Justified Accord 22

PKSOI representative Mr. Lieto participates in the closing ceremony with key leaders from AFRICOM, SETAF-AF, Kenya, Uganda and other African nations.

A three-week joint military exercise ‘Justified Accord 22’ officially closed on Thursday, 17th March 2022 in Nairobi.  PKSOI remained a key participant in the training and CPX phases of Justified Accord 22.  PKSOI has supported past exercise in Africa since 2012. 

Mr. Lieto with representatives from the European Union and an observer from Brazil during justified Accord 22.

Justified Accord is U.S. Africa Command’s joint, combined exercise that involves multiple U.S. military components, allied partner nations and international organizations to promote interoperability between participants for operations in East Africa. Justified Accord 22 brought together over 800 participants from twenty militaries across the world and it involved both Command Post and Field Training exercises. The exercise seeks to assess participant abilities in conducting operations and to enhance positive bilateral and regional relationships in conflict environments with coalition partners.

Mr Lieto with the Justified Accord senior leaders for the CPX from Kenya, Uganda, Tanzania and Nigeria (representing the African Union). 

Representing Chief of the Defense Forces (KDF), the Director of National Security Major General Solomon Manambo stated that KDF and Kenya at large was honored to host the exercise for the first time and is ready to work with her counterparts and partners in hosting similar crucial exercises. PKSOI continues to engage with AFRICOM and SETAF-AF for future exercises on the African continent.

Disarmament, Demobilization, and Reintegration Programs for Military Practitioners

Disarmament, Demobilization, and Reintegration Programs for Military Practitioners serves as a guide for organizing, planning, preparing, and executing activities in support of such operations. As the book underscores, the military’s supporting role is not passive; instead, it practices active engagement by incorporating the experience and expertise of DDR partners. Achieving a sense of teamwork among diverse organizational cultures requires creative thinking. While recognizing that DDR is essentially a civilian-led venture, the military can furnish key enablers that enhance performance and effectiveness. PKSOI regards this book as a valuable reference for military and civilian organizations coming together to implement meaningful DDR.

To read the paper click on the link below. To download this paper click on the download button below.

Maritime Stability Operations – China: Bullying Their Way Into the Arctic

Maritime Stability Operations – China: Bullying Their Way Into the Arctic -The US Geological Survey estimates that the Arctic holds approximately 90 billion barrels of undiscovered oil which is about 13 percent of global estimates and 30 percent of the Earth’s undiscovered natural gas.[i] This increase in regional shipping and resource mining may cause regional instability in the Arctic as China, Russia, and the United States and its Arctic State partners compete to ensure their interests are attended to in this newly marketable portion of the Arctic.

[i] Lino, Marissa, 2020, “Understanding China’s Arctic activities.” Accessed March 1, 2021.  https://www.iiss.org/blogs/analysis/2020/02/china-arctic

To read the full article click on the link below. To download the article click on the download button below.

Human Security in U.S. Military Operations: A Primer for DOD

The U.S. Army has always worked among people in areas of conflict. In recent times, the United States and the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) are wrestling with what human security means, how military operations impact it, and what can be done to mitigate the harm. This primer is published to inform those within DOD working in this area, whether commanders, planners or curious soldiers and civilians. If we have learned nothing else in the past 20 years of war and its aftermath, it should be that the human domain is complex. If we fail to get our efforts right in these areas, we may well have tactical successes and strategic failure.

To read the full paper click on the link below. To download this paper click on the button below.

Semi-Annual Lesson Report: Setting the Stage for Peace and Stability Operations

This edition of the Peacekeeping and Stability Operations Institute’s Semi-Annual Lesson Report: Setting the Stage for Peace and Stability Operations explores the challenges and complexities of “setting the stage” for peace and stability operations and activities.

To read the full report click on the link below. To download a copy of the report click on the button below.

