Theresa Cameranesi, et al v. DOD, et al



Download PDF
FACA Database: DOD - 12170 - Board of Visitors for the Western Hemisphere Institute for Security Cooperation - Statutory (Congress Created) - ( Verify/Review By: ... Case: 14-16432, 09/30/2016, ID: 10143409, DktEntry: 27-2, Page 1 of 20 FACA Database Federal Advisory Committee Act Access: Public Access Home Log In Agencies Search ACR Files Datasets Help FAQ DOD - 12170 - Board of Visitors for the Western Hemisphere Institute for Security Cooperation - Statutory (Congress Created) - ( Verify/Review By: CMO GFO DFO ) - Histories Back to: Committee Fiscal Year Committee History 2015 Committee History 2014 Committee History 2013 Committee History 2012 Committee History 2011 Committee History 2010 Committee History 2009 Committee History 2008 Committee History Committee History Committee History Committee History cited esi eran Cam in pt v. De 14 o.2007 se, N efen . of D 32 -164 2006 2005 2004 Committee History 2003 Committee History 2002 GSA and DataCall Systems Support Team Security and Privacy Notice[9/26/2016 2:43:39 PM] arch ived on emb Sept er 26 , 201 6 Case: 14-16432, 09/30/2016, ID: 10143409, DktEntry: 27-2, Page 2 of 20 Board of Visitors Western Hemisphere Institute for Security Cooperation MEMORANDUM THRU SECRETARY OF THE ARMY FOR SECRETARY OF DEFENSE SUBJECT: Minutes of Session, 3-4 June 2002 of the Board of Visitors for the Western Hemisphere Institute for Security Cooperation 1. General. The Board of Visitors (BoV) for the Western Hemisphere Institute for Security Cooperation (WHINSEC), a federal advisory committee established under Public Law 106-398 (The Floyd D. Spence National Defense Act for Fiscal Year 2001) 6 and Public Law 92-462 (The Federal Advisory Committee Act) and chartered on , 201 er 26 temb p 1 February 2002, convened in Room 219, Building 35 (Ridgeway Hall), WHINSEC, Fort n Se ed o Benning, Georgia at 0905 hours on 3 June 2002 andaconcluded session at 1230 hours rchiv 432 on 4 June 2002. All sessions were open to o. 14-public. At Enclosure 1 is a listing of the 16 ,N se Board members, representatives, of Defen consultants and other attendees and briefing t. Dep v personnel. At Enclosuren2siis. a copy of the BoV’s itinerary (agenda). At Enclosure 3 is a ra e ame Cpresentations made to the BoV. At Enclosure 4 is a copy of the BoV copy of each ofed in the cit Charter. 3. Purpose. This was the inaugural session for this advisory committee in compliance with PL 106-398 (Title 10 United States Code 2166). The WHINSEC BoV met to organize itself and to gather information on the Institute’s organization, curriculum, operations, resources and activities since its activation on January 17, 2001. 4. Summary. This was the BoV’s first session after the filing of its charter on 1 February 2002 and therefore the members focused on gathering information on WHINSEC and organizing themselves. While their collective initial observation is that this institute has an important role and appears to be meeting the requirements of the authorizing legislation, the members decided to schedule their annual meeting for December 12-13, 2002 and to continue their review of WHINSEC in the interim before reporting their final observations and making any recommendations to the Secretary of the Army, the executive agent, and the Secretary of Defense. 5. Details of Session. a. The session permitted the BoV members, advisors, the executive secretariat and WHINSEC faculty and staff to get to know one another and enabled the BoV to learn about WHINSEC and its operations. The BoV received detailed briefings on the Institute’s activities since its activation on 17 January 2001; met with WHINSEC faculty, Case: 14-16432, 09/30/2016, ID: 10143409, DktEntry: 27-2, Page 3 of 20 SUBJECT: Report of Session, 3-4 June 2002 of the Board of Visitors for the Western Hemisphere Institute for Security Cooperation staff and students in discussions covering a myriad of topics; met with local post and civilian governmental officials and toured the Institute’s facilities. Members of the BoV had a very positive initial impression of the Institute. b. Ten members of the U.S. general public (including four journalists) attended various portions of this meeting. One member addressed the BoV noting his opposition to the institute and U.S foreign policy in the Hemisphere but stating that the BoV appeared focused on providing independent oversight as called for by the law. 6. Results of Session. a. The BoV decided that this session would be of organization and information gathering. It will convene for its annual meeting on December 12-13, 2002. While the BoV members observed that the Institute was meeting the requirements of the legislation, they wanted to look more deeply and broadly into the Institute’s activities before providing their formal observations and recommendations to the Secretary of Defense. b. The members elected as Chairman, Ambassador (ret) Dennis Jett and as Vice Chairman, Mr. Steven Schneebaum and approved a curriculum sub-committee with Dr. Lincoln and Dr Avant as co-chair and Ambassador Sorzano volunteering to serve and MG Speer and Deputy Assistant Secretary Fisk stating that they rwould6send , 201 e 26 temb meet and report its representation for their respective agencies. This sub-committee will Sep d on observations and recommendations to the other boardchive ar members prior to the annual 432 14-1 session. The Board also approved a liaisono.with6the WHINSEC Human Rights ,N nse Defe Committee. Vice Chairman Schneebaum will serve as the HR Liaison and attend t. of Dep Human Rights committeeesessions and report his