GAO-07-416R Section 1206 Assistance 

United States Government Accountability Office

Washington, DC 20548 

February 28, 2007 

 The Honorable Richard G. Lugar 

Ranking Minority Member 

Committee on Foreign Relations 

United States Senate 

Subject: Section 1206 Security Assistance Program—Findings on Criteria, 

Coordination, and Implementation

Dear Senator Lugar: 

Section 1206 of the National Defense Authorization Act of 2006 established a new 

program that gives the Department of Defense (DOD) the authority to spend up to 

$200 million of its own appropriations to train and equip foreign militaries to 

undertake counterterrorism or stability operations.1

 Department of State (State) and 

DOD officials have cited the importance of this program in building capacity among 

partner nations to help fight the global war on terror. Moreover, they believe that 

compared with traditional security assistance programs funded by State, Section 1206 

assistance will provide greater flexibility to respond quickly to emerging threats and 

opportunities. However, some believe that such a program should be funded in the 

foreign affairs budget, which is administered by State, to ensure that the Secretary of 

State has the authority to manage foreign policy decisions and bilateral relationships. 

To address your questions about the new Section 1206 security assistance program, 

we examined (1) what criteria State and DOD use to select recipient countries and 

types of assistance, (2) how State and DOD coordinate the formulation and approval 

of Section 1206 programs, and (3) how State and DOD implement Section 1206 

programs. As part of our audit work, we interviewed State and DOD headquarters 

officials involved in the Section 1206 program and officials involved in formulating 

fiscal year 2006 proposals at embassies and combatant commands. We also reviewed 

the program’s authorizing legislation and State and DOD guidance. We briefed your 

staff on our findings on December 14, 2006. See Enclosure I for a copy of the briefing 

slides, which we have updated based on technical comments provided by DOD and 

State. 

Background 

Section 1206 of the National Defense Authorization Act of 2006 authorizes DOD to 

provide equipment, supplies, or training to a foreign country to build its capacity to 

 

1

National Defense Authorization Act of 2006, Pub. L. No. 109-163, § 1206. 119 Stat. 3136, 3456-58 (2006). 
Page 2 GAO-07-416R Section 1206 Assistance 

 

(1) conduct counterterrorism operations or (2) participate in or support stability 

operations in which the U.S. military also participates.2

 The law limits the provision 

of assistance to a foreign country’s national military forces,3

 which State and DOD 

have interpreted to mean units under the ministry of defense, not interior. The law 

also states that no country may receive Section 1206 assistance if it is prohibited from 

receiving similar assistance under other laws.4

 Further, the Secretary of Defense, in 

coordination with the Secretary of State, must notify Congress no less than 15 days 

before initiating activities in any country.5

 Additionally, State and DOD must jointly 

formulate all projects and coordinate their implementation.6 

The National Defense Authorization Act of 2007 increased the annual funding 

authority from $200 million to $300 million and extended the program for an 

additional year until the end of fiscal year 2008.7

 It also delegated approval authority 

from the President to the Secretary of Defense, with Secretary of State concurrence.8 

State and DOD officials interpret the term “concurrence” to mean that the Secretary 

of State, along with the Secretary of Defense, must approve all projects. 

In fiscal year 2006--the first year of the Section 1206 program--DOD and State 

approved a total of about $100 million for nine projects involving 15 countries (see 

encl. II for a description of the projects and a list of the participating countries).9

 This 

assistance was used primarily for equipment to improve the counterterrorism 

capabilities of recipient countries. For some countries, Section 1206 assistance 

represented a significant dollar increase in fiscal year 2006 over U.S. security 

assistance provided through the traditional State-funded programs.10 DOD’s Defense 

Security Cooperation Agency (DSCA) directs, administers, and supervises the 

execution of all security assistance programs, including Section 1206 assistance. 

Summary 

State and DOD select Section 1206 projects based on criteria established in the 

authorizing legislation and departmental guidance to combatant commands and 

embassies. State and DOD reviewers stated that they examine all proposals to ensure 

that no country participates in a Section 1206 project if it is ineligible to receive 

security assistance under other U.S. laws. Reviewers also stated that they reject 

proposals involving assistance to units under the authority of the ministry of interior 

rather than the ministry of defense. State and DOD guidance requires embassies and 

2

§ 1206. 

