Skip to content. Skip to navigation
Personal tools
Texas A&M University
Home TEX: Taxonomy for Education and eXploration Threat Intent: Terrorists & Terrorism Counterterrorism Counterinsurgency Counterinsurgency and Irregular Warfare: Issues and Lessons Learned, Testimony of Drs. Michael Lund and Lisa Schirch
Document Actions

Counterinsurgency and Irregular Warfare: Issues and Lessons Learned, Testimony of Drs. Michael Lund and Lisa Schirch

Title: Counterinsurgency and Irregular Warfare: Issues and Lessons Learned, Testimony of Drs. Michael Lund and Lisa Schirch

Date: May 7, 2009

Author: Michael Lund and Lisa Schirch

Institution: Terrorism, Unconventional Threats and Capabilities Subcommittee, United States House of Representatives

Bibliographic Entry: U.S. House of Representatives.  2009.  Terrorism, Unconventional Threats and Capabilities Subcommittee.  Counterinsurgency and Irregular Warfare: Issues and Lessons Learned.  111th Congress.  First Session.

Electronic Link: http://armedservices.house.gov/pdfs/TUTC050709/Lund_Schirch_Testimony050709.pdf

Key Words: counterinsurgency, irregular warfare, conflict prevention, state failure, humanitarian policies, interagency collaboration

Summary of Key Points, Issues, Conclusions: In their joint testimony to the House Armed Services Committee, Michael Lund and Lisa Schirch focus not on the specifics of counterinsurgencies already in progress, but rather on the cost-saving and preventative capability of multilateral humanitarian policies.  They name four lessons that they feel need to be learned:
• The most effective way to prevent insurgency and terror is to mitigate their causes
• Preventing state failure is more cost-effective than executing a counterinsurgency
• Preventive measures have been successful when tried
• The US Government’s various policy tools must be integrated more effectively both with other US agencies as well as in the international arena
Accordingly, Lund and Schirch argue that more resources should be directed toward non-military efforts at preventing state failure.  They conclude by recommending more interagency collaboration, strategic planning about foreign policy at a country-specific level, more budgetary flexibility for development programs, and building local partnerships to prevent state failure internally before an external power is forced to intervene.

Name of Researcher: Benjamin Lewellyn

Institution: Integrative Center for Homeland Security, Texas A&M University

Date Posted: June 4, 2009