Within the 21st Century the nature of contemporary conflict has turned inward, undermining the fundamental connections which facilitate the global economy. As no conflict is capable of remaining in isolation, failed nation states and distressed geographies demand the attention of the international community, if not for the interest of the state, then at least for the continued stability of international trade and governance. Yet there is no single formula to stabilize a region and introduce mechanisms for development. The procedures of Humanitarian Intervention, Disaster Relief, Physical Reconstruction and Economic Development require complex analysis and understanding. More importantly, the linkages that exist between the population, the socio-economic landscape, the conflict, and physical geography must be approached at a variety of scales, and by a variety of methods. While the primary means to understand the essential elements of the stabilization and reconstruction process is through direct experience, it is likewise possible to misdiagnose the scale of these factors, or to fail to recognize the linkages between them.
There is also a danger to synthesizing data drawn from agency reports and journalism, to making policy assumptions and program recommendations without direct contact or experience. Nonetheless there is also a freedom, to familiarize oneself with an array of data sources, to engage multiple perspectives, and to make observations that may be otherwise missed. Ideas determined in such a manner may not be practical or possible, yet they might stimulate new ideas and discussion that in the end will lead to viable solutions for some of the worlds greatest problems.
