KSU-SSI Symposium
Conflict Management and Peacebuilding:
Pillars of a New American Grand Strategy
2012 Symposium Panelists, Speakers, & Moderators
- Unmanned Systems
- C4ISR
- Versatile satcom and mobile telecommunications
- Cyber warfare
- Platforms that can perform a varied set of missions – cargo, casevac, tacevac, engagement
- Intelligence gathering
- O&M services for continued force readiness
- Government acquisition professionals will need to adapt to work with industry – minimize scope creep in requirements, evaluate technology risks, more global
- Broader competition from both U.S. and non-U.S. based defense contractors to accommodate budget pressures and wider array of technology needs
- Potential changes in export control laws to protect national security but also welcome technology investments from non-U.S. contractors and small businesses
- Shifts in contractor people investments – specifically, engineering talent
- Changes in contract structures – best value and firm fixed price contracts expected to become more common
- Increased reliance on the FYDP to develop strategic and operating plans
- Compressed development timeframes to address threats as they arise – more COTS technologies, more responsive engineering teams
2012 Symposium Directors
BIO
Robin Dorff joined the Strategic Studies Institute in June 2007 as Research Professor of National Security Affairs. He previously served on the USAWC faculty as a Visiting Professor (1994-96) and as Professor of National Security Policy and Strategy in the Department of National Security and Strategy (1997-2004), where he also held the General Maxwell D. Taylor Chair (1999-2002) and served as Department Chairman (2001-2004). Dr. Dorff has been a Senior Advisor with Creative Associates International, Inc., in Washington, DC, and served as Executive Director of the Institute of Political Leadership in Raleigh, NC (2004-2006). Dr. Dorff remains extensively involved in strategic leadership development, focusing on national security strategy and policy, and strategy formulation. His research interests include these topics as well as failing and fragile states, interagency processes and policy formulation, stabilization and reconstruction operations, and US grand strategy. He lectures frequently on these topics and has spoken all over the U.S. and in Canada, Europe, Africa, and Asia, and at institutions such as the Africa Center for Strategic Studies, the Near East-South Asia Center for Strategic Studies, the George C. Marshall Center, the Marine Corps University, the Joint Special Operations School, the National Defense University of Taiwan, and the Institute of Defence and Strategic Studies in Singapore. He is the author or co-author of three books and numerous journal articles. Dr. Dorff is the recipient of the U.S. Army Superior Civilian Service Award and the U.S. Army Outstanding Civilian Service Medal, and seven US Army War College Faculty Published Writing Awards (1996-2001, 2004). Professor Dorff holds a B.A. in Political Science from Colorado College and an M.A. and Ph.D. in Political Science from the University of North Carolina-Chapel Hill.
BIO
Dr. Volker Franke is the Director of the PhD program in International Conflict Management. He joined KSU’s Department of Political Science and International Affairs as Associate Professor of Conflict Management in the fall of 2009. Prior to coming to KSU, Dr. Franke was Associate Professor of Political Science and International Studies at McDaniel College in Westminster, MD. From 2006-2008, he served as Director of Research at the Bonn International Center for Conversion (BICC), one of Germany’s premier peace and conflict research and capacity building institutes. Currently, Dr. Franke also serves on the Scientific Advisory Board of the German Foundation of Peace Research. From 1998-2007, he was Director and Managing Editor of the National Security Studies Case Studies Program at Syracuse University’s Maxwell School of Citizenship and Public Affairs. Dr. Franke holds a Ph.D. in political science from Syracuse University’s Maxwell School, a Master of Public Administration degree from North Carolina State University and a MA in political science and sociology from Johannes Gutenberg University in Mainz, Germany. He is the author of Preparing for Peace: Military Identity, Value-Orientations, and Professional Military Education (Praeger 1999) and more than 30 journal articles, book chapters, case studies and research reports on issues related to peace and security studies, conflict management, civil-military relations, development policy and social identity. He is also the editor of Terrorism and Peacekeeping: New Security Challenges (Praeger 2005) and Security in a Changing World: Case Studies in U.S. National Security Management (Praeger 2002).
PANEL 1: The role of peacebuilding and conflict management in a future American Grand Strategy
Moderator:
BIO
Dr. Jeffrey D. McCausland is Visiting Professor of International Security at Dickinson College. He also holds the position of Distinguished Visiting Professor of Research and Minerva Chair at Strategic Studies Institute (SSI). A U.S. Army (retired) colonel, during his military career he served in a variety of command and staff positions in the United States and Europe. This included assignments as the Dean of Academics at the U.S. Army War College, Carlisle Barracks, Pennsylvania, and the Office of the Deputy Chief of Staff for Operations, working on the Conventional Forces Europe Treaty (CFE) from 1988 to 1989. He commanded the 3rd Battalion 17th Field Artillery, VII Corps during Operations DESERT SHIELD and DESERT STORM. Dr. McCausland was also the Director for Defense Policy and Arms Control on the National Security Council Staff in the White House. Furthermore, he was a member of the Department of Social Sciences, West Point; a visiting fellow at the Center for International Affairs, Harvard University; and a research fellow at the International Institute for Strategic Studies, London. Dr. McCausland’s articles have appeared in The Fletcher Forum, Parameters, Naval War College Review, Comparative Strategy, Armed Forces and Society, Defense Analysis, Field Artillery Journal, Military Review, and International Defense Review. He is also the author of a monograph, The Gulf War: A Military Analysis, published by the International Institute for Strategic Studies, London. He is a contributing author or editor to a number of books. They include: The Future of the Special Relationships, Conventional Deterrence, The Future of US-Australian Relations, and Arms Control in the 1990s. Dr. McCausland holds a Ph.D. in International Relations from the Fletcher School of Law and Diplomacy, Tufts University.
