Vojenské Rozhledy

Czech Military Review

Vojenské rozhledy / Czech Military Review Nr. 3/2022: 41-62

Případová studie řízení obranných zdrojů z hlediska (ne)udržitelného rozvojeRecenzované - Vědecký

Daniela-Elena Hrab, Gheorghe Minculete

Vojenská přítomnost USA v Afghánistánu byla předmětem retrospektivních analýz, které usnadnily identifikaci a získání důležitých zkušeností pro budoucí vojenské akce. Tento článek analyzuje s využitím případové studie způsob, jakým byly obranné zdroje řízeny z hlediska udržitelného rozvoje, a zaměřuje se na trvalé účinky hlavních projektů, jejichž cílem bylo zajistit prvotní kroky této země směrem k udržitelnému rozvoji. Tato studie následně poukazuje na pozitivní potenciál, který by vojenský nástroj mohl mít v úsilí země o dosažení cílů udržitelného rozvoje, a zvýrazňuje cestu, jakou mohou způsoby neudržitelného řízení ohrozit nebo dokonce zmařit pokrok v této oblasti. Hlavním výsledkem výzkumu je model neudržitelného využívání obranných zdrojů, který by orgány s rozhodující pravomocí měly znát, a kterému by se měly v budoucnu vyhnout, aby dosáhly dlouhodobě prospěšných výsledků.

Klíčová slova: Afghánistán; obranné zdroje; výdaje na obranu; cíle udržitelného rozvoje; neudržitelný

A Case Study of Defense Resource Management in a (Un)Sustainable Development Perspective

The US military presence in Afghanistan has been the subject of retrospective analyzes that facilitated the identification and learning of important lessons for future military actions. This article analyses, through the case study method, the way defense resources were managed from a sustainable development perspective, focusing on the durable effects of the main projects aimed at ensuring this country's initial steps towards a sustainable development destination. As a result, this study points to the positive potential that the military instrument could have in a country's efforts to achieve sustainable development goals, highlighting the way that unsustainable management practices can compromise or even nullify the progress in this area. Consequently, the main product of this research is a model of unsustainable use of defense resources that decision makers should know and avoid in the future, to obtain long-term beneficial results.

Keywords: Afghanistan; Defense Resources; Military Expenditures; Sustainable Development Goals; Unsustainable

Zveřejněno: 15. září 2022  Zobrazit citaci

ACS AIP APA ASA Harvard Chicago Chicago Notes IEEE ISO690 MLA NLM Turabian Vancouver
Hrab, D., & Minculete, G. (2022). Případová studie řízení obranných zdrojů z hlediska (ne)udržitelného rozvoje. Vojenské rozhledy / Czech Military Review, 103(3), 41-62
Sdílet...
Stáhnout citaci
  • BibTeX (.bib)
  • Bookends (.ris)
  • EasyBib (.ris)
  • EndNote (.enw)
  • EndNote 8 (.xml)
  • ISI WoS (.isi)
  • Medlars (.medlars)
  • Mendeley (.ris)
  • MODS (.xml)
  • Papers (.ris)
  • RefWorks (.txt)
  • RefManager (.ris)
  • RIS (.ris)
  • MS Word (.xml)
  • Zotero (.ris)
    • Zobrazit celý článek

