Now we know. The Americans have spelt it out in black and white. There
will be a world government, but not one even pretending to be comprised of
representatives of its nation states through the United Nations. The
United States will rule, and not according to painstakingly developed
international law and norms, but by what is in its interests.
In declaring itself dictator of the world, The United States will have
no accountability to non-United States citizens. It will bomb who it likes
when it likes, and change regimes when and as it sees fit, it will not be
subject to investigations for war crimes, for torture, or for breaches of
fundamental human rights.
When it asks the United Nations to move against Iraq, it is not
demanding agreement to a strong case for action. It now admits it has no
evidence that Iraq is preapring to use weapons of mass destruction against
any other country. The Americans have stopped pretending, and now demand
outright capitulation to its hegemony. The world will be policed in
American interests. Full stop.
So now American history screams from background discussion to the
forefront of debate. The Americans - despite their promises to be a
benevolent dictatorship, do not aim to build, stabilise, and promote
democracies. They aim to impose puppets, and agree to Faustian deals which
brutalise and disempower citizens. They pay no heed to the disastrous
results of such dictatorships when imposed in the past.
Australia's choice is to become a non-enfranchised satellite state of
the United States - and thus responsible for its aggression and a
legitimate target for those fighting to win back countries the Americans
take by force, or to fight like hell to save the United Nation's dream of
world government by negotiation.
The United Nations itself - the dream of multilateral solutions to
problems only the world acting together can solve, is on the brink of
collapse. This could be one hell of a debate, and I can't see Labor going
for American unilateralism and the crushing of the UN. Yes, it's true,
much of the sentiment against United State's behaviour is anti-American.
It's also pro-Australian, French, or whatever country you feel you belong
to.
The stunning New York Times scoop - publishing President Bush's
new national security strategy, to be given to Congress - is a frightening
document. But as David Plumb said in The Crusade's progress,
"It is time to stop being outraged by the directness and aggression of
realpolitic". What can the rest of the world do?
THE NATIONAL SECURITY STRATEGY OF THE UNITED STATES
Introduction
THE great struggles of the twentieth century between liberty and
totalitarianism ended with a decisive victory for the forces of freedom -
and a single sustainable model for national success: freedom, democracy,
and free enterprise. In the twenty-first century, only nations that share
a commitment to protecting basic human rights and guaranteeing political
and economic freedom will be able to unleash the potential of their people
and assure their future prosperity. People everywhere want to say what
they think; choose who will govern them; worship as they please; educate
their children - male and female; own property; and enjoy the benefits of
their labor. These values of freedom are right and true for every person,
in every society - and the duty of protecting these values against their
enemies is the common calling of freedom-loving people across the globe
and across the ages.
Today, the United States enjoys a position of unparalleled military
strength and great economic and political influence. In keeping with our
heritage and principles, we do not use our strength to press for
unilateral advantage. We seek instead to create a balance of power that
favors human freedom: conditions in which all nations and all societies
can choose for themselves the rewards and challenges of political and
economic liberty. By making the world safer, we allow the people of the
world to make their own lives better. We will defend this just peace
against threats from terrorists and tyrants. We will preserve the peace by
building good relations among the great powers. We will extend the peace
by encouraging free and open societies on every continent.
Defending our Nation against its enemies is the first and fundamental
commitment of the Federal Government. Today, that task has changed
dramatically. Enemies in the past needed great armies and great industrial
capabilities to endanger America. Now, shadowy networks of individuals can
bring great chaos and suffering to our shores for less than it costs to
purchase a single tank. Terrorists are organized to penetrate open
societies and to turn the power of modern technologies against us.
To defeat this threat we must make use of every tool in our arsenal -
from better homeland defenses and law enforcement to intelligence and
cutting off terrorist financing. The war against terrorists of global
reach is a global enterprise of uncertain duration. America will help
nations that need our assistance in combating terror. And America will
hold to account nations that are compromised by terror - because the
allies of terror are the enemies of civilization. The United States and
countries cooperating with us must not allow the terrorists to develop new
home bases. Together, we will seek to deny them sanctuary at every
turn.
The gravest danger our Nation faces lies at the crossroads of
radicalism and technology. Our enemies have openly declared that they are
seeking weapons of mass destruction, and evidence indicates that they are
doing so with determination. The United States will not allow these
efforts to succeed. We will build defenses against ballistic missiles and
other means of delivery. We will cooperate with other nations to deny,
contain, and curtail our enemies' efforts to acquire dangerous
technologies. And, as a matter of common sense and self-defense, America
will act against such emerging threats before they are fully formed. We
cannot defend America and our friends by hoping for the best. So we must
be prepared to defeat our enemies' plans, using the best intelligence and
proceeding with deliberation. History will judge harshly those who saw
this coming danger but failed to act. In the new world we have entered,
the only path to safety is the path of action.
As we defend the peace, we will also take advantage of an historic
opportunity to preserve the peace. Today, the international community has
the best chance since the rise of the nation-state in the seventeenth
century to build a world where great powers compete in peace instead of
continually prepare for war. Today, the world's great powers find
ourselves on the same side -- united by common dangers of terrorist
violence and chaos. The United States will build on these common interests
to promote global security. We are also increasingly united by common
values. Russia is in the midst of a hopeful transition, reaching for its
democratic future and a partner in the war on terror. Chinese leaders are
discovering that economic freedom is the only source of national wealth.
In time, they will find that social and political freedom is the only
source of national greatness. America will encourage the advancement of
democracy and economic openness in both nations, because these are the
best foundations for domestic stability and international order. We will
strongly resist aggression from other great powers - even as we welcome
their peaceful pursuit of prosperity, trade, and cultural advancement.
Finally, the United States will use this moment of opportunity to
extend the benefits of freedom across the globe. We will actively work to
bring the hope of democracy, development, free markets, and free trade to
every corner of the world. The events of September 11, 2001, taught us
that weak states, like Afghanistan, can pose as great a danger to our
national interests as strong states. Poverty does not make poor people
into terrorists and murderers. Yet poverty, weak institutions, and
corruption can make weak states vulnerable to terrorist networks and drug
cartels within their borders.
The United States will stand beside any nation determined to build a
better future by seeking the rewards of liberty for its people. Free trade
and free markets have proven their ability to lift whole societies out of
poverty -- so the United States will work with individual nations, entire
regions, and the entire global trading community to build a world that
trades in freedom and therefore grows in prosperity. The United States
will deliver greater development assistance through the New Millennium
Challenge Account to nations that govern justly, invest in their people,
and encourage economic freedom. We will also continue to lead the world in
efforts to reduce the terrible toll of AIDS and other infectious
diseases.
In building a balance of power that favors freedom, the United States
is guided by the conviction that all nations have important
responsibilities. Nations that enjoy freedom must actively fight terror.
Nations that depend on international stability must help prevent the
spread of weapons of mass destruction. Nations that seek international aid
must govern themselves wisely, so that aid is well spent. For freedom to
thrive, accountability must be expected and required.
