Soft Power of Defence Diplomacy: A New Approach ... - ISIS Malaysia

More documents

Recommendations

Info

8For this reason, public diplomacy is too important to be left entirely to civilianagencies, since the actions of the US military affect the way other countries and theircitizens view the US. The US military on occasions such as the 2004 tsunamiresponse has successfully undertaken soft power operations. Also, the US military’sshare of Official Development Aid (government assistance for the economies andwelfare of developing countries) increased from 3.5% in 1998 to 22% in 2005.USAID’s share declined from 65% to 40% in the same period. 25The rise of defence diplomacy is due to 3 insights derived from the Global War onTerrorism. First, from Iraq to Afghanistan, the fragile peace that was achievedthrough military force is not sustainable without a tangible peace dividend alongside arobust stabilization effort linked to long term, sustainable development. Second,fragile states with poor economy and weak governments was unable to protect ordefend their borders without providing essential services to and securing theallegiance of their citizens living in the vast ungoverned spaces most vulnerable toterrorist infiltration. Third, only the military has the personnel and operationalcapacity to fill in the vacuum in areas traditionally under the jurisdiction of civilianagencies. 26This resulted in the US Department of Defence (DoD) Directive 3000.05, issued inNovember 2005, which mandated the US military to treat stability operations as acore mission on par with combat operations. AFRICOM, a unified militaryheadquarters for Africa focusing on war prevention was launched in 2007 reflectingthis new emphasis but also take it further. It was designed to better enable civilmilitarycooperation to achieve a more stable environment in which political andeconomic growth can take place. Therefore, AFRICOM was given a developmentmandate and operates with an integrated interagency staff providing the platform forcoordination of other US government agencies. 27The AFRICOM model is spreading to other regional commands. In 2007, the USEuropean Command revised its Theatre Engagement Strategy, the document whichdetails methods on addressing threats to US national interests within the Europeantheatre. The new approach was called “Active Security” which emphasized nonmilitarytools to shape the strategic environment through a variety of civilianassistance missions, such as strengthening governance and improving health careinfrastructure. 28However, PACOM (Asia-Pacific region) have made no major modifications to theirorganizational structures to support the non-military humanitarian and civic assistancemission despite the mandate from DoD Directive 3000.05 and the substantial25 Williams, Abiodun, US Military and Public Diplomacy. Seib (ed), Toward a New Public Diplomacy:Redirecting US Foreign Policy. New York: Palgrave Macmillan, 2009.26 Smith, Gayle E., In Search of Sustainable Security: Linking National Security, Human Security andCollective Security to Protect America and Our World, Sustainable Security Series Paper. Center forAmerican Progress, 2008.27 Ibid.28 Brigety II, Reuben E., Humanity as a Weapon of War: Sustainable Security and the Role of the USMilitary, Sustainable Security Series Paper. Center for American Progress, 2008.
9development and extremism challenges in its area of operation especially in thecontext of the problem of fragile states such as Myanmar. 29Rise of the Soldier-DiplomatThis in turn led to the changing nature of the missions and the perceptions of what itmeans to be a soldier. Unlike most Cold War missions, which were either combat ornon-combat in nature, peacebuilding or stability operations require military forces toboth fulfil combat and non-combat functions and coordinate their efforts with partnermilitaries and a host of civilian relief organizations. 30Therefore, a new conception of military professionalism that emphasizes broadversatility instead of narrow expertise was developed. It was based on the so-calledThree-D Approach (Defence (National Security), Development (Human Security),Diplomacy (Collective Security) of the concept of Hybrid Warfare developed by thePentagon and the concept of Sustainable Security linking national security, humansecurity and collective security developed by the Center for American Progress (CAP)that reflects the growing contemporary reality of military-diplomatic fusion in thedomain of security cooperation reflected in two developments concerning civilmilitaryrelations. 31The first one is the “politicization of wars and the militarization of diplomacy” in theform of military governance. There are recent calls within the US for the reopening ofSchools of Military Government that existed during World War II. Abroad, in conflictzones such as Afghanistan and Iraq, the US military is increasingly exercisinginformal “civilians control by the military” due to the plethora of civilian actorsworking at cross purposes leaving the military as the only credible chain of command.In addition, security cooperation which covers a whole range of activities fromforeign policy to capacity building are not just non-combat operations as they are alsohighly political activities. At the high end, regional commanders have greaterresources and influence than any ambassadors, and in some parts of the world aregenuine proconsuls who can bypass the whole diplomatic hierarchy. 32The US concept of Hybrid Warfare shows remarkable similarities with Myanmar’sdomestic military norm based on the dual functions of its military in civilian andmilitary affairs. The Myanmar National Defence College publication from 2005reveals that Myanmar’s military defines its new professionalism as a military withextended competencies and skills that go far beyond the management of violence dueto its self-assigned roles as state and nation builders who has to run the state andeconomy and therefore tries to equip its officers with a variety of expertise in political,economic and social matters. These officers are not only military professionals but29 Ibid.30 Franke, Volker, The Peacebuilding Dilemma: Civil-Military Cooperation in Stability Operations,International Journal of Peace Studies, Vol. 11, No. 2, Autumn/Winter 2006, p. 12.31 Corn, Tony, From War Manager to Soldier Diplomats: The Coming Revolution in Civil MilitaryRelations, Small Wars Journal, June 30, 2009., 12 June 2010;Smith, Gayle E., In Search of Sustainable Security: Linking National Security, Human Security andCollective Security to Protect America and Our World, Sustainable Security Series Paper. Center forAmerican Progress, 2008.32 Ibid.
Page 1 and 2: 1Soft Power of Defence Diplomacy: A
Page 3 and 4: 3In this circumstance the extent of
Page 5 and 6: 5unlikely. Since the fall of Presid
Page 7: 7The activities include programs su
Page 11 and 12: 11The United StatesThe US has in fa
Page 13 and 14: 13condone terrorist gatherings on t
Page 15 and 16: 15Appendix 2: US military cooperati
Page 17 and 18: 17Appendix 4: Framework for Analysi
Page 19 and 20: 19BibliographyAlvin, Johan, Democra
Page 21: 21Soe Tin, Policy Dilemmas and Econ

Soft Power of Defence Diplomacy: A New Approach ... - ISIS Malaysia

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

Delete template?

Save as template?