Address by the Dutch Minister of Defence, Jeanine Hennis-Plasschaert, at the Munich Security Conference

From splendid national isolation towards an enhanced ability to act for all

Jeanine Hennis-Plasschaert

Ladies and gentlemen, friends, colleagues, A debate about the very foundations of trusted institutions is ongoing. Some say these foundations are shaking. The world economy has been facing its worst period in decades. Some say we tend to take our prosperity for granted. Military budget cuts are being made in many countries. Some say Europe is at risk of becoming irrelevant...

But ladies and gentlemen, I say this is an opportunity. It is up to us to turn the corner!

Like NATO Secretary General Anders Fogh Rasmussen stated last year: the financial crisis is one more reason why we should strive for greater military cooperation. And indeed! It is urgent for us to further optimize the efficiency and effectiveness of our armed forces to further enhance our ability to act.

Ladies and gentlemen, let me be frank. We do not need more headquarters. We do not need more civil servants. We do not need more bureaucracy.

In order to enhance our strength, to maximize the use of our capabilities and to optimize our combined operations, what we do need is leadership, long-term commitment and courage. A pragmatic bottom-up approach.

Of course, international cooperation is already a fact of life. All of us, gathered here today, share a history of combined military operations. And I believe that it is high time we took the next step. International cooperation is not free of obligations and we should start to act accordingly.

Ladies and gentlemen, for most countries, including the Netherlands, international cooperation is no longer a choice but a necessity. Our armed forces are - remarkably - well aware of this notion.

It is at the political level, rather, that we find obstacles to closer cooperation.

International cooperation is - still all too often - perceived as a limitation to sovereignty and national control and admittedly a factor that causes emotions to run high.

Most national parliaments tend to get increasingly involved, pushing more and more for a wide variety of strict conditions, under which our armed forces should operate.

Perfectly understandable as the lives of our men and women are on the line.

As a consequence, however, we are all too often dealing with too many national caveats within one single operation, undermining the efficiency and effectiveness of our missions.

Ladies and gentlemen, the question we have to ask ourselves is should we really fear the loss of sovereignty? Or should we define the concept of sovereignty in a less traditional way? And thus change our perspective?

When we consider our armed forces working effectively within the EU, within NATO, enhancing our ability to act in times of crisis, we can only conclude that international cooperation is beneficial to our sovereignty and security instead.

Ladies and Gentlemen, a different priority in the field of international military cooperation is for us to seriously align our collective requirements and national priorities. That goes for acquisition, training ánd logistical support.

If we are serious about preventing gaps in essential military capabilities, we should end the current practice of making military investments in 'splendid national isolation'.

Rather than counteracting each other, our respective national investments should complement each other. This is of crucial importance in order to, yet again, enhance our ability to act.

Ladies and gentlemen, we should not be afraid to critically address political decisionmaking processes, including the role of our national parliaments. We need to engage the members of parliaments in this debate.

They too should feel ownership when it comes to enhancing our strength, maximizing the use of our capabilities and optimizing our combined operations.

Their inclination to team up with fellow MP’s in partner countries has not yet been up to par with the standard set by our military professionals.

Ladies and gentlemen, in these times of shaking foundations, financial crises and military budget cuts, I would like to conclude by quoting a famous Belgian writer, Willem Elsschot: ”Between dreams and deeds, laws and practical objections remain.’’

Let us prove Elsschot wrong!

(Ministry of Defence, 3 February 2013)

Responsibility for police training shifts to Afghans

The training of police officers in Kunduz province, Aghanistan, has entered a new phase, with the Dutch mission now focusing more on helping the Afghan government prepare to take over the training itself. The government describes this shift in a progress report on the Kunduz mission, sent to the House of Representatives today. With the international mission ending in 2014, more responsibility for internal safety and security is being handed over to the Afghan authorities, and the Dutch mission’s new role is in line with this trend.

Police instructors of the Royal Military and Border Police are no longer teaching classes themselves, but instructing and supervising their Afghan counterparts. Other Afghan staff at the Kunduz police training centre are also receiving training and guidance. An Afghan mentoring team is being trained to give on-the-job support and practical training to police in the rest of the province.

Dutch police officials in the EU police mission (EUPOL) have developed a new form of instruction in which the whole range of police and judicial tasks is practised using concrete scenarios. This form of training has been well received by the Afghans and will also be applied elsewhere in Afghanistan by EUPOL.

With Dutch support, good progress has been made in developing the justice system. Kunduz now counts 65 lawyers, including 7 women. Cooperation between the police and public prosecutors has also improved.

