USIP President Jim Marshall spoke at the Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS) on March 11 for the release of a new report, “U.S. Navy Humanitarian Assistance in an Era of Austerity.” Marshall delivered the keynote address and participated in a panel discussion with Admiral (ret.) Gary Roughead (Hoover Institution), Rear Admiral (ret.) Thomas Cullison (CNA Institute for Public Research), and moderated by CSIS’s Dr. J. Stephen Morrison.

20130311-JM-CSIS-NB.jpg

The report is the product of a year-long effort led by Admiral Roughead and the CSIS Global Health Policy Center. It argues that U.S. Navy proactive humanitarian engagement—missions that go beyond U.S. Navy response to natural disasters to include more sustained and strategic engagement through planned aid projects—is valuable and should be continued. The report further notes that under increasing budget pressure, the performance of these missions must be enhanced, long-term sustainability must be taken into account, and the Navy must find ways to clarify goals, demonstrate impact, and improve funding practices and policies in the future. Moreover, the report calls for expanded planning time that integrates a wider range of actors, including with other U.S. government agencies and potential nongovernmental (NGO) partners.

USIP

In his keynote, Marshall underscored the importance of “soft power,” especially during a time of federal budget constraints. He argued that sustained programs like U.S. Navy proactive humanitarian engagement are important pieces of U.S. foreign policy and national security interests. Nevertheless, Marshall said, a core challenge now is how to monitor and evaluate the effectiveness of these programs and, importantly, how to communicate impact to funders—notably the U.S. Congress. Marshall argued that in today’s fiscal and political environment, in which it is increasingly difficult to convince many in Congress and elsewhere of the value of funding foreign aid, “it’s never been more important to demonstrate the effectiveness of soft power” as a means to advance U.S. interests. In particular, he underscored the need for planners and funders to reassess the appropriate mix of military and civilian capabilities in meeting U.S. soft power objectives.

While the military can and should play a key role, adequately funding civilian engagement projects over potentially more costly military deployments could lead to meeting core objectives at lower cost. Leveraging capabilities, increasing budget flexibility, and legitimizing the actions of partners and actors—particularly those that are low-cost, high-impact—across a variety of sectors are increasingly important to meeting these goals.

Explore Further

 

Related Publications

What’s Next for the U.S. and Russia After the Trump-Putin Summit?

What’s Next for the U.S. and Russia After the Trump-Putin Summit?

Tuesday, July 17, 2018

By: USIP Staff; William B. Taylor

After a series of disquieting meetings with European and NATO allies last week, President Trump met with Russian leader Vladimir Putin in a bid to restore relations between Washington and Moscow. In the lead up to summit, President Trump sought to temper expectations, but repeatedly affirmed his longstanding belief that improved relations with Russia would be beneficial for U.S. interests. With so many high-stake issues for the two to discuss—ranging from Ukraine to Syria and arms control to Russian meddling in U.S. and European democratic processes—it remains to be seen if the summit will lead to further rapprochement.

Mediation, Negotiation & Dialogue

Can the Trump-Putin Summit Improve U.S.-Russian Relations?

Can the Trump-Putin Summit Improve U.S.-Russian Relations?

Thursday, June 28, 2018

By: William B. Taylor; USIP Staff

Following a meeting between U.S. National Security Advisor John Bolton and President Vladimir Putin this week, the White House announced that President Trump will sit down with his Russian counterpart for their first formal summit on July 16 in Helsinki, Finland. While both presidents Trump and Putin have repeatedly emphasized the need for improved ties, there are a host of contentious issues—such as the invasion of Ukraine and subsequent U.S. sanctions, Russia’s interference in U.S. and European elections, and the Syrian civil war—that could derail the effort to improve the bilateral relationship.

Mediation, Negotiation & Dialogue

What Does the Singapore Summit Mean for South Korea, China and Japan?

What Does the Singapore Summit Mean for South Korea, China and Japan?

Thursday, June 21, 2018

By: Frank Aum; Jennifer Staats ; Ambassador Joseph Yun

The June 12 summit in Singapore between President Donald Trump and North Korean leader Kim Jong Un was a watershed moment in relations between Washington and Pyongyang. But, the more immediate and profound impact will be felt in East Asia, where North Korea’s nuclear program has threatened regional stability and security. While South Korea, China and Japan have different—sometimes starkly so—interests and positions vis-à-vis North Korea, all three of the Asian powers will be important players in efforts to implement the pledges made in Singapore. USIP’s Ambassador Joseph Yun, Jennifer Staats and Frank Aum discuss the implications for Seoul, Beijing and Tokyo.

Mediation, Negotiation & Dialogue

View All Publications