Military going soft

Panelists discussed “Humanity as a Weapon of War,” a new report on the military’s role in humanitarian assistance written by Reuben Brigerty, at the Center of American Progress. Brigerty, Director of the Sustainable Security Program at CAP, said decisions being made at the Pentagon suggest the military is realizing that force alone is not an effective strategy in warfare.

Brigerty said his paper outlines the US military’s shift from a direct line of approach in times of conflict, a “kill or capture” technique, to a softer approach that recognizes the causes of insurgencies and works to alleviate them. He said the Department of Defense is beginning to see that humanitarian efforts are not only moral undertakings, but also national security operations. According to Brigerty, the US military benefits from humanitarian ventures by showing American goodwill to skeptical populations and by planting people in the field that can observe local sentiment. He also said the US public must realize, despite written evidence, that US security interests rely on diplomacy and the military equally.

Elisabeth Kvitashvili, deputy assistant administrator at the U.S. Agency for International Development, expressed discomfort with the military’s role in humanitarian efforts. She said USAID has called upon the military in the past to assist in a supportive role and added that civilian agencies like USAID and the Department of State should continue to lead development efforts. Kvitashvili said workers at the DoS and USAID have been trained development methods and that large-scale military participation in humanitarian assistance may cause recipients of aid to doubt the neutrality of non-military organizations.