Maritime Stability Operations: A Foreign Humanitarian Assistance and Disaster Relief Case Study

Photo by: Ensign Joseph Painter U.S. Navy

Maritime stability operations are a subset of larger stability operations which take advantage of the freedoms that operating from the sea and operating under maritime law provide.  Maritime stability operations are divided into two types, steady state and crisis response.  Steady state stability operations are typically conducted by geographic combatant commanders in the form of exercises, port visits, or peace operations.  Crisis response stability operations come in the form of civil support operations, Foreign Humanitarian Assistance (FHA), and disaster response.  Whether operations are conducted by U.S. Navy, Marine Corps, or Coast Guard units, alone or along with allied maritime forces, each agency follows a list of tenets set forth for maritime stability operations planning.  This case study presents a FHA crisis response mission which was small in scope but demonstrates planners effectively and efficiently employing the tenets of maritime stability operations to ensure mission effectiveness.

Click on the link below to read the full Case Study or click the button below to Download.

Protecting Civilians A Humanitarian Obligation: Essay Series on the Protection of Civilians, Children and Armed Conflict and Cultural Property Protection

The North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) published an Essay Series,
Protecting Civilians: A Humanitarian Obligation, with a contribution from
Sarah Petrin (Williamson), and Col (Ret.) Dwight Raymond, on “A U.S.
Perspective on the Protection of Civilians.”

This image has an empty alt attribute; its file name is NATO-Essay-Cover-1.jpg

The essay outlines the U.S. military framework for civilian protection, which includes: 1) understand civilian risks 2) conduct activities that protect civilians, and 3) shape a protective environment. It also offers perspective on the challenges that the military confronts in operations to protect civilians, and highlights the importance of building the capacity of national governments to provide
security. The series was published by the NATO Office of the Secretary General, Human Security Unit and includes essays on Children and Armed Conflict and Cultural Property Protection.

To read this essay please click on the link below or to download click on the button below.

Maintaining Stability in International Space

By Dr. Raymond A. Millen and Travis Bolio

Peacekeeping and Stability Operations Institute

The purpose of stability in international orbiting space is to create and sustain an environment for the peaceful pursuit of international interests, namely science, technology, exploration, and commerce. While international competition and cooperation in international orbiting space have continued for decades, no country has pursued military conquest as a means to gain dominance in this domain or to gain a military advantage over other states. The growing investment and presence in space presage the need to ensure stability and accessibility for peaceful expansion.

The Eisenhower administration’s hallmark space policy (NSC 5814/1) sought to reserve outer space for peaceful and scientific purposes. Notably, the policy proscribed the militarization of space, that is, no permanent placement of weapons in orbit. The exploration and use of space have progressed since the Eisenhower administration created the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA). By the first two decades of the 21st century, multiple countries have placed satellites in orbital space for global communications, global positioning systems (GPS), surveillance, the internet of things, and cyber physical systems (CPS).[1] Multinational involvement in space is progressing exponentially, which also portends greater complexity and perhaps, instability unless judiciously managed.

Reinforcing US space policies, the United Nations’ Treaty on Principles Governing the Activities of States in the Exploration and Use of Outer Space, including the Moon and Other Celestial Bodies (19 December 1966) emphasized international peaceful cooperation in outer space. Specifically, the treaty outlined international cooperation, exploration, and scientific research of outer space and celestial bodies. As important, the treaty prohibited national claims of sovereignty, establishment of military bases and weapons, and the placement of weapons of mass destruction in orbit or on celestial bodies.[2] Together with US space policies, the UN space treaty established the basis for peaceful international activities in space.

Space exploration, along with a greater understanding of the universe, has continued with orbital telescopes, manned space stations, manned space missions, and unmanned space exploration systems. The utility of space is not limited to the physical domain but extends into the electromagnetic and the internet domains.  As the leading pioneer of space exploration, the United States should continue developing space systems with the purpose of enhanced space stability and exploration. Additionally, US leadership should encourage more nations to participate jointly in space efforts, as cooperative burden-sharing and mutual benefits. This paper explores development mechanisms to enhance space exploration, research, and stability: normalized space terminology; near-term stability; mid-term stability; and long-term stability. The intent is to provide broad recommendations for mankind’s expansion into outer space in a logical manner.