The Netherlands has been training the police force in Kunduz and helping to improve the justice system there since the spring of 2011. Kunduz is one of 23 provinces (there are 34 in Afghanistan) where safety and security are now the full responsibility of the Afghan authorities.

(Ministry of Defence, 22 January 2013)

Dutch Patriot batteries leave for Turkey

Two Dutch Patriot units left for the port of Eemshaven near Delfzijl today, to be shipped to Turkey. A total of 150 vehicles and 130 trailers will transport the missile defence materiel to the seaport. As part of Operation Anatolian Protector, the systems will protect our NATO Ally against Scud missile attacks from Syria.

Dutch Patriot PAC-2 launcher. Photo: MoD

The military personnel of the Defence Ground-based Air Defence Command started their 300-kilometre road journey at their home base, the Luitenant-generaal Best - Barracks in Vredepeel. The two Patriot air defence systems, including radar stations and launch installations, will move in 6 convoys of 25 vehicles and around 20 trailers each. At the port of Eemshaven, the materiel will be loaded onto a cargo ship and then travel, accompanied by 5 military personnel, to Turkey, where it is expected to arrive on 22 January.

Chief of Defence General Tom Middendorp was there to see the military personnel off. “By baring our teeth, in a military sense”, he said, “we prevent the use of even more violence. It may sound contradictory (…), but sometimes weapons are what is needed to prevent more deaths and injuries. That is exactly how the Netherlands uses its armed forces, and we have seen this for instance in our successful counterpiracy operations.”

Tomorrow, some 30 Dutch and 20 German quartermasters will leave from Eindhoven Air Base to make preparations for the mission. The main force of around 270 Dutch military personnel will follow on 21 January.

Real threat
Turkey asked NATO for assistance in protecting its population and territory from attacks by medium-range missiles from conflict hotspot Syria, its neighbour to the south. Middendorp: “The threat is a very real one. These so-called Scud missiles have a potential range of hundreds of kilometres, so they could easily hit Turkish cities.”

The Netherlands, Germany and the United States will each cover a sector, sending 2 Patriot systems each. The Dutch will be going to Adana, which with 2.1 million inhabitants is the largest city in southern Turkey.

(Ministry of Defence, The Hague, 7 January 2013)

Netherlands sends Patriot units to Turkey (Gov't news release)

The Cabinet has decided to send two Dutch Patriot units to Turkey to help protect the Netherlands’ NATO ally from possible attacks from Syria. The House of Representatives has been informed of the decision.

The Dutch Patriot missile defence systems will be deployed to protect Turkey’s territory and people. Their exact location will be decided in consultation with Turkey, the US and Germany. Deployment will in principle last a year, be purely defensive and not be used in support of a no-fly zone or offensive operation. No more than 360 military personnel will be posted abroad for the deployment. NATO acceded earlier this week to the Turkish government’s request for assistance.

The Netherlands, Germany and the US are the only NATO countries with Patriots that meet the required standard. The Patriot units have been deployed twice on previous occasions on NATO’s southern flank and once in Israel. During the Gulf War in 1991 Patriot systems protected the cities of Diyarbakir in Turkey and Jerusalem in Israel against possible Iraqi SCUD missile attacks. During the 2003 Gulf War the Patriots once more provided protection against possible Iraqi SCUD missile attacks for the area around the Turkish cities of Diyarbakir and Batman.

On 21 November the Turkish government submitted a request to NATO for the deployment of Patriot systems to protect Turkey’s territory and people from possible attacks from Syria. NATO’s 28 foreign ministers decided in Brussels on 4 December to strengthen the Turkish air defence capabilities within the existing NATO framework, to the extent permitted by national decision-making procedures.

The Supreme Allied Commander Europe, Turkey and the allies with Patriot systems (the Netherlands, the US and Germany) explored the feasibility and advisability of deploying them. On the basis of the outcome of these investigations, the Dutch government has decided to help honour the Turkish request. The Netherlands shares the Turkish government’s concerns, and is responding to the Turkish request as an ally in a spirit of solidarity, pursuant to the right of collective self-defence laid down in article 51 of the UN Charter. The Dutch deployment of Patriot systems is aimed at protecting the territory and people of the Netherlands’ NATO ally and helping de-escalate the crisis along the Alliance’s southern borders.

