US counterinsurgency and us

Perusing the recently-released interim report, "Counterinsurgency for US government policy makers", we come to page 20:

The International Community
Considerable attention should be paid to potential contributions of the international partners during the development of COIN strategy and plans...

Many U.S. allies and coalition partner have a comparative advantage in deployable capabilities relevant to COIN, e.g., training, development, and employment of national police forces (which the USG does not have.) They can also bring considerable economic development and social institution-building to COIN efforts. Coalition operations require close coordination of effort to achieve common political, economic, security and informational objectives. Early inclusion of international partners in the COIN effort, and collaborative and transparent planning, can help mitigate the effects of operational-level differences in goals, training, capabilities, equipment, logistics, culture, doctrine, intelligence and language.

Of course, Canada has experience with establishing and maintaining its own national police force.

A little further along we find the following curious section:

The Private Sector
Multinational Corporations. Multinational Corporations (MNCs) usually become involved in counterinsurgency when their own financial interests are threatened, or when financial advantage is perceived. COIN planners should consider the capabilities, risks and advantages of MNCs with respect to indigenous government needs as well as U.S. and foreign commercial interests involved.
Contractors. Contractors provide security, training, technical expertise, and logistical support. Policy makers should be cognizant of the fact that contractors are often viewed by the local population as USG representatives and any negative behavior or interaction with the local population on the part of contractors can have an adverse impact on COIN efforts.