The U.S. military has conducted an operation related to peacekeeping, peacemaking, or post-conflict occupation roughly every two years since the end of the Cold War. Ironically, despite these frequent post-conflict operations, there is no doctrine to guide the President and his Cabinet in planning for and conducting military interventions and post-conflict operations.[emph added]All that practice and we still don't get it right. Sorry, the irony escapes me at the moment.
Anyway, the two guys from Heritage clearly see what the big problem is: we don't have a plan.
Congress should require the executive branch to draft an interagency strategy for addressing the challenges of stabilizing countries after a conflict. The strategy should reflect the practical imperatives of occupying a defeated or failed state, establishing a legitimate government, securing U.S. vital national interests, and building up a civil society in the occupied state. Based on that doctrine, Congress should provide the legislative framework and resources to implement the strategic concept.This way, everybody at the Pentagon and the NSC gets his/her own copy of the to-do list, copies are clearly posted in all the restrooms in the Capitol, and a laminated copy remains on file in the Library of Congress, just in case.
In addition to having a plan, the two Heritage guys also stress the importance of keeping our terminology straight:
►Peacemaking involves the use or threat of violence to compel compliance with resolutions or sanctions designed to end conflict. Note that because "peacemaking" is war waged with the intention of ending war, it is not actually called war.
►Peacekeeping operations are undertaken with the consent of all major warring parties and are designed simply to implement a peace agreement. The two guys from Heritage consider this optional if, in the strategic judgment of you and your buddies, your military is starting to get stretched thin.
►Post-conflict operations include those minimum military activities that are required in the wake of war. Post-conflict operations are not the same as an “exit strategy,” which implies that exiting the country is the focus of operations. This is both good and bad to know if you're a soldier trying to guess if you'll be home in time for Christmas.
In Iraq and Afghanistan, the United States [note: excluding those actually in power] has relearned painful lessons on how to win the peace. Institutionalizing these lessons requires establishing a common national strategic concept for occupation operations, one that eschews the clean slate solution in favor of the disease and unrest formula.Ahh, there's nothing like the prose of foundation writers. Masterful! Plus, it has footnotes.
No comments:
Post a Comment