Number of results to display per page
Search Results
12. From Militants to Policemen: Three Lessons from U.S. Experience with DDR and SSR
- Author:
- Alison Laporte-Oshiro
- Publication Date:
- 11-2011
- Content Type:
- Policy Brief
- Institution:
- United States Institute of Peace
- Abstract:
- Consolidating the legitimate use of force in the hands of the state is a vital first step in post-conflict peacebuilding. Transitional governments must move quickly to neutralize rival armed groups and provide a basic level of security for citizens. Two processes are vital to securing a monopoly of force: disarmament, demobilization, and reintegration and security sector reform. Disarmament, demobilization, and reintegration (DDR) involve disbanding armed groups that challenge the government's monopoly of force. Security sector reform (SSR) means reforming and rebuilding the national security forces so that they are professional and accountable. U.S. experience in Afghanistan, Iraq, Liberia, Haiti, Bosnia, and Kosovo yielded three crosscutting lessons: go in heavy, tackle DDR and SSR in tandem, and consolidate U.S. capacity to implement both tasks in a coordinated, scalable way.
- Topic:
- Security, Political Violence, Armed Struggle, and Insurgency
- Political Geography:
- Afghanistan, United States, Iraq, Bosnia, Kosovo, Haiti, and Liberia
13. Optimism and Obstacles in India-Pakistan Peace Talks
- Author:
- Stephanie Flamenbaum and Megan Neville
- Publication Date:
- 08-2011
- Content Type:
- Policy Brief
- Institution:
- United States Institute of Peace
- Abstract:
- Following March 2011's “cricket diplomacy,” there is reason to be optimistic about progress on South Asian normalization as India and Pakistan have resumed bilateral dialogues. Improved relations are critical to U.S. interests in South Asia with respect to the stabilization of Afghanistan, reduction in Pakistan-based militant threats, and alleviation of regional nuclear tensions. Terrorism and the Kashmir issue remain the most toxic points of divergence which could derail progress as in past bilateral talks. Bilateral economic agreements should be pursued in order to enable commercial progress to facilitate political reconciliation. With the looming drawdown of international forces from Afghanistan in 2014, and the subsequent shift in the regional power balance, it is imperative that the international community utilize its leverage to ensure that Pakistan-India talks progress.
- Topic:
- Conflict Resolution, Foreign Policy, Diplomacy, and Bilateral Relations
- Political Geography:
- Pakistan, Afghanistan, United States, South Asia, and India
14. Pakistan, the United States and the End Game in Afghanistan: Perceptions of Pakistan's Foreign Policy Elite
- Author:
- Moeed Yusuf, Huma Yusuf, and Salman Zaidi
- Publication Date:
- 07-2011
- Content Type:
- Policy Brief
- Institution:
- United States Institute of Peace
- Abstract:
- This brief summarizes the perceptions of Pakistani foreign policy elite about Pakistan's strategy and interests in Afghanistan, its view of the impending “end game”, and the implications of its policies towards Afghanistan for the U.S.-Pakistan relationship. These perceptions were captured as part of a project, co-convened by the U.S. Institute of Peace (USIP) and Jinnah Institute (JI) in Pakistan, aimed at better understanding Pakistan's outlook towards the evolving situation in Afghanistan. A full report carrying detailed findings will be launched in August 2011 in Pakistan. Pakistani foreign policy elite perceive their country to be seeking: (i) a degree of stability in Afghanistan; (ii) an inclusive government in Kabul; and (iii) to limit Indian presence in Afghanistan to development activities. They perceive America's Afghanistan strategy to date to be largely inconsistent with Pakistan's interests. Pakistan insists on an immediate, yet patient effort at inclusive reconciliation involving all major Afghan stakeholders, including the main Afghan Taliban factions. Other issues that Pakistan's policy elite view as impediments to a peaceful Afghanistan settlement include: questionable viability of a regional framework; lack of clarity on Taliban's willingness to negotiate; the unstable political and economic situation in Afghanistan; and concerns about Afghan National Security Forces adding to instability in the future. Project participants felt that greater clarity in U.S. and Pakistani policies is critical to avoid failure in Afghanistan, to convince the Taliban of the validity of a power-sharing agreement, and to urge regional actors to play a more constructive role.
- Topic:
- International Relations
- Political Geography:
- Pakistan, Afghanistan, United States, and Taliban
15. Afghan Perspectives on Achieving Durable Peace
- Author:
- Hamish Nixon
- Publication Date:
- 06-2011
- Content Type:
- Policy Brief
- Institution:
- United States Institute of Peace
- Abstract:
- Afghans across different groups see the United States as a key party to the conflict whose direct participation in a peace process is crucial to its success, and therefore question the effectiveness of U.S. emphasis on an “Afghan-led” reconciliation strategy. The U.S. must engage directly in negotiating a settlement because of its control over the issue of withdrawal of NATO forces. The Taliban demand for full withdrawal prior to talks appears to be an opening position. A challenge will be linking a structure for drawdown to necessary steps by insurgents to allow a cessation of violence and prevent Afghanistan's use for terrorism. A settlement process will entail discussion of the composition and future of the Afghan National Security Forces, and the current “transition” strategy of a large army and expanding local defence initiatives will almost certainly need re-examining during such a process. The conflict is not only a struggle for power and resources; it is also a legitimacy crisis stemming from a system of power and patronage that feeds conflict. From this perspective, a settlement should address the concentration of powers in the presidency through incremental reform to appointments, elections, or farther-reaching changes to the structure of government over time. There is a tension between reform and using political appointments to accommodate power-sharing demands. A durable settlement will need to involve political and social agreements among Afghans taking into account the views of a range of stakeholders. To manage this tension, the intra-Afghan peace process should be oriented toward broad inclusion of non-combatants while balancing the secrecy required to make progress.
