Joint Resolution

Decisive joint action transcends politics to address cross-border issues

UNIPATH STAFF

The world’s efforts to protect commercial shipping off the coast of Somalia made spectacular gains in 2012. And the pirates aren’t happy.

Former brigand Mohamed Abdullah Aden abandoned his life of crime and went back to coaching a kids’ soccer team, preferring a pay cut to death at sea. “The coasts became too dangerous,” he told The Associated Press. “Dozens of my friends are unaccounted for and some ended up in jail.”

He’s not the only pirate that’s been put out of business. As of late 2012, more than 1,000 Somali pirates had been detained or convicted on piracy charges in 21 nations. The number of ships attacked in the first nine months of the year plummeted to 99 from 269 during the same period in 2011. Successful hijackings fell from 30 to just 13, according to the International Maritime Organization.

A key part of this successful effort was an international military partnership: Combined Task Force 151, the counterpiracy arm of the 27-nation Combined Maritime Forces. The task force was commanded in turn by Pakistan, the Republic of Korea, Thailand and Australia during 2012. Yemeni forces also assisted by distinguishing pirate vessels from fishing boats, helping regional nations to protect livelihoods. Each nation has a stake in the task force’s success.

Not every combined effort produces such impressive results. Partnerships can be fragile and fractious; merely agreeing to work together will not cure the world’s ills or eliminate disagreements between parties. The degree of success enjoyed depends on circumstances, terms of agreement and the components involved. But given the significance of issues such as piracy, human suffering and continuing conflict, there is no alternative to decisive joint action. Even if countries disagree on political matters, they can and should be set aside to address larger cross-border issues.

Mil-to-Mil
Traditional partnerships like Task Force 151 — both naval and land-based — are a cornerstone of military operations. They strengthen relations with allies that share common interests and vital security interests, and allow nations to work together to counter threats and respond to disasters that would be too large for any one country to handle alone.

One of the biggest advantages of such military-to-military (mil-to-mil) operations is that partners become familiar with each others’ techniques, tactics and procedures. This strengthens relationships and enhances interoperability, allowing nations to address a broad range of security challenges together.

Training drills are the “connective tissue” that can help build relationships even between countries that have never worked together, creating the trust and harmony that are essential to success when crises arise or conflicts erupt. Mil-to-mil connections can also be a “backdoor” of contact and communication when tensions flare between partners.

By sharing best practices, mil-to-mil partnerships can also help improve logistics procedures, communication system interoperability, maintenance operations, force protection and training programs. Best of all, because the cost is shared, a relatively small investment can produce substantial dividends. A problem that’s too expensive for one country to tackle on its own could be managed effectively if handled as a team effort.

Peace Shield 1/2012 is a great example of this kind of collaboration. The Qatari-Emirati air, sea and land military exercise boosted Gulf security and enhanced combined military operations.

A statement released by the two participating forces said: “The exercise will focus on planning and executing joint military operations, as well as the operational procedures of command and control on the ground [in addition to] the enhancement of leadership skills of the command and control center operators and military readiness of GCC personnel.” U.A.E. Maj. Gen. Rashad Mohammed Salem al-Saadi added, “[T]his event enabled us to better our performance on the battlefield and concentrate on joint operations areas that needed more work.”

Civil–Military
But as the strategic environment has expanded to include forms of engagement that include border control, reconstruction and stabilization missions, “military partnerships” have taken on a broader definition. Armed forces now routinely partner with government and quasi-governmental civilian agencies, along with nongovernmental and humanitarian organizations and other militaries.

Civil–military operations (CMOs), which emerged from U.N. missions beginning in the 1990s, have become integral components of peacekeeping and humanitarian relief efforts. They are often included in traditional military operations as well.
CMOs are designed to establish and maintain relations between military forces, government agencies, nongovernmental organizations (NGOs) and civilians in combat theaters as well as post-conflict or post-disaster situations. Unlike purely military partnerships, CMOs may include activities and functions that are normally the purview of local, regional or national government. These include support or training of law-enforcement units, along with efforts to deter organized crime, smuggling, drug trafficking and terrorism.

While sometimes dismissed as tangential soft-power initiatives, CMOs can play an essential role in facilitating military operations and achieving operational objectives. They can be valuable force multipliers in counterinsurgency operations, because CMOs fulfill the central tenet of any counterinsurgency strategy: Separate civilians from the insurgency.

By promoting basic governance and sustainable development through political, social, and economic programs, CMOs can often be more effective than conventional military operations. As Australian counterinsurgency specialist David Kilcullen explains, “CMO is the restructuring of the environment in order to displace the enemy.”

Military–NGO
In disaster relief, reconstruction and peacekeeping operations, CMOs allow militaries to create a secure and stable environment, allowing aid workers and other international actors to do their jobs effectively.

