Peace & Stability Journal Volume 7, Issue 2 | Page 5

The Association of the United States Army (AUSA) hosted a roundtable discussion at the AUSA Conference and Event Cen- ter on September 12th 2016 on ‘Peace and Stability: Operating in a Complex World’. The event opening with a key note address on the current status of Peace and Stability Operations, which was then followed by two panels addressing pertinent issues and challenges for the Peace and Stability Operations (PSO) community in achieving U.S National objectives. Peace and Stability operations are a critical part of the Department of Defense's (DoD's) mission. Promoting stability in a volatile strategic environment remains one of our nation's top concerns. Influencing local actors and countering violent extremism requires the full range of DoD's capabilities integrat- ed with the other instruments of national power. Stabilization is not an activity the U.S. military may do, but is an activity the U.S. military is doing and will continue to do. With this real- ization, a look at the essential elements of Peace and Stability operations exhibits clear requirements and demands that shape the joint force and the Army as the primary land component force provider. Current Status of Peace and Stability Operations Former Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense (DASD) for Stability and Humanitarian Affairs (SHA) under the Office of the Secretary of Defense for Policy (OSD)(P), Anne Witkowsky provided the keynote, which addressed some of the comments from former Secretary of Defense (SecDef ) Carter from the September 2016 Peacekeeping (PK) ministerial meeting in London. PSO is at a challenging moment in this rapidly chang-ing security environment. While the world overall has become more prosperous and dynamic, producing many economic, military, political, social and technological opportunities, all of these changes created challenges and crises as well. SecDef Carter addressed this dynamic in five challenges at the PK ministerial meeting: 1) taking a strong and balanced approach to deterring Rus- sian aggression, while leaving the door open to work with Russia where our interests align; 2) building a principled and inclusive security network in the Asia-Pacific region; 3) strengthening our deterrent and defense forces in the face of North Korean provocations; 4) checking Iranian aggression in the gulf; 5) and continuing to counter and defeat terrorism in partic- ular accelerating the defeat of the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant (ISIL). The challenges posed by ISIL illustrates well the potential for local insurrections to grow into global threats. The factors of instability are well known, such as threats from violent extremist organizations and random acts of violence, civil unrest, and in- ter and intra ethnic conflict. These threats cost the lives of inno- cent civilians, threaten the stability of the state, and sometimes brings about state failure. It is still of paramount importance for DoD to address the challenge of bringing peace and stability to fragile nations. For peace to last in both pre- and post-conflict phases of peace operations and effective stabilization activities, conflict prevention and capacity building strategies are essential to deter new conflict. Herein lies the opportunity for positive change. Conflict deterrence and prevention is an opportunity DoD really should not miss in order to ensure the success of peace and stability operations. Peacekeeping Operations have changed over the last 20 years with 98% of the UN missions operating under Chapter 7 man- dates. Often these missions start out in ongoing conflict with harsh physical environments, like Mali, South Sudan and the Central African Republic, while other missions face a growing terrorist threat, such as in Mali. All missions are now mandated to protect civilians, while also recognizing that sexual exploita- tion and abuse is a major challenge to Peace Operations that significantly undermines the credibility of a mission. Stabilization is conducted in highly complex environments, such as US extended engagements in Iraq, Afghanistan, Nigeria, Lebanon and Ukraine. OSD(P) SHA is in the final adjudica- tion phase of a Stability policy review, which highlights the requirement to preserve expandable capabilities for conducting large-scale, long-duration stabilization efforts in Phase 4. This review emphasizes the optimization of DoD’s defense support to stabilization, synchronizing defense activities to support or reinforce civilian stabilization efforts in designated fragile and conflict affected areas outside the US. Lessons Learned from the past 15 years in Afghanistan and Iraq are being compiled into a format translatable into current complex and small-foot- print operations in places like Syria and Iraq’s fight against the ISIL. OSD(P) SHA is completing a biennial assessment, which is conducted from a Combatant Command (COCOM) perspective, as to whether the COCOM is afforded the appropriate resources, talent and proc