SECURITY REQUIREMENTS
FOR POST-TRANSITION CUBA
G. Alexander Crowther *
August 2007
Research Professor
National Security Studies
Strategic Studies Institute
U.S. Army War College
Infosearch:
Armando Mastrapa
Jose F. Sanchez
Dept de Investigaciones
La Nueva Cuba
Agosto 23, 2007
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
FOREWORD
The United States, particularly the Army, has a long
history of involvement with Cuba. This history has included
the Spanish-American War of 1898, military interventions
in 1906 and 1912, the 1961 Bay of Pigs Invasion, the 1962
Missile Crisis, counterinsurgency, and low intensity warfare
in Latin America and Africa against Cuban supported
guerrilla movements.
During the Cold War, Fidel Castro’s communist
takeover on January 1, 1959, heightened U.S. concerns and
highlighted the threat Cuba posed as a strategic ally of the
Soviet Union. The collapse of the Soviet bloc in the 1990s
raised hopes for an end to the communist regime in Cuba.
However, after almost 5 decades of authoritarian rule, the
Cuban dictator remains firmly in power. On July 31, 2006,
his brother, Raul Castro, assumed provisional presidential
power after an official announcement that Fidel was ill and
would undergo surgery.
This monograph is designed to contribute to the process
of conceptualizing a post-Castro future for the Cuban armed
forces. They will need to be integrated into the family of
Western Hemisphere militaries, supporting democracy,
subordinate to elected civilian leaders, and respectful of
human rights. This integration will require mission and
structure changes. Colonel Alex Crowther draws attention
to the need to engage the Cuban military and proposes a
way ahead for the military, as well as for the rest of the
hemisphere.
The Strategic Studies Institute is pleased to offer this
report as part of its ongoing analytical program in support of
Army participation in national security policy formulation
and implementation.
DOUGLAS C. LOVELACE, JR.
Director
Strategic Studies Institute
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY
This monograph serves multiple purposes, the
most important of which is to contribute to the
thought process of dealing with the Fuerzas Armadas
Revolucionarias of Cuba (FAR). Change is inevitable
in Cuba. Both Fidel Castro and his brother Raul are
aging. Their passing will trigger either a succession
or a transition. With that change, Cuba’s security
requirements will change as well. This monograph
analyzes security requirements that the new Cuba will
face and proposes what missions and structure the
Cuban security forces might have after a transition.
The overall long-range U.S. goal is a stable,
democratic Cuba which is integrated into the global
market economy. The U.S. Government Commission
for Assistance to a Free Cuba says that if a Cuban
government asks for assistance, the United States
could be made available “in preparing the Cuban
military forces to adjust to an appropriate role in a
democracy.”
The Cuban military will have to change with the
times, altering its focus from the territorial defense of
Cuba and internal security to missions that are consonant
with modern circum-Caribbean militaries: control
of air- and sea-space against transnational criminals.
The military will need a new structure for these missions,
less focused on insurgency in defense of the island
and more focused on a common operating picture
and integration with the efforts of Cuba’s neighbors.
This monograph proposes a way ahead in preparing
Cuban forces for the future, integrating them into the
Western Hemisphere community of militaries, and
ensuring their support for democracy, subordination
to elected officials, and respect for human rights. It
also suggests constructive engagement of the Cuban
military with the international community. This change
is inevitable, and can be relatively painless or long and
difficult. Both the Cuban military and the international
community have to decide which way they want it to
be.
SECURITY REQUIREMENTS
FOR POST-TRANSITION CUBA
INTRODUCTION
The transfer of power from Fidel Castro to his
brother, Raul, in August 2006 prompted the Economist
to declare “the beginning of the end of the Castro
era.”1 Although no one knows when Fidel will finally
pass on the reins of power, the time is approaching.
Another unknown is the type of handoff. Fidel could
be succeeded by another communist regime, or there
could be a transition to a different type of regime. The
worst case scenario would find Cuba descending into
chaos if no one could replicate Fidel’s ability to hold
Cuba together.
This monograph posits a change to a different
type of government, and assumes that a transition
government is in place and has asked for assistance
from the United States, and that Cuba is ready to tackle
the difficult question of where the follow-on force to
the Fuerzas Armadas Revolucionarias (FAR, the Cuban
armed forces) should go. A similar type communist
regime would probably not seek to change its military
as it would be a major pillar of the regime. Therefore,
only a post-transition regime would desire to modify
the Cuban military. When the Cuban government is
ready for assistance from the United States, America
needs to be prepared to provide it. This monograph
offers a template for that assistance.
The Cuban military is currently designed and
postured for two major missions: the defense of Cuba
against U.S. aggression and the provision of internal
security. A post-transition government would not
be challenged by the first and should not require the
military to provide internal security, so the military
needs to be redesigned and reoriented.
This monograph begins with a discussion of
U.S. policy towards Cuba. Unlike most countries in
the world, in the case of Cuba, a web of executive
policies and laws produced by the legislative branch
significantly limits flexibility in dealing with both the
Cuban government and the FAR. Any proposal for
dealing with any government organization within
Cuba must start with an analysis of U.S. policy because
of these limitations.
The author next examines the FAR, including both
its history and its current state. As with everything in
Cuba, the post-Cold War era has had a huge impact on
the FAR. A current snapshot of the FAR is therefore
important. From there, the author analyzes the threats
that Cuba will probably face. He examines historical
threats to Cuba and current threats to the Caribbean,
and also considers modern transnational threats. Based
on these threats, a capabilities-based approach provides
a template for a post-Castro Cuban regime. The author
proposes a structure for a post-transition force based
on the capabilities that a Cuban force would require.
Additionally, the author examines Western
Hemisphere states, with an emphasis on the sizes
and types of militaries in countries that have similar
territory, size, and length of coastline. This analysis
provides a benchmark that may be used to develop a
rough estimate of what an appropriate size might be
for a Cuban military.
The Nicaraguan experience of the 1990s is the only
Western Hemisphere example of a Soviet/Cuban-style
military changing after the adoption of a democratic
regime. As such, an analysis of the Nicaraguan case will
provide some lessons learned and some perspectives
to consider prior to any recommendations.
The author concludes with recommendations on
“how to get there,” what Cuban security forces should
look like, a way ahead for influencing the change from
the current structure to a 21st century Cuban security
system, and precautionary measures for handling a
potentially volatile situation. Mishandling security
issues transitioning Cuba could have significant
negative effects upon the United States, so preparation
is important.
Several challenges exist. First, the Cuban military
is a founding part of the state and will not give up
power easily. Second, the Cuban military is in control
of a major portion of the Cuban economy, and it will
be very difficult to convince it to cede this position.