3

Id.

4

Id. 

5

Id.

6

Id.

7

John Warner National Defense Authorization Act of 2007, Pub. L. No. 109-364, 120 Stat. 2083, 2418 

(2006). 

8

Id.

9

The Section 1206 project involving Thailand was canceled, and other security assistance programs 

were suspended, following the September 19, 2006, coup d'etat in that country. 10State-funded security assistance programs include the Foreign Military Financing (FMF) program, 

which provides grants and loans to foreign governments for the acquisition of U.S. defense equipment, 

services, and training, and the International Military Education and Training (IMET) program, which 

provides training to foreign military and related civilian personnel. 
Page 3 GAO-07-416R Section 1206 Assistance 

 

combatant commands to explain how their proposals support U.S. national security 

objectives and address urgent or emerging threats or opportunities. Proposals also 

must explain whether other sources of funds are available and how the project will 

be sustained in future years. Additionally, in considering proposals involving their 

host country, the embassy country team and ambassador typically weigh such factors 

as compatibility of the proposed project with U.S. foreign policy goals and the partner 

country’s willingness to participate in the project and ability to absorb the assistance. 

State and DOD have developed a coordinated process for jointly reviewing and 

selecting proposals for Section 1206 projects; however, coordination in formulating 

proposals did not occur consistently between combatant commands and embassy 

country teams. Once project proposals are received from combatant commands and 

embassies, several State and DOD offices or bureaus examine all proposals and then 

meet to jointly decide which ones they recommend for funding. A final list of 

projects is presented concurrently to the Secretaries of Defense and State for their 

approval. DOD fiscal year 2007 guidance to combatant commands specifies that 

programs must be developed jointly with embassy country teams and that 

ambassadors should have full knowledge of proposed projects from their inception. 

However, we found that for projects funded in fiscal year 2006 prior to the issuance 

of formal guidance, this coordination occurred in only 5 of 14 instances before 

proposals were submitted for joint DOD and State review.11 In 9 of the 14 instances, 

coordination efforts took place before the departments notified Congress about the 

proposals. Ultimately, no project would be implemented without the support of the 

ambassador, according to State and DOD officials. The combatant commands and 

embassies we contacted reported better coordination in the formulation of fiscal year 

2007 proposals. They attributed this improvement to having more time to develop 

proposals and more explicit guidance from State and DOD.

DOD’s DSCA and security assistance officers at embassies implement Section 1206 

assistance using the same processes established for other traditional State-funded 

security assistance programs. For example, for each equipment transfer to a partner 

country, DSCA establishes the terms and conditions of the transfer and provides 

fiscal oversight. At the embassy, the security assistance officer is the primary point of 

contact to ensure delivery to and proper use by the recipient country. According to 

embassy and combatant command officials we contacted, DOD and State meet the 

requirement to coordinate implementation of Section 1206 projects through embassybased security assistance officers, who report to both their combatant commanders 

and ambassadors. 

11Although 15 countries were included in projects selected for funding in fiscal year 2006, Nigeria 

participated in two different projects, resulting in 16 instances in which coordination should have 

occurred. During the course of our work, we were unable to contact knowledgeable officials at two 

embassies. Consequently, we were only able to determine if coordination occurred in 14 instances. 
Page 4 GAO-07-416R Section 1206 Assistance 

Agency Comments

We provided a draft of this report to the Departments of Defense and State, both of 

which provided technical comments that we incorporated as appropriate. In 

commenting on our draft, State and DOD agreed with our finding that their efforts to 

jointly formulate Section 1206 proposals improved for fiscal year 2007. They also 

stated that they expect continued improvement as they gain more experience with 

this program. 

