Department of Defense and Security Cooperation: Improving Prioritization, Authorities, and Evaluations
Abstract
Chairman Fischer, Ranking Member Nelson, and distinguished members of the subcommittee, thank you for the opportunity to testify on the important subject of U.S. security cooperation. Its a pleasure to appear before you today along with my colleagues, Jeff Eggers and Melissa Dalton.3 The RAND Corporation has analyzed the costs and benefits of security cooperation extensively over the past 15 years. Ive analyzed security cooperation challenges during that same period, both at the Pentagon and at RAND. Make no mistake: Working with foreign militaries is more art than science. But it certainly shouldnt be abstract art. Security cooperation is most effective when its based on coordinated planning and informed by rigorous analysis. But ultimately, it must be tailored by the dedicatedmen and women serving overseas to meet the realities they face on the ground. Clear guidance and intensive training are crucial to ensure that they can overcome the many challenges that arise in this line of work. Today, I will focus on three questions. First, how does the Department of Defense (DoD) prioritize its security cooperation investments? Second, how does DoD manage the current patchwork of relevant legislative authorities that have been pieced together in recent years? Third, how can DoDand Congressbetter evaluate the effectiveness of these activities?
Document Details
- Document Type
- Technical Report
- Publication Date
- Mar 09, 2016
- Accession Number
- AD1014435
Entities
People
- Michael J. Mcnerney
Organizations
- RAND Corporation