One more time: prevention

The Keough School of Global Affairs July 18 hosted a multi-panel event titled “Unity on Global Fragility: Can Today’s Momentum in Washington Stop Tomorrow’s Violent Conflicts?” The event was headlined by Senator Chris Coons (Delaware) and Senator Todd Young (Indiana) who sponsored the Global Fragility Act of 2019. After remarks by Denise Natali, Assistant Secretary of the Bureau of Conflict and Stabilization Operations at the State Department, a panel discussion was held featuring Pete Marocco, Deputy Assistant Secretary of the Bureau of Conflict and Stabilization Operations, Patrick Antonietti, Director of Stabilization and Peace Operations in the Office of the Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense for Stability and Humanitarian Affairs, Department of Defense, Shamil Idriss, CEO, Search for Common Ground, and Dafna Rand, Vice President for Policy & Research, Mercy Corps. Uzra Zeya, President and CEO, Alliance for Peacebuilding, moderated.

A second panel followed immediately with Rear Admiral Tim Ziemer (US Navy, Ret.), Senior Deputy Assistant Administrator in the Bureau for Democracy, Conflict and Humanitarian Assistance at USAID, Anne A. Witkowsky, former Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense for Stability and Humanitarian Affairs, Nancy Lindborg, President and CEO, US Institute of Peace, Jake Harriman, Founder ad CEO ofNuru,and Anselme Wimye, Director of Program Quality, DRC Bukavu Office, Search for Common Ground. The second panel was moderated by George A. Lopez, Rev Theodore M. Hesburgh, Professor Emeritus of Peace Studies, Keough School of Global Affairs. Dean Scott Appleby, Marilyn Keough Dean, Keough School of Global Affairs, University of Notre Dame provided the opening and closing remarks.

Here are 5 takeaways from the event:

1. Prevention is better than reactive response:

Senator Young shared a UN statistic that there are currently more than 400 violent conflicts worldwide and half of the conflicts that ended since 2000 restarted within 7 years. Senator Coons added that the US counter-terrorism strategy since 9/11 has been ineffective and costly, listing Libya and Syria as examples of failure. If the US doesn’t invest in prevention it will end up paying more on the back end. The deployment pace for US troops is too high and often times they are ill equipped to deal with the challenges they face, which don’t require direct application of force. Young quoted Benjamin Franklin’s “an ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure.” Ziemer said many USAID operations running now are because of prior ineffectiveness in prevention.

2. Prevention needs more funding, better spending and updated success metrics:

Current spending on preventive measures is inadequate and wastes the limited funds available. Coons stated it costs $1,000,000 for every soldier deployed abroad per year, much more than it would cost to send humanitarian and development workers to stabilize weak countries. Admiral Ziemer added that the $1.2 billion over the next 5 years provided by the Global Fragility Act is a drop in the bucket of the budget. One issue is the difficulty in measuring a non-event, making it harder to justify spending to constituents. How do you value avoided cost and pain? To address this the Senators propose new metrics for success rather than money spent, which isn’t tied to any actual results. Both agree that spending should be monitored and if proven to be ineffective should be reevaluated. Witkoswky mentioned much of the funding comes with constraints hampering progress, highlighting the need for more flexible funding.

3. The problem of risk-aversion:

All the panelists agreed that the State Department is too risk averse. Without taking risks and accepting failures it can’t be effective in the crisis areas that most need its help. Harriman said adopting a “fail fast, learn fast” mentality will allow State to work in crisis areas and build off prior experience to formulate better strategy. 

4. The need for inter-Agency cooperation and cohesive strategy:

Both the Senators and panelists agree a more cohesive strategy is needed to effectively address global fragility. Currently different departments within the US government and its allies work in many places to fight global fragility but their efforts are fragmented. Defense, Diplomacy and Development need to work together. The State Department needs to work better alongside the Department of Defense to formulate a joint strategy. Coons said “We need to retrain everybody to play the same game.” 

Marocco finds State needs to deploy more with the Defense Department to understand the situation on the ground instead of dictating policy from Washington. Antonietti believes stabilization can be planned during all stages of conflict and shouldn’t be left to wait until the initial fighting is over. Harriman added the military needs to find better ways to work with nongovernmental organizations in conflict areas to win hearts and minds. He also emphasized the tendency to promote humanitarian assistance when sustainable development is needed to solve root issues. Anselme Wimye affirmed all the above points, saying that often policies are well-intended but ignore the situation on the ground and the needs of the people who live in crisis areas. If the US. can create a cohesive strategy including military, State Department, allies, and NGOs real progress can be made.

5. Understanding the long-term

Global fragility is a long-term issue. The US can’t spend for 5 years and expect large-scale results. The timeframe is at least a decade, so there is a need for continued support and funding. Ziemer pointed to the President’s Malaria Initiative (2005), which had roughly the same cost, bridged 3 administrations and resulted in a 60% reduction of mortality from malaria. The framework to deal with global fragility is in place, now the hard work of improving it, funding it, and working with allies has to be stepped up to have a significant impact.

A full video of the event is available here.