This brief is a report on a one-day civil-military roundtable to identify tensions, tradeoffs and opportunities found in the civil society–military
relationship in Afghanistan.

56

Summary

  • The intense challenge of coordinating government civilians with military actors in the International Security Assistance Forces’ Provincial Reconstruction Teams in Afghanistan has inhibited development of military relationships with civil society.
  • The counterinsurgency strategy of “shape, clear, hold, build” invites civil society organizations (CSOs) to play key roles in the final “build” stage at the operational level. Yet many CSOs resist “coordination” in a mission and strategy different from their own.
  • CSOs seek greater policy dialogue and “communication” with high-level ISAF decision makers, particularly during planning stages. An ongoing, high-level forum for civil society-military policy dialogue could help address tensions, provide a mechanism for CSOs to share their conflict assessments, and explore areas for possible collaboration such as in security sector reform.

About This Brief

This brief is a report on a one-day civil-military roundtable to identify tensions, tradeoffs and opportunities found in the civil society–military relationship in Afghanistan. The event was held at U.S. Institute of Peace on June 4, 2010 and was organized by the 3D Security Initiative of Eastern Mennonite University in partnership with the U.S. Institute of Peace, the Kroc Institute for International Peace Studies at the University of Notre Dame, National Defense University’ Center for Complex Operations, and U.S. Army Peacekeeping and Stability Operations Institute.

Three civil society leaders from Afghanistan presented their work and perspectives: Director of Afghan Civil Society Forum-organization (ACSFO) Eng. Aziz Rafiee, Program Director of Cooperation for Peace and Unity (CPAU) Mirwais Wardak, and Director of Agency Coordinating Body on Afghan Relief (ACBAR) Laurent Saillard. Funding for the event came from the Connect U.S. Fund, the Compton Foundation, and the Ploughshares Fund.

The author, Lisa Schirch, is the founding director of the 3D Security Initiative and a professor of peacebuilding at Eastern Mennonite University’s graduate Center for Justice & Peacebuilding.

Related Publications

What Has the U.S. Got Against Peace Talks?

What Has the U.S. Got Against Peace Talks?

Wednesday, November 6, 2019

By: Johnny Walsh

Last month, U.S. President Donald Trump withdrew from the Afghan peace process, closing off for the time being a rare opening to resolve a long, stagnant, and unpopular war. Whatever one thinks of the specifics of the deal that the U.S. representative at the talks, Zalmay Khalilzad, had nearly finalized with the Taliban, the episode was a perfect demonstration of the conflicted, often self-defeating view of peace agreements that mires U.S. foreign policy.

Type: Analysis and Commentary

Mediation, Negotiation & Dialogue; Peace Processes

To Protect Afghan Women’s Rights, U.S. Must Remain Engaged

To Protect Afghan Women’s Rights, U.S. Must Remain Engaged

Wednesday, October 23, 2019

By: Adam Gallagher

It’s been over a year since the U.S., led by Amb. Zalmay Khalilzad, opened talks with the Taliban aimed at ending the 18-year war. Over that year, Afghan women have demanded a seat at the negotiating table, worried that the hard-won gains made over the last two decades could be in jeopardy. Even with the peace process stalled, “it is vital that the U.S. remain engaged” to ensure that Afghan women’s rights are protected, said Rep. Martha Roby (R-AL) last week at the U.S. Institute of Peace’s latest Bipartisan Congressional Dialogue.

Type: Analysis and Commentary

Gender; Democracy & Governance

Scott Worden on Afghan Elections and the Peace Process

Scott Worden on Afghan Elections and the Peace Process

Wednesday, October 9, 2019

By: Scott Worden

A week and a half after Afghan presidential polls, the results remain unclear. But, we do know that turnout was historically low, largely due to dire security conditions. Meanwhile, with the peace process stalled, USIP’s Scott Worden says the upsurge in U.S. military operations against the Taliban is a “pressure tactic, not a victory strategy.”

Electoral Violence; Democracy & Governance; Peace Processes

Afghans Want U.S.-Taliban Talks to Resume, But with New Approach

Afghans Want U.S.-Taliban Talks to Resume, But with New Approach

Thursday, October 3, 2019

By: Belquis Ahmadi

Just days before U.S.-Taliban talks were put on freeze earlier in September, I was in Istanbul for a negotiations workshop with 25 Afghan women leaders. These women were expected to play an integral role in intra-Afghan talks that would follow a U.S.-Taliban deal. Even though a deal seemed imminent that week, the Taliban intensified their attacks on Afghan civilians and security forces. Meanwhile, these women were hard at work strategizing for peace. But they, and other Afghans I spoke with in a subsequent trip to Kabul, revealed deep trepidation over what a U.S.-Taliban deal would mean for them, their hard-won rights, and the impact a begrudging peace could have on Afghan society.

Type: Blog

Human Rights; Peace Processes

View All Publications