    Reference

    1. United Nations. Report of the World Commission on Environment and Development: Our Common Future. [online]. Oslo: Oxford University Press, 1987, p. 16, [viewed date: 10 April 2022]. Available from: <https://sustainabledevelopment.un.org/content/documents/5987our-common-future.pdf>.
    2. Munasinghe, M. Sustainable Development in Practice. Sustainomics Methodology and Applications. [online]. New York: Munasinghe Institute for Development (MIND), Cambridge University Press. 2009. p. 35. ISBN-13 978-0-511-53996-1. [viewed date: 10 April 2022]. Available from: <https://z-lib.org/>.
    3. Blewitt, J. Understanding Sustainable Development. [online]. Third Edition. London and New York, Routledge, Taylor & Francis Group, 2018, p. 4. ISBN 978-1-315-46585-2. [viewed date: 10 April 2022].Available from: <https://z-lib.org/>.
    4. Inspector General, U.S. Department of Defense. Audit of Coalition Partner Reimbursement of Dining Facility Services at Resolute Support Headquarters, Kabul, Afghanistan. [online]. 2020. Report No. DODIG-2020-096. p. 1. [viewed date: 10 April 2022].Available from: <https://media.defense.gov/2020/Jun/26/2002321943/-1/-1/1/DODIG-2020-096.PDF>.
    5. The 9/11 Commission Report. Final Report of the National Commission on Terrorist Attacks upon the United States. Authorized Edition. New York: W.W. Norton & Company, Inc., 2004. p. 369. ISBN 0-393-32671-3.
    6. Glickstein, D; Spangler, M. Reforming the Afghan Security Forces. Parameters [online]. 2014, 44 (3), p. 92. [viewed date: 10 April 2022]. Available from: <https://press.armywarcollege.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=2731&context=parameters>.
    7. Clark, G.E. War and Sustainability: The Economic and Environmental Cost. Environment: Science and Policy for Sustainable Development [online]. 2008, 50 (1), p. 3. [viewed date: 10 April 2022]. Available from: <https://doi.org/10.3200/ENVT.50.1.3-5>.
    8. Duczynski, G.; Jablonski, J.; Huddleston, S. Sustainability of the Afghan Law Enforcement and Security Forces: A 'Wicked, Messy Problem'. Journal of Information Warfare [online]. 2015, 14 (1), pp. 48-58. ISSN 1445-3347. [viewed date: 10 April 2022]. Available from: < https://www.jstor.org/stable/26487518>.
    9. Abshire, D. M.; Browne, R. The Missing Endgame for Afghanistan: A Sustainable Post-Bin Laden Strategy. The Washington Quarterly [online]. Center for Strategic and International Studies, 2011, 34 (4), p. 60. [viewed date: 10 April 2022]. Available from: <https://csis-website-prod.s3.amazonaws.com/s3fs-public/legacy_files/files/publication/twq11autumnabshirebrowne.pdf>.
    10. Yasa, A. R. From Security Sector Reform to Endemic Corruption: The Case of Afghanistan. Journal of Strategic Security [online]. 2020, 13 (3), pp. 99-100. ISSN 1944-0472. [viewed date: 10 April 2022]. Available from: <https://digitalcommons.usf.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1755&context=jss>.
    11. Special Inspector General for Afghanistan Reconstruction. What We Need to Learn: Lessons from Twenty Years of Afghanistan Reconstruction. [online]. 2021. SIGAR-21-46-LL. p. IV. [viewed date: 10 April 2022]. Available from: <https://www.sigar.mil/pdf/lessonslearned/SIGAR-21-46-LL.pdf >.
    12. Supreme Headquarters Allied Powers Europe. Allied Command Operations. Comprehensive Operations Planning Directive COPD Interim V2.0. [online]. Belgium: 2013. p. 1-9. viewed date: 10 April 2022]. Available from: <https://www.cmdrcoe.org/download.cgf.php?id=9>.
    13. Special Inspector General for Afghanistan Reconstruction. What We Need to Learn: Lessons from Twenty Years of Afghanistan Reconstruction. [online]. 2021. SIGAR-21-46-LL. p. 10. [viewed date: 10 April 2022]. Available from: <https://www.sigar.mil/pdf/lessonslearned/SIGAR-21-46-LL.pdf >.
