Thomas Donnelly, the document’s principal author and recently PNAC’s deputy director (until he was recruited by Lockheed-Martin), expressed the hope that “the project’s report will be useful as a road map for the nation’s immediate and future defense plans.” His hope has been realized in the new security strategy and military build-up of the current Bush administration. Many of PNAC’s conclusions and recommendations are reflected in the White House’s National Security Strategy document, which reflects the “peace through strength” credo that shapes PNAC strategic thinking.
The Bush administration has opted for a security strategy that is aggressive and that prioritizes the use of the military to deliver weapons of mass destruction. In his introduction to the strategy document, President Bush states that this American peace will be maintained “by fighting terrorists and tyrants.” Moreover, “as a matter of common sense and self-defense, America will act against such emerging threats before they are fully formed.” Echoing the conclusions of the PNAC’s document calling for increased U.S. military projection, the White House’s own strategy document focuses not only on rogues but also on great powers, particularly China, that are regarded as peer competitors.
http://www.fpif.org/papers/foretold_body.htmlAnother DUer posted above the Israeli policy paper called
"A Clean Break." It, too, stresses a “peace through strength” credo. Here's an intersting analysis of it:
Clean Break or Dirty War?
Israel’s Foreign Policy Directive to the United States
Executive Summary
Great changes are seldom achieved without a plan. The Israeli policy paper “A Clean Break: A New Strategy for Securing the Realm” (ACB) was authored by a group of policy advisors to Israel. Subsequently, nearly all members ascended to influential policy making positions within U.S. government, media, and academic circles. Many of the ACB policies such as toppling the government of Iraq are now in full implementation and present new challenges to the global community. Others, such as the reform of Israel’s economy have been abysmal failures, but generate little visibility or impact outside of Israel.
Cont'd:
http://www.irmep.org/Policy_Briefs/3_27_2003_Clean_Break_or_Dirty_War.htmlAnd since we're on the topic of foreign defense policies, PNAC, et al, here's another interesting analysis of our current foreign policy under Bush & Co.:
U.S. Policy Towards Iraq: Unraveling the Web
Laurence A. Toenjes
Executive Summary
When the United States began transporting troops to the Persian Gulf in the fall of 2002 it was evident that the war against Iraq was underway. This paper was begun in an attempt to answer the question: How did the war against Osama bin Laden and al Qaeda become the war to depose Saddam Hussein?
The effort to understand this change in U.S. policy led to a picture of a relatively small group of persons associated with certain think tanks and other organizations achieving disproportionate influence over the policy formulation process. The activities of fourteen organizations were coordinated by individuals who comprised a web of interlocking memberships. Many of these individuals were on record calling for the overthrow of Saddam Hussein as far back as 1998, in a letter to President Clinton. This was well before the September 11, 2001 attack on the World Trade Center and before George W. Bush became President.
The main contribution of this paper is the attempt to quantify the inter-linked nature of the 14 organizations by cross-tabulating individuals with memberships in two or more of them. Examples: Richard Perle was associated with 10 of the 14, Jeane Kirkpatrick with 7, James Woolsey with 6, John Bolton with 4. Altogether 223 links were found between the 14 groups, where a link is defined as the association of a single individual with two organizations. Although over 650 individuals associated with the 14 organizations included in the study were analyzed, just 9 individuals formed 121 of the inter-group links, accounting for over half of the total. This concentration of the inter-group linkages suggests that a small number of individuals could effectively influence and coordinate the foreign policy impact of these organizations.
Using a threshold of at least 3 members in common, a subgroup of 5 organizations was identified as forming a “clique”. A “clique” is defined as the largest subgroup wherein each is directly related to each of the others. In this case, this meant that each of the 10 pairs among the five shared at least three members. This clique consisted of The Project for the New American Century (PNAC), The Committee for the Liberation of Iraq (CLI), The Center for Security Policy (CSP), The Defense Policy Board Advisory Committee (DPB), and The Jewish Institute for National Security Affairs (JINSA).
Based upon mission statements and observed actions, the members of the clique appeared to play somewhat specialized and mutually supporting roles in the policy process. For example, PNAC was instrumental in preparing the over-all plan (Rebuilding America’s Defenses: Strategy, Forces and Resources For a New Century), while the presence of JINSA helped insure the interests of Israel as well as of the United States. The CLI was set up in the fall of 2002, reportedly at the behest of Secretary of Defense Rumsfeld, to “engage in educational and advocacy efforts to mobilize US and international support for policies aimed at ending the aggression of Saddam Hussein and freeing the Iraqi people from tyranny.” That is, the purpose of the CLI was to sell the war abroad as well as to US citizens. The CSP prided itself in expertise and facilities to efficiently disseminate a flood of position papers and press releases to Congress, the Administration, and the public at large. The DPB provided a direct link into the bowels of the Pentagon, with its members having access to classified information and the opportunity to make private presentations to the upper echelons of the Department of Defense.
A diagram is included which visually depicts the interrelations among the 14 organizations.
Cont'd: I recommend the PDF version, as an important diagram called Figure 1 is not viewable in the HTML version for some reason:
PDF:
http://www.opednews.com/toenjes_IraqPolicyWeb_withTables_July19.docHTML:
http://66.102.7.104/search?q=cache:tCe3qbnj7CkJ:www.opednews.com/toenjes_IraqPolicyWeb_withTables_July19.doc+U.S.+Policy+Towards+Iraq:+Unraveling+the+Web&hl=en&gl=us&ct=clnk&cd=1
Printer-friendly format
Email this thread to a friend
Bookmark this thread
(703 posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