observations to the BoV members. si v. ran cited in Ca me d. The Board decided to: (1) modify its draft By-Laws and vote them final at the annual session. The Board’s executive secretariat will assist the Board. (2) look into legislative wording to assist the Institute with its guest instructor program. (3) conduct an interim visit by the BoV Curriculum Sub-committee before the annual session. e. The DFO will file all information with the appropriate agencies and make the information available to the public as required by Army and DOD policy John C. Speedy, III DAMO-SS, Army G3 Designated Federal Official and Executive Secretary to the BoV WHINSEC Encls Dennis Jett Chairman, BoV WHINSEC Case: 14-16432, 09/30/2016, ID: 10143409, DktEntry: 27-2, Page 4 of 20 Board of Visitors Western Hemisphere Institute for Security Cooperation Annual Report and Recommendations 1-2 December 2004 1. The Board of Visitors (BoV) of the Western Hemisphere Institute for Security Cooperation (WHINSEC) convened for its annual meeting at 0900 on 1 December 2004, at WHINSEC, Building 35, Fort Benning, Georgia. In the absence of BG Kevin Ryan, Designated Federal Officer (DFO) and Executive Secretary to the Board, the meeting was called to order by the Acting DFO LTC (P) Linda Gould. 2. In accordance with the provisions of Public Law 92-463, the Federal Advisory Committees Act, the meeting was open to the public. Sessions were held on Wednesday 1 December 2004 from 0900 to approximately 1615, and on Thursday 2 December 2004 from 0900 to 1130. The agenda of the meeting is set out at Annex A. 3. The Members of the Board and their Advisors are listed in Annex B. The following Members and Advisors were present: 6 Members: , 201 er 26 temb Steven M. Schneebaum, Esq., Chair ep on S ived Charles A. Risher, Ph.D., Vice-Chair arch 2 1643 Mr. Clyde Taylor, representing Sen. o. 14- Chambliss , N Saxby ense Evelyn Farkas, Ph.D., Dept. of Def representing Sen. Carl Levin . Mr. Jim Irwin, eranesi v representing Rep. Phil Gingrey Cam in Ms. AnndNorris, representing Rep. Loretta Sanchez cite Mr. Daniel W. Fisk, Deputy Assistant Secretary of State LTG Anthony Jones, representing GEN Kevin Byrnes BG Benjamin Aponte, representing GEN Bantz Craddock Jennie Lincoln, Ph.D. (Thursday only) Ambassador (Ret.) Jose Sorzano Advisors: Louis Gatto, Ph.D. Mr. Eugene Shaw LTG (Ret.) Gordon Sumner Member Deborah Avant, Ph.D., and Advisors MAJ Kent Svendsen and Virginia Haufler, Ph.D. were unavoidably absent and sent regrets. There is one vacancy on the Board. Acting as Executive Secretariat to the Board, were COL Charles Hooper, LTC (P) Linda Gould, and Ms. Shannon Russ. 1 Case: 14-16432, 09/30/2016, ID: 10143409, DktEntry: 27-2, Page 5 of 20 The following specially invited guests attended: Mr. Roger Pardo-Maurer, Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense for International Security Affairs, Office of the Secretary of Defense. The following senior staff and faculty of WHINSEC attended the meeting: COL Gilberto Pérez, Commandant; LTC Jose Pizarro, Chief of Staff; Donald Harrington, Ph.D., Academic Dean and Contractor/Advisor to the Institute. 3. LTC (P) Gould officially convened the session, noting that this was the annual meeting of the Board described in 10 U.S.C. § 2166(e)(3), a public meeting under the Federal Advisory Committees Act. (A copy of the Federal Register announcement of the meeting is attached as Annex C.) By statute, the BoV is tasked with preparing and presenting to the Secretary of Defense, within 60 days of the annual meeting, “a written report of its activities and of its views and recommendations pertaining to the Institute.” See 10 U.S.C. § 2166(e)(5). 4. LTC (P) Gould then handed over presiding authority to the Board Chairman, Mr. Schneebaum, who asked all Members, Advisors, special guests, and others to introduce themselves. Mr. Schneebaum welcomed everyone present, especially those Members and Advisors attending their first meeting of the Board, BG Aponte and Dr. Gatto. He also thanked and commended the WHINSEC staff for its skill in organizing 6 , 201 er 26 temb transportation and accommodation for the Board. ep on S ed rchiv 32 a -164 14 (P) Gould’s reminder regarding No. nse, Defe 5. Mr. Schneebaum reiterated LTC the need to prepare a report at the end of the meeting. ptHe read the relevant statutory language to the Board. . of . De He also made a numberranesi v me of housekeeping announcements. a cited in C 6. Mr. Schneebaum reported that he had attended the ceremony in honor of the BoV’s long-serving DFO, Dr. Jack Speedy, at the Pentagon on September 10, 2004, and conveyed to Dr. Speedy on behalf of the entire Board warmest congratulations and best wishes for his retirement. The Chairman also noted that the former WHINSEC Liaison Officer (LNO), Mr. Ken LaPlante, had departed to assume a position at the Center for Hemispheric Defense Studies. He commended LTC (P) Gould and her staff for taking on the added responsibilities of having to replace two such valued and knowledgeable individuals. 