We are also guided by the conviction that no nation can build a safer,
better world alone. Alliances and multilateral institutions can multiply
the strength of freedom-loving nations. The United States is committed to
lasting institutions like the United Nations, the World Trade
Organization, the Organization of American States, and NATO as well as
other long-standing alliances. Coalitions of the willing can augment these
permanent institutions. In all cases, international obligations are to be
taken seriously. They are not to be undertaken symbolically to rally
support for an ideal without furthering its attainment.
Freedom is the non-negotiable demand of human dignity; the birthright
of every person - in every civilization. Throughout history, freedom has
been threatened by war and terror; it has been challenged by the clashing
wills of powerful states and the evil designs of tyrants; and it has been
tested by widespread poverty and disease. Today, humanity holds in its
hands the opportunity to further freedom's triumph over all these foes.
The United States welcomes our responsibility to lead in this great
mission.
I. Overview of America's International Strategy
"Our Nation's cause has always been larger than our Nation's
defense. We fight, as we always fight, for a just peace - a peace that
favors liberty. We will defend the peace against the threats from
terrorists and tyrants. We will preserve the peace by building good
relations among the great powers. And we will extend the peace by
encouraging free and open societies on every continent." President Bush,
West Point, New York. June 1, 2002
The United States possesses unprecedented - and unequaled - strength
and influence in the world. Sustained by faith in the principles of
liberty, and the value of a free society, this position comes with
unparalleled responsibilities, obligations, and opportunity. The great
strength of this nation must be used to promote a balance of power that
favors freedom.
For most of the twentieth century, the world was divided by a great
struggle over ideas: destructive totalitarian visions versus freedom and
equality.
That great struggle is over. The militant visions of class, nation, and
race which promised utopia and delivered misery have been defeated and
discredited. America is now threatened less by conquering states than we
are by failing ones. We are menaced less by fleets and armies than by
catastrophic technologies in the hands of the embittered few. We must
defeat these threats to our Nation, allies, and friends.
This is also a time of opportunity for America. We will work to
translate this moment of influence into decades of peace, prosperity, and
liberty. The U.S. national security strategy will be based on a distinctly
American internationalism that reflects the union of our values and our
national interests. The aim of this strategy is to help make the world not
just safer but better. Our goals on the path to progress are clear:
political and economic freedom, peaceful relations with other states, and
respect for human dignity.
And this path is not America's alone. It is open to all.
To achieve these goals, the United States will:
* champion aspirations for human dignity;
* strengthen alliances to defeat global terrorism and work to prevent
attacks against us and our friends;
* work with others to defuse regional conflicts;
* prevent our enemies from threatening us, our allies, and our friends,
with weapons of mass destruction;
* ignite a new era of global economic growth through free markets and
free trade;
* expand the circle of development by opening societies and building
the infrastructure of democracy;
* develop agendas for cooperative action with other main centers of
global power; and
* transform America's national security institutions to meet the
challenges and opportunities of the twenty-first century.
II. Champion Aspirations for Human Dignity
"Some worry that it is somehow undiplomatic or impolite to speak the
language of right and wrong. I disagree. Different circumstances
require different methods, but not different moralities." President Bush,
West Point, New York, June 1, 2002
In pursuit of our goals, our first imperative is to clarify what we
stand for: the United States must defend liberty and justice because these
principles are right and true for all people everywhere. No nation owns
these aspirations, and no nation is exempt from them. Fathers and mothers
in all societies want their children to be educated and to live free from
poverty and violence. No people on earth yearn to be oppressed, aspire to
servitude, or eagerly await the midnight knock of the secret police.
America must stand firmly for the nonnegotiable demands of human
dignity: the rule of law; limits on the absolute power of the state; free
speech; freedom of worship; equal justice; respect for women; religious
and ethnic tolerance; and respect for private property.
These demands can be met in many ways. America's constitution has
served us well. Many other nations, with different histories and cultures,
facing different circumstances, have successfully incorporated these core
principles into their own systems of governance. History has not been kind
to those nations which ignored or flouted the rights and aspirations of
their people.
Our own history is a long struggle to live up to our ideals. But even
in our worst moments, the principles enshrined in the Declaration of
Independence were there to guide us. As a result, America is not just a
stronger, but is a freer and more just society.
Today, these ideals are a lifeline to lonely defenders of liberty. And
when openings arrive, we can encourage change - as we did in central and
eastern Europe between 1989 and 1991, or in Belgrade in 2000. When we see
democratic processes take hold among our friends in Taiwan or in the
Republic of Korea, and see elected leaders replace generals in Latin
America and Africa, we see examples of how authoritarian systems can
evolve, marrying local history and traditions with the principles we all
cherish.
Embodying lessons from our past and using the opportunity we have
today, the national security strategy of the United States must start from
these core beliefs and look outward for possibilities to expand liberty.
Our principles will guide our government's decisions about
international cooperation, the character of our foreign assistance, and
the allocation of resources. They will guide our actions and our words in
international bodies.
We will:
* speak out honestly about violations of the nonnegotiable demands of
human dignity using our voice and vote in international institutions to
advance freedom;
* use our foreign aid to promote freedom and support those who struggle
non-violently for it, ensuring that nations moving toward democracy are
rewarded for the steps they take;
* make freedom and the development of democratic institutions key
themes in our bilateral relations, seeking solidarity and cooperation from
other democracies while we press governments that deny human rights to
move toward a better future; and
* take special efforts to promote freedom of religion and conscience
and defend it from encroachment by repressive governments.
We will champion the cause of human dignity and oppose those who resist
it.
III. Strengthen Alliances to Defeat Global Terrorism and Work to
Prevent Attacks Against Us and Our Friends
"Just three days removed from these events, Americans do not yet
have the distance of history. But our responsibility to history is already
clear: to answer these attacks and rid the world of evil. War has been
waged against us by stealth and deceit and murder. This nation is
peaceful, but fierce when stirred to anger. The conflict was begun on the
timing and terms of others. It will end in a way, and at an hour, of our
choosing." President Bush, Washington, D.C. (The National Cathedral)
September 14, 2001
The United States of America is fighting a war against terrorists of
global reach. The enemy is not a single political regime or person or
religion or ideology. The enemy is terrorism - premeditated, politically
motivated violence perpetrated against innocents.
In many regions, legitimate grievances prevent the emergence of a
lasting peace. Such grievances deserve to be, and must be, addressed
within a political process. But no cause justifies terror. The United
States will make no concessions to terrorist demands and strike no deals
with them. We make no distinction between terrorists and those who
knowingly harbor or provide aid to them.
The struggle against global terrorism is different from any other war
in our history. It will be fought on many fronts against a particularly
elusive enemy over an extended period of time. Progress will come through
the persistent accumulation of successes - some seen, some unseen.
Today our enemies have seen the results of what civilized nations can,
and will, do against regimes that harbor, support, and use terrorism to
achieve their political goals. Afghanistan has been liberated; coalition
forces continue to hunt down the Taliban and al-Qaida. But it is not only
this battlefield on which we will engage terrorists. Thousands of trained
terrorists remain at large with cells in North America, South America,
Europe, Africa, the Middle East, and across Asia.
Our priority will be first to disrupt and destroy terrorist
organizations of global reach and attack their leadership; command,
control, and communications; material support; and finances. This will
have a disabling effect upon the terrorists' ability to plan and operate.