Scope and Methodology 

To answer our three research questions, we examined the nine Section 1206 projects 

selected for funding in fiscal year 2006. (See encl. II for a description of the projects 

and a list of the 15 participating countries.) We interviewed officials from combatant 

commands and U.S. embassies responsible for these projects and also interviewed 

State and DOD officials that participated in the joint review and implementation 

process. At DOD, we interviewed officials in the Office of the Secretary of Defense, 

the Joint Staff, the Defense Security Cooperation Agency, and the Office of General 

Counsel. At the State Department, we interviewed officials in the Bureau of PoliticalMilitary Affairs, regional bureaus, the Bureau of Legal Affairs, the Office of the 

Director of Foreign Assistance (F Bureau), and the Office of the Coordinator for 

Counterterrorism (S/CT). Lastly, we reviewed the National Defense Authorization 

Acts of 2006 and 2007 and consulted State and DOD guidance for submitting Section 

1206 proposals. Although the Thailand project was canceled, we included it in our 

assessment of coordination between the embassies and the combatant commands. 

We conducted our review from September 2006 to February 2007 in accordance with 

generally accepted auditing standards. 

------------------------------------- 

As agreed with your staff, unless you publicly announce the contents of this report 

earlier, we plan no further distribution until 5 days from the report date. At that time, 

we will send copies of this report to the Secretaries of Defense and State and 

interested congressional committees. We will also make copies available to others on 

request. In addition, the report will be available at no charge on the GAO Web site at 

http://www.gao.gov. 

If you or your staff have any questions concerning this report, please contact me at 

(202) 512-8979 or christoffj@gao.gov. Contact points for our Offices of Congressional 
Page 5 GAO-07-416R Section 1206 Assistance 

Relations and Public Affairs may be found on the last page of this report. Key 

contributors to this report include Muriel Forster, Assistant Director; Lynn Cothern; 

Howard Cott; Martin De Alteriis; Drew Lindsey; and Grace Lui. 

Sincerely yours, 

Joseph A. Christoff 

Director, International Affairs and Trade 

Enclosures 
Page 6 GAO-07-416R Section 1206 Assistance 

Enclosure I 

1

Section 1206 Security Assistance

Briefing for Senate Foreign Relations 

Committee Staff

December 14, 2006
Page 7 GAO-07-416R Section 1206 Assistance 

Enclosure I 

2

Objectives and Methodology

Objectives

• What criteria do State and DOD use to select recipient countries and types of

assistance?

• How do State and DOD coordinate on formulation and approval of Section 1206 

programs?

• How do State and DOD implement Section 1206 programs?

Methodology

• Interviews with the 4 combatant commands (COCOMs) and 13 of the 15 U.S. embassies

involved in projects selected for FY06 funding

• Interviews with State and DOD officials involved in the joint review and implementation 

process, including OSD, the Joint Staff, DSCA, OGC, State PM and regional bureaus,

State Legal Advisor (L), the Office of the Director of Foreign Assistance (F), and the 

Office of the Coordinator for Counterterrorism (S/CT) 

• Review of State and DOD guidance for submitting proposals
Page 8 GAO-07-416R Section 1206 Assistance 

Enclosure I 

3

Summary of Findings

• Departments reported that decisions on proposals were based on criteria in law and 

guidance

• State and DOD have a coordinated process for reviewing and approving proposals

• Level of coordination between COCOMs and embassies to formulate proposals varied in FY06 and appears to have improved in FY07

• FY07 guidance emphasizes coordination between COCOMs and embassies

• 1206 programs will be implemented in the same manner as the Foreign Military Financing 

(FMF) program

• Implementation will be coordinated through Security Assistance Officers (SAOs) at embassies
Page 9 GAO-07-416R Section 1206 Assistance 

Enclosure I 

4

Background

Section 1206 of the FY06 National 

Defense Authorization Act

• Equipment, supplies, or training may be provided to a foreign 

country’s national military forces to build capacity for 

counterterrorist operations or military/stability operations in which 

the U.S. military participates

• May not be used to provide assistance to any country otherwise 

prohibited from receiving such assistance under other laws

• DOD and State jointly formulate and coordinate on

implementation

• Congressional notification is required not less than 15 days

before initiating assistance in any country
Page 10 GAO-07-416R Section 1206 Assistance 

Enclosure I 

5

Background

Changes in the FY07 Authorization

• Approval authority delegated to Secretary of Defense, with 

concurrence from Secretary of State

• Annual authorization increased from $200 million to $300 

million

• Extended authority through FY08

• Source of funds broadened to DOD O & M (which includes 

all services’ O & M funds)
Page 11 GAO-07-416R Section 1206 Assistance 

Enclosure I 

6

Background

Section 1206 FY06-Funded Programs

Source: GAO analysis of State and DOD agency data

1 When the Thailand project was cancelled because of a coup, $5.3 million had already been contracted for equipment. According to DSCA, the disposition of this equipment

had not been determined as of 11/28/06.

