Building Security Institutions: Lessons Learned in Afghanistan
After its rapid military victory over the Taliban, the international community underestimated the resources, time and work that would be required enforce to Security Sector Reform (SSR) in Afghanistan. Even though the Afghan population was supportive of the coalition’s efforts at first, the light footprint approach, fostered by the Europeans, failed to provide with satisfying results as the insurgency made its way through popular frustration.
After the security situation worsened in 2005-6, the US-led coalition intensified the build-up and the training of Afghan national security forces. But internal debates about the role they should play in such a fragmented society, particularly for the Afghan Police, created division between the United States and the other members (especially the European Union countries). On the eve of the withdrawal of ISAF combat troops, Afghan government seems unfit to handle its new security forces that sometimes are the only representatives of the state in remote areas and failed to stabilize the country.
This page contains only a summary of our work. If you would like to have access to all the information from our research on the subject, you can download the full version in PDF format.
Building Security Institutions: Lessons Learned in Afghanistan
Security Studies Center
Heir to a tradition dating back to the founding of Ifri, the Security Studies Center provides public and private decision-makers as well as the general public with the keys to understanding power relations and contemporary modes of conflict as well as those to come. Through its positioning at the juncture of politics and operations, the credibility of its civil-military team and the wide distribution of its publications in French and English, the Center for Security Studies constitutes in the French landscape of think tanks a unique center of research and influence on the national and international defense debate.
The War on Terrorism: Global Experts Reflect on Lessons Learned Twenty-Five Years After 9/11
Twenty-five years ago, the September 11 attacks prompted the invention of new security architectures that shaped the war on terrorism. Sixteen think tank experts from fifteen countries reflect on the successes, failures, and missed opportunities in the fight against terrorism—a fight that is still ongoing.
From Corsairs to Private Military Contractors. Nonmilitary Maritime Actors and the Historical Continuities of Naval Warfare
Since late 2023, several Houthi attacks on commercial shipping have involved privately contracted armed teams conducting defensive engagements and coordinating immediate response efforts, often in the relative absence of regular naval forces during the immediate hostilities at sea. These cases highlight a strategic tension that increasingly confronts modern navies. On the one hand, they are expected to conduct persistent, low-intensity maritime security tasks such as counterpiracy, maritime policing, and the protection of commercial shipping. On the other hand, they face renewed pressure to prepare for high-intensity conflict against peer and near-peer adversaries amid the return of great power competition.
Framework Nation: A European Challenge and French Ambition
First appearing in the early 2000s, the framework nation concept follows several distinct rationales, whether it refers to a country assuming the leadership of a military operation, directing a multinational capability project, or commanding a permanent force structure. In every case, the country that takes on this role fully intends to derive from it additional politico-military influence.
The Nuanced Relationship Between Public Opinion and Foreign Policy
Public sentiment is something decision-makers must contend with, especially in democratic states. However, the extent to which public opinion shapes foreign policy varies. Three Council of Councils experts in France, India, and Nigeria reflect on how public opinion does—and sometimes does not—affect foreign policy decisions.