Third, many of the elites have come from the military,
and they will be strongly motivated to maintain an
interventionist stance for the military. These elites
must be convinced that a more subordinate role is
appropriate. Fourth, the military could form a power
base from which opposition elements could challenge
a post-transition government.
U.S. POLICY TOWARDS CUBA
The Bureau of Western Hemisphere Affairs at the
Department of State has articulated U.S. goals for the
Western Hemisphere. They include strengthening
an Inter-American community formed by economic
partners that are democratic, stable, and prosperous;
friendly neighbors that help secure the region against
terrorism and illegal drugs; and nations that work
together in the world to advance shared political and
economic values.
The State Department has also articulated goals for
Cuba. According to Deputy Assistant Secretary of State
for Western Hemisphere Affairs Thomas Shannon, the
United States:
would like to see a Cuba that could reintegrate itself
into the inter-American community, that could return to
the Organization of American States, that could become
part of the Inter-American Development Bank and could
play a useful role in all the other institutions of the Inter-
American system. But in order for that to happen, Cuba
must have a transition to democracy because ultimately
a democracy is the fundamental requirement to be a
member of the OAS.
The latest legislation that affects U.S. Cuban policy
is the Cuban Liberty and Democratic Solidarity or
Libertad Act of 1995, also known as the Helms-Burton
Act. The Libertad Act has two sections that deal with
the Cuban military: Section 201 states that the United
States will “assist a transition government in Cuba
and a democratically elected government in Cuba to
prepare the Cuban military forces for an appropriate
role in a democracy.”4 Section 202 states that the
United States will ensure that Military Adjustment
Assistance provided “to a transition government in
Cuba and to a democratically elected government in
Cuba shall also include assistance in preparing the
Cuban military forces to adjust to an appropriate role
in a democracy.”5
Specific U.S. goals in Cuba have also been articulated
by the Commission to Assist a Free Cuba (CAFC). The
commission’s original report of May 6, 2004,6 provided
some policy guidance on the FAR. It articulated the
importance of dealing with the FAR by saying that
“the military’s role—if any—in a democratic Cuba will
likely be a key issue” and recommended the long-term
goal of eliminating conscription and transitioning the
FAR to an all-volunteer force. The report also pointed
out that the “Cuban security forces are profoundly
politicized and serve as agents of repression” and that
the “United States would recommend the dissolution
of the apparatus of political repression, including the
General Directorate for State Security.” CAFC I also
recommends removing the police functions from the
military.
One of the most contentious roles that the FAR
plays is within the economy. CAFC I goes into great
detail on this subject, and recommends that the FAR
be removed from the economic sector. This policy is in
keeping with long-term U.S. interests in the hemisphere,
where U.S. organizations have long sought to remove
militaries from this sphere.
In its second report (July 2006) called CAFC II,
the Commission said that “support for professional,
institutional military” would be important to,
promote and guarantee the professionalism, dignity,
and political neutrality of their [Cuba’s] armed forces.
A Cuban transition government will likely rely on this
institution to perform many tasks during and after
the transition period. The challenge for the transition
government will be to harness the military’s energies
and direct it [sic] in ways that contribute to a successful
transition period.7
CAFC II recommends that “Cubans can draw from
those experiences by asking former communist countries
to provide defense and security experts to help as
the Cuban military prepares to serve as a professional
force under the authority of a democratically-elected
civilian government.” This government would count
on an apolitical, neutral military in order to thrive.
According to CAFC II, the United States “should
encourage the Cuban Transition Government to focus
on those steps that will allow the election of a truly
democratic, representative government that can take
on that historic challenge.” Therefore the United States
should engage the FAR as soon as possible to articulate
that the standard is to act in that manner, as the other
militaries in the Western Hemisphere do.
This monograph posits that most of the CAFC I and
II goals have been achieved, with a Cuban military that
supports democracy, respects human rights, and is
subordinated to civilian authorities.
THE FAR
Civil-military
relations in Cuba are not consonant
with the
Huntingtonian paradigm, namely that the
overall goal
is a professional military subordinated to
civilian
leadership.8 Although the FAR is subordinated
to the Castro
brothers, this is a sultanistic paradigm,
not a modern civil-military relation as recognized
throughout the Western Hemisphere.
The FAR is the Cuban military, and is subordinate
to the Ministerio de las Fuerzas Armadas
Revolucionarios
(Ministry of the Revolutionary Armed Forces
[MINFAR]). Unlike many militaries in communist
countries, which were developed by communist
parties after successful takeovers, the body that
became the FAR was formed before the revolution
and the party was created after the revolution. In
this
particular case, the FAR actually formed the basis
for
the party.10 As such, they are different from
typical
communist-inspired militaries and must be
approached
differently. According to the International
Institute for
Strategic Studies,11 in 2005 the FAR consisted of
75,500
active forces and 1,159,000 reserve forces between
military and paramilitary organizations. Of the
active
duty forces,
the Army consisted of 38,000; the Navy
consisted of
3,000; the Air Force consisted of 8,000; and
the
paramilitary 26,500, which was split between the
State Security
(20,000) and 6,500 Border Guards (Tropas
Guarda
Fronteras [TGF]). The paramilitary forces report
to the
Ministerio del Interior (Ministry of the Interior
[MININT]). Of
the reserve forces, the Army had 39,000,
the Ejército Juvenil de Trabajo (Youth
Labor Army [EJT])
had 70,000,
the Civil Defense Force had 50,000, and
the Milicias
de Tropas Territoriales (Territorial Militia
[MTT])
consisted of approximately 1,000,000 people.
These reserve
forces are designed to provide strategic
depth and to
fight the Guerra del Todo Pueblo, or War
of the Entire
People/War of the Entire Population.
This doctrine
was developed in the early 1990s after
the collapse
of the Soviet Union and the concomitant
beginning of
the “Special Period.” This doctrine is
specifically
designed to defend against attack from the
United States.
It calls for the FAR to arm the people and
deploy into
the back country to keep U.S. forces tied
down and make
the price for a U.S. invasion too high
for the United
States to tolerate. Another group is the
Committees for
the Defense of the Revolution (Comités
de
Defensa de la Revolución [CDR]).
It was formed on
September 29,
1960, to support the revolution. The
committees are
omnipresent, with the duty to monitor
the activity
of everyone in their neighborhoods and
report or
punish any anti-revolutionary activities.
The Army is organized into three regional
command headquarters and three Army command
headquarters.