2 The Caribbean Basin 1206 Project supports Operation Enduring Friendship, which was first funded through FMF in FY06 and which provides support to countries in Central 

America and the Caribbean to combat transnational crime and terrorism.

Section 1206 Project Country Combatant Command

(COCOM)

Expected Equipment Delivery

Completion Date

FY06 Section 1206 

Funds Obligated

FY06 FMF 

Funding Estimate

Pakistan: Improving Counterterrorism Strike Capabilities Pakistan CENTCOM September 2007 $23,315,456 $297,000,000

Yemen: Countering Cross-Border Terrorist Activity Yemen CENTCOM June 2008 $4,291,374 $8,415,000

Lebanon: Reducing Hezbollah's Operational Space Lebanon CENTCOM June 2008 $10,489,390 $990,000

Nigeria $990,000

Sao Tome & Principe $0

Morocco $12,375,000

Algeria $0

Senegal $495,000

Nigeria $990,000

Chad $0

Tunisia $8,415,000

Indonesia: Securing Strategic Sea Lanes Indonesia PACOM August 2008 $18,409,520 $990,000

Sri Lanka: Reducing Ungoverned Maritime Spaces Sri Lanka PACOM June 2007 $10,883,283 $990,000

Thailand: Securing Strategic Sea Lanes1 Thailand PACOM On hold $5,300,000 $1,485,000

Dominican Republic $941,000

Panama $990,000

Operation Enduring Friendship2 $3,960,000

9 approved projects 15 countries 4 unified commands N/A $100,095,290 $338,036,000

Caribbean Basin: Forward Defense of the U.S. Homeland SOUTHCOM June 2007 $14,406,267

EUCOM March 2007 $6,200,000

Gulf of Guinea: Countering Threats to U.S. Energy Security EUCOM September 2007 $6,800,000

Trans-Sahara African Countries: Securing the Region Against 

Terrorists
Page 12 GAO-07-416R Section 1206 Assistance 

Enclosure I 

7

Background

Timeline for Project Submission and 

Approval in FY07

• 31 Jul Tasking for proposal development

• 15 Oct COCOMs and embassies submit proposals to DOD and State

• 13 & 20 Nov Review Board meetings

• 15 Feb SecDef approval with SecState concurrence

• 1 Mar Begin oversight committee briefs; funding sources identified

• 15 Mar LOAs complete

• 15 Apr Congressional notification complete; contracting begins
Page 13 GAO-07-416R Section 1206 Assistance 

Enclosure I 

8

Selection Criteria

Legislation and State and DOD Guidance Provide Criteria 

for Selecting Programs

• Proposals assessed on whether legal criteria are met and whether they are executable by

end of fiscal year 

• Guidance interpreting the law states that assistance may only be for forces under 

authority of the ministry of defense

• Proposals assessed for linkage with objectives in DOD Security Cooperation Guidance

and National Military Strategic Plan for War on Terrorism

• Programs should address time-sensitive, emerging threats or opportunities that cannot

wait upon the normal budget process

• Proposals should explain how assistance would be sustained in future years
Page 14 GAO-07-416R Section 1206 Assistance 

Enclosure I 

9

Selection Criteria

Section 1206 Proposals Also Considered for Compatibility 

with other Assistance Projects and Foreign Policy Goals

• State Political-Military Affairs Bureau evaluates proposals in the context of other 

security assistance programs provided to each country (e.g., FMF, IMET)