    14. Commission on Wartime Contracting in Iraq and Afghanistan. CWC Special Report 5. Sustainability: Hidden Costs Risk New Waste. [online]. 2011. p. 1. [viewed date: 10 April 2022]. Available from: <https://www.academia.edu/8400564/Special_Report_5_Sustainability_hidden_costs_risk_new_waste >.
    15. Watson Institute. International & Public Affairs. Brown University. Costs of War. [online]. 2021. [viewed date: 10 April 2022]. Available from: <https://watson.brown.edu/costsofwar/figures/2021/human-and-budgetary-costs-date-us-war-afghanistan-2001-2022>.
    16. Special Inspector General for Afghanistan Reconstruction. Quarterly Report to Congress. [online]. Virginia: 2021. p. 34. [viewed date: 10 April 2022]. Available from: <https://www.sigar.mil/pdf/quarterlyreports/2021-04-30qr.pdf>.
    17. Douglas, M.A.; Ritschel, J. Air Advising in Afghanistan - Building an Organization in Flight. Air & Space Power Journal. [online]. 2018, p. 87. [viewed date: 10 April 2022]. Available from: <https://www.airuniversity.af.edu/Portals/10/ASPJ/journals/Volume-32_Issue-3/C-Douglas_Ritschel.pdf>.
    18. Special Inspector General for Afghanistan Reconstruction. What We Need to Learn: Lessons from Twenty Years of Afghanistan Reconstruction. [online]. 2021. SIGAR-21-46-LL. p. 50. [viewed date: 10 April 2022]. Available from: <https://www.sigar.mil/pdf/lessonslearned/SIGAR-21-46-LL.pdf >.
    19. United States Government Accountability Office. Report to Congressional Committees. Afghanistan Security: Further Congressional Action May Be Needed to Ensure Completion of a Detailed Plan to Develop and Sustain Capable Afghan National Security Forces. [online]. 2008. GAO-08-661. p. 2, [viewed date: 10 April 2022]. Available from: <https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/GAOREPORTS-GAO-08-661/pdf/GAOREPORTS-GAO-08-661.pdf>.
    20. Flaherty, C. 3D Vulnerability Analysis Solution to the Problem of Military Energy Security and Interposing Tactics. Journal of Information Warfare [online]. Terrorism Research Centre. Washington DC: 2014, 13 (1), p. 21. ISSN 1445-3347. [viewed date: 10 April 2022]. Available from: <https://www.jstor.org/stable/26487008>.
    21. Special Inspector General for Afghanistan Reconstruction. What We Need to Learn: Lessons from Twenty Years of Afghanistan Reconstruction. [online]. 2021. SIGAR-21-46-LL. p. 33. [viewed date: 10 April 2022]. Available from: <https://www.sigar.mil/pdf/lessonslearned/SIGAR-21-46-LL.pdf >.
    22. Schwartz, M.; Church, J. Department of Defense's Use of Contractors to Support Military Operations: Background, Analysis, and Issues for Congress. [online]. Congressional Research Service, 2013. R 43074, p. 8. [viewed date: 10 April 2022]. Available from: <https://sgp.fas.org/crs/natsec/R43074.pdf>.
    23. Special Inspector General for Afghanistan Reconstruction. What We Need to Learn: Lessons from Twenty Years of Afghanistan Reconstruction. [online]. 2021. SIGAR-21-46-LL. p. 76. [viewed date: 10 April 2022]. Available from: <https://www.sigar.mil/pdf/lessonslearned/SIGAR-21-46-LL.pdf >.
    24. NATO Standardization Office, AJP - 01, Allied Joint Doctrine. [online]. Edition E, Version 1, 2017, p. 1-13. [viewed date: 10 April 2022]. Available from: <https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/905877/20200728-doctrine_nato_allied_joint_doctrine_ajp_01.pdf>.
    25. NATO Standardization Office, AJP - 4, Allied Joint Doctrine for Logistics. [online]. Edition B, Version 1, 2018, p. 1-2. [viewed date: 10 April 2022]. Available from: <https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/907825/doctrine_nato_logistics_ajp_4.pdf>.