7. a. The first order of business was a discussion of the venue for the spring meeting of the Board. The Chairman noted that the annual (i.e., the fall/winter) meeting of the Board will be at WHINSEC, and proposed that the spring (organizational) meeting, which will be the next meeting of the BoV, possibly in May 2005, be in Washington, D.C. Specifically, he recommended that the meeting itself be held in a committee room of one of the Houses of Congress, hosted by the relevant Board Members, and that the Members from the other House host a social event, or a dinner. b. While there was general and even enthusiastic agreement about having the spring meeting in Washington, a number of Board Members, as well as the Commandant, made 2 Case: 14-16432, 09/30/2016, ID: 10143409, DktEntry: 27-2, Page 6 of 20 the point that this change should not deter Members from making their own visits to Fort Benning during the year. The statute permits, and COL Pérez encourages, Members to visit the Institute to meet students and faculty, to attend classes and programs, and to do whatever fact-finding they wish to undertake. Only if Members actually spend time at Fort Benning, it was generally agreed, will they be in a position to give the Secretary of Defense the quality of advice and counsel that the statute requires of the Board. c. One Member of the Board proposed that selected students from the Institute attend the spring meeting, and the Commandant suggested that he would look into whether funding was available for that purpose, and whether such a trip could be accommodated into students’ schedules. There was discussion of whether a Washington meeting might provide a broader opportunity for the American public – including opponents of the Institute – to observe the BoV, and through it to learn about WHINSEC. This was generally thought to be a good thing, although one of the Board’s Advisors expressed concern that the meeting not be turned into a propaganda event. It was specifically noted that Congressional opponents might wish to attend the meeting, and there was no reason to discourage this so long as the Board’s agenda can be accomplished. d. The Commandant observed that not having to carry the logistical burden of organizing the spring meeting would be a great benefit to his staff. At the end of the discussion, LTC (P) Gould stated her conviction that it would be possible2016arrange the , to er 26 temb spring meeting in Washington, with the help of, among others,Sep Congressional the on ived Members of the Board, and that it would present public hrelations opportunities that arc 2 1643 should not be missed. It will be a challenge o. 14- something like this, but the rewards , N to do ense will be great. HQDA G-35-R Dept. of Def to work with concerned parties to select a committed . suitable date, which ameranesi communicated to Members later. will be v cited in C 8. The Chairman then called upon the Commandant to present his briefing, assisted by staff as appropriate. Before doing so, he reminded the Board that it should pay attention in particular to progress on the recommendations made at the last BoV meeting, held on 15-16 July 2004. There were four ongoing issues of significant concern: developing mechanisms for tracking the success of the Institute and the careers of its former students (“metrics”); the impact of the American Servicemember Protection Act (ASPA), in particular with respect to Article 98 agreements, on operations at the Institute; the progress of transition from the Command and General Staff Course (CGSC) curriculum to Intermediate Level Education (ILE); and the perennial question of translation of lesson plans into English. Members were encouraged to raise any questions on those subjects or any others during the briefing. 9. The Commandant of WHINSEC, COL Gilberto Pérez, then briefed the Board on developments at the Institute. A copy of his prepared outline is attached at Annex D. The highlights were the following: a. COL Pérez began with a short summary of the mission of WHINSEC and of his goals as its leader. He stressed the obligation to provide quality education in professional military and related areas, in a manner consistent with Department of Defense and U.S. 3 Case: 14-16432, 09/30/2016, ID: 10143409, DktEntry: 27-2, Page 7 of 20 Army policy, in support of the Combatant Commands for the Western Hemisphere, U.S. Southern Command (SOUTHCOM) and U.S. Northern Command (NORTHCOM). WHINSEC seeks to place the right student in the right course, and to teach them the right skills and values. b. Determining whether WHINSEC, or for that matter any educational institution, is succeeding is a complicated matter. Inherent problems in such an exercise are exacerbated here, since there are no funds, nor is there legal authority, to follow the subsequent military careers of former students on an organized basis. Nonetheless, WHINSEC has undertaken a process of Level III (external) evaluation, with one analyst already in place and another to be deployed. SOUTHCOM has a survey tool that WHINSEC is using, and there are many informal, albeit reliable, contacts through U.S. Military Group (MILGROUP) commanders and their in-country counterparts. The Commandant himself reported that he has used his own trips to Latin America as opportunities to inquire about the success and impact of former WHINSEC students. c. WHINSEC students themselves are extensively surveyed while they are on-site, and many former students have voluntarily kept in touch to provide feedback. There is, therefore, substantive information regarding how students perceive the success or failure of the course offerings. But an institutionalized, scientific, long-term “metric” is likely to 016 be elusive, for reasons both practical and legal. 