A set of U.S. Africa Command-related articles featured in Issue 51 of the Joint Force Quarterly describes the command's progression from its conception to its transition into unified command status, taking into account lessons learned and its role in foreign policy. Authors from the U.S. Africa Command staff include U.S. Army General William E. Ward, commander of the U.S. Africa Command; Colonel Thomas Galvin, director, Commander's Action Group, U.S. Africa Command; U.S. Navy Vice Admiral Robert T. Moeller, Deputy to the Commander for Military Operations, U.S. Africa Command; and Ambassador Mary C. Yates, Deputy to the Commander for Civil-Military Activities, U.S. Africa Command. Other articles were written by subject-matter experts who are not affiliated with U.S. Africa Command. Their opinions do not necessarily reflect the official views of U.S. Africa Command or its leaders but are included in this summary to contribute to public understanding of issues related to U.S. Africa Command. Joint Force Quarterly is a military journal published by the National Defense University for the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff to inform members of the U.S. armed forces, allies, and other partners. Following are summaries of the articles. The complete articles are available in the "Special Feature" section of the Joint Force Quarterly website at http://www.ndu.edu/inss/Press/jfq_pages/i51.htm. Principle of Active Security: By U.S. Army General William E. Ward, commander,U.S. Africa Command; and Colonel Thomas Galvin, director, Commander's Action Group, U.S. Africa Command In a piece, titled "U.S. Africa Command and the Principle of Active Security," Ward and Galvin discuss the command's use of "Active Security" in building security capacity in Africa. The article begins with a vignette highlighting the tragic effects of Mozambique's flood in 2000 which killed 700 people, destroyed homes, and devastated the nation's agriculture. Over the next several years, the United States government and international partners implemented programs to strengthen Mozambique's capacity to predict and respond to floods. The measures taken during this time helped Mozambique prepare for the next flood in 2008, which was more severe, but resulted in a dramatically reduced death toll and a reduced need for United States assistance. With this example, Ward and Galvin illustrate the purpose of the U.S. Africa Command: "to assist Africans in providing their own security and stability and helping to prevent the conditions that could lead to future conflicts." The authors stress the importance of developing security efforts in Africa with a holistic and sustained approach, known as "Active Security." The Africa Command bases its theater strategy on this principle, focusing on long-term solutions, rather than short-term improvements, and ensuring that skills developed during programs and other activities are retained over a sustained time period. Components of the command's Active Security programs include training, education, logistics and sustainment, exercises, activities, employment, and communication. "Active Security represents a fundamental shift in the way we address and prioritize security assistance," the authors write. "It is clearly within our national strategic interests to prevent conflict and foster conditions that permit development in Africa." For the complete article, visit http://www.africom.mil/pdfFiles/JFQ/16.pdf. The Road to a New Unified Command: By U.S. Navy Vice Admiral Robert T. Moeller, Deputy to the Commander for Military Operations, U.S. Africa Command; and Ambassador Mary C. Yates, Deputy to the Commander for Civil-Military Activities, U.S. Africa Command Moeller and Yates provide an overview of U.S. Africa Command in their article, "The Road to a New Unified Command," discussing its creation, its mission, structure, and lessons learned in its first year. The first part of the article describes the initial recommendations for the command following the determination in November 2006 that a new command was needed specifically for Africa. "The idea of an Africa command was not new, but until recent years, the continent of Africa remained a lower national security priority." The transfer of missions from three unified commands to the newly-created Africa Command places a higher priority on Africa and allows the Department of Defense to more effectively prevent and respond to security crises on the continent. Unlike other unified commands, U.S. Africa Command's structure includes interagency personnel in leadership positions throughout the command. A 60-person transition team was established to develop the command's organizational structure and establish initial guidelines. Yates and Moeller address some important "lessons learned" during the command's initial formation stage. Lack of focused communication to affected partner nations, U.S. ambassadors in embassies abroad, and other U.S. agencies prior to the announcement of U.S. Africa Command would have reduced the number of public misperceptions and concerns. "The pace of the command's establishment combined with limited time and resources to engage meant that not all desired partners were consulted," they state in the article. Other lessons learned include: Involving other commands: In establishing the Africa Command, members of the transition team learned the value of other unified commands in learning how to analyze and assess requirements and develop solutions Establishing the command as a full unified command at onset: While it was beneficial to have, as a sub-unified command, the ability to draw on the support of the U.S. European Command, it would have been more effective to establish the command as a unified command at the onset Planning for resources: To meet timelines for key establishment activities such as mission acceptance and staff training, resources planning is a necessity For the complete article, visit http://www.africom.mil/pdfFiles/JFQ/17.pdf. The Militarization of U.S. Foreign Policy? Dennis R.J. Penn, Analyst, National Security Agency In his article "The Militarization of U.S. Foreign Policy?" Penn proposes the use of an integrated 3D (diplomacy, development, and defense) security engagement policy to mitigate the perception that the United States is militarizing foreign policy. He describes U.S. Africa Command as a unique approach for shaping the international environment and promoting stability and security in Africa. "U.S. AFRICOM's nontraditional 'emphasis on development and war-prevention in lieu of warfighting' is garnering 'widespread praise' throughout the U.S. government," Penn writes. However, many have expressed concerns that the military is taking on roles traditionally held by the Department of State and the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID). A potential solution for this concern is a concept known as the 3D approach, in which three pillars of engagement--diplomacy, development, and defense--are applied equally to address security threats. "By including development and diplomacy as equal parts of the security strategy equation, the 3D concept deemphasizes the militaristic aspect of security engagement," Penn states. In implementing the 3D security engagement approach, Penn identifies four obstacles: There is no one common regional system for viewing the world within the U.S. government, creating complications of interagency coordination. There is no senior functional lead to oversee security engagement efforts in regions There are no facilities in the region to host combined 3D security engagement efforts apart from unified commands There are insufficient State and USAID resources to implement proactive security engagement activities worldwide To overcome these impediments, Penn recommends ensuring a consistent system for viewing the world across all agencies of the government, establishing a National Security Council-level representative to lead 3D efforts in each region, establishing 3D centers in each region, and increasing civilian capacity for State and USAID. For the complete article, visit http://www.africom.mil/pdfFiles/JFQ/18.pdf.