A proposal for demobilization would include both a recommendation for the reduction in the size of armed forces and the nature of the tasks the military should perform. A large portion of a government's security budget will be predetermined by the need to keep troops paid, fed, clothed and housed. But soldiering is one area of public sector employment, or even welfare, that has proved resistant to cuts. Countries recovering from war are saddled with the legacy of large standing armies and their experience of demobilization is indicative of the general problems associated with tackling troop levels. A peace process however does provide the opportunity to start a rationalizing procedure.
Demobilization is a risky enterprise, particularly in post-conflict scenarios.
But properly managed it can, as in the case of Uganda following a government request to the World bank, help bring military expenditure into line with other spending priorities. A basket of measures involving land availability, community-based training programs, veterans associations and a clearly articulated plan with defined objectives are critical. External funding support shapes the course of events on the ground. The Bretton Woods institutions have recently begun to directly support demobilization and reintegration projects as a valid investment in development. However, equally critical to the long-term viability of the peace process are the impact of structural adjustment and stabilization programs, impacting on the government's ability to sustain reintegration initiatives.