(Government.nl, 10 December 2012)

Note: This news release of the Dutch government fails to mention crucial elements contained in its Letter to Parliament of 7 December 2012 ('Kamerbrief ontplooiing van Patriot-systemen in Turkije'). First of all: the government wrote that the Netherlands and its two partners in this deployment will each protect 'an urban area' (read: city) using two Patriot batteries per city. Secondly, the Letter stresses that the Patriot units will be deployed at locations away from the Turkish-Syrian border, to the effect that: 'Het effectieve bereik van de Nederlandse Patriot-raketten is beperkt tot Turks grondgebied.' (The effective range of the Dutch Patriot missiles is limited to Turkish territory). - HdV

Dutch Diplomat named NATO Senior Civilian Representative in Afghanistan

NATO Secretary General Anders Fogh Rasmussen has appointed Ambassador Maurits R. Jochems as the next NATO Senior Civilian Representative (SCR) in Afghanistan.

Ambassador Jochems will replace Ambassador Simon Gass, who has served as the Senior Civilian Representative since April 2011. Ambassador Jochems will represent the Alliance’s political leadership in Kabul. He will work to support  NATO’s goal of a sovereign, secure and democratic Afghanistan, as agreed most recently at the Chicago Summit. This will mean practical coordination with the Afghan authorities on issues like transition and NATO’s post-2014 partnership with Afghanistan. It will also involve a close partnership with the ISAF Commander as well as the international community.

“Our mission in Afghanistan is in a very important phase and I look forward to helping to ensure that the transition goes smoothly,” said Ambassador Jochems. “I will also make it a priority to continue the good work in forging a close working partnership with the Government of Afghanistan and other actors. The success of our mission will be vital to secure a stable and prosperous Afghanistan. That is my goal.”

Ambassador Jochems, who is currently the Ambassador of the Kingdom of the Netherlands to Estonia, is expected to take up his new post in October. He has extensive experience at NATO and previously served as NATO’s interim Senior Civilian Representative in Afghanistan in 2008. He served as Deputy Assistant Secretary General for Plans in the Operations Division of NATO’s International Secretariat, during which he was deployed to Pakistan to manage NATO’s disaster relief support to Pakistan during the earthquake in 2005.

“Ambassador Jochems brings with him an in-depth knowledge of Afghanistan and the wider region which will be of great benefit to our mission there,” said the Secretary General. “His appointment comes at a crucial time for ISAF as we continue to hand over more areas of security control to the Afghan National Security Forces.”

The Secretary General also praised the work of Ambassador Gass, who is returning to the UK Foreign and Commonwealth Office after 18 months as Senior Civilian Representative.

“Ambassador Gass has made a major contribution to ensuring the successful transition of security responsibility to the Afghan authorities as well as to the Chicago NATO Summit decisions on Afghanistan. I thank him warmly for his service.”

(NATO, 7 August 2012)

List of Dutch maritime security companies

As of 1 August 2012, 464 (maritime) security companies had adhered to the Swiss-based International Code of Conduct for Private Security Service Providers (ICoC).

Listed below are the firms based in The Netherlands. For the full list, click here.

35. ARGOS Security bv

Signed by:  C.K.A.M. Paans, Managing Director
Date of becoming Signatory Company: 1 February 2011 (by letter)
Headquarters: Netherlands, North Brabant, Geertruidenberg,
Website: www.argos-security.nl

Operating as freelance security consultants since 1997, ARGOS Security bv was established in  2006. The company based in the Netherlands has been operating in North- and West Africa, the Gulf and middle East. Providing security consultancy and training services to  multinational companies operating in the high risk countries within these parts of the world. ARGOS Security bv has specialized themselves in providing professional security consultancy services covering business continuity, crises management, risk assessments, training, security audits and restructuring and. These services are provided on a short or long term base, guiding the clients throughout the process. Our exposure over more as a decade to clients within the Oil & Gas, Construction and tobacco industries provides us with the capability to  provide clients with cost effective solutions to protect their interest abroad.

40. Arxal Risk Management

Signed by: T. Peters, Director
Date of becoming Signatory Company:  1 June 2011 (by letter)
Headquarters: Netherlands, Nijmegen
Website: www.arxalriskmanagement.com

Arxal Risk Management is an innovative Netherlands-based company with international  leadership, providing an outstanding level of Global Security Risk Management Services in  high-risk areas. Arxal was developed by a security consultant operating in the Middle East during the recent conflicts that saw the need for a new innovated way to deliver security and  surveillance to clients. Arxal achieves the paramount level of client service by listening to and understanding our client’s requirements, analysing intelligence and providing bespoke solutions to the client with professional personnel. Along with our professional services we at  all times operate ethically, with integrity, and with respect to people, environment and cultures.  Arxal’s consultation and service provision enables various bodies, including private  companies, governments and non-governmental organizations (NGOs), to fulfil their operational and business activities whilst mitigating risk to their overall aims and strategies. Our values and ethics coupled with extensive military skills and expertise make Arxal Risk Management the premier choice for your security needs worldwide.

