the security environment of the twenty-first century: it is a discourse within which different players attempt to coin definitions and practices that harmonise with their organisational mandates and priorities. There are ongoing debates over what stabilisation entails, how to measure its impact, and what ‘success’ would look like. In other words, what kind of ‘stability’ is both desirable and achievable through external intervention is by no means an objective measure. Despite the often reiterated need to establish a common narrative 6 amongst all components of an integrated or ‘whole of government’ approach, decision-makers have shown little appetite for addressing the controversies that follow from different understandings of ‘stability’. The narrative of the stabilisation project pursued in Afghanistan has shifted between an ambitious agenda for transformation – involving far-reaching socio-economic and political modernisation and development – and more modest definitions of ‘stability’ in the sense of reducing the insurgency to a non-existential threat to the central government. Justifications for intervention have oscillated between ‘their wellbeing’ (e.g. Afghan women and girls) in an expansive vision of stability and ‘our security’ in a narrow focus on the denial of safe havens to transnational terrorism and crime. 7 It is no coincidence that this discourse emerges in a period of uncertainty surrounding
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Pakistan in the Danger Zone a Tenuous U.S
    Pakistan in the Danger Zone A Tenuous U.S. – Pakistan Relationship Shuja Nawaz The Atlantic Council promotes constructive U.S. leadership and engagement in international affairs based on the central role of the Atlantic community in meeting the international challenges of the 21st century. The Council embodies a non-partisan network of leaders who aim to bring ideas to power and to give power to ideas by: 7 stimulating dialogue and discussion about critical international issues with a view to enriching public debate and promoting consensus on appropriate responses in the Administration, the Congress, the corporate and nonprofit sectors, and the media in the United States and among leaders in Europe, Asia, Africa and the Americas; 7 conducting educational and exchange programs for successor generations of U.S. leaders so that they will come to value U.S. international engagement and have the knowledge and understanding necessary to develop effective policies. Through its diverse networks, the Council builds broad constituencies to support constructive U.S. leadership and policies. Its program offices publish informational analyses, convene conferences among current and/or future leaders, and contribute to the public debate in order to integrate the views of knowledgeable individuals from a wide variety of backgrounds, interests, and experiences. The South Asia Center is the Atlantic Council’s focal point for work on Afghanistan, Pakistan, India, Bangladesh, Sri Lanka, Nepal and Bhutan as well as on relations between these countries and China, Central Asia, Iran, the Arab world, Europe and the U.S. As part of the Council’s Asia program, the Center seeks to foster partnerships with key institutions in the region to establish itself as a forum for dialogue between decision makers in South Asia, the U.S.
    [Show full text]
  • Acquisitions List September 2009
    ACQUISITIONS LIST (NEW BOOKS AND JOURNAL ARTICLES) SEPTEMBER 2009 – SEPTEMBRE 2009 LISTE D’ACQUISITIONS (NOUVEAUX LIVRES ET ARTICLES DE REVUES) · To contact us : · NATO Library Public Diplomacy Division Room Nb123 1110 Brussels Belgium Tel. : 32.2.707.44.14 Fax : 32.2.707.42.49 E-mail : [email protected] · Intranet : http://hqweb.hq.nato.int/oip/library/ · Internet : http://www.nato.int/library · How to borrow items from the list below : As a member of the NATO HQ staff you can borrow books (Type: M) for one month, journals (Type: ART) and reference works (Type: REF) for one week. Individuals not belonging to NATO staff can borrow books through their local library via the interlibrary loan system. · How to obtain the Library publications : All Library publications are available both on the NATO Intranet and Internet websites. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- · Pour nous contacter : · Bibliothèque de l'OTAN Division de la Diplomatie Publique Bureau Nb123 1110 Bruxelles Belgique Tél. : 32.2.707.44.14 Télécopieur : 32.2.707.42.49 E-mail : [email protected] · Intranet : http://hqweb.hq.nato.int/oip/library/ · Internet : http://www.nato.int/library · Comment emprunter les documents cités ci-dessous : En tant que membre du personnel de l'OTAN vous pouvez emprunter les livres (Type: M) pour un mois, les revues (Type: ART) et les ouvrages de référence (Type: REF) pour une semaine. Les personnes n'appartenant pas au personnel d l'OTAN peuvent s'adresser à leur bibliothèque locale et emprunter les livres via le système de prêt interbibliothèques. · Comment obtenir les publications de la Bibliothèque : Toutes les publications de la Bibliothèque sont disponibles sur les sites Intranet et Internet de l’OTAN.
