The militarization of U.S. foreign policy
Military Role in U.S. Embassies Creates Strains, Report Says
By MARK MAZZETTI
New York Times
WASHINGTON, Dec. 19 — The expansion of the Pentagon’s presence in American embassies is creating frictions and overlapping missions that could undermine efforts to combat Islamic radicalism, a report by Congressional Republicans has found.
As the Pentagon takes on new roles collecting intelligence, initiating information operations and conducting other “self-assigned missions,” the report found that some embassies have effectively become command posts, with military personnel in those countries all but supplanting the role of ambassadors in conducting American foreign policy.
The report, completed by the Republican staff of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee last week, concluded that Pentagon “enthusiasm” has blurred chains of command and has the potential to backfire by weakening American relationships abroad and setting back American counterterrorism efforts.
Even with the military strained by long-term deployments in Iraq and Afghanistan, the Pentagon has been steadily expanding its presence outside of declared war zones, dispatching troops to embassies in remote parts of Africa, Asia and the Middle East to conduct counterterrorism missions and to train local militaries.
The military buildup is one of the legacies of Donald H. Rumsfeld’s tenure at the Pentagon. Military officials say that with some embassies reduced to a skeleton crew of civilians, the deployments are necessary to execute America’s top foreign policy priority of dismantling terrorist networks abroad.
The report’s findings were based on interviews in roughly 20 embassies around the world. While the report found that most of the ambassadors had an adequate grasp of the American military activities in their country, three ambassadors “appeared overwhelmed by the growing presence of military personnel” and said they were ill informed of the operations that the Pentagon was conducting there. “In several cases, embassy staff saw their role as limited to a review of choices already made by ‘the military side of the house,’ ” the report said.
(The rest is here.)
By MARK MAZZETTI
New York Times
WASHINGTON, Dec. 19 — The expansion of the Pentagon’s presence in American embassies is creating frictions and overlapping missions that could undermine efforts to combat Islamic radicalism, a report by Congressional Republicans has found.
As the Pentagon takes on new roles collecting intelligence, initiating information operations and conducting other “self-assigned missions,” the report found that some embassies have effectively become command posts, with military personnel in those countries all but supplanting the role of ambassadors in conducting American foreign policy.
The report, completed by the Republican staff of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee last week, concluded that Pentagon “enthusiasm” has blurred chains of command and has the potential to backfire by weakening American relationships abroad and setting back American counterterrorism efforts.
Even with the military strained by long-term deployments in Iraq and Afghanistan, the Pentagon has been steadily expanding its presence outside of declared war zones, dispatching troops to embassies in remote parts of Africa, Asia and the Middle East to conduct counterterrorism missions and to train local militaries.
The military buildup is one of the legacies of Donald H. Rumsfeld’s tenure at the Pentagon. Military officials say that with some embassies reduced to a skeleton crew of civilians, the deployments are necessary to execute America’s top foreign policy priority of dismantling terrorist networks abroad.
The report’s findings were based on interviews in roughly 20 embassies around the world. While the report found that most of the ambassadors had an adequate grasp of the American military activities in their country, three ambassadors “appeared overwhelmed by the growing presence of military personnel” and said they were ill informed of the operations that the Pentagon was conducting there. “In several cases, embassy staff saw their role as limited to a review of choices already made by ‘the military side of the house,’ ” the report said.
(The rest is here.)
Powered by Blogger
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home