全球智库信息集成服务系统

Defense institution building roles and responsibilities are not adequately defined at the program and project levels.

• Roles and responsibilities are either not defined at all, or the relationships are so complex that organizations resort to ad hoc relationships based, at times, on personalities.
• In particular, the relationship among the regional centers, combatant commands, and DIB programs is not adequately defined in current policy or guidance documents.

Involvement of partner nations in setting DIB objectives at the combatant command level is inconsistent.

DIB programs have developed processes for selecting countries and prioritizing their DIB activities.

More and better coordination mechanisms are needed to avoid the implementation of redundant security cooperation programs.

The principle of "unity of command" is lacking in the DIB community.

Although the entire DIB community has expended considerable effort at developing suitable methods to measure the progress of their investments, there is some unevenness in the approaches.

A key element in the Department of Defense's Defense Strategic Guidance is building the capacity of partner nations to share the costs and responsibilities of global leadership. To implement this goal, the Under Secretary of Defense for Policy uses several security cooperation and assistance programs to work with partner countries to support defense institution building (DIB), i.e., build the capacity of their defense ministries. In addition, the combatant commands engage in DIB in response to the security cooperation focus areas in the Guidance for Employment of the Force. DIB has four primary components — Wales Initiative Funds-DIB, Defense Institutional Reform Initiative, Ministry of Defense Advisors, and Defense Institute of International Legal Studies — but includes all security cooperation activities that develop accountable, effective, and efficient defense institutions. The primary objective of many existing DIB activities is to help partner nations develop and manage capable security forces subject to appropriate civilian control.

This report presents an analysis of a range of DIB activities, recommends a set of goals and objectives for achieving them, identifies partner nation and DIB activity selection criteria, develops a strategy for coordinating DIB activities, and recommends procedures for achieving accountability and assessment. It also identifies the most critical challenges DIB programs will face as they go forward: the inherent complexity of the DIB enterprise, the difficulty of measuring the long-term success of short-term endeavors, and the challenges of selecting partner nations for DIB activities.

• Chapter One

  Introduction

• Chapter Two

  Defense Institution Building Goals, Objectives, and Guidance

• Chapter Three

  Selecting and Prioritizing Partner Nations

• Chapter Four

  Harmonizing DIB and Other Security Cooperation Activities

• Chapter Five

  Roles and Responsibilities

• Chapter Six

  Assessment: Monitoring, Tracking, and Evaluating DIB Activities

• Chapter Seven

  Conclusions

• Appendix A

  DIB and DIB-Related Programs

• Appendix B

  Management of Defense Institution Building Programs

• Appendix C

  Interview Protocols