Panelists:
BIO
Professor Charles J. Dunlap, Jr., is a Visiting Professor of the Practice at Duke Law
School and the Executive Director of its Center on Law, Ethics and National
Security. He is a retired Air Force major general who received his
undergraduate degree from St. Joseph's University (PA), and his law degree from
Villanova University. Prior to retiring from the military in June of 2010,
General Dunlap assisted in the supervision of more than 2,500 military and
civilian attorneys worldwide. His 34-year career included tours in both the
United Kingdom and Korea, and he deployed for military operations in Africa and
the Middle East. Totaling more than 120 publications, his writings address a
wide range of topics including various aspects of national security law,
airpower, counterinsurgency, cyberpower, civil-military relations, and
leadership. A distinguished graduate of the National War College, General
Dunlap speaks frequently at professional conferences and at numerous
institutions of higher learning, to include Harvard, Yale, MIT, UVA, and
Stanford, as well as National Defense University and the Air, Army, and Navy
War Colleges. He serves on the Board of Advisors for the Center for a New
American Security.
ABSTRACT
BIO
A former senior government official, Bob Kennedy returned to his position as Professor in the Sam Nunn School of International Affairs, Georgia Institute of Technology, Atlanta, Georgia in January 2003 after serving as director of the joint German-American George C. Marshall European Center for Security Studies in Germany. In nearly 35 years of government service, Bob has also served as Civilian Deputy Commandant, NATO Defense College, Rome, Italy; Dwight D. Eisenhower Professor of National Security Studies at the U.S. Army War College, researcher at the U.S. Army Strategic Studies Institute, Foreign Affairs Officer, U.S. Arms Control and Disarmament Agency; an enlisted man in the Army; and a command pilot on active duty with the U.S. Air Force and later with the reserve forces. His most recent works are Of Knowledge and Power: the Complexities of National Intelligence (2008), “The Elements of Strategic Thinking” in Gabriel Marcella, ed. Teaching Strategy: Challenge and Response (2010) and The Road to War: Congress’ Historic Abdication of Responsibility (2010).
ABSTRACT
The Demands of Smart Power
It is often noted that the threats, potential threats, and challenges that confront and will continue to confront the United States today and in the decades ahead are far more complex than those during the Cold War. Whether they arise from the proliferation of nuclear weapons, materials and know-how; chemical or biological weapons; terrorist organizations, transnational criminal groups, drug cartels, or individuals of malevolent intention; tribal, ethnic, or sectarian strife; etc.; or rising regional powers, failing governments, cross border conflicts, global economic disturbances, environmental degradation, pandemics, or climate change, American leadership in global affairs will be severely challenged. However, perhaps the greatest challenge of the 21st Century will arise from continued but slow relative shift from the world’s predominant political, economic, diplomatic, and military superpower to primus inter pares in world affairs.
How effective the United States is in meeting the challenges, including its relative readjustment in status among nations will depend largely on how wisely it applies the instruments of national power (political, economic, psychological, and military). This paper addresses the nature of national power: its sources, instruments, and aspects and what is demanded if soft and hard power are to be molded into what is now fashionably called “Smart Power.
BIO
Michael Lekson has been with the united States Institute for Peace since 2003. Prior ro that, he served for 26 years in the Department of State, where he was Deputy Assistant Secretary of State for Arms Control, overseeing all multilateral arms control negotiations and treaty implementation, for which he received the secretary’s Distinguished Service Award. Lekson also served as deputy to the Special Representative of the President and the Secretary of State for implementation of the Dayton Peace Accords. Lekson was also director of the Office of European Security and Political Affairs, where he helped develop and implement policies to adapt NATO to the post-Cold War world, and of the Office of United Kingdom, Benelux, and Ireland Affairs, where he worked intensively on the Northern Ireland peace process.
During his Foreign Service career, Lekson served as a consular officer in Bilbao, Spain, and as a political officer in U.S. embassies in Costa Rica, Peru and the United Kingdom. He was deputy U.S. representative to the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe during the OSCE’s augmentation of its democracy building, conflict prevention, and conflict management efforts in formerly communist countries, especially in the Balkans and Central Asia. Prior to joining the Department of State, he served two years in the U.S. Army as a field artillery officer.
Lekson has a B.A. in English from Princeton University and a master’s in linguistics from Stanford University.
ABSTRACT
Conflict Management: Forever With Us. Peacebulding: Not so Much
Formal National Security Strategies are generally bureaucratic products, which have varying degrees of influence over how the executive branch organizes itself and justifies budget requests, but their strategic content is hard to pin down. The current U.S. strategy identifies four “enduring national interests": security, prosperity, values, and international order.
Structures and organizations for managing conflict persist, operating on institutional inertia and evolving (usually slowly, sometimes fast). They can gradually hollow out over time, but organizations often find new purposes even as those they were formed to address may be achieved, or become irrelevant.
We may be seeing the end of the post-World-War-II order, but we are unlikely to see it replaced. Our pivot to Asia is not going to result in anything resembling the "transatlantic" collaboration which underlay the international era which we have come to take for granted.
"Taking things for granted" is a major obstacle to developing a successful grand strategy, even theoretically.
Much of what we are used to in the world security environment - including the role of the UN, and especially of the UNSC in legitimizing force or other hostile actions against recalcitrant states - is part of the post-WWII order. As global power realigns itself, as budgetary realities and lack of political support in democratic countries make large-scale peacebuilding less likely, and as success stories continue to be scarce, the future may hold “less of the same.”