102. Dutch Control BV 

Signed by: Aart van Vugt, Director
Date of becoming Signatory Company: 1 December 2011 (by letter)
Headquarters: The Netherlands, Den Hout
Website: www.dutchcontrol.eu

Dutch Control is a Dutch Security company established in 2010 which specializes in providing national and international risk management services. The primary aim of Dutch Control is assisting its clients in conducting their business in high risk areas on a worldwide basis. Dutch  Control employs subcontractors who possess experiences gained within the Dutch Special  Forces and Law Enforcement. Our security advice is based on international standards for Risk Management and is executed by specialized security operatives and experienced consultants. Dutch Control also specializes in Maritimes Security and training, particularly for high risk transit areas. All Ship Security Assessments are conducted by Dutch Control on behalf of our clients as part of a ships security plan complying to international maritime codes.

103. Dutch Security International

Signed by: John Titahena, Executive Director
Date of becoming Signatory Company: 1 October 2011 (by letter)
Headquarters: The Netherlands, Apeldoorn
Website:

The DSI Holding Vision is to provide a cost effective, highly professional and operational  catalyst that will encourage the development of sustainable global maritime safety and security. DSI Holding aims to build, assess and maintain highly proficient military and civilian  operational systems within the fields of maritime safety, security tactics and marine  environmental protection. DSI Holding has a mission is to uphold a multi-faceted and discipline organization that strives to protect worldwide marine resources, maritime objects,  persons and stakeholders whilst respecting International, National and Regional law and  regulation.

123. ESS&SA B.V.

Signed by: Jethro Pijlman, Co-CEO
Date of becoming Signatory Company:  1 April 2011 (by letter)
Headquarters: Netherlands, Amsterdam
Website: www.ess-sa.eu

Operating in the Gulf of Aden, Arabian Sea and Indian Ocean since 2010, ESS&SA BV was established in 2009 and based in the Netherlands. We provide security, consultancy and  training services to multinational shipping companies operating in pirate occupied areas. The security services we provide include armed and un-armed Maritime Security Teams and  Escort Vessels. Our personnel are all former Royal Netherlands Marine Corps or Dutch  Maritime Special Forces personnel, and are qualified maritime professionals. By partnering  with a number of global security organizations along with ESS&SA BV’s outstanding expertise  ESS&SA BV is able to provide each client with the highest quality and most effective security solutions.

152. Griffin & Miller The Netherlands B.V.

Signed by: S. Hendriks, SEO
Date of becoming Signatory Company:  1 June 2011 (by letter)
Headquarters: Netherlands, Noord-Holland, Zaandam
Website: www.griffin-miller.org

Griffin & Miller The Netherlands B.V.is a security company fully licensed by the Dutch  Ministry of Justice. Griffin & Miller is staffed by experienced former military-, law  enforcement- and intelligence officers and provides high quality intelligence, risk control and  security services to an international clientele. The services of Griffin & Miller are supported  by a world-wide network of affiliated agencies.

250. MSS Maritime Security Solutions B.V.

Signed by: Derk Wisman, Managing Director
Date of becoming Signatory Company: 1 August 2011 (by letter)
Headquarters: Netherlands, Rotterdam
Website: www.maritimesecuritysolutions.com

MSS Maritime Security Solutions B.V. is a privately owned and well known organisation in the international maritime security market. Our approach is unique by providing one-stopshopping global maritime security solutions. We provide consultancy, onboard advisory  officers, unarmed and/or armed guards and the supply and installation of products and  technology for detection, identification, deterrence, communication and protection. Our  staff all have a professional background and have served in Navies and on merchant vessels  on a (very) senior level. They have recent and onboard counter piracy experience at (senior)  management level. Our consultants have provided services to leading maritime companies all  around the globe.

300. Pro-Intell security solutions

Signed by: Martijn Bakker, General Manager
Date of becoming Signatory Company: 1 April 2012 (by letter)
Headquarters: The Netherlands, Nijkerkerveen
Website: www.pro-intell.nl

We are Pro-Intell security solutions, our company specializes in services at risk areas worldwide. Pro-Intell security solutions was founded by former members of the Dutch Armed Forces and Elite Forces. Our objective is to provide our military expertise and experience in the world most hostile areas, for the protection of all kinds of targets in hostile and risk areas. These could be persons, high value assets, vessels which are at risk to be hijacked, as well as static, mobile and land targets, such as: locations for storage,  construction sites, convoys and seaports.

