The military/civilian divide:
peacekeeping and beyond
(© Claus Larsen)
I’d like to start my first editorial with a confession, a suggestion and an introduction.

First, the confession. I’d like to see more women in NATO Review – as authors and contributors. This is not just a nice idea. It also reflects gender in security’s increasing importance.

Already, NATO Review’s editorial director and assistant are women. And this edition has two female authors. A good start.

Relations between men and women can often be like those between the civil and military sides: close, but just not enough.

Several articles in this edition show that
the desired meeting of minds between these two sides can often be more like a collision.

We see for example how the military and civil sides work together (or sometimes don’t) in tasks like the Provincial Reconstruction Teams in Afghanistan

We also look at how NATO can best work with other organisations – and ask should collaboration be bottom up, or top down?

Second, the suggestion. NATO Review is being reviewed. And I would like feedback from readers about what you would change – and what you would keep. Click here to send your ideas.

And finally, the introduction. I have recently started as editor of NATO Review. My background is as a journalist and a speechwriter. I’m looking forward to developing NATO’s flagship publication.

I want to finish where I started – with women. Eleanor Roosevelt once said: ‘A woman is like a teabag – you never know how strong she is until she gets in hot water.’ It’s a good description of many of us – and not least the women and men in the hot water of combat right now.

Paul King
The Colombian Minister of Defence outlines the strategies that have helped his country regain territorial control and tackle drugs.
A photo account of a trip to Mazar-e-Sharif, northern Afghanistan by Danish international correspondent Ole Damkjær and photographer Claus Larsen.
William Maley looks at how Provincial Reconstruction Teams have evolved - and what’s next for them.
James V. Arbuckle examines civilian-military conflict in humanitarian operations – and looks at the skills and limits of soldiers in this context.
David S. Yost explores how NATO could further combine its strengths with those of other international organizations.
Rita Grossman-Vermaas looks at how to plug the gaps in safeguards preventing proliferation of dangerous weapons, materials and know-how.
Manjana Milkoreit makes the case for NATO being the best equipped organization to take on a dominant post-conflict reconstruction role.
Matthew Taylor reviews “Humanitarian military intervention: The conditions for success and failure” by Taylor. B. Seybolt.
Ryan Hendrickson looks at how Sweden has managed to get the best from both neutrality and NATO.