Uncertainty and conflict will always be with us, leading to a continuing need for conflict management. Key factors that successful strategies will need to address include the role of non-state actors, how we collectively manage the special dangers of nuclear weapons, the possibility of revolutionary technological developments, whether the pace of economic growth can be restored and sustained, and things that in retrospect may look obvious but looking forward are much less so.
PANEL 2: More than a Military Tool: Strengthening civil-military cooperation in peacebuilding
Moderator:
BIO
Doug Brooks is President of ISOA, the International Stability Operations Association. ISOA is a nongovernmental, nonprofit, nonpartisan association of service companies dedicated to providing ethical services to international peacekeeping, peace enforcement, humanitarian rescue, stabilization efforts and disaster relief. Mr. Brooks is a specialist on private sector capabilities and African security issues and has written extensively on the regulation and constructive utilization of the private sector for international peacekeeping and humanitarian missions.
Mr. Brooks has testified before the U.S. Congress, South African Parliament and to UN functions. He has appeared on countless TV and radio programs including al Jazeera, the BBC, CBS News, NBC News, Fox News, CNN International, National Public Radio, the Diane Rehm show, Voice of America, SABC in South Africa and the Lehrer News Hour. He has lectured at numerous universities and colleges, including Georgetown University, the South African Defense College, the Inter-American Defense College at Ft. McNair, George C. Marshall Center in Garmisch, Germany and the U.S. Military Academy at West Point.
Mr. Brooks is originally from Indiana and has a BA in History from Indiana University and an MA in History from Baylor University, with additional doctoral studies at the Graduate School of Public and International Affairs, University of Pittsburgh. He has worked as a teacher in Kambuzuma Township in Harare, Zimbabwe, at the Library of Congress, at the National Archives, and the Institute of International Education (IIE). Previous to founding IPOA he was an academic fellow at the South African Institute for International Affairs in 1999-2000
Panelists:
BIO
William Flavin is the Division Chief of the Doctrine, Concept, Education, & Training Division at the US Army Peacekeeping and Stability Operations Institute, located at the U.S. Army War College in Carlisle, Pennsylvania. He assumed his current position in July of 2007. Before this assignment, he was a senior foreign affairs analyst with Booz Allen and Hamilton on contract to assist the US Army Peacekeeping Institute for doctrine development. From 1995 to 1999, he was a Colonel in the US Army serving as the Deputy Director of Special Operations for the Supreme Allied Commander of Europe at the Supreme Headquarters, Allied Powers Europe. William Flavin has a BA in History from VMI and an MA in History from Emory University. He was a senior fellow at CSIS for his Army War College year and then taught at the Army War College.
ABSTRACT
Always an Outsider: US Military Role in International Peacebuilding
The US military has been involved in “Peacebuilding” for most of its history. From working with the Native American Indian populations, the development of the Western US, the support of Reconstruction in the Southern US, and the involvement in the Civilian Conservation Corps and other depression era programs. However these activities inside the US in support of the ‘building’ of the US Nation differ from what was called for in the overseas adventures in Mexico, Philippines, Central America, Cuba, Japan, Germany, South Korea, Africa, Balkans, Iraq, and Afghanistan where the US Military action was transitory and alien to the culture and society.
This paper will look at the challenges and opportunities that the military must face when attempting to support international “peacebuilding” enterprises. The US military will always remain an outsider to the peacebuilding process and the country it is trying to assist. It can never have sufficient knowledge about the host country and the other international actors because of its institutional processes and the temporary nature of its involvement. Because of its ability to plan, organize, respond, and mobilize resources it will be asked to undertake a wide variety of tasks beyond its basic combat skills. It is an institution noted for seizing the initiative, taking action, and getting results. Does this advance or retard peacebuilding?
The paper will consider just what can be known by the US Military about another society, its structural issues, its resilience, its long term grievances, and its vision for the future. What can the military realistically expected to understand about the other international and regional actors? By its actions the military will have an effect on the host nation but is it capable of understanding what that effect will be? How much is the military self-aware of the consequences of its actions in supporting peacebuilding? Does the military have institutional inhibitors that proscribe what it can reasonably be expected to do? Does the military’s culture and institution prevent the level of collaboration that is needed with the whole of US government and with the NGO and IGO community to support successful peacebuilding missions? But in many instances the military will be necessary so the paper will seek to propose a way ahead building upon the strengths of the military institution and mitigating the shortcomings. It will look at the knowledge, skills, and abilities that the military can and should possess and how to address the gaps that will exist. It will look at the reality behind achieving the comprehensive approach and what short of that level of cooperation might achieve the desired results.
BIO
Christopher Holshek is an independent consultant in civil-military strategy and peace operations. He is currently a Senior Associate with the Project on National Security Reform and a Country Project Manager for DoD’s Defense Institutional Reform Initiative, working intermittently in Africa, as well as a strategic consultant with Wikistrat. A retired U.S. Army (Reserve) Civil Affairs (CA) Colonel with 30 years total service, he has 25 years of civil-military operations experience at the strategic, operational, and tactical levels in joint, interagency, and multinational settings across the full range of operations, among them command of the first CA battalion to deploy to Iraq in support of Army, Marine and British forces, as a KFOR civil-military liaison officer to the UN Interim Mission in Kosovo, and in the planning and deployment of CA forces to the Balkans in the mid-1990s.
