-Caveat Lector- <<"Globalisation" means never having to say you're sorry? A<>E<>R >> From http://www.security-policy.org/papers/1999/99-D136.html {{<Begin>}} Publications of the Center for Security Policy No. 99-D 136 DECISION BRIEF 22 November 1999 'It's U.S. Security, Stupid' (Washington, D.C.): In 1980, Republican presidential candidate Ronald Reagan posed a single question with devastating effect for Jimmy Carter's reelection prospects. He asked voters: "Are you better off today than you were four years ago?" A majority correctly judged that they were not. Carter was turned out of office, Reagan was elected and the rest, as they say, is history. 'Are You More Secure Today?' An interrogatory posing a variation on the theme might prove to have a similarly decisive impact in Campaign 2000: "Are you more secure today than you were eight years ago?" Objectively evaluated, the answer is clearly "No." If Republican candidates do the necessary spadework to educate the electorate about the Clinton-Gore Administration's significant contribution to that sorry situation, they have the opportunity to engender substantial popular support for their cause. Far more importantly, they stand to create a mandate for changes that will reverse the trend toward greater national and individual insecurity. The truth of the matter is that Messrs. Clinton and Gore have squandered the strongest security policy hand ever dealt one American administration by its predecessor. Consider the following indicators: In contrast to 1992 -- when U.S. power and prestige were unrivaled and universally respected -- both have been substantially dissipated, replaced by an increasingly hollow military (shades of Jimmy Carter) and suspicion, if not outright contempt, from friends and adversaries alike. In 1992, Russia was an aspiring democracy, China a largely irrelevant (albeit an emerging) power, and every despot on the planet had been shaken by the United States' thrashing of one of their own, Saddam Hussein. Today, Russia and China are colluding with each other and every rogue nation to share in ever- more-dangerous weapons build-ups, to take advantage of the United States' appalling vulnerability to missile attack and to wage diplo-blackmail campaigns aimed at preventing the U.S. from ending that vulnerability by deploying effective missile defenses. In 1992, America's alliance relations were arguably as strong as ever, with U.S. leadership and friendship respected and valued in Europe and Asia. Now, in the wake of sustained unreliability on the part of the Clinton-Gore team -- characterized notably by the appeasement of nations our allies fear most -- the Japanese, South Koreans, Europeans and even the Israelis are, to varying degrees, looking out for themselves. In practical terms, that means they are doing deals with China and/or other potential threats, deals that are unlikely to be in either their long-term interests or ours. In 1992, the Western hemisphere was -- with the notable exception of a Cuba prostrated by the collapse of its Soviet sponsor -- a zone of democratic transition and promising economic stability. Today, from Colombia to Puerto Rico, from Venezuela to Mexico and, not least, in strategic Panama, there are symptoms of serious problems including, to varying degrees: festering political unrest, widespread corruption, ominous cooperation between narco-traffickers and Marxist revolutionaries, aliens-, drugs- and arms-smuggling, and Communist China's political, economic and strategic penetration. Lately, Cuba has found a new patron in the PRC and is relishing the prospect of additional life-support from American agricultural and other businesses and an American administration whose ideologues (like State Department policy planner Morton Halperin) yearn for a legacy of normalized relations with Fidel. What Hath Clinton-Gore Wrought To be sure, not all of these worrying developments are solely the responsibility of President Clinton, Vice President Gore and the sorry security policies they have promulgated. That said, the character and conduct of the American government during the past nearly eight years has contributed markedly to each of these problems. Of particular concern is the Administration's proclivity for relying upon deals -- "peace processes," arms control pacts, trade agreements, etc. -- that are generally not worth the paper upon which they are written. Mrs. Arafat's blood libel against Israel is just the most recent sign that President Clinton has assiduously encouraged the Jewish State to rest its security on a house of cards. China is already walking back the terms of its bilateral trade accord, just a taste of what is to come if it actually is admitted to the World Trade Organization. The most recent, and one of the most egregious, examples of the phenomenon is the new Conventional Forces in Europe agreement. The United States and nearly three score other countries signed up to the updated CFE treaty even though Russia is flagrantly violating its provisions in order to lay waste to Chechnya. Are Republicans Getting It? The good news is that in recent days, Republican presidential contenders have started to engage each other and the Democrats on security policy matters. Among the leading contenders, Steve Forbes and Senator John McCain have been addressing the topic from the outset of their respective campaigns. Last Friday, the GOP front-runner, Texas Governor George Bush, sallied forth for the first time with a speech devoted exclusively to foreign affairs. The combined effect of these efforts and the growing public perception that the world is getting to be significantly more dangerous has been to give this portfolio its highest public profile in an election campaign since Michael Dukakis played Mickey Mouse riding a tank in 1988. If the Republicans are to lay legitimate claim to their past legacy of "peace through strength" and a more realistic approach to tomorrow's security policy challenges, they are going to need to tune up some of their positions, however. For example, Gov. Bush's generally strong speech at the Reagan Library(1) and his subsequent performance on "Meet the Press" would convey both a greater sense of realism and a more convincing command of his brief if he refrained from embracing flawed initiatives with which the Clinton-Gore Administration is closely associated. Among the more worrisome of these are: the idea of throwing more good money after bad in a Nunn-Lugar aid program that is supposed to be dismantling Russian nuclear weapons but that the Government Accounting Office has repeatedly shown is approximately as fraught with misappropriated funds and unfulfilled expectations as other U.S. and multilateral handouts to the Kremlin. Of particular concern is evidence that American taxpayers' money has actually wound up subsidizing Russian military modernization programs that could pose a threat to this country.