Western Command is headquartered in
Havana,
Central Command is in Matanzas, and Eastern
Command is in
Santiago.12 The Army consists of nine
mechanized
infantry brigades, up to five armored
brigades, one
airborne brigade, one air defense artillery
regiment, and
one surface-to-air missile brigade. It also
has one
frontier brigade on duty around Guantánamo
Bay and 14
reserve brigades.
The Navy has two regional commands at
Cabañas in the
west and Holquin in the east. It has
patrol and coastal combatants, six mine warfare and
countermeasure craft, and one logistics ship. The
Navy also has some towed coastal defense artillery
and two
amphibious assault battalions consisting of
550 naval
infantry. These assets are stationed at seven
facilities spread throughout Cuba at Cabañas, Mariel,
Havana, Cienfuegos, Punta Movida (near Cienfuegos),
Holquin, and Nicaro. The Border Guards who report
to the MININT have another
23 patrol and coastal
combatants.
The Air Force has up to
103 fighter aircraft and 63
transport
aircraft spread out at a variety of airfields
throughout the
country. The Air Force has two active
fighter squadrons, based at San Antonio de los Baños
and Holguin respectively, equipped with this mix
of fighter aircraft. Additionally,
the Air Force has 40
attack
helicopters and 85 support helicopters.
Most
Cuban military
aircraft are not operational. Cuban
aviation assets are deployed to Baracoa, Camagüey,
Cienfuegos, Guines, Holgüin, Havana, San Antonio
de los Baños, San Julián, Sancti Spiritus, Santa Clara,
and Santiago de Cuba. A majority of these bases are
concentrated in the western portion of the island.
The Air Force also has
13 surface-to-air missile sites.
Due to the perceived threat from the United States,
there is an Air Defense Force called the Air Defense of
the Revolutionary Armed Forces (Defensa Anti-Aerea de
las Fuerzas Armadas Revolucionarias or DAAFAR)
which
has SA-2,
SA-3, and SA-6 surface-to-air missiles and 23
mm, 37-mm,
57-mm, 85-mm, and 100-mm antiaircraft
guns in great
quantities.
The EJT provides additional resources to the
Cuban military. Sometimes called the Cuarto Ejercito
or “Fourth Army” in reference to its supplementing
of the three armies described above,13 this force serves
several functions: it comprises a body of trained
people, it inculcates the values of the revolution, and it
provides an important labor force that the state can use
when necessary, as in the sugar cane harvest.
The History of the FAR.
The FAR has conceptual roots into the 19th
century. It traces its lineage to the mambí or Cuban
freedom fighters that fought against Spain in wars of
independence from 1868 to 1898, when the struggles
culminated in the U.S. intervention as part of the
Spanish-American War. As the FAR forces were a
product of their own revolution from 1956-58, they feel
that they are the descendants of the mambí.
The FAR itself was based on the Ejercito Rebelde,
which was the Army that Fidel used to overthrow the
Batista regime in Cuba in 1959. The Ejercito Rebelde
was in turn based on the 26th of July Movement, a
political movement created by Fidel Castro and named
after the date of the attack on the Moncada Barracks
in 1953 that marked the beginning of Fidel’s armed
struggle. The 26th of July forces crossed to Cuba in the
yacht, Granma, landing near Playa de Las Colorados
in Oriente Province on December 2, 1956. This area
of southeastern Cuba had been where all previous
revolutions and uprisings had been centered. For the
next 2 years, they fought a guerrilla war against the
forces of Batista. The Communist Party of Cuba did
not support Fidel until early 1958,14 which irritated
him and caused him to distrust the party. By January 1,
1959, the Batista regime had collapsed, and Fidel was
victorious.
When Fidel gained power, he had to determine how
to rule Cuba. The only people he trusted absolutely
were his comrades from the Ejercito Rebelde, so he turned
to them to form the backbone of the new government.
They comprised the senior leadership for the MININT.
After he declared himself a communist, he returned
to his trusted friends and used the Ejercito Rebelde to
take over the Communist Party in 1965.15 Thus the FAR
antedates the modern Cuban Communist Party and
indeed has always dominated the party, a reversal of
the norm. The party, as well as the FAR, has always
been subordinated to Fidel Castro. He created the
FAR, and he created the party.
The FAR successfully defended the island against
the Bay of Pigs operation in April 1961 and then spent
the rest of the 1960s continuing to prepare the defense
of the island. From the late 1960s through the 1980s,
the FAR also deployed overseas in support of fellow
revolutionaries throughout Africa and the Western
Hemisphere. The only time that FAR conventional
personnel were known to be in direct conflict with
conventional U.S. forces was during Operation
URGENT FURY, the 1983 U.S. intervention in Grenada.
Since the end of the Cold War and the start of the Special
Period, the FAR has downsized significantly and is
thought to have ceased overseas revolutionary support
operations. The FAR now concentrates on two main
missions: deterring the United States from invading
the island and internal security. It currently cooperates
with the U.S. Government in both counterdrug and
immigrant operations.
A Monopoly of Violence?
One way that communist governments have operated
is to create multiple security organizations to prevent
the monopoly of power within one organization
that could then overthrow the party. Cuba was theoretically
no different. On paper, the MININT is opposite
the FAR within the Cuban government. MININT
controls the nonmilitary security services, including
the State Security Troops, the DGI or Intelligence
Service, and the TGF or Frontier Guards. These forces
have always oriented on internal security.
The reality of the situation is different. As described
above, Fidel looked to the Ejercito Rebelde to provide
leadership for Cuban government services, and the
leadership of MININT came from the FAR. Since the
FAR is controlled by Raul Castro and the MININT is
controlled by the FAR, in actuality there is a monopoly
of violence in Cuba, in violation of communist doctrine.
Fidel Castro never avoided violating any doctrine
when it suited him. In this particular case, he has
ensured that all forces are directly subordinated to him
personally, through his brother, Raul. This control
was
de facto through 1996, when the FAR took direct, overt
control of MININT.16
This takeover has implications for dealing with
both the FAR and the MININT. The FAR has always
considered itself to be from the people and thus
incapable of a Tiananmen Square type operation.
Indeed, the domestic record of the FAR appears to be
one of strict avoidance of the use of force against the
Cuban people. When one examines the far more open
record of the Nicaraguan armed forces that were cast
in the same mold as the FAR, the absence of violence
against Nicaraguans is remarkable in a region where
military violence against citizens has been the historic
norm.17
THE CUBAN DEFENSE FORCES
A transitioned Cuba cannot continue with an
unchanged FAR. It must form a new military. A new
Cuban military should be based on the FAR. Designing
such a force requires an analysis of current threats
and a conceptualization of capabilities based on those
threats. From there, armed forces can be designed to
provide those capabilities.
