Abstract
It is widely accepted that in almost all military decisions, the political factor has to be taken into account. To that extent is a political advisor or “polad” needed in the military institutions as well as on the field? The face of warfare has irrevocably changed, as Robert Gates, United States Secretary of Defense reminds us: “We can expect that asymmetric warfare will remain the mainstay of the contemporary battlefield for some time. These conflicts will be fundamentally political in nature, and require the application of all elements of national power. Success will be less a matter of imposing one's will and more a function of shaping behavior – of friends, adversaries, and most importantly, the people in between” .
Until the current emphasis on transformational diplomacy in the post-9/11 environment advocated by Secretary Rice, political advisors formed a subculture within the larger political-military function. Their work has long been considered arcane. Indeed, the military decision was above everything, and considered sacred. The tide may be turning, however, as the growing importance of civilian-military cooperation has boosted demand within the military for the skills Foreign Service personnel and other civilians bring to operations requiring the integration of all elements of national power. These include stability and reconstruction, peacekeeping and peace enforcement, counterinsurgency and crisis-intervention missions. The ultimate goal of post-conflict reconstruction is the transfer of political authority to indigenous authorities. Effective Civil-Military-Cooperation (CIMIC) in stability operations must take into account the political context of the mission and aim at creating acceptable, legitimate, representative, just and stable institutions that bring about and can sustain a peaceful political transition. Political Advisors have a major role to play here.
Extract
[...] Political advisers are in a unique position to develop and apply such expertise. Political advisers are above all, counselors. Even if the commander does not accept specific recommendations, such outside counsel will inform and broaden headquarters planning. Then, the essence of a political adviser's effectiveness is his or her ability to function as a "personal and confidential" adviser to the commander. If we consider that to have a real influence on military decisions, a political adviser should be the commander's confident, we can also legitimately wonder which status is to be given to him. [...]
[...] Political Advisors have there a major role to play. Nevertheless, problems of definition of the nature and tasks of the political advisers still remain. On the one hand, although this function exists in Great-Britain since the 80s, the tasks and status of the "polad" are not always well defined. That is to say, political advisers in the United States, in Great Britain or in France may be seen differently, may be recruited either among militaries or among civilians. Depending on the country or the type of institution, the "polad" is either a diplomatic warrior, (that is to say a warrior with skills in diplomacy), or a civilian, diplomat with a military training. [...]
[...] It is undeniable that in the future, the function of political adviser will become indispensable. It is being officially and quickly established in the United States and in Great Britain. Nevertheless it remains little-known in France, and is not often studied by the French armies and Think tanks. France can benefit from the experiences of the United States, and adapt the function of "polad" to the country's specificities and type of military interventions. But France is far behind, and must think of what kind of political advisers it needs, and prepare the military institutions for their difficult acceptance and integration. [...]
[...] When integrating a political level in warfare, victory can exist without a decisive military victory. Victory there can be, if the foreign force has managed to gain the hearts and minds of the population, has trained local security forces that will be able on their own to assure security and stability for the region or the country, or again if it has enabled local politicians to regain the trust of the country and settle a new legal government. Considering these challenges and the new face of warfare, "polads" have a major role to play. [...]
[...] Will the recruitment of political advisers provide political efficiency in the military system, or will the cooperation be too difficult to reach? Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice has made support of crisis operations a characteristic of her "transformational diplomacy" initiative. "Transformational Diplomacy" is the goal which Rice describes as "work[ing] with our many partners around the world? [and] build[ing] and sustain[ing] democratic, well-governed states that will respond to the needs of their people and conduct themselves responsibly in the international system."2 Toward that end, President Bush's Fiscal Year 2009 budget submission sought funding to fill 1,100 new Foreign Service positions within the State Department, including 150 for political-military or foreign policy adviser positions in military commands within and outside combat areas. [...]