Military assets can complement humanitarian efforts by providing airlifts, rebuilding infrastructure, establishing field hospitals and enforcing the peace. By addressing humanitarian needs, NGOs help alleviate conditions that might otherwise lead to unrest and instability. By optimizing each participant’s relative strengths, military–NGO partnerships engender much good will for the military and sponsoring nation. That’s an important point, since most militaries are more likely to be part of a humanitarian intervention than to participate in a war or peacekeeping mission.

Challenges
For all their good intentions and positive potential, however, partnerships present challenges as well.

Mil-to-mil partnerships, for example, enhance trust and strengthen relations between countries. But are strong military relationships enough to overcome suspicion and fear when governments clash? If government and military objectives differ, which should prevail? Another big question is cost: As budgets shrink and the lists of problems grow, how do militaries determine which issues need the most attention?

Nonmilitary partnerships can also be problematic. In these engagements, armed forces must work with government agencies and civilians. This is not an easy relationship. While both groups are committed to service and willing to work in dangerous environments, they are profoundly different: NGOs are decentralized organizations in which lower-level workers have a great deal of autonomy. Military units, on the other hand, have a strict chain of command. Although they frequently work together in joint operations, neither is truly “in charge,” and that can lead to friction. Aid workers fear losing their neutral status if they’re associated with the military; armed forces worry about complicating the mission should NGO affiliates be killed or captured.

Similar difficulties can arise in more traditional CMOs, when militaries must gain the trust of a civilian populace. When need is desperate and funds are limited, military decisions made and actions taken can alienate the very people that need help.

Opting in
So is the partnership glass half-full or half-empty? Speaking to Unipath at the May 2012 Eager Lion exercises in Jordan, Pakistani Director of Joint Warfare Brig. Gen. Imran ul-Haq leaned toward the former.

One of six Pakistani officers participating in the exercises, he’d been invited to the event by both the U.S. and Jordan. His nation opted to attend despite what some may have perceived as tense diplomatic relations because it helped keep Pakistan connected to all of its partners in the Gulf region. “Hopefully, when we return to the home front we will continue these engagements,” he added.

Military exercises are important, he said, because they maintain professional communications when other lines might be down. While noting that in any coalition “it is a challenge to put various nations together,” he explained that the drills and training can serve as a platform that helps improve relationships.

Friendships and liaisons that form during the exercise can also help their respective countries achieve larger objectives. And should a crisis erupt, the cooperation honed during the exercise becomes a tool that allows respective governments to coordinate and respond effectively.

Haq acknowledged that cultural difficulties can plague multinational endeavors, noting that some Muslims in the military harbor concerns about working with Westerners. Having served in Morocco with France and other Western nations, however, he said they were unfounded. “My experience is absolutely different … it has been tremendous.”

Sources: Army-Technology.com; The Associated Press; Center for Disaster and Humanitarian Assistance Medicine, U.S. Department of Defense; e-International Relations (e-ir.info); Foreign Affairs; Global Humanitarian Platform; Joint Forces Quarterly; National Defense University, Prism magazine; New York University, Center on International Cooperation; Small Wars Journal; “Twenty-Eight Articles: Fundamentals of Company-level Counterinsurgency,” by David Kilcullen; United Nations; United Nations Infantry Battalion Manual; U.S. Army War College Center for Strategic Leadership, Peacekeeping Institute; U.S. Marine Corps Civil–Military Operations School; World Politics Review

CMO Peacekeeping Missions

Peacekeeping missions bring military and civilian elements together in post-conflict situations. They provide critical transport, medical and engineering assets, creating a secure environment that allows humanitarian workers to work safely and effectively.

Despite the presence of nongovernmental organizations, peacekeeping operations are essentially U.N.-run military operations that involve:

• Observation, monitoring and reporting
• Cease-fire supervision and verification
• Creating a visible presence that acts as a buffer and confidence-building measure

Peacekeeping forces also support law-enforcement agencies, help secure key government installations and vital infrastructure, and provide demining assistance when necessary.

As with other types of civil–military operations, such partnerships are not without drawbacks. While the intentions behind them are always noble, peacekeeping missions can actually prolong a war. The U.N. has also acknowledged the failure of its missions to Rwanda (1994) and Srebrenica (1995), both of which resulted in massacres.

Peacekeepers themselves face heightened risks: Sgt. Hassan Mazawdeh and Cpl. Qassem Sarhan, two Jordanian peacekeepers in Darfur, were kidnapped in August 2012 when they went to buy supplies. They were released unharmed in January 2013.

The U.N. currently supports 14 peacekeeping operations and one special political mission in Afghanistan.

---

We want to hear from you

• Does your country participate in military partnerships and peacekeeping missions?
• How does the experience help build better Soldiers or improve national security?
• How does your unit work with nongovernmental organizations?
• How are military partnerships and peacekeeping missions changing?

Unipath welcomes your ideas, articles and photos at: [email protected].