Civil–military relations: Difference between revisions

Content deleted Content added
Inbody (talk | contribs)
Inbody (talk | contribs)
Line 175:
 
According to [[Amitai Etzioni]] of the Institute for Communitarian Policy Studies, the [[AirSea Battle]] doctrine is an example of a situation in which the military conceptualizes and develops a plan to counter a perceived threat to the United States without sufficient civilian oversight.<ref>Etzioni, Amitai. "Who Authorized Preparations for War with China?" Yale Journal of International Affairs, June 2013. [http://yalejournal.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/06/YJIA-SUMMER-VOL8-ISSUE2-FINAL-A5-Etzioni-Copy.pdf]</ref>
 
==Civil–military relations in Afghanistan==
Researchers from the [[Overseas Development Institute]] wrote that 'the belief that development and reconstruction activities are central to security'...'is a central component of western involvement' and that this has been 'highly contentious among aid agencies, perhaps nowhere more so than [[Afghanistan]].'
Their April 2013 paper <ref>Ashley Jackson and Simone Haysom; April 2013; The search for common ground, Civil–military relations in Afghanistan, 2002–13; HPG Policy Brief 51; http://www.odi.org.uk/publications/7446-stablisation-civil-military-relations-afghanistan</ref> includes the following three key messages -
 
* Stabilisation approaches are likely to continue to present challenges to the aid community’s ability to act according to humanitarian principles in conflict-affected, fragile and postconflict environments. Experiences in Afghanistan highlight significant tension, if not conflict, between stabilisation and internationally recognised guidelines and principles governing civil–military interaction.
* Civil–military dialogue was markedly more effective when it was rooted in International Humanitarian Law (IHL) and strategic argumentation, as with advocacy focused on reducing harm to civilians.
* Aid agencies need to invest more in capacity and training for engaging in civil–military dialogue and, together with donors, seek to generate more objective evidence on the impact of stabilisation approaches.
 
==See also==