26, 2 epte nS ed o mbe r rchiv d. The Commandant reported one incident of particular pride. Three of the four 32 a -164 14 Paraguayan students who attended the counter-narcotics course in August 2004 were No. nse, Defe involved, just three months afterptreturning to Paraguay, in the largest drug raid in the . of . De history of their country.ranesi v raid was conducted in full compliance with international The e Cam standards, anditbyin accounts the three WHINSEC alumni (all on the Commandant’s List c ed all at the Institute) comported themselves with professionalism and honor. Board Members noted that “success stories” like this are rarely covered in the media in the United States, and repeated their often-expressed wish that there were a way of informing the public about the good works individual WHINSEC graduates were doing after returning to their countries. e. With respect to the ILE transition, COL Pérez (assisted by LTC Ress Wilson) provided a time-line showing tasks completed and those pending. The project remains an enormously ambitious one for the entire Army, and is made even more daunting and more costly at WHINSEC, because of the need to translate teaching materials into Spanish. The Commandant reviewed the costs involved through FY 08, and the plans to have a pilot ILE syllabus in place for the academic year June 06 – June 07. f. The Commandant (and Dean Harrington) reported continuing efforts to engage the Non-Governmental Organization (NGO) community with WHINSEC. Through contacts made with the Carr Center at Harvard by Dr. Avant, invitations were extended to NGOs to visit the Institute in September and October 2004. Neither was accepted. Another effort will be made in January. In addition, NGOs have been invited to nominate candidates for the Bolivar Award, and a few of these have resulted in the submission of 4 Case: 14-16432, 09/30/2016, ID: 10143409, DktEntry: 27-2, Page 8 of 20 names. Fourteen total nominations were provided, with responses from three U.S. Embassies, and three NGOs. An NGO media conference is scheduled for 10 March 2005. g. With respect to ASPA, the Commandant reported a loss of 99 students in FY 04, from seven Latin American countries (Bolivia, Costa Rica, Ecuador, Paraguay, Peru, Uruguay, and Venezuela). More than these number of spots, however, have been reprogrammed to accommodate cadets from Honduras and El Salvador. As a result, the total number of students scheduled to take courses at WHINSEC in the coming year will be greater than had been projected, with a 10% increase over the prior year (charts provided by Eric Falls, Department of State, list student body composition by rank for 2003 and 2004: see Appendix E). The assignment of cadets from Central America represents a commitment by the Department of Defense to use International Military Education and Training (IMET) funds within the Latin American theater, as the Board had recommended in July, rather than give up funds to other regions. The negative impact, while not reflected in gross student numbers, is the loss of representatives from all the nations of the region as well as a focus on cadet-level engagement versus midlevel officers. h. On the subject of the translation of lesson plans, the Commandant was able to inform the Board that 97.5% of the pages requiring translation have now, 2016 translated. been er 26 temb This total excludes those that will become obsolete with the oILEptransition, which the n Se iv d Board had urged in July need not be translated since2they e arch will very soon no longer be 1643 . 14used. , No se t. of ep i v. D n Defe i. With respect to meranes curriculum and academic developments, COL Pérez described for Ca ed in it the Board thecefforts to engage students in learning about the U.S. electoral process in November, which apparently encountered great success. These included a pre-brief, observation of polling places, and a follow-up discussion. j. Dean Harrington presented a report on the American Council on Education (ACE) evaluation of WHINSEC in October 2004. The result was that the courses were accredited for 131 credits (an increase from 93): 17 graduate credits for CGSC (0 before), 60 upper division credits (49 before), 33 lower division credits (an increase from 28), and six vocational certificate credits (none before). This result far exceeded expectations, and is a tribute to the hard work of Dean Harrington and the faculty. The Board expressed its sincere congratulations for this outcome. k. The Commandant (with Assistant Dean Joe Leuer) reported on the Open House hosted by the Institute during the weekend of protests at Fort Benning in November. Three groups – 25 organizations, mostly composed of students and clergy, a total of 432 people – were welcomed to WHINSEC’s Pratt Hall for a presentation by a panel including a representative of the Department of State, as well as WHINSEC faculty and administration. The Commandant, the Dean, LTC (P) Gould, and Mr. Schneebaum also attended the Open House and participated in the panel. COL Pérez reported that there was a frank exchange of views, and that nothing untoward happened during the sessions. 5 Case: 14-16432, 09/30/2016, ID: 10143409, DktEntry: 27-2, Page 9 of 20 An enormous effort was invested by WHINSEC staff to transport protesters to the Institute, to monitor their presence, and to ensure generally that their experience was constructive. It was reported that there were a few unfortunate incidents in which protesters were subject to excessive scrutiny, including searches of personal belongings and questioning by officials that were perceived as intimidating, or were separated from their groups for no apparent reason. COL Pérez undertook to investigate those allegations and to ensure that no such incidents are repeated next year. The Board expressed its special gratitude to Mr. Fisk for arranging for the attendance of a State Department colleague, Mr. Paul Trevelli who, by all accounts, was an invaluable participant, presenting a cogent explanation of U.S. foreign policy in Latin America. The