We will continue to encourage our regional partners to take up a
coordinated effort that isolates the terrorists. Once the regional
campaign localizes the threat to a particular state, we will help ensure
the state has the military, law enforcement, political, and financial
tools necessary to finish the task.
The United States will continue to work with our allies to disrupt the
financing of terrorism. We will identify and block the sources of funding
for terrorism, freeze the assets of terrorists and those who support them,
deny terrorists access to the international financial system, protect
legitimate charities from being abused by terrorists, and prevent the
movement of terrorists' assets through alternative financial networks.
However, this campaign need not be sequential to be effective, the
cumulative effect across all regions will help achieve the results we
seek.
We will disrupt and destroy terrorist organizations by:
* direct and continuous action using all the elements of national and
international power. Our immediate focus will be those terrorist
organizations of global reach and any terrorist or state sponsor of
terrorism which attempts to gain or use weapons of mass destruction (WMD)
or their precursors;
* defending the United States, the American people, and our interests
at home and abroad by identifying and destroying the threat before it
reaches our borders. While the United States will constantly strive to
enlist the support of the international community, we will not hesitate to
act alone, if necessary, to exercise our right of self-defense by acting
preemptively against such terrorists, to prevent them from doing harm
against our people and our country; and
* denying further sponsorship, support, and sanctuary to terrorists by
convincing or compelling states to accept their sovereign
responsibilities.
We will also wage a war of ideas to win the battle against
international terrorism. This includes:
* using the full influence of the United States, and working closely
with allies and friends, to make clear that all acts of terrorism are
illegitimate so that terrorism will be viewed in the same light as
slavery, piracy, or genocide: behavior that no respectable government can
condone or support and all must oppose;
* supporting moderate and modern government, especially in the Muslim
world, to ensure that the conditions and ideologies that promote terrorism
do not find fertile ground in any nation;
* diminishing the underlying conditions that spawn terrorism by
enlisting the international community to focus its efforts and resources
on areas most at risk; and
* using effective public diplomacy to promote the free flow of
information and ideas to kindle the hopes and aspirations of freedom of
those in societies ruled by the sponsors of global terrorism.
While we recognize that our best defense is a good offense we are also
strengthening America's homeland security to protect against and deter
attack.
This Administration has proposed the largest government reorganization
since the Truman Administration created the National Security Council and
the Department of Defense. Centered on a new Department of Homeland
Security and including a new unified military command and a fundamental
reordering of the FBI, our comprehensive plan to secure the homeland
encompasses every level of government and the cooperation of the public
and the private sector.
This strategy will turn adversity into opportunity. For example,
emergency management systems will be better able to cope not just with
terrorism but with all hazards. Our medical system will be strengthened to
manage not just bioterror, but all infectious diseases and mass-casualty
dangers. Our border controls will not just stop terrorists, but improve
the efficient movement of legitimate traffic.
While our focus is protecting America, we know that to defeat terrorism
in today's globalized world we need support from our allies and friends.
Wherever possible, the United States will rely on regional organizations
and state powers to meet their obligations to fight terrorism. Where
governments find the fight against terrorism beyond their capacities, we
will match their willpower and their resources with whatever help we and
our allies can provide.
As we pursue the terrorists in Afghanistan, we will continue to work
with international organizations such as the United Nations, as well as
non-governmental organizations, and other countries to provide the
humanitarian, political, economic, and security assistance necessary to
rebuild Afghanistan so that it will never again abuse its people, threaten
its neighbors, and provide a haven for terrorists
In the war against global terrorism, we will never forget that we are
ultimately fighting for our democratic values and way of life. Freedom and
fear are at war, and there will be no quick or easy end to this conflict.
In leading the campaign against terrorism, we are forging new, productive
international relationships and redefining existing ones in ways that meet
the challenges of the twenty-first century.
IV. Work with Others To Defuse Regional Conflicts
"We build a world of justice, or we will live in a world of
coercion. The magnitude of our shared responsibilities makes our
disagreements look so small." President Bush, Berlin, Germany, May 23,
2002
Concerned nations must remain actively engaged in critical regional
disputes to avoid explosive escalation and minimize human suffering. In an
increasingly interconnected world, regional crisis can strain our
alliances, rekindle rivalries among the major powers, and create
horrifying affronts to human dignity. When violence erupts and states
falter, the United States will work with friends and partners to alleviate
suffering and restore stability.
No doctrine can anticipate every circumstance in which U.S. action -
direct or indirect - is warranted. We have finite political, economic, and
military resources to meet our global priorities. The United States will
approach each case with these strategic principles in mind:
The United States should invest time and resources into building
international relationships and institutions that can help manage local
crises when they emerge.
The United States should be realistic about its ability to help those
who are unwilling or unready to help themselves. Where and when people are
ready to do their part, we will be willing to move decisively.
Policies in several key regions offer some illustrations of how we will
apply these principles:
The Israeli-Palestinian conflict is critical because of the toll of
human suffering, because of America's close relationship with the state of
Israel and key Arab states, and because of that region's importance to
other global priorities of the United States. There can be no peace for
either side without freedom for both sides. America stands committed to an
independent and democratic Palestine, living beside Israel in peace and
security. Like all other people, Palestinians deserve a government that
serves their interests, and listens to their voices, and counts their
votes. The United States will continue to encourage all parties to step up
to their responsibilities as we seek a just and comprehensive settlement
to the conflict.
The United States, the international donor community, and the World
Bank stand ready to work with a reformed Palestinian government on
economic development, increased humanitarian assistance and a program to
establish, finance, and monitor a truly independent judiciary. If
Palestinians embrace democracy, and the rule of law, confront corruption,
and firmly reject terror, they can count on American support for the
creation of a Palestinian state.
Israel also has a large stake in the success of a democratic Palestine.
Permanent occupation threatens Israel's identity and democracy. So the
United States continues to challenge Israeli leaders to take concrete
steps to support the emergence of a viable, credible Palestinian state. As
there is progress towards security, Israel forces need to withdraw fully
to positions they held prior to September 28, 2000. And consistent with
the recommendations of the Mitchell Committee, Israeli settlement activity
in the occupied territories must stop. As violence subsides, freedom of
movement should be restored, permitting innocent Palestinians to resume
work and normal life. The United States can play a crucial role but,
ultimately, lasting peace can only come when Israelis and Palestinians
resolve the issues and end the conflict between them.
In South Asia, the United States has also emphasized the need for India
and Pakistan to resolve their disputes. This administration invested time
and resources building strong bilateral relations with India and Pakistan.
These strong relations then gave us leverage to play a constructive role
when tensions in the region became acute. With Pakistan, our bilateral
relations have been bolstered by Pakistan's choice to join the war against
terror and move toward building a more open and tolerant society. The
Administration sees India's potential to become one of the great
democratic powers of the twenty-first century and has worked hard to
transform our relationship accordingly. Our involvement in this regional
dispute, building on earlier investments in bilateral relations, looks
first to concrete steps by India and Pakistan that can help defuse
military confrontation.
