World

Military leadership is strong; nation-building inappropriate

by YankeeJim | June 25, 2010 at 03:59 am

213 views | 0 Recommendations | 1 comment

President Obama is absolutely correct that America’s military leadership is strong and competent. They try to be adaptive with whatever strategy the executive branch serves them. From where did “nation-building” strategy come?

I don’t know the scholarly answer, but here is a reference that should work.

Obama did not invent it; but he sure should shake it.

“The RAND History of Nation-Building

By: James Dobbins, Keith Crane, Seth G. Jones, Andrew Rathmell, Brett Steele, Richard Teltschik, John G. McGinn, Rollie Lal, Rachel M. Swanger, Anga R. Timilsina

This two-volume set examines United States and United Nations nation-building missions since World War II. Its purpose is to analyze military, political, humanitarian, and economic activities in post-conflict situations, determine key principles for success, and draw implications for future nation-building missions. The first volume, America’s Role in Nation-Building: From Germany to Iraq, draws lessons from America’s experiences in rebuilding Germany, Japan, Somalia, Haiti, Bosnia, Kosovo, and Afghanistan and suggests how these lessons might be applied to the reconstruction of Iraq. Volume two, The UN’s Role in Nation-Building: From the Congo to Iraq, contains the lessons learned from eight UN cases: Belgian Congo, Namibia, El Salvador, Cambodia, Mozambique, Eastern Slavonia, Sierra Leone, and East Timor, and also examines the nation-building effort in Iraq.”

“Obama says he is 'confident' in war leadership

By Karen DeYoung

Washington Post Staff Writer
Friday, June 25, 2010

President Obama said Thursday that there will be no additional changes for now in his leadership team on Afghanistan, but that he will be "insisting on unity of purpose" and "paying very close attention" to its performance.”