Normalized Space Terminology

The domain of space encompasses three distinct dimensions: physical, network, and cognitive. The physical dimension comprises the orbital area and proceeds out to the moon, outer space and other celestial bodies. The network dimension includes the interconnected systems and processes that permit command and control of data and information around the world. The cognitive dimension covers the range of mental and conceptual processes needed to understand and operate in the space domain.[3]

The characterization of the space domain is broader in scope, as it is not limited to geographic or physical borders. This paper identifies four sub-domains as a basis for discussion: near Earth orbit, travel vectors, outer space, and the electromagnetic spectrum. All sub-domains operate in the three distinct dimensions; however the electromagnetic spectrum can have some unique interactions with the physical dimension.  A clear, mutual definition of these domains helps to establish authorities and regulations for abiding stability in space.

Near Earth orbit is the area closely surrounding the planet, in which gravity has a proximate attraction on objects. This domain is commonly used for satellites and is filled with decades of space debris. It serves as a strategic gateway for spacecraft passing through Earth’s atmosphere. As such, administration and management of space travel within near Earth orbit shall become a growing challenge.

Travel vectors are identified pathways for outer space destinations and interplanetary travel, as well as returning traffic. Travel vectors vary in terms of time and space as planets and other bodies orbit the Sun. Interplanetary traffic-peaks would correspond with planetary orbits passing closest to Earth. Similar to sea lanes and air corridors, as space traffic becomes more congested, administration and management of travel vectors become a safety issue.

The outer space domain is the vast frontier for exploration, research, and discovery of wondrous phenomena. While outer space exploration and colonization may serve to unify human efforts, they may also spur economic competition and potential disputes. Establishing stability mechanisms and a sense of multinational cooperation prior to inhabiting outer space serves to foster comity.

Exploration may expose humans to exotic viruses, so medical systems must be integral to stability practices. Medical protocols for returning space travelers, such as quarantine, detection, and disinfection, are needed to preclude potential pandemics. Similarly, standard protocols for contact with or discovery of other life forms are prudent to minimize mishaps. Creating a system of shared knowledge and best practices would promote a predictable exploration of the outer space domain. Standardized protocols would also enable standardization and interoperability of systems and infrastructure.

The vastness of space naturally presents unforeseen challenges and opportunities to inhabitation and exploration. As technological advances project humanity deeper into space and enhances an understanding of the electromagnetic spectrum, attentive governments would need to adapt. Leading governments need to deepen national and international space policies and processes to ensure technology does not outpace management and administration of space ventures. New discoveries may fundamentally change mankind’s understanding of the universe and create astounding innovations. For example, the discovery of new energy sources may solve current energy dependencies and pollution on Earth, as well as improve space vessel propulsion. However, new energy sources might pose a threat to contemporary energy providers, prompting resistance. Creating systems of systems that are dynamic enough to accommodate these changes will help prevent destabilizing effects.

The electromagnetic spectrum constitutes the waves and electromagnetic energy that is currently utilized and radiates throughout space. This sub-domain has a large impact on the network dimension. It could be the photonic energy coming from the Sun to the Earth. It can be all the communication frequencies between satellites and Earth stations, as well as among satellites and space craft. Establishing regulatory practices for the electromagnetic spectrum is necessary as space activities become more prevalent. As the electromagnetic spectrum usage increases, it can affect Earth-based activities, such as solar power and photosynthesis. Increased electromagnetic spectrum media may also interfere with communications from Earth to space vessels and celestial bases.

Maintaining stability in space would require a dynamic, iterative evaluation of challenges and potential areas of friction as mankind establishes a greater presence, commerce, and economic competition in space. The internet has connected the world and accelerated globalization to such an extent that instability in a remote country can now reverberate far beyond its borders. Similarly, space inhabitation may spawn “galaxation,” where instabilities in space may have global ramifications.