- Topic:
- NATO, Government, and National Security
- Political Geography:
- Afghanistan, United States, and Taliban
16. The United States in Iraq: Options for 2012
- Author:
- Sean Kane and William Taylor
- Publication Date:
- 05-2011
- Content Type:
- Policy Brief
- Institution:
- United States Institute of Peace
- Abstract:
- With U.S. military forces scheduled to depart Iraq in December of this year, the State Department and other civilian agencies are being asked to assume a scale of operational and programmatic responsibilities far beyond any other embassy in recent memory. The capacity of the U.S. civilian agencies to assume these responsibilities does not now fully exist. Notably, securing and moving U.S. civilians will require more than 5,000 security contractors. A limited U.S. military contingent post-2011 may well be more cost-effective than private security guards and could also relieve State and other civilian agencies of logistical and security responsibilities. This would enable them to focus on their comparative advantages: diplomacy and development assistance. Planning for the post-2011 U.S. mission in Iraq, however, remains hampered by uncertainty as to whether the Iraqi government will request an extension of the American military presence in the country. A small follow-on U.S. military force would appear to safeguard Iraqi stability and make the achievement of U.S. strategic objectives in Iraq more likely, but cannot be counted on. Should such a request not be received from the Iraqi government, the U.S. may need to reduce the planned scale and scope of its operations and goals in Iraq.
- Topic:
- Conflict Resolution and Security
- Political Geography:
- United States, Iraq, Middle East, and Arabia
17. Traditional Dispute Resolution and Afghanistan's Women
- Author:
- Sylvana Q. Sinha
- Publication Date:
- 12-2011
- Content Type:
- Policy Brief
- Institution:
- United States Institute of Peace
- Abstract:
- At least 80% of all disputes in Afghanistan are resolved through traditional dispute resolution (TDR) mechanisms, principally community councils called shuras or jirgas. TDR is therefore impossible to ignore as the primary justice institution in the country. Still, most women's groups in Afghanistan tend to oppose international donor or Afghan government support for TDR because they generally exclude women from participation and are known to issue decisions that violate women's rights. In the spring of 2011, the U.S. Institute of Peace in Kabul hosted meetings to examine the broader question of how women can gain greater access to justice. The outcome of the conversations was a more nuanced view of TDR and women in Afghanistan and a recognition that creative engagement rather than condemnation is a more productive approach to resolving deficiencies in women's rights in TDR venues.
- Topic:
- Conflict Resolution, Gender Issues, Human Rights, Foreign Aid, and Law
- Political Geography:
- Afghanistan, United States, and Asia
18. Bleak Outlook for 2011 Conference on Disarmament
- Author:
- Brian Rose
- Publication Date:
- 01-2011
- Content Type:
- Policy Brief
- Institution:
- United States Institute of Peace
- Abstract:
- The 2011 Conference on Disarmament (CD) began contentiously when Ambassador Zamir Akram, Pakistan\'s permanent representative to the United Nations, criticized United States\' support of India\'s membership in export organizations that would allow it to engage in nuclear trade. Pakistan believes such membership would further favor India and accentuate the asymmetry in fissile materials stockpiles of the two states. Strategic and security concerns drive Pakistan\'s commitment to block negotiation of a fissile material cutoff treaty. Progress during the CD seems unlikely if the United States and Pakistan remain entrenched in their respective positions.
- Topic:
- Security, Arms Control and Proliferation, Nuclear Weapons, and Treaties and Agreements
- Political Geography:
- Pakistan, United States, India, and Asia
19. Covering and Countering Extremism in Pakistan's Developing Media
- Author:
- Hannah Byam and Christopher Neu
- Publication Date:
- 03-2011
- Content Type:
- Policy Brief
- Institution:
- United States Institute of Peace
- Abstract:
- With a rise in terrorist activity spreading fear through highly publicized attacks, Pakistan's media landscape has increasingly been used as a battleground between those seeking to promote violent conflict and others seeking to manage or deter it. Pakistan's media community has not yet developed an adequate or widely accepted strategy for responding to this context of persistent extremism and conflict. The rapid rise of extremist radio stations in the Federally Administered Tribal Areas (FATA) and Khyber Pakhtunkhwa (KPK) provinces has paralleled an increase in terrorist attacks, facilitated by affordable access to FM radio, loose government regulation of broadcast media and militant control of pockets in KPK and FATA. Negative media attitudes toward the Pakistan-U.S. relationship often reflect national political differences and market incentives for sensationalist coverage. These attitudes can be transformed through changes in the diplomatic relationship between the countries based on open communication rather than institutional media reform.
- Topic:
- Foreign Policy, Political Violence, Terrorism, and Mass Media
- Political Geography:
- Pakistan, United States, and Asia
20. Counterrevolution in the Gulf
- Author:
- Toby C. Jones
- Publication Date:
- 04-2011
- Content Type:
- Policy Brief
- Institution:
- United States Institute of Peace
- Abstract:
- Saudi Arabia is pursuing a combination of domestic and regional policies that risk destabilizing the Persian Gulf and that risk undermining the United States interests there. Amid calls for political change, Saudi Arabia is failing to address pressing concerns about its political system and the need for political reform. Instead of responding favorably to calls for more political openness, the Kingdom is pursuing a risky domestic agenda, which ignores the social, economic, and political grievances that might fuel popular mobilization.
- Topic:
- Conflict Prevention, Democratization, and Counterinsurgency
- Political Geography:
- United States, Middle East, and Arabia