Citation

Thruelsen PD. Small Wars Insurg. 2011; 22(4): 619-643.

Copyright

(Copyright © 2011, Informa - Taylor and Francis Group)

DOI

10.1080/09592318.2011.581472

PMID

unavailable

Abstract

This article argues that the debate on security sector reform (SSR) needs to be taken further by taking into consideration the fact that, even though the SSR concept was not originally developed as an element in stabilising states undergoing an insurgency, it is very much being used for exactly that. When conducting counterinsurgency with a focus on the creation of stability, the baseline will ultimately have to be security sector stabilisation (SSS) as a precondition for complete SSR implementation. However, the two must be connected to avoid them undermining each other. This is important if a comprehensive approach to programme implementation and especially sustainability is to guide the programme, and not just isolated 'train and equip' stand-alone projects that do not solve either the initial need for stabilisation or the long-term need for accountable security forces. Currently, in Afghanistan the surge for security by the international military is in danger of overtaking the other elements of the SSR, thereby undermining the primary end state and thus risking laying the wrong foundation for the long-term process of SSR.

Language: en

Keywords

Afghanistan; conflict management; counterinsurgency; post-conflict; security sector reform; security sector stabilisation