Here an observation from previous CA symposia
is appropriate. Early in Operation Joint Endeavor, CA
leadership was stymied in attempting to address the
civilian environment because planning staffs drew
from operations in Somalia a concern to avoid mission
creep. Since the CA deployment included planners at
multiple echelons, with the support of senior allied
leaders at NATO, CA at Supreme Headquarters, Allied Powers, Europe, was able to influence SACEUR’s
campaign plan to direct IFOR to support provisions of
the civilian annexes to the General Framework Agreement for Peace, not simply to the task of keeping the
former belligerents separated and developing confidence-building measures.
Analogous to the need to move beyond deconflicting agencies’ independent operations to synergistic
interdependent programming, the ability to fund
projects to meet a timely need is a clear and persistent theme. Parsimonious use of program funds is a
consistent theme that interagency partners face. During its short lifespan, in common-core training, the
interagency Civilian Response Corps included in its
scenarios a dilemma common to chiefs of mission:
multiple agencies with independent funding for activities, some of which the ambassador may see as undermining current priorities. This dilemma may seem
exceptional to military commanders used to unity of
command, but ambassadors confront such situations
routinely, as does the National Security Council when
it submits integrated civil-military funding proposals
to Congress, only to receive a response underfunding
civilian activities. This challenge requires legislative
review and action as much as any appeal to interagency collaboration.
16