"Rather than viewing diplomacy and force as opposing ends of the spectrum of national policy -- with one used when the other fails -- it is important to recognize that each must seamlessly support the other," says Eric D. Newsom, Assistant Secretary of State for Political-Military Affairs. And for the bureau that he directs, "this has meant seeking the right balance between foreign policy and defense interests and strengthening defense relations through such foreign policy 'tools' as security assistance, military education and training programs, arms transfers, security dialogues, and confidence-building measures. All of these efforts pay off with stronger security relationships with allies and other countries."

As a global power, the United States is faced with the need to meet new challenges that threaten the growth of democracy and regional stability. The key political-military questions we now address are: 1) how to discern what U.S. national interests may be at stake in ambiguous, remote, and, at least in Cold War terms, peripheral regions of conflict, 2) how to determine the willingness of Congress and the American people to take the risks necessary to secure those interests, and 3) how to calibrate the diplomatic and military instruments of power for maximum effect should we decide to act. Rather than viewing diplomacy and force as opposing ends of the spectrum of national policy -- with one used when the other fails -- it is important to recognize that each must seamlessly support the other, thereby achieving a greater effect.

For the Political-Military Bureau, this has meant seeking the right balance between foreign policy and defense interests and strengthening defense relations through such foreign policy "tools" as security assistance, military education and training programs, arms transfers, security dialogues, and confidence-building measures. All of these efforts are force multipliers that pay off with stronger security relationships with allies and other countries -- which in turn have proven critical in international responses to conflicts such as those in Iraq and Kosovo.

We also must contend with a growing number of new challenges that increasingly affect all militaries worldwide. These include dealing with a growing number of intra-state conflicts; fostering more multinational peacekeeping; identifying the role of militaries in political, religious or ethnic conflicts; urging the protection of human rights and respect for democratic norms; and working for the professionalization of military forces and encouraging their acceptance of civilian authority across the globe.

In addressing these challenges, the State Department and Defense Department work together to identify where U.S. interests lie to ensure that our policies and planning processes are consistently connected. Nowhere has this been more apparent than in the area of security assistance.

Security assistance is a military foreign aid program in which the State Department outlines policy and provides funding, the Defense Department carries out the program, and the U.S. government benefits from the interaction it creates. Interagency cooperation, particularly at the field level between embassies and the unified commands, is particularly crucial in defining precisely how our security assistance "tools" can best be utilized.

The principal objective of security assistance is to cultivate foreign government support of democratic ideals by providing a range of U.S. military resources, services, and training. The "tools" for implementing this objective are embodied in several key programs, including the following:

Foreign Military Financing (FMF)

Of particular importance is the FMF program which enables key friends and allies to improve their defense capabilities and helps them become capable partners by financing the acquisition of U.S. military articles, services, and training. To date, the FMF program has been instrumental in the formation of several coalition forces working collectively to achieve common security objectives in Central Europe, Africa, Asia, and South America. Assistance also is provided to support multilateral peacekeeping operations that do not fall under the United Nations mantle. This support not only improves the ability of other nations to participate in regional peacekeeping operations, it also helps to lessen the load for the United States.

International Military Education and Training (IMET)

The IMET program has a particularly significant impact on shaping peacetime engagement between U.S. and foreign militaries. A relatively low cost program, IMET is a highly efficient component of U.S. security assistance that provides training on a grant basis annually to over 8,000 students from allied and friendly nations. Principally, IMET establishes military-to-military relationships that are beneficial in coordinating regional stability activities with recipient nations. It does so by exposing foreign students to U.S. professional military organizations and procedures. An important element within IMET is the "Informational Program" that introduces students to the vast cultural and civic aspects of American life.

Another important element is the IMET English language prerequisite. The IMET program alone has been responsible for teaching tens of thousands of foreign students English language skills. English language proficiency not only provides the basis for our militaries to communicate in peacetime and wartime, but also is widely viewed as a fundamental element in advancing U.S. ideals on democracy, human rights, and civil-military relations. From a broad perspective, English language proficiency goes well beyond comprehension of subject material in a particular course. The net result facilitates understanding of U.S. values, institutions, and political processes.

The key to IMET's success has been the opportunity for foreign military students to learn advanced military leadership concepts arm in arm with their U.S. counterparts. Foreign military students also learn a variety of tactical and strategic force employment concepts consistent with U.S. military doctrine that can result in effective international operation partnerships. For example, foreign students may learn how to support and maintain ships used in maritime protection missions or how to employ the principles of U.S. military airpower doctrine. As a result, they are better equipped to participate, alone or with U.S. forces, in peacekeeping activities.

Of equal significance are the personal relationships forged during these courses. Students are encouraged to work closely with their U.S. military counterparts to comprehend better the course material. The resulting close friendships have played an instrumental role in how the U.S. has dealt with foreign militaries in times of unrest. Numerous examples exist where former students have been able to work beyond political differences to resolve difficult problems under exceptional conditions. Often overlooked, but also important, is how former U.S. and foreign students have collaborated to introduce important civil-military and justice reforms to other militaries.

Expanded IMET

Notwithstanding the success of the IMET program, in 1991 Congress expanded the program to address concerns about human rights abuses by some military officers, civil-military conflicts, and better management of military resources. The Expanded IMET (E-IMET) program was developed to provide training in such areas as defense resource management, civilian-military roles and responsibilities, and military justice. A key component of this training is the provision for civilian leaders to attend E-IMET classes. This offers civilian leaders and their military counterparts the opportunity to have candid discussions on sensitive subjects -- often for the first time. Many E-IMET courses are specifically tailored for the country in question and presented in the host country. One of the most important impacts of E-IMET has been improving the foreign military students' understanding of their role and responsibilities within a democratic government. The results of these courses can be measured by the number of foreign military justice laws and codes of conduct passed, the greater respect for civilian control that has been engendered, and the benefits of cooperative and mutually supportive civil-military institutions.

Although E-IMET initially got off to a rocky start, its acceptance and utility have since grown immeasurably. Over 30 percent of IMET funds are used for E-IMET courses and over 25 percent of the students are civilian leaders. As acceptance for E-IMET has grown, so has the range of courses offered. Foreign nations have actively solicited development of courses specifically designed to solve some of their more compelling problems. Examples include courses in environmental cleanup, medical resource management, and disaster preparedness.

The Way Ahead

Through these types of security assistance programs, the U.S. gains critical regional access and develops alliances absolutely essential to our national security. Incidental to the assistance is the promotion of U.S. cultural and political ideals on democracy, internationally-recognized human rights, and civil-military reforms. The success of security assistance to help address the rise of new challenges will be reliant upon our continued foreign policy leadership and assistance. If we are to be resolute in our commitment to enhance military-to-military cooperation, to promote the values of democracy and respect for human rights, and to ensure that capable, trained allies are able and willing to support us when needed, then Congress must be equally resolute in providing the resources needed to continue to use these "tools" to promote our foreign policy goals and protect U.S. national security. We believe there is no better investment than contributing to the vitalization of allies and friends in order to achieve U.S. foreign policy objectives.