Board’s view was that the Open House was a good idea in principle and a success in execution, and Members generally agreed with the Commandant’s recommendation that Congressional Members consider participating next year. l. COL Pérez also briefed the Board on the increasing engagement of the Institute with U.S. Army South (USARSO), his visit to Colombia in November 2004, and, assisted by Mr. David Mize, the Director of Resource Management for WHINSEC, FY 05 finances, which included unfinanced requirements at the level of $4.76 million. Most of this ($3.9 million) reflects costs connected with the ILE conversion. Several Board Members and Advisors expressed their approval of the fiscal administration of the Institute, operating efficiently with a relatively low budget in terms of 26, 2016 per capita er tembhis trip to Colombia expenditure on students. COL Pérez informed the Board thatnduring ep o S ived he was able to speak with former graduates and their supervisors to gain an appreciation arch 2 1643 .1 of the impact of the curriculum and to evaluate4any perceived shortfalls. , No se t. of ep i v. D n Defe es m. COL Pérez completed his briefing with a charge to the Board to become more eran Cam ed in involved in the Institute through recommendations for improvements, and through cit providing information to constituencies that often have an inaccurate view of the institution and its mission. 10. After the Commandant’s briefing, the Board adjourned for lunch, at which Members and Advisors were seated at tables with WHINSEC students and faculty (with interpreters as needed), providing an opportunity for informal discussion of the experiences that Latin American military officers and their families have had during their assignment to study at WHINSEC. 11. At the opening of the afternoon session, the Chairman asked the representative of the Commander of SOUTHCOM, BG Aponte, as the major “client” agency of WHINSEC, whether SOUTHCOM was satisfied with the job the Institute was doing. BG Aponte delivered a briefing of which the prepared outline is at Annex F. His conclusions were that WHINSEC is providing valuable support to SOUTHCOM’s mission in the hemisphere. He discussed SOUTHCOM’s ongoing needs assessment, in which WHINSEC is an instrumental part. SOUTHCOM continues to seek and to receive evaluations from the various U.S. MILGROUPs in the region, and to develop mechanisms for surveying former students as well as their commanding officers. 6 Case: 14-16432, 09/30/2016, ID: 10143409, DktEntry: 27-2, Page 10 of 20 12. The Board noted with considerable disappointment that NORTHCOM was unable to send a representative to the meeting. Although NORTHCOM is not given a representative on the BoV by statute, the Board has been careful, since the institution of the new Command, to include NORTHCOM in all of its discussions, and to ensure that any special needs of NORTHCOM (including language needs) can be accommodated by the Institute. It is hoped that an officer of suitable rank will be available to attend BoV discussions in the future. 13. While there was no separate, prepared briefing by LTG Jones on behalf of the U.S. Army Training and Doctrine Command (TRADOC), LTG Jones participated actively in the discussions of the ILE transformation, describing the overall Army vision of the new educational syllabus for mid-level officers. He expressed TRADOC’s strong support for the Institute in general, and in particular for its efficiency in presenting approved training and doctrine translated into Spanish for Western Hemisphere students, as well as English materials for students from Caribbean nations. 14. The remainder of the afternoon session was dedicated to an effort to identify and discuss the issues that would form the recommendations to the Secretary of Defense, in accordance with the Board’s governing statute. The outcomes of those discussions are presented below. There was a very short briefing on WHINSEC’s physical plant, presented by CPT Rivero and CPT Mitschke, mainly to update the Board2on6 barracks , 01 er 26 temb renovation and use of a reinforced tent to house the studentsoduring the construction Sep d n period. An in-depth discussion of physical plant issueschive deferred to the spring ar was 6432 1 -1 meeting. In addition, COL Pérez introducedo.to4the Board the new Department of State ,N nse Defe representative to WHINSEC, Mr.. Michael Oreste, who has replaced Mr. Tony Interlandi. t of Dep si v. rane me in Ca 15. As provided in the Federal Register announcement of the meeting, and in conformity cited with the Federal Advisory Committees Act, the agenda called for a period of time in which members of the public were invited to address the Board. No one registered in advance to make such a presentation. At the appointed time, the Chairman asked whether there were public participants who wished to speak, and recognized Dr. Tidwell a physician and resident of Columbus, Georgia. Dr. Tidwell and his wife were two of the organizers of the God Bless Fort Benning rally, which took place at the same time as the protests in November. Dr. Tidwell commended the Board and the Institute for their work in support of a humanitarian and democratic foreign policy in Latin America. The Board then adjourned for the day. 16. The Chairman called the Board back to order at 0900 on Thursday 2 December. On behalf of the entire Board, and all friends of the Institute, Mr. Schneebaum congratulated the Acting DFO, LTC (P) Linda Gould, on her promotion to the rank of Colonel, which was officially confirmed that morning. 