Issues: Military Influence on U.S. Foreign Policy

The NSS declares that Cold War deterrence will not work against the "new deadly challenges [that] have emerged from rogue states and terrorists." Such states commonly "brutalize their own people...display no regard for international law...are determined to acquire weapons of mass destruction...sponsor terrorism around the globe...[and] reject basic human values and hate the United States and everything for which it stands." Possible acquisition of WMD by such states requires a number of U.S. counteractions: development of a national missile defense, increased emphasis on intelligence, proactive counterproliferation and strengthened nonproliferation efforts, and development of effective consequence management. All these are necessary because today "our enemies see weapons of mass destruction as weapons of choice." Moreover, the possible conjunction of WMD and terrorists not susceptible to the conventional logic of deterrence "compels us...to defend ourselves [preemptively] even if uncertainty remains as to the time and place of the enemy's attack."

• Introduction
• Sections 1 & 2. Overview, Aspirations
• Section 3. Strengthen Alliances
• Section 4. Work With Others
• Sections 5 & 6. Weapons of Mass Destruction; Free Markets and Free Trade
• Sections 7, 8, & 9. Expand the Circle of Development Agendas for Cooperative Action; Transform America's National Security Institutions
• Summary Comments
• A Thumbnail Comparison of the Last Clinton and First Bush National Security Strategies

The NSS then says that the United States "will not use force in all cases to preempt emerging threats," warns other nations not to use "preemption as a pretext for aggression," and asserts that in all cases, the "reasons for our actions will be clear, the force measured, and the cause just."

Comment: The assertion that WMD have become "weapons of choice" is unfounded. Even in the Iran-Iraq war, chemical weapons -- arguably not weapons of mass destruction -- were not employed in the initial years of that eight-year long struggle. Also unfounded is the assertion that deterrence will not work. It did work in the 1991 Gulf War, and one of the chief arguments in the NSS for enhancing WMD "consequence management" is to "deter those who possess [WMD] and dissuade those who seek to acquire them by persuading enemies that they cannot attain their desired ends" of inflicting mass casualties. Nonetheless, the NSS reiterates that U.S. preemption is allowed even if an attack's parameters are uncertain. Finally, the administration once again seems to assert that the United States will be the judge between "legitimate" preemption (by definition what the United States does) and aggression (what other states might attempt under the rubric of aggressive self-defense).

Section 6. Ignite a New Era of Global Economic Growth Through Free Markets and Free Trade

For the most part, this section of the NSS catalogues "policies that generate higher productivity and sustained economic growth" worldwide. These include market access, public health, and the rule of law. The United States will work with others to enhance energy security while "stabilizing" greenhouse gasses. But care must be taken to protect American workers from job losses due to unfair trading practices.

Comment What is most striking in this section is the assertion that "The concept of 'free trade' arose as a moral principle even before it became a pillar of economics." As the next three sentences in the NSS make clear, this statement is based on the mistaken concept that "valuing" things is somehow a moral judgment rather than merely the establishment of priorities among desires to possess objects: "If you can make something that others value, you should be able to sell it to them. If others make something that you value, you should be able to buy it. This is real freedom...."

This analysis was prepared by Col. Dan Smith, U.S. Army (Ret.). Dan, a West Point graduate and Vietnam veteran, is FCNL's Senior Fellow on Military Affairs.

< Previous

Next >