    [Show full text]
  • The Pugwash Newsletter and the Change
    NEWSLETTER issued by the Council of the Pugwash Conferences on Science and World Affairs Nobel Peace Prize 1995 Pugwash 50th Anniversary, Thinker’s Lodge, Pugwash, Nova Scotia, July 2007 Volume 44 ½ Number 1 ½ July 2007 TABLE OF CONTENTS TO THE PUGWASH COMMUNITY : . 1 SPECIAL SECTION Pugwash Meeting no. 326 “Revitalizing Nuclear Disarmament,” The 50th Anniversary of the Pugwash Conferences Co-sponsored by the Pugwash Conferences and the Middle Powers Initiative, Pugwash, Nova Scotia, Canada, 5 –7 July 2007 Communique from the Pugwash 50th Anniversary Workshop . 3 Greetings from Prime Minister Stephen Harper and Nova Scotia Premier Rodney MacDonald . 5 Program for the Pugwash 50th Anniversary Events . 7 Welcoming Remarks: Paolo Cotta-Ramusino, Douglas Roche, Raymond Szabo . 8 Workshop Report . 12 Speech by Hiroshima Mayor Tadatoshi Akiba . 18 Participant List . 23 Media Coverage, International Herald Tribune . 24 REPORTS ON RECENT PUGWASH WORKSHOPS Pugwash meeting no. 324 . 25 26th Workshop of the Pugwash Study Group on the Implementation of the Chemical and Biological Weapons Conventions: 10 Years of the OPCW: Taking Stock and Looking Forward Pu gwash Noordwijk, The Netherlands, 17-18 March 2007 Volume 44 ½ Number 1 Pugwash Meeting no. 325 . 35 July 2007 Pugwash Workshop on Iraq Erbil, Kurdistan, Iraq, 11-13 May 2007 Editor: NATIONAL PUGWASH GROUPS: . 41 Jeffrey Boutwell Canadian Pugwash Celebrates the 50th Anniversary of Pugwash Research Assistant: INTERNATIONAL STUDENT/YOUNG PUGWASH: . 44 Erin Blankenship International Student Young Pugwash & M S Swaminathan Research Foundation Consultation on “Food Security: A Great Threat to Human Security” Design and Layout: Chennai, India, 31 January—1 February 2007 Anne Read OBITUARIES: .
    [Show full text]
  • Basra: Strategic Dilemmas and Force Options
    CASE STUDY NO. 8 COMPLEX OPERATIONS CASE STUDIES SERIES Basra: Strategic Dilemmas and Force Options John Hodgson The Pennsylvania State University KAREN GUTTIERI SERIES EDITOR Naval Postgraduate School COMPLEX OPERATIONS CASE STUDIES SERIES Complex operations encompass stability, security, transition and recon- struction, and counterinsurgency operations and operations consisting of irregular warfare (United States Public Law No 417, 2008). Stability opera- tions frameworks engage many disciplines to achieve their goals, including establishment of safe and secure environments, the rule of law, social well- being, stable governance, and sustainable economy. A comprehensive approach to complex operations involves many elements—governmental and nongovernmental, public and private—of the international community or a “whole of community” effort, as well as engagement by many different components of government agencies, or a “whole of government” approach. Taking note of these requirements, a number of studies called for incentives to grow the field of capable scholars and practitioners, and the development of resources for educators, students and practitioners. A 2008 United States Institute of Peace study titled “Sharing the Space” specifically noted the need for case studies and lessons. Gabriel Marcella and Stephen Fought argued for a case-based approach to teaching complex operations in the pages of Joint Forces Quarterly, noting “Case studies force students into the problem; they put a face on history and bring life to theory.” We developed
    [Show full text]
  • Section 15.1 Civilian Personnel
    SECTION 15.1 CIVILIAN PERSONNEL Contents Introduction .................................................................................................................. 245 Civilian outreach event .......................................................................................... 245 Pre‑invasion planning and preparation ........................................................................ 246 ORHA ..................................................................................................................... 247 DFID humanitarian advisers .................................................................................. 249 The British Embassy Baghdad .............................................................................. 250 MOD civilian support to Op TELIC ......................................................................... 252 UK civilian presence during the Coalition Occupation of Iraq ...................................... 255 UK civilian deployments to ORHA ......................................................................... 255 The CPA and the return to a “war footing” ............................................................. 263 The impact of deteriorating security ....................................................................... 272 The British Offices in Baghdad and Basra ............................................................. 291 Preparations for the transfer of sovereignty ........................................................... 294 The post‑CPA UK civilian presence in Iraq