The Threats.
Cuba has had several types of threats which can
prove instructive when planning for post transition
security requirements.
These include traditional
threats,
current Caribbean threats, and transnational
threats that
can face any state in the 21st century. In
the first category, challenges to the Cuban government
have included outside intervention, civil war or
uprisings, smuggling, corruption, racial tensions,
and natural disasters, mainly storms.
Cuba will not
face outside
intervention but may face an uprising
and racial
tensions if a transition is not handled well;
however, the main historical threats that Cuba
will face
again will
likely center on smuggling, corruption, and
natural
disasters.
Among the current threats to Caribbean governments
are transnational
crime, pollution or other environmental
challenges, a
lack of resources, globalization,
and terrorist
use of the Caribbean as a platform against
the United
States. Transnational crime mainly centers
on illicit
trafficking to include people, money, arms, and
drugs. An
additional specific threat that a transitional
Cuban
government will probably face is controlling
arms and
munitions.
The Capabilities.
Based on the threats discussed above, the Cuban
security forces need to have a minimum set of capabilities
to control their maritime space, their air space,
their terrestrial space, and to respond to natural disasters,
mainly hurricanes. The maritime control mission
should include a search and rescue (SAR) capability.
Additionally, due to the presence of international
narco-terrorists,
Cuba requires a counterterrorism
capability. In
the long run, the capability to perform
peacekeeping
operations would provide a way for
Cuba to
reintegrate into the community of Western
Hemisphere
states. Additionally, the military should
be sufficiently large to provide internal security in case
the Ministry of the Interior proved to be incapable of
handling an emergency.
A New Structure for the Cuban Military.
The Strategic Level. To achieve these capabilities,
the FAR needs a
new structure. To provide terrestrial,
maritime, and
air control, the Cuban military requires
forces that
can operate in those areas. The current
Cuban Army can form the basis for a ground force,
the current Air Force and the air defense force should
combine to form the basis for a future Air Force, and
the current Navy and border guards can be combined
to form a maritime force. Due to the need to control
the Cuban maritime environment, this force should
be oriented like the old Cuban guarda-costa of the 19th
century.
Every country requires a policy-level organization
that provides guidance for the armed services.
Currently, MINFAR provides that guidance. Although
it is theoretically a ministry of defense, it is actually
an organization that provides for the personal control
of the FAR by the Castro brothers. After
a transition,
MINFAR should
change to a ministry of defense within
the
Huntingtonian sense, with a civilian leader who is
appointed by
the democratically-elected president.
Throughout the Western Hemisphere, the norm
is for police forces to handle internal security and for
militaries to handle external security. Militaries report
to a Ministry of Defense and other security forces report
to a MININT. MINFAR must divest itself from control
of the MININT. A new MININT must be designed with
care to ensure that it is also subordinated to civilian
elected leaders. The police and other domestic security
forces should stay with MININT. Any remaining
military intelligence organizations should stay with
MINFAR, and all other intelligence assets should be
transferred to the new MININT.
One model that has proved effective is a civilian
Ministry of Defense with a Joint Staff headed by a
senior general officer. Another model that has utility
would be a combined staff under a civilian minister.
Regardless of which model is used, Cuban civilian
and military personnel should immediately be offered
positions at the various staff colleges throughout the
hemisphere that are designed to train and educate
civilians and military in security-oriented positions.
Extra-hemispheric countries such as Spain, the United
Kingdom, Japan, the Republic of Korea, and Australia
should also be involved in educating senior civilians in
the Cuban Ministry of Defense. At the same time, senior
military personnel should be selected to go to staff
colleges in countries that have consolidated democratic
systems in order to assist them in understanding the
many facets of subordination to civilian authorities.
The Cuban strategic level should also be able to
provide a limited command and control capability.
The Cuban military should have one national-level
command center, similar in theory to the North
American Aerospace Defense (NORAD) Command
in Cheyenne Mountain, Colorado. This post should
serve as the center where all radars and other sensors
and reports are aggregated. It should have a picture
of everything that happens in the aerospace and
maritime regions surrounding Cuba. There should
also be a backup capability in case the primary center
is rendered inoperable by a natural disaster.
The Cuban common operating picture should
be piped to regional command posts. The national
command center
can then order regional commands to
execute operations in support of national sovereignty
missions or in response to natural disasters. Additionally,
the Cuban government should provide this common
operating picture to friendly states in the Caribbean
to assist with regional security initiatives. The Cuban
government and security forces should be prepared
to cooperate with the Bahamas, the Caymans, Haiti,
Jamaica, Mexico, and the United States. Each of the
services should be structured to support the national
missions.
The Army. The Cuban Army
should consist of four
brigade-level
headquarters. The Army component
in each regional joint command should be one of the
brigade headquarters. The fourth brigade headquarters
should provide command and control for the Cuban
strategic reserve and could be deployable to act as a
headquarters for any overseas operation. In this, it
would be similar to the recently formed Canadian
Expeditionary Command,
which provides command
and control for all deployments outside of the country.
This would form the basis for the
long-range goal of
providing
a peacekeeping capability.
Each brigade/Army component command should
have several subordinate units.
tretyenuida ai=golpista
This allows the Cuban Army to retain a capability
similar to what currently exists but enable the Army
to divest itself of the Air Defense Artillery regiments in
each Army area. In addition to the main combat arms
organizations, each brigade should have the combat
support and combat service support assets (military
police, logistics, engineers, military intelligence, etc.) to
make it into a
brigade combat team capable of
standalone
activities.
The Cuban Army strategic reserve capability can
consist of the
fourth brigade mentioned above, with one
armored
regiment, one motorized regiment, and the
Cuban airborne
regiment. This allows a downsizing of
the present strategic reserve but retains a capability.
The Army should also have a reserve component.
This currently consists of 14 brigades, but can be
downsized to 8 regiments, with 2 assigned to each of
the 4 Army brigade headquarters.
The Army can use the assets saved by
demobilizing
the air
defense assets and spare combat arms assets
to form
engineer units. Cuba will have a significant
infrastructure shortfall for many years after a transition.
Each of the four brigades should have a minimum of
one engineer regiment. Additionally, Cuba might
form some special military units designed to upgrade
and repair key infrastructure such as roads, railroads,
and port facilities. They could also perform support
missions preparing for and recovery from natural
disasters.