• As of FY07, State’s Office of Director of U.S. Foreign Assistance reviews 

proposals for compatibility with all other U.S. assistance in each country

• State regional bureaus prioritize proposals for the countries within their region

and assess whether proposals are compatible with overall foreign policy for

those countries

• Ambassadors consider whether proposals would be supported by partner

countries and if proposals are consistent with embassies’ strategic goals
Page 15 GAO-07-416R Section 1206 Assistance 

Enclosure I 

10

State / DOD Review

Approval

SecState

SecDef

Proposals by:

•Embassies

•COCOMS and 

Services

CounterTerrorism

Proposals

Stability 

Operations 

Proposals

Final Approval

President

Congressional

notification 

required within 15

days of program

initiation

Informal Congressional

consultation

Programmatic Constraints

Policy Priorities

• Security Cooperation

Guidance

• WOT Plans

Legal Constraints

Vetting Criteria

State

•PM

•Regional Desks

•Legal (L/FA)

•S/CT

DOD

• OSD Policy

• OSD Comptroller

•Joint Staff

•Services

•DSCA

•OGC

DOD/State Coordination

FY06 Proposal Submission and Approval 

Process Built in State and DOD Coordination

Note: For FY07, State included the Office of Director

of U.S. Foreign Assistance in the review process; 

presidential approval is no longer required. Source: DOD
Page 16 GAO-07-416R Section 1206 Assistance 

Enclosure I 

11

State / DOD Review

Programmatic Constraints

Policy Priorities

• Security Cooperation

Guidance

• WOT Plans

Legal Constraints

Vetting Criteria

State

•PM

•Regional Desks

•F Bureau

•Legal (L/FA)

•S/CT

DOD

•OSD Policy

•OSD Comptroller

•Joint Staff

•Services

•DSCA

•OGC

DOD/State Coordination

State and DOD Developed a Coordinated Process for

Reviewing Proposals

•State and DOD staff review and prioritize

all proposals regardless of origin

•Senior State and DOD officials meet to 

approve vetted proposals to present to 

the Secretaries of Defense and State

•78 proposals submitted for FY07 at a 

total cost of about $800 million

Source: DOD
Page 17 GAO-07-416R Section 1206 Assistance 

Enclosure I 

12

DOD/State Coordination

Coordination Between COCOMs and Embassies 

Appears to Have Improved in FY07

Source: GAO analysis of State and DOD agency data

Country FY06 Projects Combatant Command

(COCOM)

Proposal Origin

(FY06)

Coordination Before

Joint Review Process 

(FY06)

Coordination Before

Notifying Congress

(FY06)

Improved

Coordination for

FY07?

Lebanon Reducing Hezbollah's Operational Space CENTCOM COCOM YES YES YES

Pakistan Improving Counterterrorism Strike Capabilities CENTCOM COCOM YES YES YES

Yemen Countering Cross-Border Terrorist Activity CENTCOM COCOM YES YES MIXED

Algeria Trans-Sahara African Countries: Securing the Region Against 

Terrorists EUCOM COCOM NO NO NO

Chad Trans-Sahara African Countries: Securing the Region Against 

Terrorists EUCOM COCOM NO NO YES

Nigeria (1) Trans-Sahara African Countries: Securing the Region Against 

Terrorists EUCOM COCOM NO NO YES

Nigeria (2) Countering Threats to U.S. Energy Security EUCOM COCOM NO YES YES

Sao Tome & Principe Countering Threats to U.S. Energy Security EUCOM COCOM NO YES YES

Senegal Trans-Sahara African Countries: Securing the Region Against 

Terrorists EUCOM COCOM NO NO YES

Indonesia Securing Strategic Sea Lanes PACOM COCOM YES YES YES

Sri Lanka Reducing Ungoverned Maritime Spaces PACOM COCOM YES YES YES

Thailand Securing Strategic Sea Lanes PACOM Embassy NO YES No FY07 Proposal

Dominican Republic Caribbean Basin: Forward Defense of the U.S. Homeland SOUTHCOM COCOM NO NO YES

Panama Caribbean Basin: Forward Defense of the U.S. Homeland SOUTHCOM COCOM NO YES YES