Indonesia took courageous steps to create a working democracy and
respect for the rule of law. By tolerating ethnic minorities, respecting
the rule of law, and accepting open markets, Indonesia may be able to
employ the engine of opportunity that has helped lift some of its
neighbors out of poverty and desperation. It is the initiative by
Indonesia that allows U.S. assistance to make a difference.
In the Western Hemisphere we have formed flexible coalitions with
countries that share our priorities, particularly Mexico, Brazil, Canada,
Chile, and Colombia. Together we will promote a truly democratic
hemisphere where our integration advances security, prosperity,
opportunity, and hope. We will work with regional institutions, such as
the Summit of the Americas process, the Organization of American States
(OAS), and the Defense Ministerial of the Americas for the benefit of the
entire hemisphere.
Parts of Latin America confront regional conflict, especially arising
from the violence of drug cartels and their accomplices. This conflict and
unrestrained narcotics trafficking could imperil the health and security
of the United States. Therefore we have developed an active strategy to
help the Andean nations adjust their economies, enforce their laws, defeat
terrorist organizations, and cut off the supply of drugs, while - as
important - we work to reduce the demand for drugs in our own country.
In Colombia, we recognize the link between terrorist and extremist
groups that challenge the security of the state and drug trafficking
activities that help finance the operations of such groups. We are working
to help Colombia defend its democratic institutions and defeat illegal
armed groups of both the left and right by extending effective sovereignty
over the entire national territory and provide basic security to the
Colombian people.
In Africa, promise and opportunity sit side by side with disease, war,
and desperate poverty. This threatens both a core value of the United
States - preserving human dignity - and our strategic priority --
combating global terror. American interests and American principles,
therefore, lead in the same direction: we will work with others for an
African continent that lives in liberty, peace, and growing prosperity.
Together with our European allies, we must help strengthen Africa's
fragile states, help build indigenous capability to secure porous borders,
and help build up the law enforcement and intelligence infrastructure to
deny havens for terrorists.
An ever more lethal environment exists in Africa as local civil wars
spread beyond borders to create regional war zones. Forming coalitions of
the willing and cooperative security arrangements are key to confronting
these emerging transnational threats.
Africa's great size and diversity requires a security strategy that
focuses bilateral engagement, and builds coalitions of the willing. This
administration will focus on three interlocking strategies for the
region:
* countries with major impact on their neighborhood such as South
Africa, Nigeria, Kenya, and Ethiopia are anchors for regional engagement
and require focused attention;
* coordination with European allies and international institutions is
essential for constructive conflict mediation and successful peace
operations; and
* Africa's capable reforming states and sub-regional organizations must
be strengthened as the primary means to address transnational threats on a
sustained basis.
Ultimately the path of political and economic freedom presents the
surest route to progress in sub-Saharan Africa, where most wars are
conflicts over material resources and political access often tragically
waged on the basis of ethnic and religious difference. The transition to
the African Union with its stated commitment to good governance and a
common responsibility for democratic political systems offers
opportunities to strengthen democracy on the continent.
V. Prevent Our Enemies from Threatening Us, Our Allies, and Our
Friends with Weapons of Mass Destruction
"The gravest danger to freedom lies at the crossroads of radicalism
and technology. When the spread of chemical and biological and nuclear
weapons, along with ballistic missile technology -- when that occurs, even
weak states and small groups could attain a catastrophic power to strike
great nations. Our enemies have declared this very intention, and have
been caught seeking these terrible weapons. They want the capability to
blackmail us, or to harm us, or to harm our friends -- and we will oppose
them with all our power." President Bush, West Point, New York, June
1, 2002
The nature of the Cold War threat required the United States - with our
allies and friends - to emphasize deterrence of the enemy's use of force,
producing a grim strategy of mutual assured destruction. With the collapse
of the Soviet Union and the end of the Cold War, our security environment
has undergone profound transformation.
Having moved from confrontation to cooperation as the hallmark of our
relationship with Russia, the dividends are evident: an end to the balance
of terror that divided us; an historic reduction in the nuclear arsenals
on both sides; and cooperation in areas such as counterterrorism and
missile defense that until recently were inconceivable.
But new deadly challenges have emerged from rogue states and
terrorists. None of these contemporary threats rival the sheer destructive
power that was arrayed against us by the Soviet Union. However, the nature
and motivations of these new adversaries, their determination to obtain
destructive powers hitherto available only to the world's strongest
states, and the greater likelihood that they will use weapons of mass
destruction against us, make today's security environment more complex and
dangerous.
In the 1990s we witnessed the emergence of a small number of rogue
states that, while different in important ways, share a number of
attributes. These states:
* brutalize their own people and squander their national resources for
the personal gain of the rulers;
* display no regard for international law, threaten their neighbors,
and callously violate international treaties to which they are party;
* are determined to acquire weapons of mass destruction, along with
other advanced military technology, to be used as threats or offensively
to achieve the aggressive designs of these regimes;
* sponsor terrorism around the globe; and
* reject basic human values and hate the United States and everything
for which it stands.
At the time of the Gulf War, we acquired irrefutable proof that Iraq's
designs were not limited to the chemical weapons it had used against Iran
and its own people, but also extended to the acquisition of nuclear
weapons and biological agents. In the past decade North Korea has become
the world's principal purveyor of ballistic missiles, and has tested
increasingly capable missiles while developing its own WMD arsenal. Other
rogue regimes seek nuclear, biological, and chemical weapons as well.
These states' pursuit of, and global trade in, such weapons has become a
looming threat to all nations.
We must be prepared to stop rogue states and their terrorist clients
before they are able to threaten or use weapons of mass destruction
against the United States and our allies and friends. Our response must
take full advantage of strengthened alliances, the establishment of new
partnerships with former adversaries, innovation in the use of military
forces, modern technologies, including the development of an effective
missile defense system, and increased emphasis on intelligence collection
and analysis.
Our comprehensive strategy to combat WMD includes:
* Proactive counterproliferation efforts. We must deter and defend
against the threat before it is unleashed. We must ensure that key
capabilities -- detection, active and passive defenses, and counterforce
capabilities -- are integrated into our defense transformation and our
homeland security systems. Counterproliferation must also be integrated
into the doctrine, training, and equipping of our forces and those of our
allies to ensure that we can prevail in any conflict with WMD-armed
adversaries.
* Strengthened nonproliferation efforts to prevent rogue states and
terrorists from acquiring the materials, technologies and expertise
necessary for weapons of mass destruction. We will enhance diplomacy, arms
control, multilateral export controls, and threat reduction assistance
that impede states and terrorists seeking WMD, and when necessary,
interdict enabling technologies and materials. We will continue to build
coalitions to support these efforts, encouraging their increased political
and financial support for nonproliferation and threat reduction programs.
The recent G-8 agreement to commit up to $20 billion to a global
partnership against proliferation marks a major step forward.
* Effective consequence management to respond to the effects of WMD
use, whether by terrorists or hostile states. Minimizing the effects of
WMD use against our people will help deter those who possess such weapons
and dissuade those who seek to acquire them by persuading enemies that
they cannot attain their desired ends. The United States must also be
prepared to respond to the effects of WMD use against our forces abroad,
and to help friends and allies if they are attacked.