The Navy. The
maritime force should combine
the two
current maritime forces: the Navy and the
Tropas de
Guardia Frontera. This would reduce the
bureaucratic overhead and provide centralized force
generation. While the FAR can trace its roots back to
the mambí of the late 19th century, as suggested earlier,
the new Cuban maritime force could trace its roots to
the very competent guarda costa of the colonial time
period. The Navy’s overall mission would be maritime
control, centering on border control, customs, and
smuggling prevention. This mission set calls for it to
be configured for patrol and counterdrug operations,
SAR, and multinational regional maritime cooperation
operations. In terms of facilities, the Navy has two bases
near Cienfuegos; one should be closed. The Cuban
Navy should also have a mix of forces deployed from
the remaining six bases.
These missions call for the Navy to run long-range
patrols along the extensive Cuban coastline.
There
should be some
long-range 110+-foot boats to patrol
into the
Straits of Florida; the waters to the northwest
of Cuba; the
Yucatán Channel; the waters to the south
of Cuba; and
the areas between Cuba, Jamaica, and
Haiti. Twenty
four of these large patrol craft should
be stationed,
six per base, at Mariel, Cienfuegos,
Holguin, and
Santiago de Cuba to cover the farther
reaches of
Cuban maritime space. This allows for two
being on
patrol, two preparing for patrol, and two in
maintenance.
Small, short-range
80-foot or less patrol craft such
as Boston
Whalers or Rigid-hull Inflatable Boats should
control the
area near ports as well as performing forward
patrols of the
archipelagos on the north-central coast
of Cuba
between the mainland and Cay Sal Bank and
the Bahamas,
and in the archipelagos off of Piña del
Rio and the
Isla de Juventud off the south coast. They
should be home-ported at the six remaining Navy bases
but forward-deployed into patrol areas that allow for
them to perform their presence missions. Based upon
the size of their port facilities, Havana should have
eight of these patrol craft; Santiago de Cuba, Matanzas,
Cienfuegos, Nuevitos, and Mariel should have six
patrol craft each; and Puerto Padre and Moa should
have three patrol craft apiece.
Although the FAR currently has a type of Marine
Corps, any follow-on force has no need for an
amphibious capability;
however a proposed guarda
costa should
have some sort of boarding capability,
either through
a maritime naval infantry or a SEAL-
type special
operations capability.
The FAR
currently has a robust naval radar
capability,
which should be maintained or even
expanded to
observe the waters near shore, providing
another part
of the Cuban common operating picture.
The Air Force. To dominate its airspace, the Cuban
Air Force requires interceptors and rotary-wing assets
as well as a robust radar architecture to provide the
airspace portion of the common operating picture.
For their strategic
airspace dominance, the
Cubans depend on their former Soviet fighter
aircraft,
including 50 MiG 21 Fishbed aircraft, 20 MiG 23
Flogger
aircraft and three MiG 29 Fulcrum aircraft. This
aircraft
mix is probably too much for the Cubans to sustain.
The Air Force should concentrate on one airframe
to
simplify maintenance and training. Given that the
Cuban military will not have to defend against
fighter
or bomber aircraft, the MiG 21 airframe is sufficient for
any airspace control missions the Air Force needs to
perform. The
Cuban
government
should
sell
its
MiG
23
and
MiG
29 aircraft
and
concentrate
on
making
its
fleet
of
MiG
21 aircraft
flyable.
The current fleet of rotary
wing aircraft consists of 40 Mi-8 Hip, 45
Mi-17, and
40 Mi-25/35 Hind helicopters.
This fleet will serve the Cuban government well, given
the large number of small islands and large amount
of territorial sea. The Hind helicopters can also serve
in the airspace control capacity when vectored in by
command and control assets.
Cuban transport aircraft consist of a variety from
small AN-2 Cub to large IL-76 Candid models. The
Cuban military should keep all of these in the short term
to ascertain future needs. With small islands spread
over a large area and a substandard transportation
infrastructure on the mainland, the Cuban military
will likely need all of its airlift capabilities into the
foreseeable future.
This Air Force should be deployed to fields
throughout Cuba to respond to commands from the
three regional headquarters. In addition to combat
aircraft, modest fixed-wing airlift assets would
be required to provide support for international
operations as well as intra-Cuba military support.
This capability would also support any airborne and
special operations forces. The Cuban military would
also require a rotary-wing capability, which should be
forward deployed with an orientation on providing
a SAR capability, as well as providing air mobility to
Cuban ground and maritime forces and supporting
disaster relief operations.
Joint
Capabilities. In order to support a counterterrorism
capability,
Cuba requires special operations
forces (SOF).
Although it would not need a huge
counterrerrorism force, Cuba could use one SOF
battalion. This capability should be based on the
current SOF capability within the FAR.
Many different armed forces in the Western
Hemisphere have developed a
peacekeeping capability.
Once Cuba has transitioned, it can also form such a
capability, utilizing assets from each of the four Army
brigades and using detachments from the guarda costa
and the Air Force as appropriate.
The Operational Level.
As discussed above,
there are currently three
Army, two Navy,
and two Air Force regional
headquarters.
These
should
be consolidated.
Each of
the Army headquarters should change to regional joint
headquarters. This is a transition that the Canadian
Forces undertook in 2006 to promulgate a more joint
character to their armed forces. This “Regional Joint
Task Force” structure has worked well for Canada.
Three Cuban
joint headquarters with responsibility for
terrestrial,
maritime, and airspace defense could find
synergies,
especially in the synchronization of air and
maritime
forces. These headquarters would also be able
to execute disaster preparedness and relief operations.
Each of the regional headquarters should have
three component commands similar to service
component commands for the current U.S. regional
combatant commands.
As an example, the Western
Command would
contain a Western Command Joint
Headquarters
with Western Army Command, Western
Guarda Costa
Command, and Western Aerospace
Command.
Each joint command should be equipped to
provide command and control for terrestrial, maritime,
and aerospace operations and be able to tap into the
national-level common operating picture, so that it
can determine which combination of forces should be
deployed to face challenges.
How Large Should Cuban Security Forces Be?
When conceptualizing an appropriate size for the
Cuban military, it may be instructive to examine some
attributes that Cuba shares with other countries in the
Western Hemisphere. These comparisons can provide
force size guidance that might be appropriate for a post-
transition Cuban military. Territory size and length of
coastline are two indicators that we can use.
Territory size is an important driver for the proper
sizing of a military, and most countries in the Western
Hemisphere have problems with territorial control.
From Honduras and Nicaragua in Central America, to
Colombia and Peru in South America, to Haiti in the
Caribbean, many countries have never consolidated
government control over their territory.
Cuba,
located
astride
the
major
drug route
from
the
source
zone
of
South
America
to
the
United
States,
is
in significant danger
of penetration by transnational
criminals in the post-transition
time period. As Haiti
currently shows, a lack
of government control leads
to near-anarchy and a
very strong narco-presence. As
such, Cuba must count
control of terrestrial territory as
very important.
