Development policy is increasingly interested in gaining a more constructive influence in security affairs, advocating
its capacities to contribute to the ending of violent conflicts and stabilizing fragile security. Restoration of effective statehood and provision of new conditions of economic and social reconstruction are the main areas in which development policy finds a complementary role in relation to classic foreign and security policy, but the problem is not only one of defining the interface between civil components and military actors, but also one of the positioning of development policy and its aspirations to political coherence in the realm of the competitive engagements of other policy areas. The German case as regards development policy is marked by a closer convergence between development policy and foreign policy in distributing sharing humanitarian aid and emergency relief work done by development agencies and military interventions. Although the position of the German Ministry for Economic Cooperation and Development favors the assumption of the new security challenges as part of its own agenda, it is also as well looking very closely at maintaining the boundaries between military and civil matters on the ground. The main concerns are to attain a major level of legitimacy for development policy and its future role as an essential part of strategic planning. This means shifting the boundaries between the traditional practices and contents of development policy (poverty reduction, climate change, etc. and so on) to a new understanding of security policy based on the European Security Strategy (ESS). This new development policy needs to assume a proactive stance, aggregating its operational experiences into strategic concepts and compromises. On the other hand, the new emphasis on “extended security” as the basis of this new thinking could endanger the autonomy of development policy. Chances and risks of the new alliance between security and development policy show imbalance that new forms of development-military cooperation have been made effective on the ground (Bosnia, Kosovo, Macedonia, Afghanistan); meanwhile , the debate question continues as to whether development policy is becoming overstretched by the reallocation of its funds and decisions at the expense of the “traditional issues” of development policy. Development policy was all too often forced to take the back-seat in to the interest of the security policy, ` with the result that it remained stagnant. Representatives of development policy are therefore likely to be very cautious in determining the comparative strengths of its operational capacities in order to be sure that the complex security problems can really be solved on the basis of experiences in conflict prevention. The legitimacy of development policy will depend on meeting its own aspirations beyond the typical forms of intervention offered by classic foreign and security policy.