The security sector reform debate is still in its embryonic stage. Considerable political, practical, conceptual and strategic work still needs to be done on security sector reform before a flexible approach can be developed to most situations. There has been a shift in thinking from donor countries, international financial institutions and development agencies towards security sector reform.
This paper (in ‘Building Stability in Africa: Challenges for the New Millenium’, from the Institute for Security Studies’ Monograph Series) explores the concepts and challenges of security sector reform in the 21st century. Traditionally, security sector assistance was seen as the preserve of foreign ministries or their defence establishments. Military assistance was highly politicised and followed the ideologies of the donors. It focused more on technical assistance than on organisational restructuring. The emphasis was on country security, not the security of individuals and communities. No real attempt was made to include civilian policy sectors. The end of the Cold War and the emergence of civil society as a new actor in governance relations created the space for security sector reform to be included within a broader development remit. A conceptual and normative shift is evident, as the emphasis is now placed on civil-military relations in the successful management of a country’s national defence function. In 1999, the UK Department for International Development placed security sector reform on the international development agenda, emphasising the links between security sector reform and poverty alleviation.
Donors used to adopt a zero-sum approach, which is when a reduction in military expenditure is always seen as a good thing because it releases valuable resources for country development. There is no necessary correlation between reductions in military expenditure and the development of a country. The reduction in security forces has been a major factor to several coup d’etats that have occurred in the past forty years.
- The inclusion of the security sector within a broader development agenda has started. Police reform is not an end in itself but linked to criminal justice reform. For example, South Africa benefited from Danish and Dutch police advisors during its process of police restructuring from 1994.
- A pragmatic definition of the security sector is advocated. This involves the traditional statutory instruments of state-centred security, and the indigenous military organisations that have played a positive role in contributing to the physical securities of communities.
- The core components of the security sector are the army, police, intelligence services, paramilitary organisations and guerrilla armies.
- Virtually all African security and political institutions are near mirror reflections of their colonial institutions. The reality has been that the subordination of armed forces to civil control has been achieved by a complex system of processes of a non-institutional nature, and formal mechanisms are just one factor.
- The relationship between security sector downsizing and the attainment of political stability is conditioned by political, economic, social and institutional factors, which are unique to a particular country.
Current Western concepts of security sector reform should be contextualised within an African environment to reflect realities and African needs. It is not possible to state an overarching theoretical system explaining all security sector reform, but the importance of democratic civil-military relations that stress the universal moral values of transparency, accountability and the primacy of elected government are a base for all reforms.
- The scope of security sector reform needs to be expanded to incorporate non-institutional actors and mechanisms.
- The role that police agencies, intelligence services and private security companies play in securing or undermining civil- military relations should be considered.
- The concept of the ‘apolitical’ soldier needs to re-examined. The armed forces are always involved in politics in varying degrees. This results in the involvement of political concepts in the corporate identity of the armed forces.
- Security sector reform should be contextualised within democracy, human rights, good governance and the creation of accountability and transparency in security sector processes.
- Local ownership of security sector reform is needed, not a direct application of western models. A strategic indigenisation of the reform process is required.
- The content of reform should be determined to alleviate any interagency fighting and the under-utilisation of interventions that do not reflect strategic necessity.