Cuba has over 110,000 square kilometers of
territory, the same size as Pennsylvania. It is slightly
smaller than Nicaragua and Honduras and larger than
Guatemala and Panama. Nicaragua has a total of 14,000
military and Honduras has about 12,000. Guatemala
is decreasing to about 15,000 military. Panama has a
paramilitary force that totals slightly less than 12,000.
All four countries have territory that is beyond state
control. A case
could be made that the militaries of
these countries are too small to control their
territory,
so a military of around 49,000 is probably about
right
for Cuba.
Coastline length can be an important factor in
determining the size of a naval security force, especially
in the Caribbean. Any island there must be able to
control its maritime environment, or transnational
criminals will quickly dominate the area.
Within the
Western Hemisphere,
Chile, Argentina, and Colombia
have similar-sized
coastlines. Chile has a Navy of
19,000; Argentina,
17,000; and Colombia, 22,000.21
When compared to these
countries, the 3,000 personnel
and handful of
watercraft that Cuba can deploy
demonstrates that its
maritime capability is extremely
low.
Western Hemisphere Templates.
What assumptions may be derived from territory
and coastline data? When one analyzes territory
size, Cuba has a much larger military than the four
countries that are similar in size. However, all four
have significant problems with territorial control. The
result is that the Cuban military should not be as small
as the militaries of Nicaragua, Honduras, Guatemala,
or Panama.
Cuba is the largest island in the Caribbean. As
such, its coastline is much longer than those of other
countries in the sub-region, and comparable to the larger
countries in the hemisphere. The lesson is that
Cuban
naval forces are woefully inadequate to dominate
the
maritime space. Comparison to the navies of
countries
with similar coastlines indicates that the Cuban
Navy
should be dramatically expanded.
Although a country should not base the size of its
military entirely on the sizes of the militaries of other
countries with similar characteristics, this comparison
can provide a “sanity check” on a proposed sizing. This
comparison shows that the overall size of the Cuban
military is probably correct; however the Navy should
be larger.
NICARAGUA—A CASE STUDY
Cuba assisted the Frente Sandinista de Liberation
Nacional (FSLN or Sandinistas) in their struggle against
the Somoza regime in Nicaragua. When Somoza fled,
the opposition formed the Provisional Government,
which ended up being dominated by Daniel Ortega and
the FSLN. The government formed the Ejercito Popular
Sandinista (EPS) from the FSLN ground fighters when
it faced pressure from the United States. It rapidly
expanded these forces to include an Air Force, a large
rotary wing fleet, tanks, and the other accoutrement
of a mechanized force based on Soviet and Cuban
doctrine.
The EPS spent the 1980s supporting the FMLN
in El Salvador, fighting against U.S.-backed
counterrevolutionaries (the contras) and
preparing for an attack by the United States.
With the Esquipulas II Central
American peace accords of 1987, violence diminished
rapidly, and the Nicaraguan government agreed to
hold elections. The FSLN lost those elections in 1990,
and Doña Violeta Chamorro became the president. This
was the time for the United States to engage with the
new, democratically elected government of Nicaragua.
Instead, the United States isolated that government.
The new Nicaraguan government faced a huge
challenge in civil-military relations. President
Chamorro inherited the EPS and was forced to accept
the continuance of Humberto Ortega, one of the main
FSLN actors and brother of the FSLN president that
Chamorro defeated, as the Comandante of the EPS
as part of her transition plan. She chose discretion
and maintained Humberto Ortega as the Minister of
Defense for several years. She did not insist on huge
changes in the EPS in the short term, concentrating
instead on consolidating her rule over Nicaragua.
This approach proved to be very effective as the EPS
eventually transferred its loyalty from the FSLN to
the government of Nicaragua, rebranding itself as the
Ejercito Nicaragüense (EN).
In the aftermath of the 1990 election, the United
States linked assistance with elimination of Sandinista
influence in the government in general and the military
in particular. Given this atmosphere, military ties took
a while to develop. The EPS/EN was very suspicious
of the United States in the 1990s. Hurricane Mitch
changed the situation. Nicaragua was hard hit. The
United States responded with military deployments
into the region to assist with recovery. Due to the
dire circumstances prevalent in Nicaragua, the EN
determined to work with the United States.
Much to
its surprise, the EN
found the U.S. military a worthy
partner. In response to
its changed perception of the U.S.
military, the EN placed
representation in Washington,
DC. In June 2000, it
assigned a brigadier general as
the first Nicaraguan
Defense Attaché since the 1979
revolution. His mission
was to effect a rapprochement
between the EN and the
U.S. military. Within 2 years,
Comandante of the EN
General Javier Carrion visited
the United States and
laid a wreath at the Tomb of the
Unknowns at Arlington
National Cemetery.
Relations
had been normalized.
Nicaragua and Cuba.
Parallels exist between the Nicaraguan case and
Cuba. Each country is small and located near the
United States in the circum-Caribbean. Each was
heavily influenced by the United States. Each fought
against a dictator initially supported by the United
States. Each had a revolutionary form of government
that was actively opposed by the United States and
subsequently had unfavorable relations with the
United States.
Some lessons may be learned from the post-
transition situation in Nicaragua. First, animosity
between the U.S. Government and elements in
Nicaragua slowed improvements in relations. Second,
the attitude of the EN prevented a rapprochement for
10 years. Third, cooperation between the U.S. military
and the EN provided a catalyst that produced a rapid
improvement in relations between the militaries. From
these lessons, several conclusions can be derived.
First, animosity between elements in the United States
and elements in Cuba can cause bad relations between
Cuba and the United States after a transition. Second,
actively diminishing any animosities between actors in
the two countries can have a rapid payback. Third,
any work with the FAR can have a positive influence
on post-transition relations.
RECOMMENDATIONS
The
following
14 actions
could
assist
reformation
of
the
Cuban
armed
forces.
1. Engage the
Cuban military. As mentioned earlier
in this monograph, Section 201 of the Libertad Act
states that the United States will “assist a transition
government in Cuba and a democratically elected
government in Cuba to prepare the Cuban military
forces for an appropriate role in a democracy.”22
Section 202 states that the United States will ensure
that Military Adjustment Assistance provided “to a
transition government in Cuba and to a democratically
elected government in Cuba shall also include
assistance in preparing the Cuban military forces to
adjust to an appropriate role in a democracy.” CAFC
II states that a Cuban transition government will likely
rely on the military to perform many tasks during
and after the transition period. The challenge for the
transition government will be to harness the military’s
energies and direct it in ways that contribute to a
successful transition period.24 The only way to make
this happen is to engage the FAR and communicate
the standards that apply to militaries in the Western
Hemisphere: support of democracy, subordination to
civilian authority, and respect for human rights.