307. QPO Maritime Security Company 

Signed by: R.G. van den Berge, Managing Director
Date of becoming Signatory Company:  1 April 2012 (by letter)
Headquarters: The Netherlands, Voorschoten
Website: www.qpo-msc.com

Qua Patet Orbis* Maritime Security Company (QPO MSC) offers professional maritime security  services. We are specialized in protecting ships and drilling platform against external pirate attacks. QPO MSC provides tailored advice regarding maritime security risk management. Based on the location and intended transit route, we assess and analyze the security risks and potential hijacking threats. This allows us to take any necessary preventive measures. We support and advice our clients in making objective and balanced decisions regarding all  matters of maritime security in high-risk situations. Besides our main security task, we  provide various forms of security related training. QPO MSC supports and advises our clients  in taking precautions to reduce the risk of being hijacked. QPO MSC secures and protects  your vessel, platform, crew and cargo by deploying professional security teams. We conduct our tasks in close cooperation with the master of the ship or drilling platform.  We are always focused on protecting our clients from external pirate attacks without putting the crew and cargo at risk.

*Qua Patet Orbis is the motto of the Dutch Marine Corps

348. Schütz Swart International

Signed by: Jeroen Schütz, Director
Date of becoming Signatory Company: 1 December 2011 (by letter)
Headquarters: The Netherlands, Groesbeek
Website: www.schutz-swart.com

Schütz Swart International delivers security risk management services and is specialised in international operations. We provide consultancy, operational support and training enabling  our clients to achieve their goals in high-risk situations. The safety of personnel, assets and  business continuity is the driving force behind our services. Our maritime security services  include a company owned Maritime Security Escort Vessel, Maritime Security Teams and  Maritime Security Consultancy. Schütz & Swart offers high quality services based on the  international experience and expertise of our operators and consultants. This is  complemented by an Advisory Board, which assures the quality of services is compliant with  the highest International Standards.

383. Shore & Offshore Security Group

Signed by: Paul Wiebes, Managing Director
Date of becoming Signatory Company:  1 June 2011 (by letter)
Headquarters: Netherlands, Nieuwer-Ter-Aa
Website: www.shore-offshoresecurity.com

Shore & Offshore Security Group is a Dutch based company, specializing in maritime security and ensuring safe passing through high risk areas for clients vessels', cargo, and crew. Shore & Offshore Security Group provides training and drills for crews in how to deal with the  piracy threat, in addition to providing skilled armed and unarmed security teams to commercial shipping companies and luxury yachts. We also accommodate security to static  marine and land based objects as well.

395. Specops Company BV

Signed by: Mark Zuiderdujin, CEO
Date of becoming Signatory Company: 1 April 2012 (by letter)
Headquarters: The Netherlands, Pumerend
Website: www.specops-company.com

Providing high-risk global crisis and risk management services for nearly six years, Specops Company 3 core practices include Maritime, Air and Ground support. We set the industry standard for personalized and highly skilled assessment, planning and protection at every level throughout the enterprise, serving multinational corporations, small and mid-sized businesses, individuals, governmental agencies and nonprofit organizations. Our daily preoccupation is providing the most cost-effective, responsive and personalized possible customer care. We collaborate with business decision-makers at every level to ensure  seamless planning, communication and execution for optimal risk management. The best way to mitigate risk is to prevent it  – through best planning practices. But in today’s  challenging and rapidly changing global workplace, crisis responsiveness is also critical. Specops Company takes a holistic approach, providing companies the tools to know their  business, know their risks – and know the best means to securing corporate safety, integrity  and prosperity.

417. THE GROUP NLD U.A.

Signed by: Anton J. Melein, CEO - Owner
Date of becoming Signatory Company:  1 June 2011 (by letter)
Headquarters: Netherlands, Amsterdam
Website: www.thegroup-nld.com

Support of, advice on and provision of security-related training courses, for – among others – military and police units, the provision of specialized security services as well as distribution and sales of security and safety related materials, mainly for the department(s) of Justice and Defence. THE GROUP's major strength is the calibre and experience of its staff who are drawn mainly from elite Armed Forces and Police units. In particular, there is a strong historical association with the Dutch (Maritime) Special  Forces. Staff are trained and capable, supported wherever necessary by experts with specialist skills. The Group NLD has unrivalled experience in providing training and education services to governments, corporations, NGO's, military and law enforcement  personnel. The Group NLD offers consultancy and advice in any form on all the topics within the field of security & special operations. The Group NLD offers an exclusive variation of specialist services throughout the security branch. We provide state of the art detection means, highly trained  personnel, education & evaluation means and advise on all the topics within the field of security. All services and products are provided tailor made. We provide security for individuals, (multinational) companies, governments and NGOs, etc.

(Defensie weblog, 3 augustus 2012)

UN in South Sudan: hit or miss?

