p>
Posted on 03/11/2010 10:41:45 PM PST by Jet Jaguar
Spencer Ackerman has offered a thoughtful response to my earlier post on the lack of strategic thinking emanating from the Obama Administration and his comments give me an opportunity to clarify my thoughts. Spencer, perhaps in a glass half full sort of way, sees a method to the Obama Administration's madness, but I think he tends to place far too much on emphasis on words rather than actions.
One can certainly argue that Bob Gates has talked about re-calibrating civilian and military elements of national security, but if you read between the lines what you might actually see is a Secretary of Defense calling for the military to maintain its primacy in national security decision-making. As I wrote over the summer in the pages of Dissent: Secretary of Defense Gates caused a buzz in 2007 when he declared the need for a “dramatic increase in spending on the civilian instruments of national security.” But nowhere did he call for the Pentagon to shed any responsibilities. Indeed, in his next breath, Gates made clear “I’ll be asking for yet more money for Defense this year.” At the same time, he noted the incongruous sight of “field artillerymen and tankers building schools and mentoring city councils.” Gates remarked that these skills will need to be “institutionalized and retained” in the military. More recently, it's hard to square Obama's call for a changed mindset or even a modest and restrained foreign policy when you have the military's key planning document - the QDR - argue that the US seeks to prevent and deter conflict by, "Extending a global defense posture comprised of joint, ready forces forward stationed and rotationally deployed to prevail across all domains, prepositioned equipment and overseas facilities, and international agreements." This is a recipe of imperial overstretch and an effective long-term strategy process at the highest levels of government would hopefully point out how crazy this is and how disproportionate such a vast global military footprint is to actual US interests and the legitimate threats to our nation.
But as I tried to point out earlier, there is no long-term strategic planning process in this Administration. I can't help but think that part of the reason for this is that Obama's foreign policy apparatus is manned by people who don't necessarily see what the QDR is suggesting as a bad thing. (And for what it's worth, my understanding is that there are at least some folks at the highest levels of the NSC who recognize that this is a serious problem in need of immediate rectification).
And I have to say while Spencer is correct that Adminal Mullen has laid out "the early phase of the first vision for the responsible use of military force from a Joint Chiefs Chairman since Colin Powell" - that vision is, in my humble opinion, completely wrong. Look at what Mullen had to say: We must not look upon the use of military forces only as a last resort, but as potentially the best, first option when combined with other instruments of national and international power.
We must not try to use force only in an overwhelming capacity, but in the proper capacity, and in a precise and principled manner. And we must not shrink from the tug of war -- no pun intended -- that inevitably plays out between policymaking and strategy execution. Such interplay is healthy for the republic and essential for ultimate success. I'm sorry, but to me this is pretty close to the mindset that got America involved in Iraq in the first place; the last thing America needs after the disaster of Iraq is a further loosening of the constraints on the use of military force. If Mullen's view are reflective of the president's than I'm lot more depressed about the direction Obama is going to be taking American foreign policy.
And look Spencer may well be correct that "broad strategic constructs are taking form" but I just don't see it. I see a lot of discordant pieces and words that are being contradicted by actions. What I do see is an escalation in Afghanistan that only perpetuates the stranglehold that terrorism has over our foreign policy debates and a direct contradiction of the great speech that John Brennan gave last year in which he called for "the fight against terrorists and violent extremists" to be "returned to its right and proper place: no longer defining—indeed,distorting—our entire national security and foreign policy, but rather serving as a vital part of those larger policies." What I see is nibbling around the edges on defense spending; increased resources for civilian agencies and a rhetorical focus on development but none of the sort of big picture, systemic thinking that the country needs.
I don't mean to sound like a party pooper here, because I think there are many things that the Obama folks have gotten right on foreign policy, but I come to this issue with the view that America desperately needs to re-think its national security strategy - to rebuild civilian agencies, de-emphasize the role of the military, rebuild the global governance architecture, define US interests less broadly and usher in a new restrained and more modest approach to foreign policy. Very little that I've seen so far makes me think that any of this is happening as quickly or as decisively as it should. But of course that's just one man's opinion - I'll be curious to hear what my blog mates and commenters think about all this . .
But as I tried to point out earlier, there is no long-term strategic planning process in this Administration. I can't help but think that part of the reason for this is that Obama's foreign policy apparatus is manned by people who don't necessarily see what the QDR is suggesting as a bad thing. (And for what it's worth, my understanding is that there are at least some folks at the highest levels of the NSC who recognize that this is a serious problem in need of immediate rectification).
Goldwater-Nichols Act requires the CIC to present a National Security Strategy to the US congress.
It was due in July, 2009.
Still nothing.
Ping.
“I don’t mean to sound like a party pooper here, because I think there are many things that the Obama folks have gotten right on foreign policy, but I come to this issue with the view that America desperately needs to re-think its national security strategy - to rebuild civilian agencies, de-emphasize the role of the military, rebuild the global governance architecture, define US interests less broadly and usher in a new restrained and more modest approach to foreign policy. Very little that I’ve seen so far makes me think that any of this is happening as quickly or as decisively as it should. But of course that’s just one man’s opinion - I’ll be curious to hear what my blog mates and commenters think about all this . .”
Dear Mikey,
Fear not. You are not a party pooper. You are the sh!t!
Long-term strategy:
What did I miss?
No "long-term strategy," my ass. The strategy is as plain as the nose on your face.
The strategy has been in place since 1932.
yitbos
“What did I miss?”
Flooding our country with islamics. Shariah. Take that to the bank.
Yep. Islamic sympathizer lawyers at DOJ. “Entreprenurial” programs for muslims. He’ll take us down the path of England, Sweden, Belgium and France. Watch for it.
Check it out.
p>
Long-term strategy:
1. Bankrupt the US to "punish" us for our sins
2. Create massive unemployment to get the unemployed to force the passage of health care
3. Grow annual deficits 5x to accelerate wealth transfer to its "rightful owners."
4. Gut defense to make the U.S. vulnerable to its enemies.
5. Create massive new entitlement class parasites
6. Flood the electorate with 30 million new Democrat voters - i.e., citizenship for illegal aliens. Which also happens to accelerate the destruction of the historical white, Euro-centric, male, Protestant power structure.
7. Destroy capitalism and accelerate government take-over of businesses
8. Rapidly expand regulations to curtail freedoms and travel
What did I miss?
Flooding our country with islamics. Shariah. Take that to the bank.
.
I think that about covers it...
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.