CAFC II said that “support for [a] professional,
institutional military” would be important to
“promote and guarantee the professionalism, dignity,
and political neutrality of their armed forces.” It also
recommends that “Cubans can draw from those
experiences by asking former communist countries
to provide defense and security experts to help as the
Cuban military prepares to serve as a professional
force under the authority of a democratically-elected
civilian government.” This government would require
an apolitical, neutral military in order to thrive.
2. Transition
MINFAR to a Ministry of Defense
that subordinates the Cuban armed forces to civilian
authority. All actors should seek a mission change for
the Cuban armed forces. In accordance with CAFC
I, the Cuban government should remove police
functions from the military, as well as removing the
Cuban military from internal security missions. The
Cuban government should form a Ministry of Defense
modeled after successful Western Hemisphere models
such as Chile. This effort will require support from
several sources, including providing education at
the Center for Hemispheric Defense Studies at Fort
McNair and assistance from other countries which
have made this transition, including Spain, Chile,
Brazil, and Argentina. Assistance from the United
Kingdom, Canada, Japan, Germany, and Australia
could be helpful as well. In addition, overseas Cubans
could assist. As CAFC II says, “Cubans abroad with
military and defense backgrounds could be invited by
the Cuban Transition Government to form teams to
train, mentor, and advise Cuban defense and military
leadership through the transition.”
3. Separate
MINFAR and MININT. Normally internal
and external security missions belong to separate
organizations. As described earlier, the MINFAR has
no desire to be involved in internal security operations;
however it supervises the MININT, which maintains
the responsibility. MININT should be removed from
the control of MINFAR and transferred to another
governmental organization, such as a MININT. The
police and other domestic security forces should stay
with MININT. Although there may be a need for some
sort of military intelligence, all other intelligence assets
should be transferred from MINFAR control.
4. Adopt
a long-range
goal
of
removing the FAR
from the economy.
It will be very difficult to wean
it from the money that the FAR makes from tourism
and other parts of the economy. MINFAR needs to
understand that its role in the economy is unacceptable.
Removing MINFAR from the economy will require
a fully funded resource
stream and a fully funded
pension fund.
A follow-on Cuban government and
anyone who
assists it will need to provide a budget as
well as a
retirement plan. These are the two greatest
excuses the
FAR would have to maintain its grip on the
economy.
5. Do not
demobilize the FAR. An attempt to
demobilize the FAR could succeed, but the resultant
security vacuum would produce a situation like Haiti,
where the lack of security capability has left large
amounts of the country to transnational criminals.
If
the FAR felt that an
attempt to demobilize it was an
attack on the country
of Cuba, this would trigger the
Guerra del Todo Pueblo,
which would result in a situation
where elements of
society and demobilized military
personnel with access
to large stockpiles of weapons
combine to run a full-scale
insurgency aimed against
the United States and
the new Cuban government.
Additionally, a follow-on Cuban government will
need to rely on the FAR. As CAFC I points out, “loyal
and dependable military units will be needed at least
until a democratic government can be consolidated and
a new constitution approved by the people. Reliable
military forces could help transition authorities
prevent massive seaborne migration and distribute
humanitarian assistance.” Therefore it would be in
U.S. national interests to avoid demobilization
of the
FAR.
6. Involve
other countries and organizations in
the new Cuba.
The State Department cogently points
out that democratic transition in Cuba is “a project
of the Americas, and it’s a project of a community of
nations that is committed to democracy.” CAFC II
states that “other democratic countries or international
organizations may be able to provide similar expertise
and logistical support for the military and security
services.” Clearly other countries need to be involved
in assisting Cuba with the transition and with the
professionalization of the Cuban military. Center-left
governments and their militaries can assist with this
project, to include Spain, Chile, Brazil, and Argentina,
as well as other countries such as Colombia, Mexico,
and El Salvador.
7. Insist on a
major doctrinal change with the
abandonment of the Guerra del Todo del
Pueblo. This
doctrine is based on the perceived need to defend
Cuba from the United States. As the United States is
not a threat to Cuba, this outdated doctrine should be
dropped immediately. The assets dedicated to support
the Guerra del Todo del Pueblo should be realigned to
assist with the transition to a modernized military.
8. Disband
the militia and the Comites de Defensa
de la Revolucion.
This is another structure change that
should emanate from a transition to civilian leadership.
The CDRs will have no reason to exist once a perceived
threat from the United States is eliminated and should
be taken apart as soon as possible. The huge militia
system of the FAR should also be stood down. With
the removal of the doctrine of the Guerra del Todo del
Pueblo, there is no need for the capacity to radically
expand the size of the FAR in case of emergency. As
discussed previously, a federal reserve force should
be developed to provide the FAR a modest expansion
capability.
9. Eliminate
conscription and transition the FAR to
an all-volunteer force.
CAFC I recommends these as
long-term goals.
Although this may take some time
to phase in, most
countries in the hemisphere have
changed to this model.
10. Be patient.
Allow time for change. This series
of seismic changes will take a while. Although some
FAR officers will support these proposed changes,
the entire group of changes will be opposed by the
majority of FAR officers. Partner countries need to
allow time for change. As discussed, it took a decade
after elections for the Nicaraguan Army to post an
attaché to Washington, DC, and another year before
the United States put a Military Group into Managua.
11. Put a U.S.
attaché and security assistance
organization
in Havana as soon as is feasible
within the
strictures of U.S. policy.
Ask for a Cuban
attaché to be
posted to Washington, DC, at the same
time.
Although some actors will not want to move
quickly, the Nicaraguan case demonstrates that, once
communications are open, it can become much easier
for the two sides to find common ground.
12. Provide
security assistance as soon as possible.
This assistance should be concentrated on international
military education and training (IMET). The sooner that
the Cuban military sees the U.S. backing rhetoric with
tangible support, the quicker it will cooperate.
Placing
Cuban officers into U.S.
military schools and exposing
them to U.S. culture
will garner tangible results as the
Cubans realize that the
United States is not inherently
evil.
13. Do not
adopt punitive, Helms-like legislation
such as was
passed against Nicaragua. This type of
legislation will prevent the U.S. Government from
cooperating with and assisting a follow-on Cuban
government at the exact time when the Cuban
government will need support. Punitive legislation
will only drive Cuba into the arms of Venezuela and
the People’s Republic of China.
14. Be
magnanimous. Do not seek to humiliate
Cuban security
forces. A little understanding can be of
tremendous assistance during a time of transition.
