the process of security sector reform - ISAC Fund

Dr Timothy Edmunds THE PROCESS OF SECURITY SECTOR REFORM
Dr Timothy Edmunds THE PROCESS OF SECURITY SECTOR REFORM
cratisation through SSR – may well reduce the potential for conflict between
neighbours.
Finally, security sector reform is an important factor for those states that want
to integrate more closely with Western Institutions such as the EU or NATO
– or associated programmes like PfP. While decisions on membership of these
kinds institutions tend to be informed as much by political reasons as by specific
security sector reform successes, it does remain an important factor, particularly
in relations with NATO.
IMPLEMENTATION
That at least is the theory and rationale that lies behind the security sector reform
concept. What does SSR mean in practice though? How does it actually happen?
How is it implemented?
The first point to note is that security sector reform is a process rather than an
end point. International and domestic security requirements are always changing,
and all states have to be able to adapt their security sectors to meet these
demands effectively. Democracy too is continuous process, and all established
democracies adapt and reform their democratic procedures in accordance with
changing circumstances.
For example, the terrorist attacks of 11 September 2001 have initiated a major
review of security sector controls and priorities in the United States. In essence,
the US itself – as well as the UK and many other European countries – have been
going through their own processes of SSR since 9/11.
Security sector reform does make particular demands in countries that are in
countries that are going through democratisation or that are emerging from
conflict. Here there is often no established procedure for democratic control
of security sector actors, despite the fact that there may have been very strong
civilian control under the old regime.
Security sector actors themselves can sometimes be politicised, and used to
playing (or being used to play) a key role in domestic politics. Indeed, in many
countries, the security sector – or at least elements of it – may well have been a
key instrument of control by the old regime, and as a result it might be tied to it
both through its ideology and its own interests.
If a society is emerging from conflict, then the security sector will have to
undergo a fundamental role change from one structured around the demands
of conflict – in which it is likely to have played a central role – to one more
suited to a peacetime environment. In general this will involve a reduction in the
size and importance of the security sector, and so is likely to directly threaten
security sector actors’ own sectional interests.
All these factors both make SSR necessary and are potential obstacles in its
way. However, several lessons emerge from the experiences of other countries
in these areas.
In particular, it is clear that SSR processes in the democratising states tend fall
into two overlapping and interrelated phases – ‘first generation’ reforms, and
‘second generation’ reforms.
• ‘First generation SSR’ concerns the establishment of new institutions,
structures and chains of responsibility for the security sector.
• ‘Second generation SSR’ concerns the consolidation of previous reforms,
and the effective and efficient operation of institutions and procedures at
a sustainable cost for the state and society.
FIRST GENERATION SECURITY SECTOR REFORM
First generation SSR is primarily concerned with the establishment of appropriate
structures for (democratic) civilian control, and measures to depoliticise
security sector actors and remove them from partisan intervention in domestic
politics.
Key elements of first generation SSR include:
First: the establishment of clear civilian-dominated chains of command. This
ensures that control of the security sector remains firmly in the hands of civilians
14 15