[In recent weeks, GMF Senior Resident Fellow Jim Kunder has served as an instructor in the U.S. Department of State (Foreign Service Institute) course on Foundations of Interagency Reconstruction and Stabilization.   The course, targeted at the new U.S. Government "Civilian Response Corps," is intended to prepare civilian responders for deployment to conflict and post-conflict environments.]

In 2004, the U.S. Congress authorized the creation of the Coordinator for Reconstruction and Stabilization (CRS) within the Department of State, to serve as a focal point for  U.S. Government (USG) civilian response to conflict and post-conflict crises abroad.   The creation of the “CRS” office, and the naming of a Coordinator (currently Ambassador John Herbst), was the culmination of a long debate about how the U.S. could increase its capacity to help rebuild nations in crisis, and how to create a civilian capacity that would match its ability to deploy military forces quickly.   Given that the formulation of the CRS concept occurred during a national debate on the effectiveness of the Afghanistan and Iraq reconstruction efforts ensured that the debate was vigorous, and sometimes contentious.   The CRS mission and organization are described at www.state.gov/s/crs.

Since 2004, some analysts have expressed doubts about whether the Office of the Coordinator for Reconstruction and Stabilization would ever reach “take-off velocity,” and establish a viable new capability, given limited funding, spotty support from senior-most policymakers, and entrenched resistance from established USG institutions.   But, over the past several weeks, the long nascent CRS initiative has started to become a reality.     Several dozen trainees €“ from the State Department, USAID, the Justice Department, the Centers for Disease Control, and other federal agencies €“ began the process of transformation into the first unit of CRS’s “Civilian Response Corps.”

The Civilian Response Corps is intended to serve as the USG’s “first responders” if a country, especially a country in conflict, were to require substantial reconstruction assistance beyond that provided in normal USG assistance programs.   Modeled on the concept of Disaster Assistance Response Teams (DARTs) pioneered by the U.S. Agency for International Development, the Civilian Response Corps is designed to provide a “whole of government” USG capability during crisis response.   Rather than serve as a unilateral capability, Corps members are receiving instruction in how to integrate their response with the priorities of the government in crisis, the UN system, and the work of multilateral and bilateral donors, NGOs and other international organizations.   In theory, when the Civilian Response Corps is fully trained and provided with logistical support, advance elements will be able to deploy, if requested, within 48 hours.

As will be obvious to readers, this new USG initiative provokes a range of important questions and is likely to spur significant debate.   When and under what circumstances will this capacity be used?     Will a standby team dispatched from the United States arrive with sufficient cultural awareness and understanding of local circumstances to be effective?   Will this new team in some sense counterbalance strong reliance on military tools?   Is there a risk that a large team from the U.S. will overshadow local government leadership?   What will be the precise nature of its cooperation with other multilateral and bilateral efforts?   Will the team have the technical capacity and resources to accomplish its stated mission?   What will be the trigger for withdrawing the Civilian Response Corps and returning to “steady state” diplomatic and development relationships?

Each of these questions deserves careful attention.   But at least one question has been answered:   there is no longer any debate about whether the U.S. government will create a new crisis response capacity.   The teams are in training.   The initiative has been launched.

No related posts.