Originally commissioned an armored cavalry officer, Col (ret.) Holshek deployed for 18 months as Senior U.S. Military Observer and Chief of Civil-Military Coordination (CIMIC) in the United Nations Mission in Liberia, where he broke new ground in applying and validating CIMIC concepts and later assisted in the development of UN civil-military policy. His final tour of military duty was as the Military Representative at the U.S. Agency for International Development’s Office of Military Affairs for USEUCOM/SHAPE, helping to link security and development at the national strategic level in an interagency setting as well as to stand up the National Response Center for the Haiti earthquake. Over the years, he has also had significant input to the development of policy and doctrine for NATO CIMIC, U.S. Army civil affairs, Joint civil-military operations, and UN-CIMIC, as well as stability operations doctrine, the Capstone Concept for Joint Operations, and the Quadrennial Diplomacy and Development Review. He is currently revising the Peace Operations Training Institute UN-CIMIC course as well the African Center for Constructive Resolution of Disputes CIMIC handbook for Africa.
Col (ret.) Holshek is a rare American who has served with the UN in both military and civilian capacities (as a civilian, with the UN as a logistics officer with the UN Transitional Administration in Eastern Slavonia and with UNMIK as Political Reporting Officer). He has spent 16 years in Europe on both civilian and military assignments, among them as a civilian international relations analyst at HQ U.S. Army Europe in the critical years between 1989 and 1993. In more recent years, he has been a consultant associated with DynCorp International, Creative Associates, the Institute for Defense Analyses, and the Naval Postgraduate School’s Center for Civil-Military Relations.
Among his accomplishments has been the development of CIMIC capabilities and programs in a number of NATO Partnership and other Security Assistance countries. In addition to Bachelor’s degrees from the George Washington University in international affairs, German, and history, as well as a Master’s from Boston University in international relations, he is a graduate of the resident U.S. Army War College, with a Master’s in strategic studies. An executive director of the Cornwallis Group, a director in the Civil Affairs Association, and a visiting lecturer at George Mason University, he has written extensively on national security strategy and civil-military, stability, and peace operations, and blogs regularly for the Huffington Post.
ABSTRACT
Thinking Globally, Acting Locally: Civil-Military Coordination in the 21st Century
Given the strategic imperatives of the 21st century environment, civil-military coordination is more relevant to enduring U.S. and international engagements than ever. However, the contextualization of civil-military interaction in international intervention needs overhaul because it remains largely based on top-down, power-driven 20th century Western notions of national sovereignty and security rather than the emerging, values-based bottom-up realities of human security in a hyper-connected, globalized world. In this world, the cache of legitimacy and credibility hold the greatest sway, whether in the culturally charged Middle East, in the growing competition between American and Chinese models in East Asia and the Pacific, or in the weak and fragile states of Africa. There is plenty of evidence for this problem, given the tremendous difficulties, for example, in post-conflict operations in Iraq, in stabilizing Afghanistan, and in civil-military strains over military forces employment of humanitarian methods to “win hearts and minds” against the NGO claim of exclusivity in humanitarianism.
In a day and age when Napoleon’s famous observation that “in war, the moral is to the physical as three is to one” takes on a whole new dimension in both conflict management and prevention, the approach to civil-military coordination (cooperation and operations) must be first and foremost more emblematic of its inherently strategic nature, where both policymakers and practitioners must re-cast it, in theory and application, as “thinking globally and acting locally”.
Given the ascendancy of the post-industrial, softer strength of ideas nested in civil society over industrial, physical or empirical applications of state power in instruments such as military and police forces, the re-contextualization, re-balancing, and proper fusion of civil and uniformed elements along that central nexus is the key, whether for humanitarian, development, or reasons of state interest.
The most appropriate contextualization therefore understands the essence of civil-military coordination in the 21st century as an operational extension of the civil-military relationship in democratic civil societies, in which the military is subservient to and supportive of “civilian power” and that its civil-military role is that of an enabler, especially in the security sector. To be effective at an economy of cost, effort, and risk, the actions of U.S. and other uniformed state instrumentalities must be consonant with the values of the democratic societies they represent. In policy and practice, they have to walk the talk. Civil society organizations, on the other hand, must in turn recognize that uniformed organizations that operate as such are themselves extensions of civil society and thus have a role in making peace, albeit more indirect than direct. This qualitative blend of realism and idealism best ensures success.
No other nation is best suited to lead this transformation than the United States, given its dynamic, multicultural civil society, its democratic national values, its still significant worldwide appeal, and the breadth and depth of the U.S. military’s experience in civil-military coordination. When Americans demonstrate their time-honored civil-military relationship in view of adversaries and partners alike, they make this transforming principle difficult to defeat and easy to emulate. And when they reach out to collaborate with others, they bring the whole world with them, changing themselves with it.
BIO
Scott Schein is the Director of Strategic Studies & Planning for EADS-North America based in Arlington, VA. He joined the company in 2008, and his responsibilities include leading strategic planning for the U.S., conducting various M&A initiatives, developing partnership strategies, supporting business development on various programs, and executing key growth projects. He works closely with EADS’ senior management globally on plans to grow the U.S. business organically and through acquisition. Prior to EADS-NA, Mr. Schein led the aerospace and defense platform within Highland Capital Management’s Private Equity Group. In this capacity, he served on the Board of Directors for Nex-Tech Aerospace, led platform M&A, and developed operations plans and growth strategies for aerospace companies in the firm’s investment portfolio. Previously, Mr. Schein worked for Honeywell Aerospace, McKinsey & Company, and Lockheed Martin in various engineering and management roles. He holds a Master of Business Administration with honors from Georgetown University and a Bachelor of Science in Aerospace Engineering from the University of Michigan.
