A new policy prescription article thingy (yeah, I totally own a dictionary) from the Brookings Institution thinks the US government should create a new department that is specially designed for reconstruction and stabilization that will serve past the reconstruction and stabilization of Iraq and Afghanistan. It'll fall somewhere between National Security and the State Department it seems.
I'm usually not in favor of creating new departments or bureaucracies, but this one seems alright, actually reworking a system that will provide me (hopefully) with job security.
What I find really encouraging is tying this notion of national security with peacebuilding. Meaning, we don't send troops into other countries without an actual plan for what they'll do once they've finished and only use international peace keeping forces in a secondary role. Novel concept, I know.
The most interesting idea the article poses in terms of actual peacebuilding is the idea of elections.
"It is incumbent on the international community to guarantee peace and impose law and order in the absence of a widely accepted rule of law. In addition to provision of basic security, there is a “window of necessity” to meet humanitarian needs and give people confidence in the future. Key factors are restarting basic social services, getting kids back to school, and stimulating local jobs that give people an alternative to taking up arms. The process must start to disarm, demobilize, and reintegrate (DDR) warring opponents. Some form of political activity must begin, often locally, that will lead to credible governance. Elections, when conducted too soon, can be detrimental, forcing competition among previously warring factions before wounds have healed and potentially entrenching criminals or warlords in political office."
I think in the particular case of Iraq and Afghanistan, there was such pressure to show that the US had properly implemented democracy in these countries, and so the gun was jumped to hold elections. While these elections may have had great examples of participation of the populations, they were nonetheless nothing more than an imitation of a democratic process. I think the US is making huge mistakes in pushing democracy on nations that can't provide security for the process to begin with, at least not in any way beneficial to their people.
Of course there are many other mistakes that have led to the present mess, and one of these days, I'll be able to write a very exact and well informed opinion about it. Until then, we can all enjoy the musings of a student grasping onto bits of information, desperately trying to sound smart.
0 comments:
Post a Comment