Prioritizing Security Sector Reform

Prioritizing Security Sector Reform: A New U.S. Approach argues that security sector reform should be at the core of a new U.S. policy to strengthen the security sector capacity of countries where U.S. interests are at stake. Today's fragile environments feature a host of postconflict and postauthoritarian states and transitioning and new democracies that have at least one critical thing in common: Their security sectors are dysfunctional. Why these states cannot fulfill their most basic function-the protection of the population and their government-varies widely, but the underlying reason is the same. The security sector does not function because security sector institutions and forces are absent, ineffective, predatory, or illegitimate. In place of large, boots-on-the-ground interventions relying on expensive train and equip programs with only fleeting impact, Washington needs a new approach for engaging in fragile environments and a policy for prioritizing where it engages and for what purpose. The volume offers case studies to exemplify the context in which a new U.S. approach might be warranted, discusses other countries' experiences with security sector reform policies and examines how the United States should design and implement a security sector reform policy. Book jacket.

Challenges to security and human rights involving extractive and other industries gave rise to an evolving framework of policy, standards and good practice generally known as business and human rights (BHR). Problems with inefficient and unaccountable security institutions are addressed by security sector reform (SSR). From an empirical perspective – the view from the often mutual operating grounds of BHR and SSR – both approaches share many challenges, as well as end goals. It is thus striking that only on rare occasions are challenges in governance of the security sector addressed upfront as problems of poor resource governance, and vice versa. This paper describes the grounds where SSR and BHR coincide in principles, actors and activities, and which synergies can be built on that base. It makes the business case for SSR, and the SSR case for business. The paper assesses how SSR can channel resources and know-how from business to address critical challenges related to ownership, capacity and sustainability of reform processes. Opportunities for bridging BHR and SSR are drawn from a broad range of policy and guidance, and by looking at lessons from case studies on Guinea, Colombia and Papua New Guinea. SSR and BHR should not collide; ideally, they should cohere. A variety of multistakeholder initiatives open new opportunities to bring this about, with particular relevance to SSR in extractive environments. The overall conclusion, supported by practical propositions for implementation, is that the existing policies and standards in SSR and BHR already allow, and call for, a less rigid approach to the challenges addressed in both fields.

Security sector reform (SSR) and transitional justice processes often occur alongside each other in societies emerging from conflict or authoritarian rule, involve many of the same actors, are supported by some of the same partner countries and impact on each other. Yet the relationship between SSR and transitional justice, or “dealing with the past” (DwP) as it is also called, remains underexplored and is often marked by ignorance and resistance. While SSR and transitional justice processes can get into each other’s way, this paper argues that SSR and DwP are intrinsically linked and can complement each other. SSR can make for better transitional justice and vice versa. Transitional justice needs SSR to prevent a recurrence of abuses, an essential element of justice. SSR can learn from transitional justice not only that it is better to deal with rather than ignore an abusive past but also how to address an abusive legacy in the security sector. The validity of these assumptions is tested in two case studies: the police reform process in Bosnia and Herzegovina after 1995 and the SSR process in Nepal after 2006.

The authors explore the definition of Security sector reform (SSR) as it has emerged in the international community. The makeup of the security sector is examined, principles are identified for implementing SSR, and outcomes SSR is intended to produce are specified. Supporting case studies assess specific SSR programs. The authors conclude that those conducting SSR programs must understand and continually revisit the policy goals of SSR programs so as to develop concepts that support a transitional process that moves forward over time. State actors must acknowledge and often accommodate nonstate security actors more effectively in SSR planning and implementation, while recognizing both the advantages and the risks of collaborating with such actors. The authors also note the need for more flexible and better integrated funding processes. (Originally published by the Strategic Studies Institute.)

The persistent gap between theory and practice in SSR can be a source of much irritation and disappointment at failures to implement SSR norms as well as in response to concepts and strategies that seem unhelpfully far removed from local realities. This paper compares ideal-case SSR environments with real-life conditions of implementing SSR. Through offering suggestions for better practice in SSR implementation, it shows that the art of applied SSR can be learned.

Although the financial sustainability of United Nations (UN) support to institutional capacity building in post-conflict contexts may be the least analysed topic on the peacebuilding agenda, understanding the costs of rebuilding and maintaining the security sector should be one of the most important priorities for security sector reform (SSR) practitioners today. Through innovative partnerships between the UN and the World Bank, a new and important practice area in public financial management of the security sector is beginning to take shape. This paper traces the new demands placed on peacekeeping operations to “get more bang for every peacekeeping buck”, and explores how to match SSR priorities and recurring costs in the security sector with available resources over the long term. In presenting the lessons learned from the security sector public expenditure review conducted by the UN and the World Bank in Liberia in 2012, the first such review jointly undertaken by the two organizations, the paper seeks to illustrate how the discussion on right-sizing of the security sector can go hand in hand with a discussion on right-financing in order to help prioritize key reforms pragmatically in light of the available fiscal space. Specifically, the paper provides SSR practitioners with insights into the challenges often encountered when assisting national authorities to address the political economy of SSR, and how to navigate those dilemmas.

"Security sector reform (SSR) is widely recognised as key to conflict prevention, peace-building, sustainable development and democratisation. SSR has gained most practical relevance in the context of post-conflict reconstruction of so-called failed states' and states emerging from violent internal or inter-state conflict. As this volume shows, almost all states need to reform their security sectors to a greater or lesser extent, according to the specific security, political and socio-economic contexts, as well as in response to the new security challenges resulting from globalisation and post-9/11 developments. Contributions from academics and practitioners elaborate on both the conceptual underpinnings and the practical realities of security sector reform and - a crucial aspect of post-conflict peace-building - security sector reconstruction. "

This book examines the evolution, impact, and future prospects of the Security Sector Reform (SSR) model in conflict-affected countries in the context of the wider debate over the liberal peace project. Since its emergence as a concept in the late 1990s, SSR has represented a paradigm shift in security assistance, from the realist, regime-centric, train-and-equip approach of the Cold War to a new liberal, holistic and people-centred model. The rapid rise of this model, however, belied its rather meagre impact on the ground. This book critically examines the concept and its record of achievement over the past two decades, putting it into the broader context of peace-building and state-building theory and practice. It focuses attention on the most common, celebrated and complex setting for SSR, conflict-affected environments, and comparatively examines the application and impacts of donor-supported SSR programing in a series of conflict-affected countries over the past two decades, including Afghanistan, Sierra Leone, the Democratic Republic of Congo, East Timor and Bosnia-Herzegovina. The broader aim of the book is to better understand how the contemporary SSR model has coalesced over the past two decades and become mainstreamed in international development and security policy and practice. This provides a solid foundation to investigate the reasons for the poor performance of the model and to assess its prospects for the future. This book will be of much interest to students of international security, peacebuilding, statebuilding, development studies and IR in general.