Table Of ContentSECURITY SECTOR TRANSFORMATION IN
SOUTHEASTERN EUROPE AND THE MIDDLE EAST
NATO Science for Peace and Security Series
This Series presents the results of scientific meetings supported under the NATO Programme:
Science for Peace and Security (SPS).
The NATO SPS Programme supports meetings in the following Key Priority areas: (1) Defence
Against Terrorism; (2) Countering other Threats to Security and (3) NATO, Partner and
Mediterranean Dialogue Country Priorities. The types of meeting supported are generally
“Advanced Study Institutes” and “Advanced Research Workshops”. The NATO SPS Series
collects together the results of these meetings. The meetings are co-organized by scientists from
NATO countries and scientists from NATO’s “Partner” or “Mediterranean Dialogue” countries.
The observations and recommendations made at the meetings, as well as the contents of the
volumes in the Series, reflect those of participants and contributors only; they should not
necessarily be regarded as reflecting NATO views or policy.
Advanced Study Institutes (ASI) are high-level tutorial courses to convey the latest
developments in a subject to an advanced-level audience.
Advanced Research Workshops (ARW) are expert meetings where an intense but informal
exchange of views at the frontiers of a subject aims at identifying directions for future action.
Following a transformation of the programme in 2006 the Series has been re-named and re-
organised. Recent volumes on topics not related to security, which result from meetings
supported under the programme earlier, may be found in the NATO Science Series.
The Series is published by IOS Press, Amsterdam, and Springer Science and Business Media,
Dordrecht, in conjunction with the NATO Public Diplomacy Division.
Sub-Series
A. Chemistry and Biology Springer Science and Business Media
B. Physics and Biophysics Springer Science and Business Media
C. Environmental Security Springer Science and Business Media
D. Information and Communication Security IOS Press
E. Human and Societal Dynamics IOS Press
http://www.nato.int/science
http://www.springer.com
http://www.iospress.nl
Sub-Series E: Human and Societal Dynamics – Vol. 24 ISSN 1874-6276
Security Sector Transformation
in Southeastern Europe and
the Middle East
Edited by
Thanos Dokos
Hellenic Foundation for European and Foreign Policy (ELIAMEP),
Athens, Greece
Amsterdam • Berlin • Oxford • Tokyo • Washington, DC
Published in cooperation with NATO Public Diplomacy Division
Proceedings of the NATO Advanced Research Workshops on
(a) Security Sector Transformation in SEE
Tirana, Albania
27–29 February 2004
(b) Security Sector Transformation in the Mediterranean
Halki, Greece
8–12 September 2005
© 2007 IOS Press.
All rights reserved. No part of this book may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system,
or transmitted, in any form or by any means, without prior written permission from the publisher.
ISBN 978-1-58603-757-4
Library of Congress Control Number: 2007930110
Publisher
IOS Press
Nieuwe Hemweg 6B
1013 BG Amsterdam
Netherlands
fax: +31 20 687 0019
e-mail:
Security Sector Transformation in Southeastern Europe and the Middle East v
T. Dokos (Ed.)
IOS Press, 2007
© 2007 IOS Press. All rights reserved.
Introduction
For most countries, security today is primarily measured in non-military terms and
threats to security are non-military in nature. These threats include incompetent gov-
ernment, corruption, organized crime, insecure borders, smuggling [weapons, drugs,
contraband, people], illegal migration, ethnic and religious conflict, proliferation of
weapons of mass destruction, shortage of natural resources [e.g., water] and, of course,
terrorism.1
As security is no longer just a military concern, it is no longer just the preserve of
MODs and MFAs which have, to date, been the main ministries involved in security
cooperation. It is no longer possible to draw a clear distinction between external secu-
rity and internal security. Security henceforth requires the coordination of the ‘external’
ministries [i.e., MOD and MFA] and their agencies [armed forces, intelligence ser-
vices] with those of the ‘interior’ ministries: internal affairs, education, finance, over-
seas development, transport, environment; health, etc., with their agencies [policing
forces, security services, disaster relief agencies, etc.]. Security today takes in social
development and demands the involvement of all elements of society in a way which
security in the Cold War days did not. Meeting these new security requirements de-
mands fundamental reform of national structures, patterns of investment, and systems
of government. Likewise it demands the evolution of international institutions on a
truly radical scale.