    [Show full text]
  • Strategic Dialogue on South Asia Conference Report
    STRATEGIC DIALOGUE ON SOUTH ASIA CONFERENCE REPORT International conference organized jointly by CERI-Sciences Po (Paris) and the Brookings Institution (Washington, DC) Paris, June 29-30, 2006 The third “Allies conference” on South Asia was held at the Centre d’Etudes et de Recherches Internationales in Paris on 29 and 30 June 2006. It followed two earlier conferences, held at Brookings in Washington DC in 2003 and 2005. This meeting brought together South Asian experts and concerned government officials –participating in their private capacity – from nine countries: Australia, Canada, France, Germany, Japan, Poland, Switzerland, the United Kingdom and the United States. The conference explored two major issue-areas. The first was South Asia’s setting in the wider world, including China’s role, and sources of tension from South Asia’s periphery. The second set of issues took a global perspective, in which nuclear and economic factors were examined, as were the policies of the US, Europe and the EU-India partnership, and Japan’s South Asia policies. These talks were off-the-record and private, allowing for frank discussion. They clarified regional policies and trends, as well as the approaches to South Asia of major non-regional powers. This report summarizes the conference proceedings and notes some major conclusions that emerged from the discussions. Part I presents the conference program and the list of participants. Part II sets forth the major policy-related conclusions reached at the meeting. Part III is a more detailed, analytical summary of the discussion itself. The conference was organized with the support of the French Ministry of Foreign Affairs through its Policy Planning Department (Centre d’Analyses et de Prévisions, CAP) and the Secretariat-General of National Defense (Secrétariat Général de la Défense Nationale, SGDN).
    [Show full text]
  • The Future of Pakistan
    FOREIGN POLICY at Brookings The Future of Pakistan Stephen P. Cohen South Asia Initiative THE FUTURE OF PAKISTAN Stephen P. Cohen The Brookings Institution Washington, D.C. January 2011 1 ABOUT THE AUTHOR Stephen P. Cohen is a senior fellow in Foreign Policy at Brookings. He came to Brookings in 1998 after a long career as professor of political science and history at the University of Illinois. Dr. Cohen previously served as scholar-in-residence at the Ford Foundation in New Delhi and as a member of the Policy Planning Staff of the U.S. State Department. He has also taught at universities in India, Japan and Singapore. He is currently a member of the National Academy of Science’s Committee on International Security and Arms Control. Dr. Cohen is the author or editor of more than eleven books, focusing primarily on South Asian security issues. His most recent book, Arming without Aiming: India modernizes its Military (co- authored with Sunil Das Gupta, 2010), focuses on India’s military expansion. Dr. Cohen received Bachelor’s and Master’s degrees at the University of Chicago, and a PhD from the University of Wisconsin. EDITOR’S NOTE This essay and accompanying papers are also available at http://www.brookings.edu/papers/2010/09_bellagio_conference_papers.aspx 2 TABLE OF CONTENTS PREFACE………………………………………………………………………….. 1 INTRODUCTION………………………………………………………………….3 PAKISTAN TO 2011………………………………………………………………. 5 FOUR CLUSTERS I: Demography, Education, Class, and Economics………………………….. 16 II: Pakistan’s Identity……………………………………………………….. 23 III: State Coherence………………………………………………………… 27 IV: External and Global Factors…………………………………………...... 34 SCENARIOS AND OUTCOMES…………………………………………………. 43 CONCLUSIONS…………………………………………………………………… 50 SIX WARNING SIGNS……………………………………………………………. 51 POLICY: BETWEEN HOPE AND DESPAIR…………………………………….
