Readings Newsletter
Become a Readings Member to make your shopping experience even easier.
Sign in or sign up for free!
You’re not far away from qualifying for FREE standard shipping within Australia
You’ve qualified for FREE standard shipping within Australia
The cart is loading…
With continuing emphasis on building partner capacity to deal with internal and external security threats, the United States (US) Department of State and Department of Defense continue to increase partner nation security force capacity within Security Sector Reform (SSR). This monograph assesses whether US SSR programs, in concert with other contributor nations, fulfill US foreign policy better when implemented by US government agencies rather than by contractors. The intervening variables of transparency, effective oversight, and contractor misconduct were identified to help illustrate examples where policy outcomes are predictable based on the given method of SSR support. Several case studies test the theory and link the independent and dependent variables. Within six selected case studies, the analysis shows how the intervening variables of transparency, effective oversight, and contractor misconduct effect the outcome of the SSR effort. These case studies provide a qualitative comparison to test the theory by reviewing SSR performed by predominantly contracted, mixed, and predominantly military sources. The case studies include six countries with various types of support as well as policy intents. An examination of support to Ukraine in 2009, Georgia in 2008, and Senegal in 2009 provide examples of SSR programs utilizing a mix of contracted and US government support. A second examination of support to Croatia in 1995, Democratic Republic of the Congo in 2009 and South Sudan in 2009 provide examples of predominantly contracted support to the SSR programs. Examining the case studies with the three variables identified within the literature review resulted in an unclear connection between a specific policy and the overall outcome. US policy aims for SSR programs may result in unintended consequences, regardless of the type of support and overall unity of effort of the SSR program.
This work has been selected by scholars as being culturally important, and is part of the knowledge base of civilization as we know it. This work was reproduced from the original artifact, and remains as true to the original work as possible. Therefore, you will see the original copyright references, library stamps (as most of these works have been housed in our most important libraries around the world), and other notations in the work.
This work is in the public domain in the United States of America, and possibly other nations. Within the United States, you may freely copy and distribute this work, as no entity (individual or corporate) has a copyright on the body of the work.
As a reproduction of a historical artifact, this work may contain missing or blurred pages, poor pictures, errant marks, etc. Scholars believe, and we concur, that this work is important enough to be preserved, reproduced, and made generally available to the public. We appreciate your support of the preservation process, and thank you for being an important part of keeping this knowledge alive and relevant.
$9.00 standard shipping within Australia
FREE standard shipping within Australia for orders over $100.00
Express & International shipping calculated at checkout
With continuing emphasis on building partner capacity to deal with internal and external security threats, the United States (US) Department of State and Department of Defense continue to increase partner nation security force capacity within Security Sector Reform (SSR). This monograph assesses whether US SSR programs, in concert with other contributor nations, fulfill US foreign policy better when implemented by US government agencies rather than by contractors. The intervening variables of transparency, effective oversight, and contractor misconduct were identified to help illustrate examples where policy outcomes are predictable based on the given method of SSR support. Several case studies test the theory and link the independent and dependent variables. Within six selected case studies, the analysis shows how the intervening variables of transparency, effective oversight, and contractor misconduct effect the outcome of the SSR effort. These case studies provide a qualitative comparison to test the theory by reviewing SSR performed by predominantly contracted, mixed, and predominantly military sources. The case studies include six countries with various types of support as well as policy intents. An examination of support to Ukraine in 2009, Georgia in 2008, and Senegal in 2009 provide examples of SSR programs utilizing a mix of contracted and US government support. A second examination of support to Croatia in 1995, Democratic Republic of the Congo in 2009 and South Sudan in 2009 provide examples of predominantly contracted support to the SSR programs. Examining the case studies with the three variables identified within the literature review resulted in an unclear connection between a specific policy and the overall outcome. US policy aims for SSR programs may result in unintended consequences, regardless of the type of support and overall unity of effort of the SSR program.
This work has been selected by scholars as being culturally important, and is part of the knowledge base of civilization as we know it. This work was reproduced from the original artifact, and remains as true to the original work as possible. Therefore, you will see the original copyright references, library stamps (as most of these works have been housed in our most important libraries around the world), and other notations in the work.
This work is in the public domain in the United States of America, and possibly other nations. Within the United States, you may freely copy and distribute this work, as no entity (individual or corporate) has a copyright on the body of the work.
As a reproduction of a historical artifact, this work may contain missing or blurred pages, poor pictures, errant marks, etc. Scholars believe, and we concur, that this work is important enough to be preserved, reproduced, and made generally available to the public. We appreciate your support of the preservation process, and thank you for being an important part of keeping this knowledge alive and relevant.