Morocco Trans-Sahara African Countries: Securing the Region Against 

Terrorists EUCOM COCOM

Tunisia Trans-Sahara African Countries: Securing the Region Against 

Terrorists EUCOM COCOM

15 countries

(16 cases) 9 approved projects 4 COCOMs 15 COCOMs,

1 embassy

5 of 14

cases

9 of 14

cases

10 of 12

countries with FY07

proposals

Embassy contact was unable to identify staff

familiar with Section 1206 project

No response from embassy
Page 18 GAO-07-416R Section 1206 Assistance 

Enclosure I 

13

DOD/State Coordination

Coordination Between COCOMs and Embassies 

Appears to Have Improved in FY07

•Lebanon: The SAO at the embassy developed FY06 and FY07

proposals with ambassador support before submission by CENTCOM 

for joint review.

•Pakistan: The SAO at the embassy developed FY06 and FY07 

proposals with ambassador support before submission by CENTCOM. 

The embassy also submitted the FY07 proposal through State

Department channels.

•Yemen: The SAO at the embassy developed the FY06 and FY07 

proposals in coordination with the embassy pol-econ officer. The ambassador supported the proposals before CENTCOM submitted

them for joint review.

-- The Combined Joint Task Force-Horn of Africa in Djibouti developed a regional FY07 proposal involving Yemen. The embassy was not aware of this proposal until after submission by CENTCOM.

•CENTCOM officials stated that, except for the regional proposal, SAOs at the embassies developed all FY07 proposals, which would ensure coordination with State since they are part of embassy country teams.

CENTCOM
Page 19 GAO-07-416R Section 1206 Assistance 

Enclosure I 

14

DOD/State Coordination

Coordination Between COCOMs and Embassies 

Appears to Have Improved in FY07

•Algeria: EUCOM did not brief embassy staff on the FY06 Trans-Sahara proposal until September 27, 2006, at which point the embassy rejected Algeria’s participation because of diplomatic concerns. 

•Chad: EUCOM did not brief embassy staff on the FY06 Trans-Sahara proposal until after it had been approved and funded. The SAO at the embassy voiced concerns about the proposal and is awaiting a status report from EUCOM. 

•Nigeria (Gulf of Guinea): The proposal resulted from an existing maritime security initiative, in which the Ambassador was involved. EUCOM briefed the ambassador on the 1206 proposal after submission.

•Nigeria (Trans-Sahara): EUCOM did not brief embassy staff on the proposal until August 2006, and the embassy is awaiting an update from EUCOM. 

•Sao Tome and Principe: Embassy did not know about the Gulf of Guinea program involving Sao Tome and Principe until after EUCOM submitted the proposal for review. EUCOM briefed embassy about proposal in June 2006 and gained support from ambassador before congressional notification. 

•Senegal: EUCOM did not brief embassy staff on the Trans-Sahara proposal until October 2006, at which point the embassy cited concerns about the project’s sustainability. The embassy is waiting to hear from EUCOM about how it will address these issues. 

•EUCOM officials stated that, for FY07, they provided documentation of coordination and evidence of ambassador support for all proposals, as instructed in FY07 guidance. 

--Embassy staff from Chad, Nigeria, Sao Tome and Principe, and Senegal said that EUCOM coordinated with the embassy prior to submitting FY07 proposals.

EUCOM
Page 20 GAO-07-416R Section 1206 Assistance 

Enclosure I 

15

DOD/State Coordination

Coordination Between COCOMs and Embassies 

Appears to Have Improved in FY07

•Thailand: The SAO and political officer worked together to develop the FY06 proposal within 24 hours. They briefed PACOM after they submitted the proposal through State Department channels. 

•Indonesia: The SAO developed the FY06 proposal in coordination with the embassy’s pol-mil officer and forwarded it to PACOM for 

submission with the ambassador’s endorsement. The SAO kept the 

ambassador informed throughout the process. 

•Sri Lanka: The SAO developed the FY06 proposal and submitted it to 

PACOM with the support of the ambassador. During the development 

of the proposal, the SAO briefed the ambassador and deputy chief of 

mission during weekly country team meetings. 

