John Bolton spoke Sunday at the American Freedom Alliance event 9/11 +10: IS THE U.S. ANY SAFER TODAY?
He had some interesting comments. (The following paraphrases are based on my notes. He discusses the same topic in this article at AEI's website. Much, but not all, of what he said Sunday is in this commentary.)
RESPONSE TO KRUGMAN
Paul Krugman's blog post on Bush and Giuliani is the view of someone deep in the heart of the establishment, not some fringe element. It is typical of the "blame America" view. Why are our responsibilities so great? Consider Krugman and his ilk who deny our right to defend ourselves.
ARE WE SAFER TODAY?
Yes and no; there’s no simple answer. There are several variables in play with more forces unleashed against us. Our military has had amazing successes overthrowing the Taliban in Afghanistan and Hussein in Iraq.
However, we are not yet fully safe despite these big victories. We need to wage war against the direct and indirect state sponsors of terrorism.
Bush was correct in saying shortly after 9/11 that this would be a “long war.” The proper comparison would be to the long war we won against communism.
In today’s “world of ambiguity” we can never be fully safe.
LAW ENFORCEMENT VERSUS WAR
An important decision post-9/11 was to reject the metaphor that terrorism is a law enforcement issue. This doesn’t capture the nature of the threat. As an act of war against us, we can marshal the nation to action. The fact that Obama maintained or extended several policies of the Bush administration (keeping Gitmo open, increasing drone attacks in Pakistan, etc.) means the debate of war versus law enforcement view of terrorism is now resolved in the U.S. This is not the case in Europe.
NATURE OF THE THREAT
The threat from “radical Islam” is growing and metastasizing because the overthrow of autocrats in Egypt, Libya, and elsewhere are releasing the repressed forces, which include radical Islam.
The threat from radical Islamist governments comes not just from the direct violence but also from their policies. There is a philosophical and political component, not just a military one.
American weakness, not strength, is provocative.
We face the alternative of fighting them in America or in the Middle East, which is why we need to maintain a strong American presence there.
Changes since 9/11 have raised new worries. Most notably, WMD proliferation opens the door to their use by terrorists. This threat is real: computers captured in Afghanistan show in great detail the long-term goal of Al Qaeda to use WMDs. Al Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula, for instance, is working to develop the capability to use Ricin.
ROGUE STATES
The rogue states are cooperating against America. Iran and North Korea are potential sources of nuclear proliferation to terrorists. Pakistan is estimated to have 60 – 200 nukes, which could fall into the hands of the radical Islamists if they seize control of the government.
North Korea has shown itself to be a major player in the Middle East. For instance, it was their nuclear reactor blown up in Syria not too long ago.
[Bolton is] very worried that the Obama administration has given up trying to prevent Iran going nuclear. There are fundamentally different ideas running the Iranian government than run that of the USSR. We can’t contain and deter them the way we did with the Soviets. This leads to the Saudis, Egypt, and others getting nukes, and eventually the terrorists getting them.
GREAT POWERS
The “Great Power” politics from the Cold War haven’t gone away. We have a resurgent Russia, using oil to influence Europe. China is developing for the first time a blue-water navy, including subs and aircraft carriers. They are already fighting for mineral claims in the South China Seas.
DEFENSE BUDGET
Over the next few months we face an important defense budget battle. The economic crisis has spurred the need to reduce government spending, taxes, and regulations. The Congressional “supercommittee” appointed to specify budget cuts may trigger dramatic budget cuts. The Obama administration has already cut $350B from defense. As part of the debt ceiling fight, another $400B has already been cut. If the trigger is pulled, we’re looking at a total $1.5 Trillion in defense cuts.
Such drastic cuts are contrary to a proper view of war, such as that articulated by JFK: “Let every nation know, whether it wishes us well or ill, that we shall pay any price, bear any burden, meet any hardship, support any friend, oppose any foe, in order to assure the survival and the success of liberty.”
My comments:
It was great to see an enthusiastic audience cheering many of these points.
Bolton made many good points with which I agree. He has an excellent grasp of the dangers we face from terrorists and their state sponsors, and the problems we're having in dealing with them. Some of the information was new to me, but the general assessment was not. He did a good job of assessing how unsafe we are, but didn't provide new insights into how to deal with the problem. It also isn't clear what he thinks the long-term future shape will be: will we find a permanent solution to the radical Islamist threat, or learn to become like Israel, under constant threat?
No comments:
Post a Comment