ABSTRACT
A defense contractor’s primary charter is to develop products, technologies, and services that support the U.S. military’s daily mission. The President’s strategic guidance indicates that this mission will shift away from a Cold War model – fighting two large conflicts simultaneously – to more varied, irregular conflicts that may or may not involve nation-states (although China and the Korean Peninsula are mentioned specifically as regions to monitor closely). In addition, the guidance suggested a smaller, more agile ground force and stronger international partnerships with India and Latin America. Contractors will need to adapt their way of doing business to continue to support the military’s mission. The mission shift outlined in the strategic guidance will also require development of specific technologies and products over the next 10 years:
Supporting this mission shift will occur under reduced procurement and RDT&E budgets over the next 10 years. Large program opportunities will be few and far between. A pipeline of smaller programs will place more pressure on investments. Contractors will want to be able to apply standard technologies and platforms across a wider range of programs to justify investments. Policy and mission shifts will have other broad considerations for industry:
PANEL 3: Peace and Development: Key Elements of a new Grand Strategy
Moderator:
BIO
Dr. Akanmu G. Adebayo is professor of history and interim director of the Center for Conflict Management at Kennesaw State University (KSU), Georgia, USA. Until June 2009, Adebayo was executive director of the Institute for Global Initiatives at KSU where he directed the institution’s internationalization programs including international partnerships, study abroad, faculty and staff exchanges, internationalization research, and other academic support and program development initiatives. Other positions held at KSU included Assistant Dean, College of Humanities and Social Sciences (2001-2003); and Assistant Director, Office of International Programs (1995-1997). Adebayo earned his Ph.D. from Obafemi Awolowo University, Ile-Ife, Nigeria, where he also taught in the History Department for ten years. He has been appointed visiting scholar at prestigious universities and institutes, including York University, North York, Canada (1991-92); Institute for Modern Oriental Studies, Berlin, Germany (1994); Dominican Institute, Ibadan, Nigeria (1998); and University of Ibadan, Ibadan, Nigeria (2009). Adebayo has published widely in learned and refereed journals. He is currently Editor-in-Chief of the Journal of Global Initiatives. His published books include (author) Embattled Federalism: A History of Revenue Allocation in Nigeria (New York, 1993); (co-author) Culture, Politics and Money among the Yoruba (New Brunswick, 2000); (co-editor) Instructional Technology for Basic Education in Ghana (Cape Coast, 2003); (co-editor) Globalization and Transnational Migrations: Africa and Africans in the Contemporary Global System (London: Cambridge Scholars Publishing, 2009); (co-editor) Marginality and Crisis: Globalization and Identity in Contemporary Africa (forthcoming May 2010 by Lanham, MD: Lexington Books). Adebayo is currently engaged in research into African economic history since 1900.
Panelists:
BIO
Dr. Alamir has worked as an academic researcher and lecturer at the University of the Armed Forces and the German Federal Staff and Command College from 1997-2002. After an assignment with the Federal Ministry of Defence from 2002-2004, she joined the German Agency for Technical Cooperation as a Program Manager for Security Sector Reform. From 2006-2011 see worked for the private enterprise, IABG, as Head of Comprehensive Security. Recently, she has established the consultancy company "alacon" . Besides longstanding experience as a lecturer for academic students and practitioners, she has had field experience in Afghanistan, Azerbaijan, Ghana, and Indonesia, among others. In 2006 she worked as a Political Advisor to the Senior Civilian Representative of NATO in ISAF HQ, Kabul. She has published numerous articles in books and scientific magazines. Her clients cover governmental agencies, universities, and private enterprises. Her fields of expertise cover a broad range of security policy issues. In recent years she has specialized on the security-development nexus, civil-military interfaces, aspects of comprehensive security and interagency cooperation in national and international crisis management. She is familiar both with military and civilian approaches to crisis management and peace building at strategic, operational and tactical level
ABSTRACT
Any grand strategy that claims to reconcile ends, ways and means in an integrated manner based on a thorough understanding of our strategic environment, will undoubtedly have to accept advancements of peace and development in the conflict and crisis prone countries of the Middle East, Africa, Asia and Latin America as a prerequisite for a conducive strategic environment of tomorrow. Hence, the question is not whether peacebuilding and development should be key elements of a new US grand strategy, but whether how strategic thinking and action can embrace them.
It will be argued that peacebuilding and development elude conventional presumptions and patterns of strategic thinking in numerous ways. The paper analyzes challenges that peacebuilding and development pose to strategic thinkers and reflects on options to tackle them.
BIO
Michael Ashkenazi is currently the Programme Leader for SALW Control at the Bonn International Center for Conversion, a German applied research centre focussing on security and development.
Dr Ashkenazi has conducted research in Afghanistan, China, Guinea Bissau, Japan, Korea, Liberia, Nepal, South Sudan, Timor Leste, and Uganda. His current research interests range from traditional security providers through arms and ammunition storage, DD&R, SSR, to the effects of SALW on societies and development. He has previously worked on Japanese religion, food culture, and business culture, and on migration.
His research has been disseminated through numerous publications, including the TRESA (Training and Education on Small Arms) publications, and numerous courses across the world including in Columbia, Germany, Ghana, Mozambique, South Sudan and UN Headquarters. Audiences range from police and military officers through NGO members to parliamentarians.
Previous to working for BICC Dr. Ashkenazi was professor of anthropology, teaching graduate and undergraduate students at universities in Canada, Israel, and the UK. He has also served as infantryman, platoon and company commander, and in staff positions. He was educated in Israel, Japan, and the US.
ABSTRACT
Forces of Order and Disorder: Security Forces and the Illusion of Conflict Management
Policy-makers (and analysts) are often under the illusion that they can ‘manage’ conflict. Perhaps at some remove, and looking at the big picture, that is potentially possible. In this paper I want to look at the micro-end of the scale. I argue, on the basis of field data collected in Timor, Sudan, Uganda, Ghana, and Nepal, that we need to look at three types of security providers: state, commercial, and traditional to understand how conflict is managed. In particular, I suggest, that transitions in the ascendancy of one type of provider to another are indicative, and possibly the consequence of, societal changes that herald growing instability and potential conflict.