By Mirjam van den Berg

The Dutch contribution to UNMISS is little more than a failed attempt to ease the Dutch government’s conscience, say South Sudanese living in the Netherlands. “We’re doing valuable work,” claim Dutch police consultants who were deployed in southern Sudan, now known as the Republic of South Sudan.

“You can’t build a new country when the base is flawed,” says Dutch police advisor Bert van Assenderp. Deployed with the United Nations Mission in Sudan (UNMIS) in 2008 and 2009, he trained hundreds of Southern Sudanese police officers. “It might seem like a drop in the bucket, but only when a society is getting along well can you focus on legislation and reconstruction.”

The typical Dutch contribution to UNMIS consisted of 30 police trainers and military support at a time, for a period of six months. UNMIS was rounded up after South Sudan’s independence and was followed by UNMISS – the United Nations Mission in the Republic of South Sudan. Six months are too short, admits Van Assenderp’s colleague Henny Korswagen. “By the time you’re getting somewhere, you have to leave again.”

That raises the question of whether UNMISS can really achieve something. Ayuen Panchol, a South Sudanese blogger, says he can't see why UNMISS is there to start with. "The times that you need them, they don't intervene."

Suspicious bunch
The mandate of UNMIS police trainers Van Assenderp and Korswagen wasn't to intervene, but to train. They were based in Bor, where they had to start from scratch. Korswagen lays out the scene. “You see a group of young men in blue uniforms and they tell you that these are police recruits. They sure know how to handle a machine gun, but can’t decipher a number plate.”

“They’re a suspicious bunch, because everybody knows that some months ago, they were wearing military gear and operated from the bush. However, we also saw how eager they were to learn new things and gain trust within the community.”

Van Assenderp and Korswagen set out seemingly simple tasks. They organised trainings in traffic control and crowd monitoring. Then they prepared the recruits for more serious duties like VIP security and monitoring elections.

"Given the current position of South Sudan, where customary law and ethnic sensitivities are a substantial part of everyday life, we realize we can't force South Sudan into becoming a modern 21st century state. But even though it's a slow process that may seem trivial, you have to start somewhere," says Van Assenderp.

Conscience relief
Santo Deng, a South Sudanese radiologist living in the Netherlands since 1995, thinks the Dutch contribution to UNMISS is a way to ease the Dutch government's conscience. "What can you do with 30 people in a country as big as South Sudan? Compare that to the commitment the Dutch government shows towards Afghanistan or the anti-piracy missions along the coast of Somalia."

Lieutenant Colonel Bart van den Bosch is currently deployed with UNMISS in Juba. "Our intention is not to run the country, but to support the South Sudanese government in developing the country and its institutions. The Dutch armed forces have committed themselves for two years to South Sudan. After that, it's a political decision whether the Netherlands want to be involved any longer, although I can imagine that our commitment will be extended," he says.

PR strategy
If the Netherlands does decide to prolong its stay, Sudanese blogger Moez Ali suggests that UNMISS do something to get a better reputation among the Sudanese and Sound Sudanese people.

He says: “The presence of the UN gives you the feeling that you’re poor, that you need help and that outside intervention is the only solution. At the same time, the UN has a very bad track record and operates on a system that is generally too bureaucratic to be of much help in development issues. Why does everybody focus on what South Sudan has achieved in its one year of independence, but does nobody question the real impact UNMISS has had in the past six years?”

(Radio Netherlands Worldwide (=Wereldomroep), 8 July 2012

Uruzgan: 'How Bureaucracy Impedes Victory in Afghanistan'

By James L. Creighton

When I took command of a NATO task force in Uruzgan Province, Afghanistan in July 2010, one of my first patrols in the province included a stop at the construction site for an unfinished U.S.-funded police headquarters. Inside, we found loose 82mm mortar rounds and cell phone components: clearly the tools of an IED-maker.

Finishing this well-intentioned project that had become a shelter for terrorists became one of my top priorities. The project had stalled due to a cumbersome bureaucracy, poor contracting procedures, high leadership turn-over, and a lack of proper supervision,

When I relinquished command and left Afghanistan about a year later, the project was back on track but still incomplete, despite three years of frustrating effort. Next door to the police headquarters, meanwhile, my Australian friends and counterparts had quickly transformed a vacant lot into a gleaming, functioning school for girls—all within a single calendar year.

