not something the APRM can create on its own, but it could assist in providing a platform to such nascent institutions, such as emerging chambers of commerce – especially those representing the smaller firms, which are most vulnerable to harassment. A modest contribution that the APRM could make is to actively seek out such business associations, and canvass their views on state of the business environment and corresponding governance matters. At the very least, this should enhance their profile and give them some experience of engaging in policy debates. building a strong military such that ―lowering military expenditures‖ became one of the principles to guide the Conference on Security, Stability, Development and Cooperation (CSSDA).69 Finally, it is notable that this section is related to Bottlenecks no. 10 (non-responsive civil service) and no. 11 (attacks on democracy and governance). What the APRM does about weak states and institutions The APRM questionnaire asks about the conditions that generate conflict. Under Objective 3 on ‗Prevention and Management of Intra- and Inter-State Conflicts‘, it asks: Bottleneck 3: Weak States and Institutions   Concept Moreover, since these issues have implications for all aspects of socio-political life, actual evidence is spread throughout the CRRs. The APRM standards deal with this matter often only indirectly, but because some of them deal with security matters in some detail, they have a bearing on this specific bottleneck. The relevant standards include:  AU, NEPAD Declaration on Democracy, Political, Economic and Corporate Governance (2002, Durban, South Africa)  AU, Protocol Relating to the Establishment of the Peace and Security Council of the African Union (2002, Durban, South Africa)  OAU, Declaration and Plan of Action on Drug Control, Abuse and Illicit Drug Trafficking in Africa (1996, Yaoundé, Cameroon)  OAU, Declaration of the Assembly of Heads of State and Government on the Establishment within the OAU of a Mechanism for Conflict Prevention, Management and Resolution (1993, Cairo, Egypt)  OAU, Declaration on the Framework for an OAU Response to Unconstitutional Changes of Government (2000, Lomé, Togo) Although the title may appear broad, this bottleneck is in fact largely limited to the capacity of states to deal with security threats, focusing on state security services. Robust institutions are an essential part of state capacity to deal with and resolve conflict, to resist threats to its security, to enforce law and order, and to implement national policy. As President Museveni observed:68 Threats to international peace and security often come from the world‘s weakest states. Such countries can fall prey to and spawn a host of transnational security threats, including terrorism, weapons proliferation, organized crime, infectious disease, environmental degradation, and civil conflicts that spill over borders. … Therefore, Army building is very important especially for countries living in turbulent areas. This is important for governance and rebuilding of economies emerging from conflicts like ours. While the robustness of all institutions is important, the key reference point in President Museveni‘s analysis is the state of the national security apparatus – its military, security and law enforcement agencies. This is important, since dysfunction in these institutions poses a disproportionate impact on the wellbeing of citizens. Incapable or ill-disciplined security forces not only undermine the shield from society; they can also turn into a threat to the societies they are meant to protect. 69 It is instructive to observe here that, when the so-called Kampala Document was adopted in 1991 under the leadership of President Yoweri Museveni, then Chairman of the OAU, and President Olusegun Obasanjo, then Chairman of the African Leadership Foundation, the major challenge in Africa was the preoccupation with 68 ‗What conditions generate conflict in your country?‘ (Question 1) and ‗What mechanisms exist for preventing, reducing and managing conflicts in your country?‘ (Question 2) Discussion Paper. 25 The Kampala Document demanded that member states reduce their military expenditures, which “should involve actual reductions and ceilings in manpower and reduced expenditures on military hardware.” See The Kampala Document (1991), available at http://www.au2002.gov.za/docs/key_oau/c ssdca.pdf.