From the perspective of US policy, there are two lessons to be learned here: an understanding of the micro-social dynamics is important for ensuring a success in peacebuilding efforts; and dynamic movement among micro-actors serves as a good intervention point to limit conflict. However, a recognition of the difficulties inherent in large institutions (such as nations) operating at the micro-level needs to be recognized.
BIO
Dwight Raymond joined PKSOI in July 2009 after retiring from the Army as an Infantry Colonel. His military assignments included infantry leadership, command, and staff positions; faculty positions at the United States Military Academy and the US Army War College, theater-level plans positions in Korea, and training and advisory assignments at the National Training Center and in Iraq as an advisor to an Iraqi Army brigade. His awards include the Defense Superior Service Medal, Legion of Merit, Bronze Star Medal, Combat Infantryman’s Badge, and the Airborne, Ranger, and Pathfinder qualification badges. Dwight has a Bachelors Degree from the United States Military Academy and Masters Degrees from the University of Maryland School of Public Affairs, the US Army School of Advanced Military Studies, and the United States Army War College. He has developed military doctrine related to the Protection of Civilians, and is one of the primary authors of the Mass Atrocity Response Operations (MARO) Military Planning Handbook.
ABSTRACT
Working Title: "An Interagency Approach to Mass Atrocity Prevention"
As discussed in a variety of references including a recent Presidential Study Directive on Mass Atrocities (PSD-10), the government has a weak record regarding the prevention of and response to mass atrocities. This is in part due to the challenges faced by a large, risk-averse bureaucracy in (a) Determining that mass atrocities are possible, imminent, or occurring; (b) Deciding what actions to take; and (c) Resourcing, mobilizing, positioning and employing resources to prevent or respond to mass atrocities effectively. This paper describes an approach to interagency policy and planning in order to mitigate mass atrocities. The paper includes situational considerations as well as the diplomatic, informational, military, and economic tools that may be applied in different circumstances. It advances the following principles for governmental actions: (a) Prevention is preferable to response; (b) The U.S. has a wide range of diplomatic, informational, military, and economic tools that should be considered and integrated; (c) Understand the complete context; (d) Act quickly to address concerns and take advantage of opportunities; (e) Multilateral efforts are preferable to unilateral action; (f) Planning for transitions should begin as early as possible.
PANEL 4: Conflict Management, Peacebuilding and a New American Grand Strategy: Views from Abroad
Moderator:
BIO
Dr. Volker Franke is the Director of the PhD program in International Conflict Management. He joined KSU’s Department of Political Science and International Affairs as Associate Professor of Conflict Management in the fall of 2009. Prior to coming to KSU, Dr. Franke was Associate Professor of Political Science and International Studies at McDaniel College in Westminster, MD. From 2006-2008, he served as Director of Research at the Bonn International Center for Conversion (BICC), one of Germany’s premier peace and conflict research and capacity building institutes. Currently, Dr. Franke also serves on the Scientific Advisory Board of the German Foundation of Peace Research. From 1998-2007, he was Director and Managing Editor of the National Security Studies Case Studies Program at Syracuse University’s Maxwell School of Citizenship and Public Affairs. Dr. Franke holds a Ph.D. in political science from Syracuse University’s Maxwell School, a Master of Public Administration degree from North Carolina State University and a MA in political science and sociology from Johannes Gutenberg University in Mainz, Germany. He is the author of Preparing for Peace: Military Identity, Value-Orientations, and Professional Military Education (Praeger 1999) and more than 30 journal articles, book chapters, case studies and research reports on issues related to peace and security studies, conflict management, civil-military relations, development policy and social identity. He is also the editor of Terrorism and Peacekeeping: New Security Challenges (Praeger 2005) and Security in a Changing World: Case Studies in U.S. National Security Management (Praeger 2002).
BIO
Dr. Kwesi Aning was educated at the University of Ghana and the University of Copenhagen where he earned his PhD. He presently serves as the Dean & Director of Academic Affairs and Research at the Kofi Annan International Peacekeeping Training Centre (KAIPTC), Accra, Ghana. Prior to taking up this position, he worked with the African Union as its Expert on counter-terrorism, peace and security. He serves on several scholarly boards and his key 2011 publications include: 'Security links between trafficking and terrorism in the Sahel’ Africa South of the Sahara (London: Routledge); ‘African domestic and cross-border challenges’ in Chester A. Crocker, Fen Osler Hampson, Pamela Aall, Eds., Rewiring Regional Security in a Fragmented World (Washington, D.C.: USIP); ‘Regional approaches to ECOWAS and AU state-building processes’ in Mats Berdal & Dimonik Zaum eds. ‘Power after Peace: The political economy of post-conflict State-building’ (Oxford: OUP) with Naila Salihu and ' Accountability for Intervention: Negotiating Civilian Protection Dilemmas with Respect to Economic Community of West African States and African Union Interventions,’ African Security, Vol. 4, No. 2, with Naila Salihu.
ABSTRACT
Negotiating the pitfalls of peace and security in Africa and a new American Grand strategy: APSA & AFRICOM
With the failure of the Organisation of African Unity (OAU) to fulfill the ambitions and optimisms of its establishment in the 1960s, it was finally succeeded by the African Union (AU), which sought through expansive and deepening multiple institutional processes to respond to Africa's multi-faceted security challenges. Establishing a security architecture through which the AU and its regional economic communities (RECs), as building blocks, would respond to these challenges, these robust initiatives have been introduced concurrently with partner states and institutions both offering support while at the same time implementing their own national strategic interests. One such critical partner has been the United States of America, which through multiple engagements and its own grand strategies has made it one of the key partners of the AU's institutionalisation processes. But over the past decade, following such pathways have not always been mutually beneficial to either the AU nor the US.