•PACOM held a September 2006 planning meeting in Manila attended 

by SAOs and State pol-mil officers from several embassies to develop the regional proposal with support of embassies and PACOM before submission for joint review.

•All three embassies characterized coordination as effective in the

development of an FY07 regional maritime security proposal. 

PACOM
Page 21 GAO-07-416R Section 1206 Assistance 

Enclosure I 

16

DOD/State Coordination

Coordination Between COCOMs and Embassies 

Appears to Have Improved in FY07

•Dominican Republic: The FY06 proposal involving the Dominican Republic provides funding for an existing maritime security initiative in the Caribbean known as “Enduring Friendship.” The embassy supports 

Enduring Friendship but was not aware of the FY06 Section1206 

proposal to provide funding for it. SOUTHCOM briefed the embassy in September 2006, after congressional notification. 

•Panama: The FY06 proposal involving Panama provides funding for 

the Enduring Friendship maritime security initiative. The SAO and 

ambassador had prior knowledge of the Enduring Friendship initiative, 

but they did not learn of the FY06 1206 proposal related to this initiative until June. The embassy supported the project once they 

learned about it. 

•SOUTHCOM: SOUTHCOM tasked SAOs to oversee development of

FY07 proposals and coordinate with embassy country teams to ensure that ambassadors supported proposals before submission.

SOUTHCOM
Page 22 GAO-07-416R Section 1206 Assistance 

Enclosure I 

17

DOD/State Coordination

Coordination Between COCOMs and Embassies 

Appears to Have Improved in FY07

• COCOMs and embassies had more time to formulate 

proposals in FY07 (two months compared to one or two 

weeks in FY06)

• FY07 guidance and template for submitting proposals 

emphasized coordination between COCOMs and State 

entities in the field and asked for documentation of

coordination
Page 23 GAO-07-416R Section 1206 Assistance 

Enclosure I 

18

Program Implementation

1206 Programs Will be Implemented in

Same Manner as FMF Program

• DSCA will establish an FMS case for equipment to be provided as it would 

under the FMF program

• DSCA uses unique 1206 code for fiscal tracking

• SAOs at embassies will implement 1206 programs along with other 

security assistance programs

• Embassies will apply same human rights vetting procedures to 1206 as to

other programs

• SAOs will coordinate implementation with embassy and COCOM

• No 1206-specific agency guidance on assessment

• 1206 programs would likely be included in existing embassy and

COCOM assessments of security goals 
Page 24 GAO-07-416R Section 1206 Assistance 

Enclosure I 

19

Concluding Observations

• State and DOD appear to have developed a coordinated

process for reviewing and approving proposals

• Discussions with COCOMs and embassies indicated that

coordination improved in FY07

• Poor coordination was more common for regional proposals

• Too soon for assessment of 1206 program’s impact on

security cooperation and foreign policy goals
 Enclosure II 

 

Section 1206 Fiscal Year 2006 Project Descriptions 

(Dollars in millions)

Project name Countries 

involved Project description/Objectives 

Caribbean Basin: Forward Defense 

of the U.S. Homeland ($14.4) 

Dominican 

Republic, 

Panama

Provides interoperable communications and computers

with training and technical support to establish a joint 

maritime command, control, and communications

architecture to support counterterrorism operations. 

Gulf of Guinea: Countering Threats 

to U.S. Energy Security ($6.8) 

Nigeria, 

Sao Tome and 

Principe 

Establishes a Regional Maritime Awareness Capability 

through the use of commercially available equipment;

promotes stability and enhances counterterrorism 

capabilities. 

Indonesia: Securing Strategic Sea 

Lanes ($18.4) Indonesia

Assists in developing an Integrated Maritime Surveillance 

System to support maritime security in Indonesia, 

including the Malacca Strait, and facilitates

counterterrorism operations.

Lebanon: Reducing Hezbollah’s 

Operational Space ($10.5) Lebanon 

Helps the Lebanese Armed Forces bolster the government

of Lebanon’s ability to exert control over its territory and 

reduce the operational space of militias such as

Hezbollah. 

