Upload
hollie-chambers
View
218
Download
0
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
PRT MeS EvaluationCPPB Workshop
Outline
1. Background
2. Purpose of evaluation
3. Evaluation approach
4. Findings
• Plans & concepts
• National directions for PRT
• Are we doing the right things/Desirable effects
• Unintended effects
5. Recommendations (to SwAF)
6. Using CPPB Guidelines
7. Questions
1. Background
• The Provincial Reconstruction Teams were introduced in Afghanistan in 2002
• Extend Afghan Government authority
• Provide a light footprint
• Avoid occupation
• Sweden has been framework nation for PRT MeS since 2006
2. Purpose of Evaluation
• SwAF
• The Swedish Defence Research Agency (FOI)
• Jun 2009 – Feb 2010
• Formative evaluation
• Learning focus
• Questions:
• Is the current direction & guidance for the PRT relevant?
• Is the PRT doing the right things?
• Which unintentional effect has the PRT had?
• Which intended or desirable effects has the PRT not achieved?
3. Evaluation Approach
1. Evaluation design and baseline establishment (Jun-Oct 2009)
• Conflict analysis,
• Theory of change
• Develop questions
2. Evaluation execution (Nov 2009)
3. Final report and advice on implementation (Dec 2009 – Feb 2010)
4. Findings - Concepts
• The COIN-doctrine (US) a well thought-out approach
• The PRT concept is heterogeneous and has contributed to fragmentization
• Civil-military coordination needs to be focused
• Parallel structures
• Essential needs
4. Findings - PRT National directions
• National C2
• PRT design
• Large freedom = large responsibility
• Controlling factors
• Taliban forces
• ISAF
• ANSF
• Lessons learned
• The process of D&G
4. Findings - The right things/Desirable effects
• Tactical mobility a constraint
• Security for the population is relatively good in the MeS area
• Rule of law completely missing
• Not a military task, but will affect mission
• Corruption a huge obstacle
• ANA has made progress (autumn 2009)
• ANP are still facing huge challenges
-> Conclusion: Sweden has focused Security line of operation. This is insufficient for a PRT
4. Findings - Unintended effects
• Heterogeneous PRT-concept
• Unfulfilled expectations
• Weak CIMIC
• Strong army in a weak country; ”Pakistanisation”
• Distance from population
• Disadvantaged population groups
5. Recommendations (to SwAF)
• Revise PRT direction
• Improve national C2
• Train COIN at the conceptual level
• Addressing essential needs
• CIMIC
• Don’t ask for needs you cannot satisfy
• Mission tactics for Force Protection
• Improve Mobility
6. Using the CPPB Guidelines
• Is the PRT a CPPB?
• Conflict Analysis
• We made our own
• Crucial step in any CPPB evaluation
• Theory of change
• Made us focus on plans, concepts and doctrine
• Shaped the evaluation
6. Using the CPPB Guidelines
• Criteria
• Relevance
• Sustainability
• Impact
• Coherence
• Coverage
• Detailed descriptions useful
• Linkages and consistency with values less well developed
7. Questions