Text Browser Navigation Bar: Main Site Navigation and Search | Current Page Navigation | Current Page Content
Key Insights: • The initiatives for the extensive national security reform that is required to meet current threats will have to come from outside of the executive branch bureaucracy. This is true even though former senior members of the Project on National Security Reform are holding key executive branch positions. • The 3-D’s (defense, diplomacy, development, as 3 overlapping circles) has been a harmful way to portray the capacities, requirements, and relationships for policy and operational effectiveness, especially in ongoing counterinsurgency operations in Afghanistan. The current 3-D’s model is incorrect, as these functions are not properly represented by circles, are not the same size in terms of capacity and resources, and in many significant ways they do not overlap in several respects in the key areas necessary for effective integration, alignment, and coordination. • The Obama Administration still has much work to do in organizing development efforts to focus on the need for stronger political, economic and social development structures, resources, and leadership. Given the ongoing efforts in Iraq and Afghanistan, there is an urgent need for better defining the roles and responsibilities.
Conflict Management and Peacebuilding: Pillars of a New American Grand Strategy
Conflict Management and "Whole of Government": Useful Tools for U.S. National Security Strategy?
National Security Reform 2010: A Midterm Assessment
Rethinking Leadership and "Whole of Government" National Security Reform: Problems, Progress, and Prospects
Leadership and National Security Reform Conference
Leadership and National Security Reform: The Next President's Agenda
The Interagency and Counterinsurgency Warfare: Aligning and Integrating Military and Civilian Roles in Stability, Security, Transition, and Reconstruction Operations
The Future of Transatlantic Security Relations