promoting security sector reform in fragile states - GFN-SSR

More documents

Recommendations

Info

Box 5. Tailoring Responses to Country Context Political context Is the capacity of the civil authorities to exercise oversight and control over one or more of the security bodies weak? If so, consider • assisting the legislature as a whole and relevant legislative committees to develop the capacity to evaluate security sector policies and budgets • supporting national dialogues on issues relating to security sector governance • helping to strengthen and create oversight bodies, such as the auditor general’s office, police commission, and human rights commission Is democratic accountability of the security bodies to civil authorities inadequate or deteriorating? If so, consider • supporting civil society efforts to train civilians in security affairs, defense economics, and democratic policing; to monitor security-related activities; and to offer constructive advice to policymakers • encouraging national dialogues that lead to the development of national strategies for strengthening security sector governance • providing professional training for security force personnel consistent with norms and principles of democratic accountability, such as the role of the military in a democracy, democratic policing, and human rights training Security context Is transborder crime a major problem? If so, consider • supporting the development of regional policing capacity • encouraging regional dialogues on security issues Is the country at war? If so, consider • encouraging parties to the conflict to discuss security sector governance in the course of peace negotiations • training civilians to enhance their capacity to manage and oversee the security sector Economic context Does one or more of the security forces have privileged access to state resources? If so, consider • supporting incorporation of security sector into government-wide fiscal accountability and transparency processes • supporting anticorruption activities • assisting civil society to develop the capacity to monitor security budgets Do the security bodies receive inadequate financial resources to fulfill their missions? If so, consider • strengthening the capacity of legislators and economic managers to assess security budgets and carry out oversight functions • encouraging participatory national security assessments that have the major objective of developing missions within a realistic resource framework Social context Do unaccountable security forces create a sense of insecurity within the country as a whole or among certain communities and groups? If so, consider • supporting the creation of police councils and other civilian bodies to monitor the behavior of the security bodies • encouraging human rights and gender-sensitivity training Is civil society prevented from monitoring the security sector? If so, consider • providing training for security forces in democratic policing and defense in a democracy • empowering civil society through legislation and its own interaction with civil society on security issues 12 USAID ISSUE PAPER NO. 11
An in-depth approach is most desirable, but is not always feasible. Conducting a contextual analysis informed by the sort of agenda proposed in the Clingendael assessment framework and the DAC policy statement and paper may provide a useful starting point for dialogue with partner countries. The starting point is to identify key contextual categories. Within each, a series of questions can be asked. When answered in the affirmative, a number of possible responses can be identified. This process is illustrated in box 5 and appendix 3. The contextual analysis is no more than an analytic aid. It can be used to help build up a picture of the country environment within which the security sector operates, as well as ways in which some problems could be addressed. Precisely how they are addressed should be the subject of consultations between local stakeholders (governmental and nongovernmental) and their external partners. What Lessons Can Be Drawn from Current SSR Work? Lessons to be drawn from any sort of development work pertain either to specific types of interventions or the process of providing assistance. To develop an Agency-wide approach to SSR, the focus should be on lessons relating to process, especially the effective design and delivery of assistance. Some mirror lessons learned about delivering effective development assistance in areas unrelated to security. These are reiterated because they have not been fully incorporated into development practice. There are six process-related lessons: 1. Strengthening democratic security sector governance is a highly political activity. Improving democratic security sector governance thus cannot be addressed solely by technical measures. Rather, it is essential to understand critical political relationships among key actors, how and why decisions are made, and incentives and disincentives for change. Strategies need to be developed for supporting reformers and minimizing the impact of spoilers. This is a particularly critical aspect of contextual analysis; it requires looking beyond formal legislation and organizational structure to develop a picture of how local institutions function. External actors often focus on formal institutions and structures, leading them to undertake interventions that have no hope of achieving the desired outcomes. To obtain information needed for appropriate interventions, external actors need to observe the functioning of local institutions and cultivate relationships with key local stakeholders, including civil society actors and potential spoilers. 2. The most successful external interventions are those that build on existing local capacity and take local ownership seriously. While the principles underlying democratic security sector governance are applicable to all societies, every country’s unique history and mode of operations influence how these principles are applied. The objective of external support to SSR should be to help local actors identify how best to achieve transparency, accountability, civil management, and oversight of security bodies in a manner consistent with the local context. Even where it is weak, there is generally some degree of local capacity upon which to build. As in other sectors, local actors should be capacitated, not bypassed. 16 In this way, efforts to build their commitment will be maximized, and implemented reforms are more likely to be sustained. Of necessity, this is a long-term approach. Once embarked upon, the process of strengthening security sector governance needs to be shaped and conditioned by the pace of social and political change in a given country, not arbitrary donor timetables or funding decisions. 17 The weaker the state, the longer the period is likely to be. It is extremely important, however, to make the necessary investment. Consultative processes that build consensus on the need for change and the direction and nature of change are critical for reform efforts. 18 Such processes, however, require adequate time for stakeholders to reach a consensus. External stakeholders can help local stakeholders to do this, but the effort requires patience and an ability to facilitate politically sensitive discussions. Unless all key stakeholders 16 For example, a core operating principle of the UK Defence Advisory Team is “assisting and facilitating—not doing—through the provision of processes, frameworks, and methodologies” to ensure local ownership and build increased capacity (Fuller 2003, 12). 17 Timetables established for postconflict programs are often not geared toward maximizing local participation or ownership, and linkages with longer-term development activities are often not made adequately. 18 In the security sector, the highly consultative South African process is viewed as a model by developing countries—in Africa and beyond. PROMOTING SECURITY SECTOR REFORM IN FRAGILE STATES 13
Page 1 and 2: PROMOTING SECURITY SECTOR REFORM IN
Page 3 and 4: PROMOTING SECURITY SECTOR REFORM IN
Page 5 and 6: Contents Contents . . . . . . . . .
Page 7: Preface Bilateral and multilateral
Page 10 and 11: these are the Agency’s experience
Page 12 and 13: manitarian crises often reign in th
Page 14 and 15: Security matters to the poor and ot
Page 16 and 17: …Policing is well regarded in Okp
Page 18 and 19: assistance agencies working on SSR-
Page 20 and 21: Box 4. Categorizing Support for Dem
Page 24 and 25: are in agreement on the way forward
Page 26 and 27: tors. Development assistance agenci
Page 28 and 29: Furthermore, USAID has considerable
Page 30 and 31: agencies and other development assi
Page 33 and 34: References Ball, Nicole. 2002. Enha
Page 35 and 36: Appendix 1. Key Strategic Objective
Page 37 and 38: the broad spectrum of SSR and devel
Page 39 and 40: Appendix 3. Tailoring Responses to
Page 41: 3. Do unaccountable security forces
Page 44: U.S. Agency for International Devel

promoting security sector reform in fragile states - GFN-SSR

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?