17. The remainder of the session was then dedicated to discussing those issues that Members felt were contentious, or that they felt should be the subjects of recommendations to the Secretary of Defense. The outcome of those conversations was as follows: 7 Case: 14-16432, 09/30/2016, ID: 10143409, DktEntry: 27-2, Page 11 of 20 a. Metrics. It was agreed that it is important for a number of reasons to be able to measure the Institute’s performance. The Secretary of Defense and the American people, have a right to know whether the Government’s investment in WHINSEC is being spent wisely. There was considerable discussion about just what it is that should be measured. At least four potentially quantifiable matters were listed: (a) the success of the Institute as an educational institution, i.e., are the courses and instructors effective, and are the students learning? (b) the extent to which the Institute is serving the objectives of the United States in the theater, i.e., is the Institute a useful vehicle to reach U.S. foreign policy objectives? (c) whether students at the Institute go on to have successful careers, i.e., have they internalized the standards of military professionalism taught at WHINSEC? and (d) whether former students at WHINSEC have properly learned the human rights lessons taught to them, i.e., are they involved in violations of human rights or international humanitarian law? While surveys and feedback mechanisms can be used before students return home, it was generally agreed that for a variety of reasons there can never be an efficient, formal means of monitoring either students’ reactions to their WHINSEC experiences, or the progress of their subsequent careers. Moreover, there are unique sensitivities connected with WHINSEC: those who, for whatever reason, mistrust the Institute already would hardly tolerate efforts to monitor the lives of foreign citizens long after26, 2016received they er temb training at Fort Benning. ep on S 64 14-1 including. other , No nse Defe 32 a e rchiv d Other educational institutions, Army institutions, have had to deal with this same problem. LTGDJones described for the Board the methods used at Fort t. of p v. e ne i Leavenworth. He stressed sthat there is a difference between two measurable facts: mera in Ca whether graduates are implicated in human rights violations, and whether they have cited progressed in their professions following their WHINSEC educations. He recommended utilization of military-to-military tracking to help determine whether training of military leaders has been successful. He noted that many graduates might progress not only in their military careers, but also in the civilian leadership of their countries. b. “Success stories.” Members noted with some frustration that opponents of the Institute have deftly managed to assign guilt to WHINSEC (or its predecessor, the School of the Americas) for every human rights violation committed by a person who once walked through the Institution’s front door, even if it was to study helicopter repair. This has deflected the focus of the public discussion of the Institute to what Members agreed was irrelevant. The real issue is whether WHINSEC is carrying out the mission that the law assigns to it. Nevertheless, Members discussed at some length whether there was any data base of “success stories,” to counter to some degree the “rogues gallery” public relations assault from the Institute’s opponents. An Advisor reminded the Board that it was dangerous to move in the direction of “taking credit” for graduates’ successes, since that is inconsistent with insisting on institutional innocence with respect to the failures. It was generally agreed, however, that it would be useful to have more accurate and more regular 8 Case: 14-16432, 09/30/2016, ID: 10143409, DktEntry: 27-2, Page 12 of 20 reporting, even if only on an anecdotal basis, of the activities of former WHINSEC students. c. ILE transition. The consensus of the Board was that the previous day’s session had exhausted the subject. d. NGO participation. The Board noted that it has continually revisited the question of how to interest NGOs in participation with WHINSEC, and virtually all efforts made by the faculty and administration have failed. A number of Members indicated that they perceived an irony here: human rights organizations appear unwilling even to visit the educational institution that they seek to close down so they can see it for themselves, choosing to rely for their information on sources that have a heavy political agenda. Other board members believe that the problems WHINSEC has had engaging the human rights community has more to do with the legacy of the School of the Americas and cultural differences between the NGO community and the military, and thus was bound to take time. Nevertheless, and regardless of the reasons for this, it was the consensus of the Board that the Institute should continue to make whatever efforts it can make to reach out to the NGO community (productive efforts to engage some NGOs through the Carr Center at Harvard are now underway), and to solicit NGO participation in Human Rights and Democracy Week, nominations for the Bolivar Award, and the like, and to take advantage of contacts and opportunities presented to it, but that it should, 2016 embark on a not er 26 temb major campaign or to spend substantial resources unless current p e circumstances change. on S ed rchiv 32 a -164 Board Members acknowledged thatsthey. 