FEATURE ARTICLE

August 2005

U.S. Shifting Focus to ‘Stability Operations’

By Harold Kennedy

After years of trying to minimize U.S. participation in peacekeeping operations, the Bush administration is embarking upon an ambitious effort to improve the ability of the military services—and related civilian agencies—to conduct such missions as part of its global war on terrorism.

At press time, Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld was preparing to issue a new directive spelling out how his department would plan, train, conduct and support peacekeeping assignments, which the Pentagon prefers to call stability operations.

“Stability operations connote something different from traditional peacekeeping missions,” Jeffrey Nadaner, deputy assistant defense secretary for stability operations, told National Defense. “They are more than UN blue helmets manning border checkpoints.”

Since it was created after World War II, the United Nations has conducted 48 peacekeeping operations. Such missions typically have involved lightly armed uniformed observers monitoring a ceasefire between two warring parties, with little authority to intervene.

In contrast, stability operations, as defined by the Defense Department, are conducted, at least in part, by robust, combat-equipped military units that can use whatever force is necessary to end fighting and restore a functioning society in a war-torn region, Nadaner said.

Although Rumsfeld has yet to sign the proposed directive, it already “has launched a huge process within the Department of Defense and all of its components,” Nadaner noted. All of the services, regional combatant commands, U.S. Joint Forces Command and Special Operations Command are scrambling to figure out their roles in such missions, he said. The Defense Department has been doing stability operations for at least 15 years, but “we need to do them better,” he explained.

“Stability operations need to receive a similar priority as major combat operations. That involves developing a set of metrics for measuring how to flesh out contingency plans for stability operations, just like we have for combat scenarios.”

Among the issues that planners are studying is what percentage of officers should have training in certain languages, Nadaner said. Military units need to be able to operate immediately in almost any culture, he noted. “Before 9/11, one could never have imagined U.S. troops in Afghanistan.”

In addition, the department is considering whether the uniformed services need to create whole new units dedicated to peacekeeping. One National Defense University proposal calls for converting two active-duty Army divisions into fulltime stabilization and reconstruction units. These organizations would include military police, engineer, medical, civil affairs and psychological operations units—all of which have been in high demand for peacekeeping operations—along with a medium-weight Stryker brigade.

Nadaner, however, doesn’t think that is a good idea. “My thinking is that creating specialized units could be very costly and not create the capabilities that you need in stability operations,” he said.

A former Marine Corps commandant, Gen. Charles C. Krulak, once said that the United States needs to be able to fight a three-block war, Nadaner noted, with one block engaged in heavy combat, another in stability operations and a third in recovery.

“I think the United States needs an all-utility force. Troops should be very adaptable. It would serve the nation very well if they had more stability-operations training, but when they are deployed, they have to be ready for combat. In today’s environment, there is no front or rear.”

The Bush administration also has become convinced that stability operations require a stronger effort from U.S. civilian agencies. (see related story)

The shift toward stability operations is a big change of direction for this administration, which came into office resisting the idea of using U.S. military forces to engage in “nation building” in strife-ridden countries, such as Haiti, Somalia and Bosnia.

U.S. experience in Afghanistan and Iraq—where fighting continues years after the declared end to major combat operations—has persuaded both civilian and uniformed officials that the United States needs to be better prepared to use its military might to help prevent conflicts from breaking out and, if that fails, to stop the violence and begin reconstruction as soon as possible, Nadaner said.

An early indication of the administration’s change in attitude came in 2003, when the Army reversed its decision to close its Peacekeeping Institute at Carlisle Barracks, Pa. Instead, the facility—established a decade earlier as part of the Army War College—was renamed the Peacekeeping and Stability Operations Institute, and its staff has been doubled, from 10 to 20, according to the director, Army Col. John F. Agoglia.

The institute’s mission, he said, is to advise senior defense leaders, service and combatant commanders, and civilian officials in related government agencies regarding peacekeeping and stability operations. “One of the things we are trying to do is to build long-term relationships between the military institutions, civilian agencies and international non-government organizations involved in stability operations,” Agoglia said.

The administration took another step toward embracing stability operations in June 2004, when Bush endorsed a plan developed by the G8 countries—the eight major industrial democracies—to expand global peacekeeping capabilities as a way to pacify troubled regions, such as Africa. The plan, dubbed the Global Peacekeeping Initiative, committed the G8 countries to:

• By 2010, train and equip 75,000 troops around the world to conduct peace-support operations.
• Develop a transportation and logistics system to deploy and support peacekeeping units in the field.
• Establish a facility in Vincenza, Italy, to increase the capabilities and interoperability of constabulary or gendarme forces. These are police units with military organizations and abilities, such as the Italian Carabinieri, French Gendarmerie and Spanish Guardia Civil.
• Create a clearinghouse for member countries to exchange information and coordinate peace operations training and exercises in Africa.

