The Disam Journal Of International Security Assistance Management

This report summarizes the research conducted in a project entitled "The Effectiveness of U.S. Military Training Activities in Promoting Internal Defense and Development in the Third World." This report assesses the effectiveness, utility, and advisability of U.S. training of foreign militaries in internal defense and development (IDAD) skills. Among the project's conclusions are the following: training in IDAD skills has only a marginal effect on a foreign military's behavior; with the end of the Cold War, the United States can nonetheless show more discretion in determining which countries will receive IDAD training; such discretion will be particularly important given the overall decrease in U.S. foreign military training and the need to maximize the effects of such training worldwide; training in foreign internal defense (FID) or IDAD skills should be complemented by education in the theories underlying democratic development such as is being provided through the expanded IMET (IMET-E) program.

As the United States scales back its military on the one hand, and increasingly perceives its own security to be linked with broader international stability and security on the other, the United States' need for low-cost, effective means of international influence and leverage will expand commensurately. In this new, post-Cold War environment, U.S. training programs are likely to assume greater importance. This Note examines the role that U.S. foreign military training in internal defense and development (IDAD) skills can play in improving friendly and allied countries' stability and security. Specifically, this Note (1) Assesses the current status of Department of Defense foreign internal defense (FID) and IDAD training; (2) Determines the issues that need to be addressed in making this training adequate; and (3) Begins to answer the question of whether or not the United States provides the most appropriate training possible to developing countries' militaries. International military students train alongside U.S. military students at military training institutions in the continental United States. Yet, U.S. training is designed to meet the demands of a large, technologically sophisticated armed force on a conventional-ostensibly European-battlefield and does not address the needs of many foreign militaries. Indeed, the preponderance of U.S. courses focuses on logistical, tactical, and support operations for conventional battlefield warfare, while many developing countries have less-conventional training requirements, often for internal rather than external security. Nonetheless, there are U.S. courses-both advanced courses and basic training in tactics, techniques, and procedures (TTP)-that are applicable to the unique requirements of many developing countries.

This report explores the feasibility of U.S. Army roles in twelve former Soviet republics and assesses the costs, benefits, and risks of potential Army missions. It focuses on roles that replicate or build on existing Army and DoD assistance programs, especially "dual-purpose" missions that would serve both Army and host-nation interests. The study concludes that although few roles would fully meet key "dual-purpose" criteria, the Army could undertake some modest aid actions in the twelve republics--swiftly and at relatively low cost--that it routinely performs in other countries for largely self-interested reasons. The most promising could be built around small-scale nation assistance actions, primarily involving Reserve Component medical and engineer units, which the Army regularly conducts throughout the developing world, typically in conjunction with scheduled training activity. While the study findings do support a modest Army aid role, they cannot support a recommendation that the Army undertake specific actions absent key situational factors. However, they do argue that the Army's potential as an aid instrument be brought into sharper relief as an instrument available to policymakers.