Table of Contents Table of Contents
Previous Page  18 / 104 Next Page
Basic version Information
Show Menu
Previous Page 18 / 104 Next Page
Page Background





AFSA Scholarship

Clements Worldwide

Embassy Risk Management

The Hirshorn Company

McGrath Real Estate Services

Peake Management, Inc.

Senior Living Foundation

WJD Management

ANSWERS to Quiz, p.16

1. “I don’t understand any of what

that person is saying.”

2. Refers to purchasing something

without inspecting it first.

3. Refers to somebody who didn’t

have to work to get where they are.

4. “To be so insulted that you’re not

able to reply.”

5. “Go away/leave me alone.”

6. “To look at each other coldly, with


7. “You make the most with what

you’ve got.”

8. “To keep postponing an important


9. “What goes around comes


10. “Buying something very cheaply.”

a perfect or risk-free settlement of this

problem. However, we believe without

it, the risks to the security of the United

States and our friends and allies would be

far greater.

“We are satisfied that the JCPOA

will put in place a set of constraints and

inspections that can assure that Iran’s

nuclear program during the terms of the

agreement will remain only for peace-

ful purposes and that no part of Iran is

exempt from inspection. As with any

negotiated settlement, the most durable

and effective agreement is one that all

sides will commit to and benefit from over

the long term.

“We support close congressional

involvement in the oversight, monitoring

and enforcement of this agreement. Con-

gress must be a full partner in its imple-

mentation and must evaluate carefully

the value and feasibility of any alternative

that would claim better to protect U.S.

security and more effectively to prevent

Iran from acquiring a nuclear weapon.

In particular, Congress must give careful

attention to evaluating whether alterna-

tives would be more or less likely to nar-

row the options for resolving this issue

without the use of force.

“In our judgment the JCPOA deserves

congressional support and the opportu-

nity to show it can work. We firmly believe

that the most effective way to protect U.S.

national security and that of our allies and

friends is to ensure that tough-minded

diplomacy has a chance to succeed before

considering other more costly and risky


—Shannon Mizzi, Editorial Intern

Spotlight on Rule of Law

Programs in Afghanistan

I n July, the Special Inspector General for Afghanistan Reconstruction issued the results of an audit of the efforts to develop

the rule of law in Afghanistan that gives

much food for thought.

SIGAR aimed to determine the extent

to which (1) the rule of law strategy and

objectives are current and define the

scope of assistance, (2) agencies can fully

account for programs and funding, (3)

progress is being systematically measured,

and (4) challenges encountered are being


Distressingly, the answer in each case

was “not much.”This is captured in the

report’s title, “Rule of Law in Afghanistan:

U.S. Agencies Lack a Strategy and Cannot

Fully Determine the Effectiveness of Pro-

grams Costing MoreThan $1 Billion.”

SIGAR details its findings that the

Departments of Defense, State, Justice

and USAID have spent at least $1 billion

on some 66 programs since 2003, but

that there is little indication of what was

achieved and, moreover, there has been

no comprehensive rule of law strategy

since 2009.

The IG’s recommendations, as well

as comments fromDOD and DOJ, and

joint comments from Embassy Kabul and

the USAIDMission for Afghanistan are


in the report.


—Susan B. Maitra, Managing Editor