It has taken almost a decade for us to comprehend the true nature of
this new threat. Given the goals of rogue states and terrorists, the
United States can no longer solely rely on a reactive posture as we have
in the past. The inability to deter a potential attacker, the immediacy of
today's threats, and the magnitude of potential harm that could be caused
by our adversaries' choice of weapons, do not permit that option. We
cannot let our enemies strike first.
In the Cold War, especially following the Cuban missile crisis, we
faced a generally status quo, risk-averse adversary. Deterrence was an
effective defense. But deterrence based only upon the threat of
retaliation is far less likely to work against leaders of rogue states
more willing to take risks, gambling with the lives of their people, and
the wealth of their nations.
In the Cold War, weapons of mass destruction were considered weapons of
last resort whose use risked the destruction of those who used them.
Today, our enemies see weapons of mass destruction as weapons of choice.
For rogue states these weapons are tools of intimidation and military
aggression against their neighbors. These weapons may also allow these
states to attempt to blackmail the United States and our allies to prevent
us from deterring or repelling the aggressive behavior of rogue states.
Such states also see these weapons as their best means of overcoming the
conventional superiority of the United States.
Traditional concepts of deterrence will not work against a terrorist
enemy whose avowed tactics are wanton destruction and the targeting of
innocents; whose so-called soldiers seek martyrdom in death and whose most
potent protection is statelessness. The overlap between states that
sponsor terror and those that pursue WMD compels us to action.
For centuries, international law recognized that nations need not
suffer an attack before they can lawfully take action to defend themselves
against forces that present an imminent danger of attack. Legal scholars
and international jurists often conditioned the legitimacy of preemption
on the existence of an imminent threat -- most often a visible
mobilization of armies, navies, and air forces preparing to attack.
We must adapt the concept of imminent threat to the capabilities and
objectives of today's adversaries. Rogue states and terrorists do not seek
to attack us using conventional means. They know such attacks would fail.
Instead, they rely on acts of terrorism and, potentially, the use of
weapons of mass destruction - weapons that can be easily concealed and
delivered covertly and without warning.
The targets of these attacks are our military forces and our civilian
population, in direct violation of one of the principal norms of the law
of warfare. As was demonstrated by the losses on September 11, 2001, mass
civilian casualties is the specific objective of terrorists and these
losses would be exponentially more severe if terrorists acquired and used
weapons of mass destruction.
The United States has long maintained the option of preemptive actions
to counter a sufficient threat to our national security. The greater the
threat, the greater is the risk of inaction -- and the more compelling the
case for taking anticipatory action to defend ourselves, even if
uncertainty remains as to the time and place of the enemy's attack. To
forestall or prevent such hostile acts by our adversaries, the United
States will, if necessary, act preemptively.
The United States will not use force in all cases to preempt emerging
threats, nor should nations use preemption as a pretext for aggression.
Yet in an age where the enemies of civilization openly and actively seek
the world's most destructive technologies, the United States cannot remain
idle while dangers gather.
We will always proceed deliberately, weighing the consequences of our
actions. To support preemptive options, we will:
* build better, more integrated intelligence capabilities to provide
timely, accurate information on threats, wherever they may emerge;
* coordinate closely with allies to form a common assessment of the
most dangerous threats; and
* continue to transform our military forces to ensure our ability to
conduct rapid and precise operations to achieve decisive results.
The purpose of our actions will always be to eliminate a specific
threat to the United States or our allies and friends. The reasons for our
actions will be clear, the force measured, and the cause just.
VI. Ignite a New Era of Global Economic Growth through Free Markets
and Free Trade.
"When nations close their markets and opportunity is hoarded by a
privileged few, no amount -- no amount -- of development aid is ever
enough. When nations respect their people, open markets, invest in better
health and education, every dollar of aid, every dollar of trade revenue
and domestic capital is used more effectively." President Bush,
Monterrey, Mexico, March 22, 2002
A strong world economy enhances our national security by advancing
prosperity and freedom in the rest of the world. Economic growth supported
by free trade and free markets creates new jobs and higher incomes. It
allows people to lift their lives out of poverty, spurs economic and legal
reform, and the fight against corruption, and it reinforces the habits of
liberty.
We will promote economic growth and economic freedom beyond America's
shores. All governments are responsible for creating their own economic
policies and responding to their own economic challenge. We will use our
economic engagement with other countries to underscore the benefits of
policies that generate higher productivity and sustained economic growth,
including:
* pro-growth legal and regulatory policies to encourage business
investment, innovation, and entrepreneurial activity;
* tax policies -- particularly lower marginal tax rates -- that improve
incentives for work and investment;
* rule of law and intolerance of corruption so that people are
confident that they will be able to enjoy the fruits of their economic
endeavors;
* strong financial systems that allow capital to be put to its most
efficient use;
* sound fiscal policies to support business activity;
* investments in health and education that improve the well-being and
skills of the labor force and population as a whole; and
* free trade that provides new avenues for growth and fosters the
diffusion of technologies and ideas that increase productivity and
opportunity.
The lessons of history are clear: market economies, not
command-and-control economies with the heavy hand of government, are the
best way to promote prosperity and reduce poverty. Policies that further
strengthen market incentives and market institutions are relevant for all
economies - industrialized countries, emerging markets, and the developing
world.
A return to strong economic growth in Europe and Japan is vital to U.S.
national security interests. We want our allies to have strong economies
for their own sake, for the sake of the global economy, and for the sake
of global security. European efforts to remove structural barriers in
their economies are particularly important in this regard, as are Japan's
efforts to end deflation and address the problems of non-performing loans
in the Japanese banking system. We will continue to use our regular
consultations with Japan and our European partners - including through the
Group of Seven (G-7) - to discuss policies they are adopting to promote
growth in their economies and support higher global economic growth.
Improving stability in emerging markets is also key to global economic
growth. International flows of investment capital are needed to expand the
productive potential of these economies. These flows allow emerging
markets and developing countries to make the investments that raise living
standards and reduce poverty. Our long-term objective should be a world in
which all countries have investment-grade credit ratings that allow them
access to international capital markets and to invest in their future.
We are committed to policies that will help emerging markets achieve
access to larger capital flows at lower cost. To this end, we will
continue to pursue reforms aimed at reducing uncertainty in financial
markets. We will work actively with other countries, the International
Monetary Fund (IMF), and the private sector to implement the G-7 Action
Plan negotiated earlier this year for preventing financial crises and more
effectively resolving them when they occur.
The best way to deal with financial crises is to prevent them from
occurring, and we have encouraged the IMF to improve its efforts doing so.
We will continue to work with the IMF to streamline the policy conditions
for its lending and to focus its lending strategy on achieving economic
growth through sound fiscal and monetary policy, exchange rate policy, and
financial sector policy.
The concept of "free trade" arose as a moral principle even before it
became a pillar of economics. 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, the freedom for
a person -- or a nation -- to make a living. To promote free trade, the
Unites States has developed a comprehensive strategy:
* Seize the global initiative. The new global trade negotiations we
helped launch at Doha in November 2001 will have an ambitious agenda,
especially in agriculture, manufacturing, and services, targeted for
completion in 2005. The United States has led the way in completing the
accession of China and a democratic Taiwan to the World Trade
Organization. We will assist Russia's preparations to join the WTO.