 Near-Term Stability

Before addressing future endeavors in space, the United States must face contemporary realities. Stability in near Earth orbit currently rests on a foundation of deterrence. Effective deterrence requires the capability and national will to retaliate against potential attacks emanating within, from, or through near Earth orbit (e.g., weaponized satellites and intercontinental ballistic missiles). Seemingly innocuous, orbiting objects can serve as weapons as well. For example, a large, dense object guided for the purpose of plunging onto the Earth’s surface can wreak regional or even global devastation, as large meteorites in the past have demonstrated.  Deterrent capabilities require an arsenal of Earth-based retaliatory systems, such as weaponized satellites and missiles, held in launch readiness. National will is established through a declaration of retaliatory capabilities and assured response to threats vis-à-vis near space orbit. The dyad of national capability and will ensures potential aggressors do not misstep by misjudging US resolve and readiness.[4]

A “No First Use” policy assures the international community that the United States will not conduct preventive attacks in response to perceived or potential aggression. US deterrence policy should not attempt to define what is considered aggression, keeping the issue ambiguous (i.e., physical attack, cyberattack, blinding attack, and electronic warfare). The essence of deterrence places the onus of action on potential aggressors and fosters uncertainty in regards to what types of actions will trigger a US response.

To mitigate fears concerning the militarization of international space, the United States should consider changing the name of Space Force to something less provocative, perhaps Space Service. As the organization evolves, it may predominantly comprise robots, computers, scientists, engineers, and ultimately space vessel crews. At some point, the United States should consider offering membership to qualified candidates from other countries. Foreign membership in the organization would increase a unified endeavor, as well as maintaining US leadership and guidance for space service.

According to the Space Force, Space Domain Awareness is the “effective identification, characterization and understanding of any factor associated with the space domain that could affect space operations and thereby impact the security, safety, economy, or environment of our Nation.”[5] The Space Force should continue extending this vision for future expansion into space and the economic ramifications to the global economy, so as to ensure the stability in space.

In anticipation of future space exploration and enduring presence, the United States should consider promoting international space agreements which foster cooperation and partnership. This anticipatory approach would address stability issues in near Earth orbit and build on them over time. Specifically, the United States should begin the process of international economic agreements for space exploration and commerce. Public and private commercial interests shall become more prominent as access to space becomes open to all countries and business corporations. Economic drivers, rather than security issues, have the potential to create instability as countries and corporations vie for orbit positions, travel vectors, and planetary exploitation.

Human expansion into space will likely create opportunities for illicit and subversive activities. To address smuggling, piracy, sabotage, pilferage, and other criminal activities, establishing a rule of law framework and common legal jurisdictions should occur prior to inhabitation of space. All of these issues are addressed in national and international laws, so expanding them to include illicit activities in space should present fewer problems.

Mid-Term Stability

Near Earth orbit shall inevitably serve as global gateways to the frontier of space. An international gatekeeper agreement is needed since access to space shall impact all national and commercial enterprises interested in space exploration and commerce. The current sharing of near Earth orbit and the advantages it provides for public and private sectors are already a source of global competition and cooperation. While few countries currently possess the capability to establish a presence in space orbit, all countries are impacted by national space programs and policies, so an international space agreement is prudent to avoid future disputes. As near Earth orbit becomes more accessible, countries and companies will begin to invest in space enterprises, likely at an exponential rate. Hence, developing policies and agreements now will mitigate potential conflicts in the future.

Creating an environment that is beneficial for international economic development in space will be a key driver of activity and advancement. Currently, the physical barrier limits space activities, but this barrier will lessen as technology improves. Current trade laws do not account for the scope of space activities and investments. Through advancements and improvements in processes, regulations need to be dynamic enough to adapt to these changes. Transparent regulatory practices would enable the improvement of the international economic environment.

A revenue system to fund the orbital federation or system would be a necessary component of space activities. Transparent and consensual funding legislation promotes the equitable administration of orbital activities. The largest barrier to participation in space will be the financial demands on funding and maintenance of space endeavors. International financial policies and regulations to make space ventures more economically viable for countries and corporations would provide opportunities for increased infrastructure development in the space domain.

The administration of orbital gateways requires thoughtful management to ensure that access is equitable, fair, and open for all future national and private enterprises in order to avoid monopolies by early pioneers. International enterprises over orbital gateways, travel vectors, planets, moons, and asteroids should become the norm. Accordingly, the United States should consider the establishment of a space governing council that is scalable and diverse enough to allow for the continued expansion of the space domain. Initial administration of orbital gateways is within Earth-based government structures, but leading governments involved in space will need to think about the future establishment of quasi-independent or autonomous governments away from the immediate vicinity of Earth.