In this paper, we explore and examine the history of US engagements in Africa, especially in the peace and security arena and juxtapose such grand strategic calculations with Africa's own perceptions of and responses to its security challenges. Furthermore, we explore how in the face of common challenges both the AU and US can identify and respond to their security challenges in a manner that makes this relationship a win-win one instead of the present one driven by suspicion, competition and outright hostility.
BIO
Prof. Dr. Tobias Debiel has been working for the Institute for Development and Peace (INEF), University of Duisburg-Essen, from 2004 and became director of the Institute in 2006. In April 2006, he was also appointed a professor in in international relations and development policy, Institute of Political Science, University of Duisburg-Essen. In September/October 2008 Tobias Debiel served as Guest Professor at Fudan University in Shanghai, China . In November 2008 and January 2009 he held Guest Professorships at at the Herzliya Interdisciplinary Center (IDC), close to Tel Aviv, and at Al-Quds University in Jerusalem.
Amongst his publications are: Tobias Debiel / Lambach, Daniel / Pech, Birgit Pech: A Silent Farewell? State fragility as challenge to the good governance approach, in: Rüdiger Schmitt-Beck/Tobias Debiel/Karl-Rudolf Korte (Eds.), Governance and Legitimacy in the Globalised World. Baden-Baden: Nomos 2008, and Debiel, Tobias / Messner, Dirk / Nuscheler, Franz / Roth, Michèle / Ulbert, Cornelia(Eds.) : Global Trends 2010. Frankfurt/M.: Fischer Taschenbuch Verlag, 2009 (in print).
ABSTRACT
BIO
Dr. Esterhuyse lectures in strategy in the Faculty of Military Science of Stellenbosch University at the South African Military Academy. Holding a PhD from Stellenbosch University and an MSS from Pretoria University, Dr. Esterhuyse is also a graduate of the summer programme in military history at the US Military Academy, West Point, and the programme on the analysis of military operations and strategy (SWAMOS) of Columbia University’s Saltzman Institute of War and Peace Studies. Before joining the Faculty of Military Science, he served as a lieutenant colonel in the South African Army. Dr. Esterhuyse regularly publishes on contemporary security, strategic, defence, and military issues and has a keen interest in (South African) military history. At present, Dr. Esterhuyse leads a team of international researchers, commissioned by the SA Army, to investigate the military and institutional culture of the Army. He serves as a member of the scientific committee of the Defence Academies and Colleges e-Learning (DACeL) Practitioners’ Network, and is the editor of Scientia Militaria: The South African Journal of Military Studies.
ABSTRACT
Conflict or Confluence of Interests: South African and US Security Involvement in Africa
The paper explores the often-hypocritical relationship between South African and the United States concerning African security. It is a relationship that changed diametrically at the end of the cold war. Ironically, the end of the cold war brought a former Soviet-supported revolutionary movement to power in South Africa – a movement with a long history of flirtation with socialism and terrorism. There is no doubt that the United States is still considered as being on “the other side of the hill” by a South African government who still views itself as part of the underdogs. At the same time, the South African government places a very high emphasis on Africa’s position in the world at large and its leadership role on the continent in particular. These historical and continental perspectives often bring strong contradictions and tensions to the fore in democracy, Africanism, and anti-colonialism as the driving forces of South African foreign policy.
From a security perspective, Africa matters – to the United States and to South Africa. The real question is, why and how? Of course, there are questions about the nature of the security and threat agenda in Africa and, more importantly, who is setting or dictating the agenda? The more important issue, though, concerns the pathways of addressing the concerns on the security agenda. In South Africa, perceptions about the United States and, specifically, how US prefers to deal with a threat agenda, have been shaped predominantly by the very kinetic-driven US involvement in Iraq, Afghanistan and, more recently, also Libya. The creation of a US military command for Africa reinforced this perception. It is a perception that raises a wide variety of questions about conflict and confluence of US/SA interests.
BIO
Dr. Liselotte Odgaard is an Associate Professor at the Royal Danish Defence College. Her areas of expertise include International Relations, Asia-Pacific Security and China Studies. Her most recent international position was in 2008-09, when she was a residential fellow at the Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars, Washington, D.C., USA. Her most recent major publication is China and Coexistence: Beijing’s National Security Strategy for the 21st Century, published in December 2011 by the Woodrow Wilson Center Press/Johns Hopkins University Press.
ABSTRACT
Preparing for the Imperfect World: Strategy in conflict management environments
This paper assesses the strategic planning process regarding conflict management in the security sector with the purpose of identifying key elements of strategic planning that are essential to realize the visions of political leaders. The debate on strategy in the international relations literature does not entail thorough discussions of the concept of strategy since the analysts usually assume that strategy is conflated with theoretical concepts such as balancing, coercive diplomacy, regimes, etc. The advantage is that strategic analysis is based on simple conceptual models with solidly tested theoretical dynamics from international relations. The disadvantage is that the levels and issues dealt with in different settings involved in strategic planning are not taken fully into account and no process is identified. By contrast, the debate on strategy in the strategic studies debate among defence academies often contains detailed conceptual analyses of strategy. This literature identifies and systematizes the complexity of actors and issues involved in strategic planning. However, because it is situated within a military planning context, it is often marked by detail rather than breath of view. It describes the total agenda of strategic planning without deducing the key elements that are crucial to meet political visions. This paper attempts to combine the two traditions, utilizing the eye for key variables and dynamics in the international relations literature with the conceptualization of strategic planning that has been carried out in a strategic studies setting. The paper uses the levels of grand, security and theater strategy to describe the process of strategic planning and the variables of time, position, legitimacy, implementation structure and capabilities to describe the substance of strategic analysis. The levels and variables together constitute a concept of strategy useful for identifying problems of strategic planning processes and how these problems can be mended. The paper analyzes the transformation of Danish defence from a mobilization force based on military lines of operation to an expeditionary force based on a more comprehensive approach to operations as a case demonstrating the usefulness of this concept of strategy for identifying challenges and opportunities in strategic planning and how these can be used for the purpose of more efficient and accurate planning.