* Press regional initiatives. The United States and other democracies
in the Western Hemisphere have agreed to create the Free Trade Area of the
Americas, targeted for completion in 2005. This year the United States
will advocate market-access negotiations with its partners, targeted on
agriculture, industrial goods, services, investment, and government
procurement. We will also offer more opportunity to the poorest continent,
Africa, starting with full use of the preferences allowed in the African
Growth and Opportunity Act, and leading to free trade.
* Move ahead with bilateral free trade agreements. Building on the free
trade agreement with Jordan enacted in 2001, the Administration will work
this year to complete free trade agreements with Chile and Singapore. Our
aim is to achieve free trade agreements with a mix of developed and
developing countries in all regions of the world. Initially, Central
America, Southern Africa, Morocco, and Australia will be our principal
focal points.
* Renew the executive-congressional partnership. Every administration's
trade strategy depends on a productive partnership with Congress. After a
gap of 8 years, the Administration reestablished majority support in the
Congress for trade liberalization by passing Trade Promotion Authority and
the other market opening measures for developing countries in the Trade
Act of 2002. This Administration will work with Congress to enact new
bilateral, regional, and global trade agreements that will be concluded
under the recently passed Trade Promotion Authority.
* Promote the connection between trade and development. Trade policies
can help developing countries strengthen property rights, competition, the
rule of law, investment, the spread of knowledge, open societies, the
efficient allocation of resources, and regional integration -- all leading
to growth, opportunity, and confidence in developing countries. The United
States is implementing The Africa Growth and Opportunity Act to provide
market-access for nearly all goods produced in the 35 countries of
sub-Saharan Africa. We will make more use of this act and its equivalent
for the Caribbean Basin and continue to work with multilateral and
regional institutions to help poorer countries take advantage of these
opportunities. Beyond market access, the most important area where trade
intersects with poverty is in public health. We will ensure that the WTO
intellectual property rules are flexible enough to allow developing
nations to gain access to critical medicines for extraordinary dangers
like HIV/AIDS, tuberculosis, and malaria.
* Enforce trade agreements and laws against unfair practices. Commerce
depends on the rule of law; international trade depends on enforceable
agreements. Our top priorities are to resolve ongoing disputes with the
European Union, Canada, and Mexico and to make a global effort to address
new technology, science, and health regulations that needlessly impede
farm exports and improved agriculture. Laws against unfair trade practices
are often abused, but the international community must be able to address
genuine concerns about government subsidies and dumping. International
industrial espionage which undermines fair competition must be detected
and deterred.
* Help domestic industries and workers adjust. There is a sound
statutory framework for these transitional safeguards which we have used
in the agricultural sector and which we are using this year to help the
American steel industry. The benefits of free trade depend upon the
enforcement of fair trading practices. These safeguards help ensure that
the benefits of free trade do not come at the expense of American workers.
Trade adjustment assistance will help workers adapt to the change and
dynamism of open markets.
* Protect the environment and workers. The United States must foster
economic growth in ways that will provide a better life along with
widening prosperity. We will incorporate labor and environmental concerns
into U.S. trade negotiations, creating a healthy "network" between
multilateral environmental agreements with the WTO, and use the
International Labor Organization, trade preference programs, and trade
talks to improve working conditions in conjunction with freer trade.
* Enhance energy security. We will strengthen our own energy security
and the shared prosperity of the global economy by working with our
allies, trading partners, and energy producers to expand the sources and
types of global energy supplied, especially in the Western Hemisphere,
Africa, Central Asia, and the Caspian region. We will also continue to
work with our partners to develop cleaner and more energy efficient
technologies.
Economic growth should be accompanied by global efforts to stabilize
greenhouse gas concentrations associated with this growth, containing them
at a level that prevents dangerous human interference with the global
climate. Our overall objective is to reduce America's greenhouse gas
emissions relative to the size of our economy, cutting such emissions per
unit of economic activity by 18 percent over the next 10 years, by the
year 2012. Our strategies for attaining this goal will be to:
* remain committed to the basic U.N. Framework Convention for
international cooperation;
* obtain agreements with key industries to cut emissions of some of the
most potent greenhouse gases and give transferable credits to companies
that can show real cuts;
* develop improved standards for measuring and registering emission
reductions;
* promote renewable energy production and clean coal technology, as
well as nuclear power -- which produces no greenhouse gas emissions, while
also improving fuel economy for U.S. cars and trucks;
* increase spending on research and new conservation technologies, to a
total of $4.5 billion -- the largest sum being spent on climate change by
any country in the world and a $700 million increase over last year's
budget; and
* assist developing countries, especially the major greenhouse gas
emitters such as China and India, so that they will have the tools and
resources to join this effort and be able to grow along a cleaner and
better path.
VII. Expand the Circle of Development by Opening Societies and Building
the Infrastructure of Democracy
"In World War II we fought to make the world safer, then worked to
rebuild it. As we wage war today to keep the world safe from terror, we
must also work to make the world a better place for all its citizens."
President Bush, Washington, D.C. (Inter-American Development Bank) March
14, 2002
A world where some live in comfort and plenty, while half of the human
race lives on less than $2 a day, is neither just nor stable. Including
all of the world's poor in an expanding circle of development - and
opportunity - is a moral imperative and one of the top priorities of U.S.
international policy.
Decades of massive development assistance have failed to spur economic
growth in the poorest countries. Worse, development aid has often served
to prop up failed policies, relieving the pressure for reform and
perpetuating misery. Results of aid are typically measured in dollars
spent by donors, not in the rates of growth and poverty reduction achieved
by recipients. These are the indicators of a failed strategy.
Working with other nations, the United States is confronting this
failure. We forged a new consensus at the U.N. Conference on Financing for
Development in Monterrey that the objectives of assistance - and the
strategies to achieve those objectives - must change.
This Administration's goal is to help unleash the productive potential
of individuals in all nations. Sustained growth and poverty reduction is
impossible without the right national policies. Where governments have
implemented real policy changes we will provide significant new levels of
assistance. The United States and other developed countries should set an
ambitious and specific target: to double the size of the world's poorest
economies within a decade.
The United States Government will pursue these major strategies to
achieve this goal:
* Provide resources to aid countries that have met the challenge of
national reform. We propose a 50 percent increase in the core development
assistance given by the United States. While continuing our present
programs, including humanitarian assistance based on need alone, these
billions of new dollars will form a new Millennium Challenge Account for
projects in countries whose governments rule justly, invest in their
people, and encourage economic freedom. Governments must fight corruption,
respect basic human rights, embrace the rule of law, invest in health care
and education, follow responsible economic policies, and enable
entrepreneurship. The Millennium Challenge Account will reward countries
that have demonstrated real policy change and challenge those that have
not to implement reforms.