Colonel James Creighton

The challenges we faced in bringing this single U.S. project to fruition, and the strategies that allowed other NATO nations to move more quickly, symbolize many of the obstacles faced and lessons learned by U.S. and NATO personnel in Afghanistan. These lessons highlight how outside help, if offered and managed with an awareness of local cultural sensitivities, can help transform whole communities for the better in a much shorter period of time. In Afghanistan, the U.S. needs to reduce its massive bureaucracy and regulatory environment that’s preventing troops from doing their jobs.

I reported to the International Security Assistance Force in Afghanistan on June 27, 2009. As the lead planner on the newly established ISAF Joint Command (IJC) run by both Americans and Afghans, I supervised planning for the security of Afghanistan, including the role of the 30,000-soldier U.S. “surge,” and the corresponding 10,000 increase in NATO forces.

After a year, planning included how to replace the Dutch when they departed Uruzgan, a province about 100 miles north of Kandahar. The plan called for a NATO command called “Combined Team Uruzgan” (CTU) to take control of Uruzgan after the Dutch departure. The new team would consist primarily of U.S. and Australian forces and be commanded by a U.S. colonel—in this case, me.

Police in Uruzgan’s capital city Tarin Kowt clearly needed better facilities if they were to play a major role in an Afghan-led security effort after NATO forces depart in 2014. The Combined Security Transition Command (of Afghanistan) and the Afghan Ministry of Interior Affairs decided the police headquarters in Tarin Kowt was a high-priority project. They tasked the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers with its construction.

The project, which included four major buildings and several outbuildings, was 70 percent done when the Afghan contractors from Kabul and Kandahar stopped paying their subcontractors and fled the area, taking the rest of the money with them.

The previous Dutch commanders viewed the headquarters as a U.S. project and let it sit unfinished. They also chose not to deal with the local police chief, who, although corrupt, was able to secure the safety of the population by resolving conflicts and expanding police presence throughout the province in a professional manner. The lack of ownership, change-over in coalition leaders, and distrust of local officials created a situation where there was no one who felt responsible for the half-completed project. In fact, when I returned to base after my initial patrol and made inquires as to the status of the project, it took several weeks just to find documentation on the project and determine exactly how it had come to fail.

A lot can go wrong in Afghanistan, and in the scheme of things you could argue this project was a drop in the bucket. Our frustrated attempts to get the project restarted so that it could be completed are symbolic of the dysfunctional process the United States has created, making building trust—and constructing buildings—as difficult as possible. The four-acre compound stood as a monument to the inept bureaucracy of the coalition.

To get the project on track, we had to find “back pay” for security services that for two years had guarded the partially built but unoccupied police headquarters. The Corps of Engineers had a dilemma: The original contract was cancelled, but all funds had already been paid out to the original contractor who fled the area. There was simply no money remaining to pay the guards. Even if there were additional construction funds available, the Corps could not pay the guards, as to do so would have violated U.S. regulations on how construction funds can be spent. The Corps tried to solve this problem by initiating a new contract, but it was still against regulations to include back pay for two years of security. It took seven months to get the exceptions and authorizations needed for the guards to receive their money. The final solution to pay the guards required the Corps of Engineers to strike a deal with Matiullah Khan, a local warlord. Matiullah also happened to be the commander of the local militia, the Kandak-e Amniat-e Uruzgan (KAU), and a colonel in the Afghan National Police (ANP). The idea was that he would keep the site secure indefinitely, a necessary evil to finish the project.

After two years of inactivity, the contractors were ready to finish the job, but again the Corps of Engineers stepped in and stopped the effort. In Afghanistan, the Corps is required to adhere to certain specifications on construction projects, so parts of the plan had to be redesigned. This continued for several months, with the project commencing in fits and starts.

Then there were the multiple regulations clearly designed for the United States but blindly transferred to such projects in Afghanistan. When hand rails and wheelchair ramps did not meet U.S. codes, the contractors had to stop their work. Accessibility is important, but we lost another two months reworking the plans. Afghan contractors were not prepared to meet the requirements of U.S. plumbing and electric codes either. Insisting on adherence to Western plumbing standards hardly made sense, since most Afghans did not use Western facilities and often ruined the plumbing soon after installation.

Finally, there were the myriad rules and regulations that required Afghan companies to fill out mountains of paperwork, which they simply were not prepared for. After 11 frustrating months and the intervention of a high-ranking officer, the project had barely restarted and was still several months from completion when I departed in June 2011.

Compare the police headquarters with the beautiful school next door, where girls were already getting an education. Without many of the road-blocks that the U.S. task force experienced, the Australian-led Provincial Reconstruction Team was able to build their school in under a year. The Australians tracked the progress with regular check-ins and aggressive quality assurance while coordinating their activity with AusAID (the equivalent to USAID). Unlike the Americans, the Australians would have been able to detect absconding contractors quickly. Moreover, unlike the U.S. practice of paying contractors up front, they dispensed funds in phases throughout construction. Finally, they did not face the raft of construction regulations built for their home country; they constructed their projects in accordance with Afghan standards.