14 No themselves might be a useful resource n e, Defe have personal and professional connections the Institute in this capacity, since of ept. many i v. D anes NGOs. mer in Ca cited for with e. Protests and the Open House. The Board commended the Commandant and his staff, as well as the outside participants, for their proactive and successful strategy for responding to the protests in November. f. ASPA and Article 98 agreements. Board Members recognized quickly that they are not all in agreement on the advisability of ASPA sanctions; at the same time, they agreed that the statute is the law, and that everyone must live within it. The fact is that, as the BoV had recommended, IMET funding for Latin America has remained within the region. Seven countries that had planned to send students to WHINSEC were unable to do so. Nevertheless, WHINSEC was able to boost overall attendance, in part through an increase in attendance of cadets, rather than mid-level or non-commissioned officers, who have been WHINSEC’s traditional constituency. There was considerable discussion about the impact of ASPA sanctions on the composition of the student body. The Commandant reiterated his commitment to have the right student in the right course. His concern was not whether students were cadets, but rather whether he and his staff had the maximum flexibility and capacity to educate appropriate students, in light of the Institute’s human and financial resources. 9 Case: 14-16432, 09/30/2016, ID: 10143409, DktEntry: 27-2, Page 13 of 20 g. Translations. As the process of translating lesson plans has now been virtually completed, there was no further discussion of this issue. 18. Recommendations. After these discussions, the Board of Visitors adopted the following recommendations, to be transmitted to the Secretary of Defense: a. Metrics. The Board reluctantly acknowledges that WHINSEC cannot and, in the current state of affairs, should not attempt to track the careers of individual former students. It should continue, and indeed it should improve, the mechanisms currently in place for after-action reports and follow-up from students, using the best available techniques for gathering class feedback. The Board recommends that thought be given by the WHINSEC staff to increasing and improving its devices to obtain this kind of information. Beyond what WHINSEC can do on-site, the Board recommends that the U.S. MILGROUPs in Latin America be used, at least on an informal basis, to acquire information about the successes and failures of former WHINSEC students who have returned to their own countries. There may well be means of collecting reports from Embassies in the theater. Before the spring meeting, the BoV recommends that efforts be made by the Department of Defense to gather whatever recent information is available regarding WHINSEC 6 graduates, for dissemination to and discussion by the Board. The agenda 2for that meeting , 01 er 26 temb will include development of a more organized and institutionalized means of collecting ep on S ived that information, and making it available to the public,rcwithout editorial control. a h 432 16 . 14, No ense BoardDef t. of agreed that it is Dep b. “Success stories.” The not its institutional role to . disseminate “success meranesi v but rather to provide public oversight and to report stories,” in Ca accurate information. That said, it was the Board’s view that a proper and objective set cited of “metrics,” as discussed in paragraph (a) above, may obviate the need for a separate mechanism for disseminating “success stories.” c. ILE transition. The Board has been pleased to see that WHINSEC is being fully incorporated into the process of transition from CGSC to ILE. The Commanding General of TRADOC is to be commended for this support. The BoV recommends that this integration continue, and specifically urges the Secretary to recall the additional onus on WHINSEC, beyond the burden all of its sister institutions must bear, because of the need to translate educational materials into Spanish. If this requires additional funding for WHINSEC, then that funding should be provided. The objective is not only to retain and improve a first-class curriculum, including graduate-level professional educational opportunities for students (as has now been recognized by the American Council on Education), but to ensure that United States military officers who pursue the ILE program at WHINSEC are in no way disadvantaged in comparison with their peers who take the course at Fort Leavenworth or elsewhere. d. NGO participation. The Board believes that WHINSEC needs to review its means of reaching out to the NGO community. Years of experience demonstrate that some of the organizations that it wants to reach have their own reasons for declining any 10 Case: 14-16432, 09/30/2016, ID: 10143409, DktEntry: 27-2, Page 14 of 20 opportunity to visit the Institute, to meet with its faculty or students, or to learn about its mission. Further efforts to obtain the substantive participation of those groups is probably not a wise use of federal funding. But other organizations may be more open to engagement, and care should be taken to follow leads that may build bridges. NGOs should continue to be included in mass mailings, such as appeals for nominations for the Bolivar Award. The Institute should continue to invite representatives to participate in programs, for example in Human Rights and Democracy Week, and to act as a resource for further development of the human rights curriculum. But other than that, no additional resources should be invested in efforts to appeal to those NGOs that have made their position clear by repeated refusal to engage. New NGOs should be pursued within the discretion of the Commandant and the Dean. However, the educational mission of the Institute