Long Term Stability

Global gateways to space could take the form of mega space ports in near Earth orbit. Mega space ports assume both technical and human dimensions. Technically, the construction of mega space ports would facilitate the reception and servicing of space vessels for exploration, transportation, commerce, salvage, and mining. Construction of mega space ports would be more economical and practical in a near-zero gravity environment than from Earth-based launch missions with construction crews and materials.

Construction of a space port would require modularization for expansion, with robotics and computers performing manufacture, construction, and design modifications. The initial and core module would be for the smelting of metal and the manufacture of material for modular expansion. Construction robotics and computers would be indispensable in the harsh environment of space. Automated repair and maintenance facilities for robotics and computers would obviate the need for direct human involvement and would minimize the use of Earth-based launch missions for the purpose of replacement parts and repairs. 

Conceptually, automated salvage vessels could focus initially on recovering space debris orbiting the Earth and delivering it to the core module for smelting and manufacture of modular components. Salvage work would serve to clean up space debris in orbits and travel vectors, which will increasingly become hazards to orbiting satellites and traffic. Hence, salvage work would be more economical than launching construction materials from Earth to the space ports.

The salvaging of space junk alone would not meet the material needs of space ports. In view of their low gravitation fields, the Moon and nearby asteroids are more economical for the mining and transportation of ore to space ports. Mining may require some human labor, so international agreements on mining contracts, bases, and operations would become necessary. Of course, mining would require the construction of bases and equipment, thereby becoming a major project in itself.

In view of economy and freedom from Earth’s gravity, separate space manufacturing facilities would be needed for the construction of large space vessels. As with mega space ports, these facilities would need core modules for smelting and manufacture of modular components, and for the manufacture of space vessels. In addition to robotics and computers, administrators, scientists, engineers, and laborers would be devoted to the construction of large space vessels.

The design, shielding, computers, communications, and propulsion of large space vessels should be built for upgrades and new innovations. Until more effective means for propulsion are developed, nuclear reactors would likely remain the most practical. Since crews of large space vessels would experience long tours of duty, amenities, such as living quarters, dining, entertainment, and relaxation become more important. Such vessels should be intended for exploration and scientific discovery. These vessels should not have weapons unless a threat materializes.

The human dimension would evolve over time. At some point, mega space ports and spacecraft manufacturing facilities could become capable of life support and artificial gravity. In addition to robotics and computers, administrators, scientists, engineers, and laborers would be required for maintenance and management of the space ports and manufacturing facilities, as well as scientific work. At a minimum, space ports would comprise facilities for space traffic control, port administration, constabulary, commerce, science research, passenger terminals, maintenance, living accommodations, dining, and exercise.

International participation in this program would reap benefits in terms of cooperation, diverse innovation, and a commitment to stability in space. Further, international ownership and administration would preclude the establishment of national monopolies in near Earth orbit and celestial bodies. A small governing space council, a constabulary, and a judiciary would serve to maintain the rule of law in each space port. Corporations will likely vie for commercial enterprises in space, so the port commerce office would administer regulatory policies designed to prevent corporate monopolies and predatory practices.

As other planets, moons, and asteroids become more accessible for commerce, exploration, and possible colonization, governance will eventually become an issue. Setting precedents on rule of law governance, authorities, administration, and so forth in the early stages of habitation of near Earth orbit would set the stage for later expansion. Accordingly, a space governing body should operate as a democracy with checks and balances to guarantee universal rights and representation. Executive, legislative, and judicial bodies may serve as the model for good governance of orbital space. Representation from governments and corporations active in space, with room for expansion, would serve to protect rights and interests. A formal constitution describing the political structure, electoral process, term limits, and criteria for office would provide for long term stability in space governance. As habitation of space expands farther from Earth, the need for autonomous government bodies will assume greater import.


The development of the space domain promises vast technological advances, new energy discoveries, and enormous wealth creation. The investment in space ventures would reap benefits far above overhead costs. Nevertheless, expansion into space should be based on a comprehensive plan with built-in stability mechanisms. Beginning the process now would prevent a haphazard evolution of space enterprises.