Pakistan: Improving 

Counterterrorism Strike

Capabilities ($23.3) 

Pakistan 

Helps develop integrated rotary wing assets capable of 

expediting the receipt, analysis, and dissemination of

intelligence. Facilitates the rapid planning and execution 

of Pakistani counterterrorist special operations raids in

the Federally Administered Tribal Areas and border 

region to fight terrorists and anti-coalition militants. 

Sri Lanka: Reducing Ungoverned

Maritime Spaces ($10.9) Sri Lanka 

Promotes the development of a Counterterrorism 

Maritime Security Capability. 

Thailand: Securing Strategic 

Sea Lanes ($5.3) Thailand 

Helps establish an intelligence fusion hub critically

located on the Andaman Sea to support Royal Thai Navy 

operations and enhance counterterrorism capabilities.a

Trans-Sahara African Countries: 

Securing the Region Against 

Terrorists ($6.2)

Algeria, Chad, 

Morocco, 

Nigeria, Senegal, 

Tunisia 

Helps develop a secure multinational information sharing

network to share and store information effectively. 

Enables countries to act on information that is essential to 

disrupt and attack terrorist networks, and conduct peace 

and security operations. 

Yemen: Countering Cross-Border 

Terrorist Activity ($4.3) Yemen 

Helps increase the capability of the Yemeni Armed Forces

to prevent cross-border arms trafficking and helps 

suppress terrorist activity.

Source: DOD 

a

This project was canceled in September 2006 because of a coup in Thailand. When the project was canceled, $5.3

million had already been contracted for equipment. According to the Defense Security Cooperation Agency, the

disposition of this equipment had not been determined. 

(320453) 

Page 25 GAO-07-416R Section 1206 Assistance
This is a work of the U.S. government and is not subject to copyright protection in the

United States. It may be reproduced and distributed in its entirety without further

permission from GAO. However, because this work may contain copyrighted images or

other material, permission from the copyright holder may be necessary if you wish to

reproduce this material separately. 
GAO’s Mission The Government Accountability Office, the audit, evaluation and 

investigative arm of Congress, exists to support Congress in meeting its 

constitutional responsibilities and to help improve the performance and 

accountability of the federal government for the American people. GAO 

examines the use of public funds; evaluates federal programs and policies; 

and provides analyses, recommendations, and other assistance to help

Congress make informed oversight, policy, and funding decisions. GAO’s 

commitment to good government is reflected in its core values of 

accountability, integrity, and reliability. 

The fastest and easiest way to obtain copies of GAO documents at no cost

is through GAO’s Web site (www.gao.gov). Each weekday, GAO posts 

newly released reports, testimony, and correspondence on its Web site. To

have GAO e-mail you a list of newly posted products every afternoon, go 

to www.gao.gov and select “Subscribe to Updates.” 

The first copy of each printed report is free. Additional copies are $2 each. 

A check or money order should be made out to the Superintendent of 

Documents. GAO also accepts VISA and Mastercard. Orders for 100 or 

more copies mailed to a single address are discounted 25 percent. Orders 

should be sent to: 

U.S. Government Accountability Office 

441 G Street NW, Room LM 

Washington, D.C. 20548 

To order by Phone: Voice: (202) 512-6000 

TDD: (202) 512-2537 

Fax: (202) 512-6061 

Contact: 

Web site: www.gao.gov/fraudnet/fraudnet.htm

E-mail: fraudnet@gao.gov

Automated answering system: (800) 424-5454 or (202) 512-7470 

Gloria Jarmon, Managing Director, JarmonG@gao.gov (202) 512-4400 

U.S. Government Accountability Office, 441 G Street NW, Room 7125 

Washington, D.C. 20548 

Paul Anderson, Managing Director, AndersonP1@gao.gov (202) 512-4800

U.S. Government Accountability Office, 441 G Street NW, Room 7149 

Washington, D.C. 20548 

Obtaining Copies of 

GAO Reports and 

Testimony

Order by Mail or Phone 

To Report Fraud,

Waste, and Abuse in 

Federal Programs 

Congressional 

Relations 

Public Affairs 

PRINTED ON RECYCLED PAPER