* Improve the effectiveness of the World Bank and other development
banks in raising living standards. The United States is committed to a
comprehensive reform agenda for making the World Bank and the other
multilateral development banks more effective in improving the lives of
the world's poor. We have reversed the downward trend in U.S.
contributions and proposed an 18 percent increase in the U.S.
contributions to the International Development Association (IDA) - the
World Bank's fund for the poorest countries - and the African Development
Fund. The key to raising living standards and reducing poverty around the
world is increasing productivity growth, especially in the poorest
countries. We will continue to press the multilateral development banks to
focus on activities that increase economic productivity, such as
improvements in education, health, rule of law, and private sector
development. Every project, every loan, every grant must be judged by how
much it will increase productivity growth in developing countries.
* Insist upon measurable results to ensure that development assistance
is actually making a difference in the lives of the world's poor. When it
comes to economic development, what really matters is that more children
are getting a better education, more people have access to health care and
clean water, or more workers can find jobs to make a better future for
their families. We have a moral obligation to measure the success of our
development assistance by whether it is delivering results. For this
reason, we will continue to demand that our own development assistance as
well as assistance from the multilateral development banks has measurable
goals and concrete benchmarks for achieving those goals. Thanks to U.S.
leadership, the recent IDA replenishment agreement will establish a
monitoring and evaluation system that measures recipient countries'
progress. For the first time, donors can link a portion of their
contributions to IDA to the achievement of actual development results, and
part of the U.S. contribution is linked in this way. We will strive to
make sure that the World Bank and other multilateral development banks
build on this progress so that a focus on results is an integral part of
everything that these institutions do.
* Increase the amount of development assistance that is provided in the
form of grants instead of loans. Greater use of results-based grants is
the best way to help poor countries make productive investments,
particularly in the social sectors, without saddling them with ever-larger
debt burdens. As a result of U.S. leadership, the recent IDA agreement
provided for significant increases in grant funding for the poorest
countries for education, HIV/AIDS, health, nutrition, water, sanitation,
and other human needs. Our goal is to build on that progress by increasing
the use of grants at the other multilateral development banks. We will
also challenge universities, nonprofits, and the private sector to match
government efforts by using grants to support development projects that
show results.
* Open societies to commerce and investment. Trade and investment
are the real engines of economic growth. Even if government aid increases,
most money for development must come from trade, domestic capital, and
foreign investment. An effective strategy must try to expand these flows
as well. Free markets and free trade are key priorities of our national
security strategy.
* Secure public health. The scale of the public health crisis in
poor countries is enormous. In countries afflicted by epidemics and
pandemics like HIV/AIDS, malaria, and tuberculosis, growth and development
will be threatened until these scourges can be contained. Resources from
the developed world are necessary but will be effective only with honest
governance, which supports prevention programs and provides effective
local infrastructure. The United States has strongly backed the new global
fund for HIV/AIDS organized by U.N. Secretary General Kofi Annan and its
focus on combining prevention with a broad strategy for treatment and
care. The United States already contributes more than twice as much money
to such efforts as the next largest donor. If the global fund demonstrates
its promise, we will be ready to give even more.
* Emphasize education. Literacy and learning are the foundation
of democracy and development. Only about 7 percent of World Bank resources
are devoted to education. This proportion should grow. The United States
will increase its own funding for education assistance by at least 20
percent with an emphasis on improving basic education and teacher training
in Africa. The United States can also bring information technology to
these societies, many of whose education systems have been devastated by
AIDS.
* Continue to aid agricultural development. New technologies,
including biotechnology, have enormous potential to improve crop yields in
developing countries while using fewer pesticides and less water. Using
sound science, the United States should help bring these benefits to the
800 million people, including 300 million children, who still suffer from
hunger and malnutrition.
VIII. Develop Agendas for Cooperative Action with the Other Main
Centers of Global Power
"We have our best chance since the rise of the nation-state in the
17th century to build a world where the great powers compete in peace
instead of prepare for war." President Bush, West Point, New York,
June 1, 2002
America will implement its strategies by organizing coalitions - as
broad as practicable - of states able and willing to promote a balance of
power that favors freedom. Effective coalition leadership requires clear
priorities, an appreciation of others' interests, and consistent
consultations among partners with a spirit of humility.
There is little of lasting consequence that the United States can
accomplish in the world without the sustained cooperation of its allies
and friends in Canada and Europe. Europe is also the seat of two of the
strongest and most able international institutions in the world: the North
Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO), which has, since its inception, been
the fulcrum of transatlantic and inter-European security, and the European
Union (EU), our partner in opening world trade.
The attacks of September 11 were also an attack on NATO, as NATO itself
recognized when it invoked its Article V self-defense clause for the first
time. NATO's core mission - collective defense of the transatlantic
alliance of democracies - remains, but NATO must develop new structures
and capabilities to carry out that mission under new circumstances. NATO
must build a capability to field, at short notice, highly mobile,
specially trained forces whenever they are needed to respond to a threat
against any member of the alliance.
The alliance must be able to act wherever our interests are threatened,
creating coalitions under NATO's own mandate, as well as contributing to
mission-based coalitions. To achieve this, we must:
* expand NATO's membership to those democratic nations willing and able
to share the burden of defending and advancing our common interests;
* ensure that the military forces of NATO nations have appropriate
combat contributions to make in coalition warfare;
* develop planning processes to enable those contributions to become
effective multinational fighting forces;
* take advantage of the technological opportunities and economies of
scale in our defense spending to transform NATO military forces so that
they dominate potential aggressors and diminish our vulnerabilities;
* streamline and increase the flexibility of command structures to meet
new operational demands and the associated requirements of training,
integrating, and experimenting with new force configurations; and
* maintain the ability to work and fight together as allies even as we
take the necessary steps to transform and modernize our forces.
If NATO succeeds in enacting these changes, the rewards will be a
partnership as central to the security and interests of its member states
as was the case during the Cold War. We will sustain a common perspective
on the threats to our societies and improve our ability to take common
action in defense of our nations and their interests. At the same time, we
welcome our European allies' efforts to forge a greater foreign policy and
defense identity with the EU, and commit ourselves to close consultations
to ensure that these developments work with NATO. We cannot afford to lose
this opportunity to better prepare the family of transatlantic democracies
for the challenges to come.
The attacks of September 11 energized America's Asian alliances.
Australia invoked the ANZUS Treaty to declare the September 11 was an
attack on Australia itself, following that historic decision with the
dispatch of some of the world's finest combat forces for Operation
Enduring Freedom. Japan and the Republic of Korea provided unprecedented
levels of military logistical support within weeks of the terrorist
attack. We have deepened cooperation on counter-terrorism with our
alliance partners in Thailand and the Philippines and received invaluable
assistance from close friends like Singapore and New Zealand.
The war against terrorism has proven that America's alliances in Asia
not only underpin regional peace and stability, but are flexible and ready
to deal with new challenges. To enhance our Asian alliances and
friendships, we will:
* look to Japan to continue forging a leading role in regional and
global affairs based on our common interests, our common values, and our
close defense and diplomatic cooperation;
* work with South Korea to maintain vigilance towards the North while
preparing our alliance to make contributions to the broader stability of
the region over the longer-term;
* build on 50 years of U.S.-Australian alliance cooperation as we
continue working together to resolve regional and global problems -- as we
have so many times from the Battle of Leyte Gulf to Tora Bora;
* maintain forces in the region that reflect our commitments to our
allies, our requirements, our technological advances, and the strategic
environment; and
* build on stability provided by these alliances, as well as with
institutions such as ASEAN and the Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation
forum, to develop a mix of regional and bilateral strategies to manage
change in this dynamic region.