As mankind expands into the solar system, sovereignty claims and governance of the space commons shall become issues as more countries and commercial enterprises begin interplanetary operations. The regulation of space traffic would require the assignment of space vectors to mitigate congestion and accidents. A space communications agency would be needed to regulate communications traffic. An international sovereignty policy would be needed for private and international bases in space, on planets, on moons, and on asteroids.

All of the complexities, challenges and opportunities from the development of space domains cannot be anticipated. However, US leadership and international collaboration can begin laying the groundwork for eventual expansion and habitation of space. As with any human interaction, stability issues will remain abiding. Establishing stabilization mechanisms from the onset will create an environment of cooperation and healthy competition as economic and scientific advances develop the space domain.

[1] For an archival history of US administrations’ space policies, see https://aerospace.org/space-policy-resources

[2] 2222 (XXI). Treaty on Principles Governing the Activities of States in the Exploration and Use of Outer Space, including the Moon and Other Celestial Bodies, Office for Outer Space Affairs, 19 December 1966, https://www.unoosa.org/oosa/en/ourwork/spacelaw/treaties/outerspacetreaty.html, 17 August 2020.

[3] Spacepower, Space Capstone Publication, Headquarters United States Space Force (June 2020), 5-8, https://www.spaceforce.mil/Portals/1/Space%20Capstone%20Publication_10%20Aug%202020.pdf, 14 August 2020.

[4] Coercion theory (i.e. deterrence and compellence) remains relevant in near Earth orbit and likely beyond. Thomas C. Schelling, Arms and Influence (New Haven, Connecticut: Yale University Press, revised edition, November 5, 2008).

[5] Spacepower, 34, 38-39.

USAWC sponsors academic workshop on Women in Peace & Security

  • USAWC Commandant addresses DoD equities in Women, Peace and Security
  • USAWC’s WPS lead’s war college education motivated and guided her work with WPS
  • PME representatives share best practices for WPS integration

As an Army critical care nurse, Col. Veronica Oswald- Hrutkay has instructed at the Army Trauma Training Center and deployed in support of Operation Desert Shield/Desert Storm; UN Protection Force Mission Provide Promise in Zagreb, Croatia; and Operation Iraqi Freedom. It was always about saving lives – then, and now at the strategic level of human security, said the Army War College lead for Women, Peace and Security.

The first of a planned annual series, the Women, Peace, and Security Join Academic Forum Workshop is a two-day virtual collaboration among those in planning and policy roles and those in professional military education. For two days, Aug. 25 – 26, 2020, the participants focused on opportunities within PME to integrate WPS principles into the strategic mindedness of faculty and student.

“Within the Defense Department, WPS actions are force multipliers,” said U.S. Army War College Commandant Maj. Gen. Steve Maranian, opening the workshop. To read more of this USAWC article please CLICK HERE.

Crippling Insurgencies with National Reconciliation Programs: A Primer for Military Practitioners


This primer on reconciliation programs serves to complement counterinsurgency strategies. While such programs require a fair amount of organization, resources, funding and manpower, the key distinction is they are predominately managed by host nation governments. This requirement means that US military and government officials must focus on advising and the provision of resources to support a reconciliation program. The purpose of this primer is to inform US advisors on the salient features of a reconciliation program. This task is by no means simple because host nation governments are unlikely to pursue a reconciliation program without US persistence and guidance.

This primer provides a methodical approach to inducing surrender among common insurgents and providing ways for them to become productive citizens. Effective reconciliation programs have the potential to shorten the length and costs of an insurgency. Such programs serve to accelerate the healing process in the midst of an insurgency. In the aftermath of an insurgency, reconciliation programs provide the requisite infrastructure for the implementation of disarmament, demobilization, and reintegration (DDR) programs. As such, reconciliation programs lay the groundwork for enduring stability in an affected country.

Scot N. Storey
Colonel, Director
US Army Peacekeeping and Stability Operations Institute

To read Crippling Insurgencies with National Reconciliation Programs: A Primer for Military Practitioners Click Here