    [Show full text]
  • The United Kingdom's 2001-2003 Preparation for the Invasion of Iraq
    1 Between Dream and Deed: The United Kingdom’s 2001-2003 Preparation for the Invasion of Iraq by KAROLIEN EMMA MICHELLE KEARY Thesis submitted in partial fulfilment of the requirements for the degree of DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY IN INTERNATIONAL POLITICS at DEPARTMENT OF INTERNATIONAL POLITICS ABERYSTWYTH UNIVERSITY 2017 2 Between Dream and Deed: The United Kingdom’s 2001-2003 Preparation for the Invasion of Iraq by KAROLIEN EMMA MICHELLE KEARY Thesis submitted in partial fulfilment of the requirements for the degree of DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY IN INTERNATIONAL POLITICS at DEPARTMENT OF INTERNATIONAL POLITICS ABERYSTWYTH UNIVERSITY 2017 3 To my grandmothers, who should have had a chance to study geography and languages. 4 Declarations This work has not previously been accepted in substance for any degree and is not concurrently submitted in candidature for any degree. This thesis is the result of my own investigations, except where otherwise stated. Where correction services have been used, the extent and nature of the correction is clearly marked in a footnote. Other sources are acknowledged by footnotes giving explicit references. A bibliography is appended. I give consent for my thesis, if accepted, to be available for photocopying and for interlibrary loan, and for the title and summary to be made available to outside organisations. The word count of the thesis is 90,397 words. The views expressed in this work are the author’s own and do not reflect the official position of the Federal Public Service of Foreign Affairs or the Belgian government. 5 Acknowledgements When four years ago I pleaded with the department to get Hidemi as a new supervisor, I knew working with him would be an intellectual delight and suspected it would change the way I understood the world.
    [Show full text]
  • Newsletter 22
    BRITISH INSTITUTE FOR THE STUDY OF IRAQ NEWSLETTER NO. 22 November 2008 BRITISH INSTITUTE FOR THE STUDY OF IRAQ (GERTRUDE BELL MEMORIAL) REGISTERED CHARITY NO. 219948 BRITISH INSTITUTE FOR THE STUDY OF IRAQ 10, CARLTON HOUSE TERRACE LONDON SW1Y 5AH, UK E-mail: [email protected] Tel. + 44 (0) 20 7969 5274 Fax + 44 (0) 20 7969 5401 Web-site: http://www.britac.ac.uk/institutes/iraq/ The next BISI Newsletter will be published in May 2009. Brief contributions are welcomed on recent research, publications and events. They should be sent to BISI by post or e-mail to arrive by 15 April 2009. BISI Administrator Joan Porter MacIver edits the Newsletter. Cover: Our new BISI logo with the beautiful calligraphy of our new name in was drawn by Taha al-Hiti through the (اﻟﻤﻌﻬﺪ اﻟﺒﺮﻳﻄﺎﻧﻲ ﻟﺪراﺳﺔ اﻟﻌﺮاق) Arabic assistance of BISI Council member, Sir Terence Clark KBE. Taha al-Hiti was born in Baghdad in 1971 and began calligraphy at the age of six. He later studied under the master calligrapher Abbas al-Baghdady, who awarded him in 2005 his ‘Ijaza’ (licence). Meanwhile he graduated in architecture from Baghdad University and, after post-graduate studies in Islamic architecture in Vienna, he moved to London, where he practised as an architect for several years. He is at present senior architect/project manager on major building projects for a British company in Abu Dhabi. He has held exhibitions of his calligraphy in Baghdad, London, Abu Dhabi and Dubai. The British Institute for the Study of Iraq is very grateful to Mr al-Hiti for providing us with such a wonderful example of his calligraphy for our logo.