Completing the police headquarters is important not only for the local police, but also for improving the image of the local and national Afghan government as well as NATO forces. When NATO or the United States promises to make improvements in cooperation with the Afghan government, the people see a more effective, more trustworthy government. The success of counterinsurgency operations is contingent on assisting the local government in earning the trust of its people.

I worked with a remarkable multinational group of soldiers and civilians. We worked together across cultures and regulatory structures. Though it was no small task, the group divided labor, and I believe we made a real difference in securing and building infrastructure in Uruzgan. But all too often, the U.S. Army’s obstacles are self-inflicted. Problems with contracting and money disbursement in Iraq and other theaters are directly related to the massive bureaucracy associated with contracting. We have gone too far in regulating projects, to the point where we are wasting time and money due largely to our own inefficiency. Given the massive regulatory requirements, the U.S. cannot effectively manage or even complete many of its projects.

James L. Creighton served as a commissioned officer in the U.S. Army for 30 years, including as commander of Combined Team Uruzgan. He is chief of staff of the EastWest Institute in New York.

(World Policy Blog, 16 April 2012)

Dutch Foreign Ministry official arrested for spying

A Dutch foreign ministry official has been arrested on suspicion of bribery and leaking confidential information, possibly including state secrets.

The 60-year-old man was detained on 24 March, the Public Prosecutor’s Office announced* on Friday. Following a court ruling, the suspect will be remanded in custody for up to a fortnight.

The man is accused of passing on secret information to a couple living Germany who are believed to be spies for Russia.**

(Radio Netherlands, 30 March 2012)

* Text of statement of the Public Prosecutor's Office (in Dutch)

**  The Foreign Ministry official is suspected to have provided information to a German couple during seven years. In return, he is said to have received monthly payments. According to the Dutch daily 'De Telegraaf', the intelligence passed on by the 60-year old man included information on foreign operations by the Dutch secret services AIVD (civilian) and MIVD (military).
Given the date of arrest of the Germans (October 2011), this concerns Andreas en Heidrun Anschlag, suspected of having spied during twenty years for Russia's foreign intelligence agency SVR. The name of the Dutchman came up during the investigation into the case of the Anschlag couple. For more information on the Anschlag case, see this article by 'Der Spiegel'. (hdv)

Amerikaanse generaal Petraeus koninklijk onderscheiden

De Amerikaanse generaal David Petraeus is vandaag op het ministerie van Defensie benoemd tot Ridder Grootkruis in de Orde van Oranje Nassau met de zwaarden. Deze hoge koninklijke onderscheiding ontving Petraeus als erkenning voor zijn bijzondere verdiensten voor Nederland tijdens zijn verschillende militaire commandantschappen, in het bijzonder tijdens de missie in Afghanistan. Defensieminister Hans Hillen reikte de onderscheiding uit.

GEN (ret.) Petraeus. with the US, Dutch and Frisian flags

Minister Hillen bedankte in zijn toespraak Petraeus voor de onvoorwaardelijke steun aan de Nederlandse militairen en zijn drijvende kracht achter een succesvolle missie. Door zijn persoonlijke inspanningen voor de samenwerking tussen Nederland en Amerika kon Nederland belangrijke operationele successen bereiken met de Task Force Uruzgan.

Commandant ISAF
Sinds 6 september 2011 is David Petraeus Director, Central Intelligence Agency (CIA). Hij diende eerder als commandant U.S. Central Command in Florida en als commandant van de Multi-National Force - Iraq. Vanaf juli 2010 was hij een jaar lang commandant van de ISAF-missie in Afghanistan.

Nederlandse familie
Petraeus is de eerste Amerikaanse generaal sinds de Tweede Wereldoorlog die de hoge onderscheiding ontving. De voormalig viersterrengeneraal, die als zoon van een Nederlandse vader Friese ‘roots’ heeft, kreeg zijn versierselen omgehangen in aanwezigheid van Nederlandse (oud) militaire collega’s en zijn Friese familieleden. Commissaris van de Koningin van Friesland John Jorritsma overhandigde de generaal zijn familiestamboom die teruggaat tot het jaar 1599.

Petraeus reageerde verheugd op zijn onderscheiding, hij prees de goede samenwerking met Nederland en de kwaliteit van de Nederlandse militairen. Hij sloot toepasselijk af in het Nederlands: “Nederland, voor altijd!”

(bron: ministerie van Defensie, 16 maart 2012)