(2) What is required, instead of promising more money, is a top-to-bottom reappraisal of the effectiveness and wisdom of this program under present and foreseeable circumstances. the proposition that the United States needs to give Russia "months" to renegotiate the legally defunct 1972 Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty and share its defensive technology with Moscow. These steps could only slow down, complicate and possibly seriously compromise the sort of global anti-missile capabilities the country so clearly needs. The United States should announce now that it is going to begin deploying anti-missile systems in six-months -- as a practical matter the soonest such steps could be taken, even if the most near-term approach (i.e., a sea-based deployment utilizing adapted AEGIS fleet air defense assets) is utilized. If the Russians want to talk during that period, fine. But those talks will not impede or influence our deployment. the commitment to continue the Clinton-Gore moratorium on nuclear testing. As the Governor's father put it on his last day in the White House six years ago: "The requirement to maintain and improve the safety of U.S. forces necessitates continued nuclear testing for those purposes, albeit at a modest level, for the foreseeable future." The Bottom Line In the coming months, Gov. Bush will have ample opportunity to reconsider -- and hopefully dispense with -- these deviations from what was otherwise a largely Reaganesque vision of American security policy. The country will be well served if that vision, whether expressed by him or another candidate, is offered as a stark alternative to the Clinton-Gore formula that has led to increasing insecurity for our country and its people. - 30 - 1. See the Center's Security Forum entitled The World According to 'W' (No. 99- F 34, 20 November 1999). 2. See in this regard, a highly critical op.ed. article by Lieutenant General William E. Odom (USA Ret.) in today's Wall Street Journal, entitled "Clinton 'Quids' Don't Produce Russian 'Quos.'" It says, in part: "Mr. Clinton's message is the same as always: Russia is making slow progress toward democracy, and the West should be patient. A quick look at Russia suggests Mr. Clinton is wrong....Prime Minister Vladimir Putin is calling for greater military spending, most of which will fund Russia's campaign in Chechnya....What does the West do? Prepare to offer another International Monetary Fund loan to Moscow. IMF managing director Michel Camdessus has said he will stop funding if he sees that "an uncontrolled increase in defense spending is overshooting the budget." But, given that key Russian military industries have been well-funded over the past few years, all IMF loans have directly or indirectly contributed to weapons production." NOTE: The Center's publications are intended to invigorate and enrich the debate on foreign policy and defense issues. The views expressed do not necessarily reflect those of all members of the Center's Board of Advisors. Top of Page © 1988-1999, Center for Security Policy {{<End>}} A<>E<>R ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Integrity has no need of rules. -Albert Camus (1913-1960) + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + The only real voyage of discovery consists not in seeking new landscapes but in having new eyes. -Marcel Proust + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + "Believe nothing, no matter where you read it, or who said it, no matter if I have said it, unless it agrees with your own reason and your common sense." --Buddha + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + It is preoccupation with possessions, more than anything else, that prevents us from living freely and nobly. -Bertrand Russell + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + "Everyone has the right...to seek, receive and impart information and ideas through any media and regardless of frontiers." Universal Declaration of Human Rights + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + "Always do sober what you said you'd do drunk. That will teach you to keep your mouth shut." Ernest Hemingway + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + Forwarded as information only; no endorsement to be presumed + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. section 107, this material is distributed without charge or profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving this type of information for non-profit research and educational purposes only. DECLARATION & DISCLAIMER ========== CTRL is a discussion and informational exchange list. Proselyzting propagandic screeds are not allowed. Substance—not soapboxing! These are sordid matters and 'conspiracy theory', with its many half-truths, misdirections and outright frauds is used politically by different groups with major and minor effects spread throughout the spectrum of time and thought. That being said, CTRL gives no endorsement to the validity of posts, and always suggests to readers; be wary of what you read. CTRL gives no credeence to Holocaust denial and nazi's need not apply. Let us please be civil and as always, Caveat Lector. ======================================================================== Archives Available at: http://home.ease.lsoft.com/archives/CTRL.html http:[EMAIL PROTECTED]/ ======================================================================== To subscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email: SUBSCRIBE CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED] To UNsubscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email: SIGNOFF CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED] Om
