Federated Defense in the Middle East - CSIS report by Jon B. Alterman, Kathleen H. Hicks, Melissa Dalton, Thomas Karako with contributors Colin McElhinny and Richard Say
The Center for Strategic & International Studies (CSIS) Federated Defense Project has released a new report that examines the potential for a “federated defense” approach to U.S. action in the Middle East, the constraints to closer military cooperation in the region, and specific capability areas that would benefit from federated defense.
“The United States has enduring security interests in the Middle East,” said Dr. Kathleen Hicks, CSIS senior vice president, Henry A. Kissinger Chair, and director of the International Security Program. “To advance these interests, especially in light of pressing resource constraints, we need a strategic approach to develop the right capabilities, and share key responsibilities, among like-minded allies and partners.”
Stabilizing the Middle East requires continued attention and investment from the United States and its global allies and partners. Federated defense involves building partner capabilities in a way that shares the burden of providing security in a more effective and efficient manner. Federated defense would, over time, create partner capabilities that augment and complement U.S. capabilities. Doing so requires identifying discrete areas of cooperation between the United States and its allies and partners that would leverage partner capabilities in pursuing common security objectives. A more clearly defined strategic approach would improve communication, more effectively distribute the financial burden, better leverage complementary capabilities, and institutionalize senior-level dialogue on strategic goals and priorities.
Comments
With respect, there is a gross error in this report.
Iran does not possess a "nuclear weapons program" according to a consensus of our American intelligence community. Yet in this CSIS report,the opposite is accepted as both fact and premise.
This CSIS report represents continued, if more shared hard power projection of force towards the same largely unsuccessful policies, as previously manifested in OEF-A, OIF, the NATO intervention in Libya and regime change policies directed at the Syrian Arab Republic.
The notion of a "federated defense" of the Middle East would have a greater chance of success were the region's challenges include constructively, the accepted involvement of Iran, Syria and Russia. That may even be the key. That is to say adoption of a more realistic, inclusive approach, rather than yearning for better results with the same fundamentally exclusive approach.