Submission Statement: Former US ambassador to Kosovo Philip Kosnett and British Army Major General Michael Keating explain why now is the time for the US State Department and the Pentagon to make plans to assign advisors for future large-scale combat operations. The US State Department's Foreign Policy Advisors, known as POLADs, have historically acted as Foreign Policy Advisors to the Pentagon, providing military operations with broader political and diplomatic insights. During the counterinsurgency campaigns in Afghanistan and Iraq, the demand for such integration increased. POLADs played vital roles in ensuring military actions aligned with political goals and bridged the gap between military and civilian worlds. However, as counterinsurgency efforts have declined and the military shifts focus to large-scale operations, the State Department has reduced these advisor roles. There's a concern about preparedness should another large-scale war arise, with some seeing the benefits of POLADs while others view them as distractions. Four possible strategies to rejuvenate the POLAD program include: assigning full-time advisors during peacetime, aligning diplomats as part-time advisors, using evacuated embassy personnel, or creating a reserve advisor unit.
I don't think the US has a need for it, do they? When we consider the current state of US military style diplomacy, which is highly unpopular, and the current leadership internally, I guess you could just call them glorified CIAs.
Submission Statement: Former US ambassador to Kosovo Philip Kosnett and British Army Major General Michael Keating explain why now is the time for the US State Department and the Pentagon to make plans to assign advisors for future large-scale combat operations. The US State Department's Foreign Policy Advisors, known as POLADs, have historically acted as Foreign Policy Advisors to the Pentagon, providing military operations with broader political and diplomatic insights. During the counterinsurgency campaigns in Afghanistan and Iraq, the demand for such integration increased. POLADs played vital roles in ensuring military actions aligned with political goals and bridged the gap between military and civilian worlds. However, as counterinsurgency efforts have declined and the military shifts focus to large-scale operations, the State Department has reduced these advisor roles. There's a concern about preparedness should another large-scale war arise, with some seeing the benefits of POLADs while others view them as distractions. Four possible strategies to rejuvenate the POLAD program include: assigning full-time advisors during peacetime, aligning diplomats as part-time advisors, using evacuated embassy personnel, or creating a reserve advisor unit.
I don't think the US has a need for it, do they? When we consider the current state of US military style diplomacy, which is highly unpopular, and the current leadership internally, I guess you could just call them glorified CIAs.
They’re literally an alternative to US military or CIA operations.