Keynote Speakers
BIO
Minister zu Guttenberg served as German Federal Minister of Defense from 2009 to 2011 and as Federal Minister of Economics and Technology from February 2009 to October 2009. As Minister of Defense, zu Guttenberg led the most significant structural reform to the German Bundeswehr since 1955, particularly leading the effort of transforming the Bundeswehr from a conscription-based army to an all-professional military. He also served as a member of the German parliament or Bundestag from 2002- 2011 and as a leading member of the Bundestag’s Foreign Affairs Committee from 2005 to 2008.
Minister zu Guttenberg is leading a new transatlantic dialogue initiative at the Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS) which will bring European and American thought-leaders, practitioners and officials together on a variety of security and economic related issues to develop a bold, new strategic vision to reinvigorate the transatlantic relationship and prevent strategic drift. By exploring the global shift of power, the increased global economic and market instability and the challenge to multilateral institutions, the focus of the project will examine how the transatlantic relationship can lead in this increasingly complex geopolitical setting.
ABSTRACT
The Transatlantic Relationship: A breaking or restorable Pillar of a New American Grand Strategy?
Global governance failures and economic disparity influence the evolution of a variety of other global risks most of them are tightly connected. Disconnection through Connection: new, intertwined global challenges and global shifts of power bear the risk of a marginalization of traditional partnerships and multinational institutions.
What are the consequences for Europe and the US? Will the transatlantic relationship remain a core element of Western political influence or is it in agony - also because of a "Pacific and Asian 21st Century?"
A bold and long-term strategic vision for the transatlantic community needs to reinvigorate the transatlantic relationship by promoting a global democratic political culture (that respects specific cultural aspects) and fostering a regional cooperative model in a multi-polar and increasingly complex geopolitical setting.
BIO
Bill Smullen was appointed as the Director of National Security Studies at the Maxwell School of Citizenship and Public Affairs in June of 2003. He is also Maxwell’s Senior Fellow in National Security and a member of the faculty of Syracuse University’s S.I. Newhouse School of Public Communications as a Professor of Public Relations.
Prior to his appointment at Syracuse University, he was the Chief of Staff to Secretary of State Colin L. Powell and of the U.S. Department of State beginning in January 2001. As principal advisor to the Secretary, he was responsible for monitoring and evaluating the formulation and implementation of departmental policies. He was also involved in the planning and development of concept strategy associated with foreign policy matters.
A professional soldier for 30 years, he retired from the U.S. Army in 1993. His military career included a series of infantry and command and staff assignments at the platoon, company, battalion, brigade and division levels, as well as several public affairs positions including Media Relations Officer at West Point and Chief of Media Relations for the Department of the Army. Overseas Army tours took him to Korea, Panama and twice to Vietnam. His military schooling included the Army’s Command and General Staff College and the Army War College. His military citations include the Defense Superior Service Medal, the Legion of Merit, the Bronze Star Medal, the Army Meritorious Service Medal, the Air Medal, the Combat Infantryman’s Badge and the Parachutist’s Badge.
His last assignment on active duty was Special Assistant to the eleventh and twelfth Chairmen of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, Admiral William J. Crowe, Jr., and General Colin L. Powell. Upon leaving active duty, he became the Executive Assistant to General Powell, assisting with the writing and promotion of his best-selling autobiography, “My American Journey,” published in 1995. From 1993 to 2001 he had daily responsibility for managing the General’s private office and professional activities. Beginning in 1997 he doubled his responsibilities by becoming the Chief of Staff for America’s Promise—The Alliance for Youth, which General Powell chaired from May 1997 to January 2001.
Among his career accomplishments, he has been elected to Syracuse University's S.I. Newhouse School of Public Communications Hall of Fame, the University of Maine ROTC Hall of Fame, and was chosen as the recipient of the University of Maine 2007 Alumni Career Award, which is the highest honor presented by the University of Maine Alumni Association. He received the 2007 Public Relations Society of America’s Lloyd B. Dennis Distinguished Leadership Award. In 2005, he was named to Strathmore’s “Who’s Who,” as one who has demonstrated leadership and achievement in his occupation and profession.
He earned a Bachelor of Arts Degree in Business and Economics from the University of Maine in 1962 and a Master of Arts Degree in Public Relations from the S.I. Newhouse School of Public Communications at Syracuse University in 1974.
ABSTRACT
New Threats, New Thinking
There has been and continues to be no shortage of threats to the United States and the world at large. The global landscape is lined with challenges that seem so broad and so interconnected. The world of today is a crucible of problems and threats that affect us in ways once unthinkable: terrorism; piracy; hunger and humanitarian concerns; pandemics; climate change; demands for highly strategic resources including energy, food and water; cyber security; proliferation of nuclear, chemical and biological weapons; global economic concerns; and regional instabilities. They are abundant in number and can defy predictability. They require strategic thinking and planning so as to anticipate, prevent and deal with them effectively in times of crisis. This talk will explore those threats and suggest necessary thinking and responses.
© Copyright 2012 KSU-SSI Symposium. All rights reserved.