For the United States to do its part, Bush proposed to increase funding for peace-support operations by $660 million over the next five years.

Under the African Contingency Operations Training and Assistance program, a White House official noted, the United States has trained and helped equip more than 12,000 peacekeepers from 10 African countries. Under the Enhanced International Peacekeeping Capabilities program, the United States also has helped a total of 29 countries improve the ability of their military services to conduct such operations.

In June, the Defense Department kicked off the Trans Saharan Counterterrorism Initiative with Exercise Flintlock 2005. Approximately 1,000 U.S. special operations forces began training their counterparts from seven Saharan countries in military tactics considered critical in enhancing regional security and stability.

The Trans Saharan initiative follows a Pan Sahel effort that was launched after the Sept. 11, 2001 attacks as a means to prevent terrorists from establishing bases in Mali, Mauritania, Chad and Niger. The new program adds Morocco, Algeria, Tunisia, Senegal and Nigeria to the training list.

The seven countries share vast, relatively unpopulated and ungoverned regions crisscrossed by traditional caravan routes, which can provide hideouts and staging areas for terrorists and criminals, U.S. defense officials said.

The ability of African nations to conduct peacekeeping operations was likely to be tested in July, when the African Union planned to begin increasing its UN-sponsored peacekeeping force in Sudan’s Darfur region from 3,320 troops currently to more than 7,700. An estimated 180,000 Sudanese have died in Darfur, and 2 million others have been driven from their homes during a conflict between rebels and pro-government militia.

South African President Thabo Mbeki, whose country is a member of the AU, said in June that the union had not asked for any nation outside of Africa to deploy troops to Darfur. “It’s an African responsibility, and we can do it,” he told reporters at the White House.

NATO has agreed to provide logistical support, including airlift. The United States helped transport the first contingent of African peacekeepers to Darfur, and Bush promised Mbeki that U.S. assets would participate in the latest effort.

Meanwhile, also in June, the United Nations extended the mandate of its peacekeeping mission in Haiti for another eight months and added more than 1,000 military and police personnel, bringing the Brazilian-led force to a total of nearly 9,400 in preparation for elections later this year. The UN unit replaced U.S. troops who deployed to the country in 2004.

That same month, a U.S. Institute of Peace Task Force on the United Nations, mandated by Congress, reported that current UN peacekeeping efforts “are bedeviled by limited capacity and operational challenges.” While many UN peacekeeping operations—from Namibia to Kosovo—have helped to provide stability and to promote political and economic development, “there also have been tragic failures,” said the task force, which was chaired by former House Speaker Newt Gingrich and former Senate Majority Leader George Mitchell. In some places, such as Sierra Leone, East Timor, Rwanda and Srebenica, large-scale killings took place despite the presence of UN peacekeepers.

“In addition, the credibility of UN peacekeeping has been badly damaged by revelations of sexual exploitation and abuse in the UN operations in the Congo and elsewhere,” the report said. The task force recommended that the United States press the United Nations to make the following reforms:

• Develop plans for multi-dimensional peace operations that thoroughly integrate security needs with economic and political development requirements. Prior to deployment, a strategic assessment of the crisis should be made to determine the full range of measures that will be necessary.
• Quickly implement a policy of zero tolerance of sexual exploitation and abuse by peacekeepers.
• Enforce uniform standards of conduct for all civilian and military participants, and improve related training programs. Hold senior managers accountable.
• Do not accept peacekeepers from countries that are unable to discipline their troops
• Deploy more women peacekeepers.
• Assist the victims of conflicts.
• Substantially increase the availability of capable, designated forces, properly trained and equipped for rapid deployment.

The United States should strengthen its participation in building international capacity for regional peacekeeping, the task force said. The Defense Department’s recent efforts to enhance coordination and capabilities for stability operations “set the right tone,” but it could do more, the report said.

For example, the United States participates in the UN’s stand-by system, which maintains a list of countries willing to deploy on peacekeeping missions and the resources they can contribute. But the task force said that U.S. participation “is of only limited operational value ... as it provides only a very general list of U.S. capabilities, with little indication of what precisely might be forthcoming.” More than 50 governments, including the United Kingdom, Australia and many other U.S. allies, provide more detailed information about the support they might consider, the task force noted.

The United States also should support the creation of a senior police-force management unit to assist in the establishment of new peace operations and increased, longer range funding for such missions, the task force said.

Back To Top