CONCLUSION
Change is inevitable in Cuba. One aspect of that
change is the FAR. The FAR currently has a doctrine
designed to defend Cuba against attack from the United
States. In addition, its orientation is towards internal
defense. It also dominates the Cuban economy. It is
subordinate directly to the Castro brothers and acts
against democracy. These things will have to change.
The Cuban military must be professional, politically
neutral, and support democracy and democratically
elected leaders. The FAR should be oriented towards
control of its own sea- air- and land-space. These things
are all achievable. The FAR is a force with a history of
success and effort in support of the missions given by
the government. As such, it is capable of change if it is
called for by the Cuban leadership.
On the part of the United States, the U.S. Government
needs to engage the Cuban military. At some point,
the United States has had conceptual disagreements
with most militaries throughout the hemisphere. With
engagement and assistance, all of the militaries in
the region have changed to support democracy and
eschew human rights violations. With an attitude
of engagement rather than confrontation, the United
States could help the Cuban military to achieve the
same.
END NOTES
1. Economist, August 5, 2006.
2. Department of State Western Hemisphere Affairs Web Site,
3. Thomas Shannon, Assistant Secretary for Western
Hemisphere Affairs, Foreign Press Center Briefing Speech, “U.S.
Policy Toward Cuba,” Washington, DC, August 23, 2006, www.
state.gov/p/wha/rls/rm/2006/71070.htm.
4. Libertad Act, Title II—Assistance To A Free And Independent
Cuba 22 U.S.C. 6066 Sec. 201, “Policy Toward A Transition
Government And A Democratically Elected Government In
Cuba.”
5. Libertad Act, Title II, Sec. 202, “Authorization Of Assistance
For The Cuban People.”
6. CAFC original report, referred to as CAFC I, May 6, 2004,
8. Samuel Huntington discusses the overall goal of civilian
control of the military in Chapter Four, “Power, Professionalism,
and Ideology: Civil-Military Relations in Theory,” The Soldier
and the State, Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1957,
pp. 80-97. Huntington addresses civil-military relations in other
types of regimes in Chapter Four, “Praetorianism and Political
Decay,” Political Order in Changing Societies, New London, CT:
Yale University Press, 1968, pp 192-263.
9. Eusebio Mujal-Leon and Joshua W. Busby, “The Role of
the Armed Forces in Transition—Lessons for Cuba,” Encuentro
Magazine, Spring 2003 pp. 127-132. Original article available in
authors remark that the Cuban regime is “a personalistic and
charismatic dictatorship with an idiosyncratic mix of national-
military, egalitarian, and residual Communist elements.”
10. Hal Klepak, Cuba’s Military 1990-2005: Revolutionary
Soldiers During Counter-Revolutionary Times, New York: Palgrave
MacMillan, 2005.
11. The Military Balance 2005-2006, London: International
Institute for Security Studies (IISS), pp. 332-333.
12. Deployment information comes from Global Security at
13. Klepak.
14. Richard Gott, Cuba, A New History, New Haven: Yale
University Press, 2004, p. 161.
15. Klepak.
16. Department of State, Annual Human Rights Reports, available
17. G. A. Crowther, “Central American Militaries, the United
States and Democracy in Post-Cold War Central America,”
Unpublished dissertation, Tulane University, November 10,
2006.
18. The author thanks Captain Albert Lord, USN, for assistance
in designing a new Cuban maritime force.
19. The author thanks Colonel George “Roberto” Doran, USAF,
for assistance in designing a new Cuban Air Force.
20. Territory size is derived from the CIA Country Web Page,
21. Military sizes are taken from IISS, The Military Balance,
2005-2006 edition.
22. Libertad Act: Title II—Assistance To A Free And
Independent Cuba, 22 U.S.C. 6066 Sec. 201, “Policy Toward
A Transition Government And A Democratically Elected
Government In Cuba.”
23. Libertad Act: Title II—Assistance To A Free And
Independent Cuba, 22 U.S.C. 6066 Sec. 202, “Authorization Of
Assistance For The Cuban People.”
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
BIOGRAPHICAL SKETCH OF THE AUTHOR
GLENN ALEXANDER CROWTHER is a Research Professor of National Security
Studies in the Strategic Studies Institute, U.S. Army War College. He served in
a variety of platoon and company level positions in the 17th Infantry
Regiment in the 7th Infantry Division (Light) at Fort Ord,
California. He commanded Headquarters and Service Company, United Nations
Command Security Force—Joint Security Area—Pan Mun Jom and subsequently the
Cheju-do Training Center in Korea. Colonel Crowther has also served in a variety
of Foreign Area Officer, Operations Officer and Strategist positions in U.S.
Army South and U.S. Southern Command in Panama and Miami. He has served two
tours at the Pentagon working as a Strategic Plans and Policies Officer on the
Department of the Army Staff and as a Politico-Military Officer at the Joint
Staff J-5 (Strategic Plans and Policies Directorate).
Colonel Crowther is a graduate of the Infantry Officers Basic and Advanced
Courses, the Combined Arms and Services Staff School, and the Command and
General Staff College at the School of the Americas. He was also an Army War
College Fellow at the Fletcher School of Law and Diplomacy at Tufts University.
Colonel Crowther has a B.A. in International Relations from Tufts University, an
M.S. in International Relations from Troy State University, and a Ph.D. in
International Development from Tulane University.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
This publication is a work of the U.S. Government as defined in Title 17,
United States Code, Section 101. As such, it is in the public domain, and under
the provisions of Title 17, United States Code, Section 105, it may not be
copyrighted.
The views expressed in this report are those of the author and do not
necessarily reflect the official policy or position of the Department of the
Army, the Department of Defense, or the U.S.
Government. This report is cleared for public release; distribution is
unlimited.
Comments pertaining to this report are invited and should be forwarded to:
Director, Strategic Studies Institute, U.S. Army War College, 122 Forbes Ave,
Carlisle, PA 17013-5244.
All Strategic Studies Institute (SSI) publications are available on the SSI
homepage for electronic dissemination. Hard copies of this report also may be
ordered from our homepage. SSI’s homepage address is:
ww.StrategicStudiesInstitute.army.mil.
The Strategic Studies Institute publishes a monthly e-mail newsletter to
update the national security community on the research of our analysts, recent
and forthcoming publications, and upcoming conferences sponsored by the
Institute. Each newsletter also provides a strategic commentary by one of our
research analysts. If you are interested in receiving this newsletter, please
subscribe on our homepage at
www.StrategicStudiesInstitute.army.
ISBN 1-58487-300-0
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------