    26. Schwartz, M. Wartime Contracting in Afghanistan: Analysis and Issues for Congress. [online]. Congressional Research Service, 2011, R 42084, p. 3. [viewed date: 10 April 2022]. Available from: <https://sgp.fas.org/crs/natsec/R42084.pdf>.
    27. Inspector General, U.S. Department of Defense. Audit of Coalition Partner Reimbursement of Dining Facility Services at Resolute Support Headquarters, Kabul, Afghanistan. [online]. 2020. Report No. DODIG-2020-096. p. ii. [viewed date: 10 April 2022]. Available from: <https://media.defense.gov/2020/Jun/26/2002321943/-1/-1/1/DODIG-2020-096.PDF>.
    28. Kitt, M.M. and others, An Occupational Health Services Initiative at a Women's Hospital in Kabul, Afghanistan. [online]. Public Health Reports, 2006, 121, p. 650. [viewed date: 10 April 2022]. Available from: <https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1781906/pdf/phr121000650.pdf>.
    29. North Atlantic Treaty Organization. The Secretary's General Annual Report. [online]. 2019, pp. 70-71. [viewed date: 10 April 2022]. Available from: <https://www.nato.int/nato_static_fl2014/assets/pdf/2020/3/pdf_publications/sgar19-en.pdf>.
    30. United Nations. Six women's rights activists still missing in Afghanistan. [online]. [viewed date: 10 April 2022]. Available from: <https://news.un.org/en/story/2022/02/1111012>. [viewed date: 10 April 2022].
    31. United Nations. Taliban's backtracking on girls' education, 'deeply damaging'. [online]. [viewed date: 10 April 2022]. Available from: <https://news.un.org/en/story/2022/03/1114482>.
    32. United Nations. Afghanistan: 'Palpable' fear of 'brutal and systemic repression' of women grows. [online]. [viewed date: 10 April 2022]. Available from: <https://news.un.org/en/story/2021/09/1100562>.
    33. United Nations. Afghanistan women's rights are 'red line', UN rights chief tells States. [online]. [viewed date: 10 April 2022]. Available from: < https://news.un.org/en/story/2021/08/1098322>.
    34. Special Inspector General for Afghanistan Reconstruction. What We Need to Learn: Lessons from Twenty Years of Afghanistan Reconstruction. [online]. 2021. SIGAR-21-46-LL. p. 18. [viewed date: 10 April 2022]. Available from: <https://www.sigar.mil/pdf/lessonslearned/SIGAR-21-46-LL.pdf >.
    35. Special Inspector General for Afghanistan Reconstruction. The Risk of Doing the Wrong Thing Perfectly: Monitoring and Evaluation of Reconstruction Contracting in Afghanistan. [online].2021. SIGAR-21-41-LL. pp. XVIII, 16. [viewed date: 10 April 2022]. Available from: < https://www.sigar.mil/pdf/lessonslearned/SIGAR-21-41-LL.pdf>.
    36. North Atlantic Treaty Organization. Afghanistan Lessons Learned Process. [online]. 2021. p. 1. [viewed date: 10 April 2022]. Available from: <https://www.nato.int/nato_static_fl2014/assets/pdf/2021/12/pdf/2112-factsheet-afgh-lessons-en.pdf>.
    37. Special Inspector General for Afghanistan Reconstruction. What We Need to Learn: Lessons from Twenty Years of Afghanistan Reconstruction. [online].2021. SIGAR-21-46-LL. p. 33 [viewed date: 10 April 2022]. Available from: < https://www.sigar.mil/pdf/lessonslearned/SIGAR-21-46-LL.pdf>.
    38. United Nations. Afghanistan: UN launches largest single country aid appeal ever. [online]. [viewed date: 10 April 2022]. Available from: <https://news.un.org/en/story/2022/01/1109492>.
    39. United Nations. Transforming Our World: the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development. [online]. New York, 2015, pp. 14-28. [viewed date: 10 April 2022]. Available from: <https://sustainabledevelopment.un.org/content/documents/21252030%20Agenda%20for%20Sustainable%20Development%20web.pdf>.

    Zpět na obsah