    [Show full text]
  • Section 10.1 Reconstruction
    SECTION 10.1 RECONSTRUCTION: MARCH 2003 TO JUNE 2004 Contents Introduction ....................................................................................................................... 3 UK post-conflict objectives and planning assumption ...................................................... 4 Humanitarian assistance .................................................................................................. 7 Coalition-building ............................................................................................................ 18 Post-conflict reconstruction and ORHA .......................................................................... 22 Responsibility for reconstruction .............................................................................. 22 UK concerns over participation in ORHA ................................................................. 28 Decisions to increase UK support for ORHA ............................................................ 43 Reconstruction strategy and funding ........................................................................ 60 Concerns over the scale of the reconstruction challenge and ORHA’s response .... 62 Resolution 1483 ....................................................................................................... 70 The return to a ‘war footing’, June 2003 ......................................................................... 72 Advice on the UK’s responsibilities as an Occupying Power ................................... 83 The first UK plan
    [Show full text]
  • PRISM Vol 1, No 2
    PRISM❖ Vol. 1, no. 2 03/2010 PRISM Vol. 1, no. 2 ❖ 03/2010 www.ndu.edu A JOURNAL OF THE CENTER FOR COMPLEX OPERATIONS PRISM ABOUT CENTER FOR COMPLEX OPERATIONS (CCO) CCO WAS ESTABLISHED TO: PRISM is published by the National Defense University Press for the Center for ❖ Serve as an information clearinghouse and knowledge Enhancing the U.S. Government’s Ability to manager for complex operations training and education, PUBLISHER Complex Operations. PRISM is a security studies journal chartered to inform members of U.S. Federal Agencies, allies, and other partners on complex and Prepare for Complex Operations acting as a central repository for information on areas Dr. Hans Binnendijk integrated national security operations; reconstruction and nationbuilding; relevant such as training and curricula, training and education pro- CCO, located within the Center for Technology and policy and strategy; lessons learned; and developments in training and education vider institutions, complex operations events, and subject EDITOR AND RESEARCH DIRECTOR National Security Policy (CTNSP) at National Defense to transform America’s security and development apparatus to meet tomorrow’s matter experts University, links U.S. Government education and training Michael Miklaucic challenges better while promoting freedom today. institutions, including related centers of excellence, ❖ Develop a complex operations training and education com- lessons learned programs, and academia, to foster unity munity of practice to catalyze innovation and development DEVELOPMENTAL EDITOR of effort in reconstruction and stability operations, of new knowledge, connect members for networking, share Melanne A. Civic, Esq. COMMUNICATIONS counterinsurgency, and irregular warfare—collectively existing knowledge, and cultivate foundations of trust and called “complex operations.” The Department of Defense, habits of collaboration across the community Constructive comments and contributions are important to us.
    [Show full text]
  • The UK's Foreign Policy Approach to Afghanistan and Pakistan
    House of Commons Foreign Affairs Committee The UK's foreign policy approach to Afghanistan and Pakistan Fourth Report of Session 2010–11 Volume I Report, together with formal minutes, oral and written evidence Additional written evidence is contained in Volume II, available on the Committee website at www.parliament.uk/facom Ordered by the House of Commons to be printed 9 February 2011 HC 514 Published on 2 March 2011 by authority of the House of Commons London: The Stationery Office Limited £23.00 The Foreign Affairs Committee The Foreign Affairs Committee is appointed by the House of Commons to examine the expenditure, administration, and policy of the Foreign and Commonwealth Office and its associated agencies. Current membership Richard Ottaway (Conservative, Croydon South) (Chair) Rt Hon Bob Ainsworth (Labour, Coventry North East) Mr John Baron (Conservative, Basildon and Billericay) Rt Hon Sir Menzies Campbell (Liberal Democrats, North East Fife) Rt Hon Ann Clwyd (Labour, Cynon Valley) Mike Gapes (Labour, Ilford South) Andrew Rosindell (Conservative, Romford) Mr Frank Roy (Labour, Motherwell and Wishaw) Rt Hon Sir John Stanley (Conservative, Tonbridge and Malling) Rory Stewart (Conservative, Penrith and The Border) Mr Dave Watts (Labour, St Helens North) The following Member was also a member of the Committee during the parliament: Emma Reynolds (Labour, Wolverhampton North East) Powers The Committee is one of the departmental select committees, the powers of which are set out in House of Commons Standing Orders, principally in SO No 152. These are available on the Internet via www.parliament.uk. Publication The Reports and evidence of the Committee are published by The Stationery Office by Order of the House.
    [Show full text]