is the most important factor, and, in the opinion of the Board, there is no reason to go to extraordinary lengths to win support from outside organizations. Individual members of the Board of Visitors, of course, are free (and indeed are encouraged) to use their individual connections with NGOs as they see fit, and where possible should at least facilitate appropriate meetings for NGOs with WHINSEC personnel. e. Protests and the Open House. It is the sense of the Board of Visitors that WHINSEC hosted a very successful and well-executed Open House, and the Board commended the Commandant and his staff for a job well done, especially in encouraging dialogue with people who may not have had dialogue on their minds when016 came to , 2 they er 26 temb p Fort Benning. The Board was especially pleased to see that otheeDepartment of State sent nS iv d a representative capable of addressing the many questionseabout the role of WHINSEC in arch 6432 14-1 hemispheric policy. The Board recommends .that the Commandant make additional , No nse Defe efforts next year to avoid any appearance of intimidation of protesters, and that all t. of Dep si . WHINSEC staff continue etovrespect the right of protesters to peaceful expression of their eran Cam in views. The Board hopes that at least some of its Congressional Members will find time cited to attend the Open House next November. f. ASPA and Article 98 agreements. The Board noted that it is pleased with the decision to retain IMET funds in the Hemisphere, as it had previously recommended. It encourages the continuation of that policy. The Board recommends reassignment of IMET funds be made as promptly as possible, to permit WHINSEC maximum flexibility in optimizing its student load. The Board hopes that the distribution of students by country and rank/grade, will not have a negative impact on the mission of the Institute. g. Overall impression. It continues to be the view of the Board that the Western Hemisphere Institute for Security Cooperation is a success story, in terms of its diligent pursuit of its mission of teaching professional military values, including human rights and democracy. The Board offers its congratulations to COL Gilberto Pérez for his accomplishments during his first nine months in post, and looks forward to continued improvement at the Western Hemisphere Institute for Security Cooperation. 19. The statutory tasks of the Board having been completed, the Chairman returned presiding authority to the Acting Designated Federal Officer, and LTC (P) Gould adjourned the meeting of the Board of Visitors at approximately 1130, 2 December 2004. 11 Case: 14-16432, 09/30/2016, ID: 10143409, DktEntry: 27-2, Page 15 of 20 WE HEREBY CERTIFY that, to the best of our knowledge, the foregoing Report is complete and accurate. Linda L. Gould Lieutenant Colonel, United States Army Alternate Designated Federal Officer and Executive Secretary to the Board of Visitors Steven M. Schneebaum Chairman Board of Visitors Members of the Board have individually reviewed this Report, and to the extent possible, their additions and corrections have been incorporated. Under the Board’s by-laws, Members are entitled to have their own views on any subject discussed by the Board included in the Report to the Secretary. No Member indicated that he or she wished to submit such a statement. cited esi eran Cam in pt v. De o. 14 se, N efen . of D 12 32 -164 arch ived on emb Sept er 26 , 201 6 Case: 14-16432, 09/30/2016, ID: 10143409, DktEntry: 27-2, Page 16 of 20 -164 t. of cited in Ca p v. De nesi mera Def . 14 , No ense ived rch 32 a ep on S 7, 20 er 2 temb 16 Case: 14-16432, 09/30/2016, ID: 10143409, DktEntry: 27-2, Page 17 of 20 -164 t. of cited in Ca p v. De nesi mera Def . 14 , No ense ived rch 32 a ep on S 7, 20 er 2 temb 16 Case: 14-16432, 09/30/2016, ID: 10143409, DktEntry: 27-2, Page 18 of 20 -164 t. of cited in Ca p v. De nesi mera Def . 14 , No ense ived rch 32 a ep on S 7, 20 er 2 temb 16 Case: 14-16432, 09/30/2016, ID: 10143409, DktEntry: 27-2, Page 19 of 20 -164 t. of cited in Ca p v. De nesi mera Def . 14 , No ense ived rch 32 a ep on S 7, 20 er 2 temb 16 Case: 14-16432, 09/30/2016, ID: 10143409, DktEntry: 27-2, Page 20 of 20 AGENDA WHINSEC BOARD OF VISITORS MEETING Date: 21 November 2014 Location: Bradley Hall, 7301 Baltzell Ave., Bldg. 396, Fort Benning, GA 31905 TIME 08000805 08050815 08150900 09000915 09150930 09300945 09451000 10001015 10151030 10301100 11001200 ITEM NAME Designated Federal Officer (DFO) opens meeting Mr. Klippstein Introductions and welcome of new Board members, selfintroduction by other attendees, and opening remarks by the Chair Dr. Mendelson Forman WHINSEC Commandant Update COL Anthony Discussion Dr. Mendelson Forman Break Dr. Mendelson Forman State Department Western Hemisphere Update DAS Lee U.S. Northern Command Update BG Taylor U.S. Southern Command Update LTG6Tovo 201 OSD (Policy) Update o. 14 32 -164 arch ived on er 2 emb Sept ns in Public comment period as announced e, Nthe Federal Register Defe t. of ep i v. D nes 7, Mr. Earle Dr. Palacios Discussion:in Camera items to be carried forward, including Review cited Subcommittees; Proposed dates for next Board meeting; Chair and Vice Chair nominations/elections; Other matters Chair/DFO deem appropriate for consideration Dr. Mendelson Forman 12001205 Dress: Designated Federal Officer adjourns meeting Civilian – Business attire Military – ACU APPROVED BY DESIGNATED FEDERAL OFFICER: Mr. Klippstein //Original Signed// Daniel M. Klippstein Designated Federal Officer

Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.

Why Is My Information Online?