The security sector of a state may be defined broadly as encompassing those ele-
ments granted a legitimate and exclusive role in the exercise of coercive power in soci-
ety to deal with external and internal threats to the security of the state and its citizens.2
As such, security sector reform (SSR) encompasses all those organizations that have
the authority to use, or order the use of force, or the threat of force, as well as those
civil structures that are responsible for their management. The organizations concerned
include: military and paramilitary forces, intelligence services, police forces, both na-
1 In the case of the Middle East, to cope with the new type of security challenge, Arab countries are under
domestic and international pressure to develop a wide range of new skills and capabilities. These include
establishing and training anti-terrorist units and rapid intervention troops, extended surveillance, improving
communication and liaison both between various segments of the security sector and with foreign intelli-
gence services, enhancing cooperation between different internal intelligence services, control of money
flows and monitoring of activities undertaken by charity organizations. (Luethold, p. 3)
2 According to International Alert, the security sector can be viewed as forming three pillars:
(a) Groups with a mandate to wield the instruments of violence – military, paramilitaries and police
forces;
(b) Institutions with a role in managing and monitoring the security sector – civilian ministries, par-
liaments and NGOs; and
(c) Bodies responsible for guaranteeing the rule of law – the judiciary, the penal system, human rights
ombudsmen and, where these bodies are particularly weak, the international community. (Interna-
tional Alert, Towards a better practice framework in security sector reform. Broadening the debate,
p. 1)
vi
tional and local, together with border guards and customs services, judicial and penal
3 4
systems, and the civil authorities mandated to oversee these agencies.
The overall aim of SSR is the transformation of security institutions so that they
play an effective, legitimate and democratically accountable role in providing external
and internal security for their citizens. Institutional reform focuses upon building up
their capacities in line with the standards assumed appropriate to the democratic politi-
5
cal context. Transformation of the security sector requires broad consultation and in-
6
cludes goals such as strengthening civilian control and oversight of the security sector,
professionalisation of the security forces, demilitarization and peace-building; and
7
strengthening the rule of law. SSR is therefore about much more than the internal
structure of security forces; it promotes the strengthening of norms in relation to the
8
proper relationship between the security sector and society at large.
To implement such changes in a civil-military partnership requires, among other, a
civilian body of experts knowledgeable enough to address defence and security issues
with credibility and confidence. Without such civilian expertise, decision-makers can-
not take hard decisions which are opposed by the entrenched and conservative military
3
Attention is given increasingly to building the capacity of judicial and penal systems, and working to en-
sure their political independence and accountability through training and support to judges, lawyers, human
rights activists and other NGO representatives. (Chanaa, p. 30)
4
Jane Chanaa, Security Sector Reform: Issues, Challenges and Prospects, Adelphi Paper 344, IISS, Lon-
don, 2002, p. 7.
5
According to Hanggi and Tanner, SSR is “aimed at the efficient and effective provision of state and hu-
man security within a framework of democratic governance. Although SSR is still an evolving and therefore
contested concept, and lessons learned from practical experience are still rather scarce, it increasingly shapes
international programmes for development assistance, security cooperation and the promotion of democracy.
This process is driven by the understanding that an unreformed security sector represents a decisive obstacle
to the promotion of sustainable peace, development and democracy.” According to the Development Assis-
tance Committee (DAC) of the OECD, “SSR is another term used to describe the transformation of the secu-
rity system –which includes all the actors, their roles, responsibilities and actions—working together to man-
age and operate the system in a manner that is more consistent with democratic norms and sound principles
of good governance and this contributes to a well-functioning security framework.” (Hanggi & Tanner,
p. 16–17)
6
Strengthening civilian control and oversight of the security sector implies the reform of the relevant gov-
ernmental and non-governmental civilian institutions to enhance their capacity for the oversight, management
and control of the security sector to make sure security institutions exist and function in accordance with their
role in a democratic society. This includes:
• Reforming and professionalising ministries of defence and internal affairs; independent ombuds-
men offices; civilian review boards; legislatures; budget offices; audit units; and finance minis-
tries.
• Capacity-building of NGOs, professional associations, research and advocacy institutes, and uni-
versities.
• Supporting efforts at building trust within the military that civilian institutions are able to success-
fully and efficiently evaluate security requirements or take responsibility for security-related deci-
sions. (International Alert, p. 3)
7
International Alert, p. 1–2. From an institutional perspective, democratic governance of the security sec-
tor would include:
(a) a constitutional and legal framework which enshrines the separation of powers
(b) civilian control and management of the security sector by government
(c) parliamentary control and oversight of the security sector
(d) judicial control in the sense that the security sector is subject to the civilian justice system
(e) “public control” of the security sector through the existence of a security community representing
civil society. (Hanggi & Tanner, p.11)
8
Chanaa, p. 29.
vi
staff. Building such an expert civilian security community is the sine qua non of de-
fence and security sector reform.
The volume at hand is the outcome of two seminars organized by ELIAMEP in Ti-
9
rana (27–29 February 2004) and Halki (7–11 September 2005) with the support of
NATO’s Science Programme. ELIAMEP would like to express its gratitude to Profes-
sor Fernando Carvalho Rodrigues, Scientific Director of NATO’s Science Programme
for his support of our SSR activities during the past few years. I would also like to
thank our partners in the two seminars: the Institute for Contemporary Studies in Tirana
and the Albanian Media Institute for the Tirana seminar and the Jordanian Center for
Strategic Studies, and especially Dr. Nawaff Tell, for the Halki seminar.
Finally, I would like to emphasize ELIAMEP’s continuing commitment to the is-
sue of Security Sector Reform, through new workshops in the context of the Halki In-
ternational Seminars, or other meetings with our counterparts in Southeastern Europe,
the Black Sea, the Mediterranean and the Middle East, as well as our close cooperation
with the Arab Reform Initiative (ARI), and the Euro-Mediterranean Study Commission
(EuroMeSCO).
Thanos Dokos
Director-General,
Hellenic Foundation for European & Foreign Policy (ELIAMEP), Athens
9
There may have been some SSR-related developments that are not covered by the respective country
chapters because of the usual in academic circles delay between a seminar/workshop and the eventual publi-
cation of the proceedings.
vi
About the Authors
Aldo Bumçi, Research Director, Albanian Institute for International Studies
Ümit Cizre, Department of Political Science Bilkent University, Ankara
Eden Cole, Outreach Coordinator, The Geneva Centre for the Democratic Control of
Armed Forces (DCAF)
Obaida el-Dandarawy, Third Secretary, Ministry of Foreign Affairs, Cairo, Ph.D.
student, Fletcher School of Law and Diplomacy, Boston
Thanos Dokos, Director-General, Hellenic Foundation for European & Foreign
Policy (ELIAMEP), Athens
Chris Donnelly, Director, UK Defence Academy’s Advanced Research and
Assessment Group
Philipp H. Fluri, Deputy Director, The Geneva Centre for the Democratic Control of
Armed Forces (DCAF)
Roland Friedrich, Adviser with the Middle East North Africa Programme, Geneva
Centre for the Democratic Control of Armed Forces (DCAF)
Peter Gill, Reader in Politics and Security, Liverpool John Moores University
Derek Lutterbeck, Programme Coordinator, Geneva Center for Security Policy
(GCSP)
Liviu Muresan, founding member and Executive President of the European Institute
for Risk, Security and Communication (EURISC) Management Foundation,
Bucharest
Bill Park, Senior Lecturer at the Defence Studies Department, King’s College, London
Fred Tanner, Director, Geneva Center for Security Policy (GCSP)
Jan Arveds Trapans, Former Minister of Defence of Latvia; Former Latvian
Ambassador to NATO; Expert, DCAF, Geneva
Willem van Eekelen, former Secretary-General, Western European Union
ix
Contents
Introduction v
Thanos Dokos
The Challenge of Transformation in the Security Landscape of Today 1
Chris Donnelly
Developing a National Security Concept: Assessing New Threats to Security 13
Bill Park
The Parliamentary Dimension of Security Sector Reform 21
Willem van Eekelen
Intelligence Services in the Post 9/11 Era: The Dilemma Between Efficiency
and Democratic Control 31
Peter Gill
The Evolution of Civil-Military Relations and Progress in Greek Security Sector
Reform 39
Thanos Dokos
The Romanian Experience with Democratic Control of the Security Sector 51
Liviu Muresan
Security Sector Reform in Albania: An Overview 71
Aldo Bumçi
Government Reform and Internal Cooperation: A Study of Albania 85
Jan Arveds Trapans
The Civil-Military Power Balance Under the Justice and Development Party
Government in Turkey 101
Ümit Cizre
Civil-Military Relations in Egypt: An Overview 113
Obaida El-Dandarawy
Civil-Military Relations and Security Sector Reform in the Arab World:
The Experience of Palestine 121
Roland Friedrich
Looking East and South: Promoting Security Sector Reform in the EU’s
Neighbourhod 13
Fred Tanner and Derek Lutterbeck
Security Sector Governance and Reform in South East Europe – A Brief Study
in Norms Transfer 145
Philipp H. Fluri and Eden Cole
ELIAMEP’s Halki International Seminars 2005: Executive Summary 173