We are attentive to the possible renewal of old patterns of great power
competition. Several potential great powers are now in the midst of
internal transition - most importantly Russia, India, and China. In all
three cases, recent developments have encouraged our hope that a truly
global consensus about basic principles is slowly taking shape.
With Russia, we are already building a new strategic relationship based
on a central reality of the twenty-first century: the United States and
Russia are no longer strategic adversaries. The Moscow Treaty on Strategic
Reductions is emblematic of this new reality and reflects a critical
change in Russian thinking that promises to lead to productive, long-term
relations with the Euro-Atlantic community and the United States. Russia's
top leaders have a realistic assessment of their country's current
weakness and the policies - internal and external - needed to reverse
those weaknesses. They understand, increasingly, that Cold War approaches
do not serve their national interests and that Russian and American
strategic interests overlap in many areas.
United States policy seeks to use this turn in Russian thinking to
refocus our relationship on emerging and potential common interests and
challenges. We are broadening our already extensive cooperation in the
global war on terrorism. We are facilitating Russia's entry into the World
Trade Organization, without lowering standards for accession, to promote
beneficial bilateral trade and investment relations. We have created the
NATO-Russia Council with the goal of deepening security cooperation among
Russia, our European allies, and ourselves. We will continue to bolster
the independence and stability of the states of the former Soviet Union in
the belief that a prosperous and stable neighborhood will reinforce
Russia's growing commitment to integration into the Euro-Atlantic
community.
At the same time, we are realistic about the differences that still
divide us from Russia and about the time and effort it will take to build
an enduring strategic partnership. Lingering distrust of our motives and
policies by key Russian elites slows improvement in our relations.
Russia's uneven commitment to the basic values of free-market democracy
and dubious record in combating the proliferation of weapons of mass
destruction remain matters of great concern. Russia's very weakness limits
the opportunities for cooperation. Nevertheless, those opportunities are
vastly greater now than in recent years - or even decades.
The United States has undertaken a transformation in its bilateral
relationship with India based on a conviction that U.S. interests require
a strong relationship with India. We are the two largest democracies,
committed to political freedom protected by representative government.
India is moving toward greater economic freedom as well. We have a common
interest in the free flow of commerce, including through the vital sea
lanes of the Indian Ocean. Finally, we share an interest in fighting
terrorism and in creating a strategically stable Asia.
Differences remain, including over the development of India's nuclear
and missile programs, and the pace of India's economic reforms. But while
in the past these concerns may have dominated our thinking about India,
today we start with a view of India as a growing world power with which we
have common strategic interests. Through a strong partnership with India,
we can best address any differences and shape a dynamic future.
The United States relationship with China is an important part of our
strategy to promote a stable, peaceful, and prosperous Asia-Pacific
region. We welcome the emergence of a strong, peaceful, and prosperous
China. The democratic development of China is crucial to that future. Yet,
a quarter century after beginning the process of shedding the worst
features of the Communist legacy, China's leaders have not yet made the
next series of fundamental choices about the character of their state. In
pursuing advanced military capabilities that can threaten its neighbors in
the Asia-Pacific region, China is following an outdated path that, in the
end, will hamper its own pursuit of national greatness. In time, China
will find that social and political freedom is the only source of that
greatness.
The United States seeks a constructive relationship with a changing
China. We already cooperate well where our interests overlap, including
the current war on terrorism and in promoting stability on the Korean
peninsula. Likewise, we have coordinated on the future of Afghanistan and
have initiated a comprehensive dialogue on counter-terrorism and similar
transitional concerns. Shared health and environmental threats, such as
the spread of HIV/AIDS, challenge us to promote jointly the welfare of our
citizens.
Addressing these transnational threats will challenge China to become
more open with information, promote the development of civil society, and
enhance individual human rights. China has begun to take the road to
political openness, permitting many personal freedoms and conducting
village-level elections, yet remains strongly committed to national
one-party rule by the Communist Party. To make that nation truly
accountable to its citizen's needs and aspirations, however, much work
remains to be done. Only by allowing the Chinese people to think,
assemble, and worship freely can China reach its full potential.
Our important trade relationship will benefit from China's entry into
the World Trade Organization, which will create more export opportunities
and ultimately more jobs for American farmers, workers, and companies.
China is our fourth largest trading partner, with over $100 billion in
annual two-way trade. The power of market principles and the WTO's
requirements for transparency and accountability will advance openness and
the rule of law in China to help establish basic protections for commerce
and for citizens. There are, however, other areas in which we have
profound disagreements. Our commitment to the self-defense of Taiwan under
the Taiwan Relations Act is one. Human rights is another. We expect China
to adhere to its nonproliferation commitments. We will work to narrow
differences where they exist, but not allow them to preclude cooperation
where we agree.
The events of September 11, 2001, fundamentally changed the context for
relations between the United States and other main centers of global
power, and opened vast, new opportunities. With our long-standing allies
in Europe and Asia, and with leaders in Russia, India, and China, we must
develop active agendas of cooperation lest these relationships become
routine and unproductive.
Every agency of the United States Government shares the challenge. We
can build fruitful habits of consultation, quiet argument, sober analysis,
and common action. In the long-term, these are the practices that will
sustain the supremacy of our common principles and keep open the path of
progress.
IX. Transform America's National Security Institutions to Meet the
Challenges and Opportunities of the Twenty-First Century
"Terrorists attacked a symbol of American prosperity. They did not
touch its source. America is successful because of the hard work,
creativity, and enterprise of our people." President Bush, Washington,
D.C. (Joint Session of Congress), September 20, 2001
The major institutions of American national security were designed in a
different era to meet different requirements. All of them must be
transformed.
It is time to reaffirm the essential role of American military
strength. We must build and maintain our defenses beyond challenge. Our
military's highest priority is to defend the United States. To do so
effectively, our military must:
* assure our allies and friends;
* dissuade future military competition;
* deter threats against U.S. interests, allies, and friends; and
* decisively defeat any adversary if deterrence fails.
The unparalleled strength of the United States armed forces, and their
forward presence, have maintained the peace in some of the world's most
strategically vital regions. However, the threats and enemies we must
confront have changed, and so must our forces. A military structured to
deter massive Cold War-era armies must be transformed to focus more on how
an adversary might fight rather than where and when a war might occur. We
will channel our energies to overcome a host of operational
challenges.
The presence of American forces overseas is one of the most profound
symbols of the U.S. commitments to allies and friends. Through our
willingness to use force in our own defense and in defense of others, the
United States demonstrates its resolve to maintain a balance of power that
favors freedom. To contend with uncertainty and to meet the many security
challenges we face, the United States will require bases and stations
within and beyond Western Europe and Northeast Asia, as well as temporary
access arrangements for the long-distance deployment of U.S. forces.
Before the war in Afghanistan, that area was low on the list of major
planning contingencies. Yet, in a very short time, we had to operate
across the length and breadth of that remote nation, using every branch of
the armed forces. We must prepare for more such deployments by developing
assets such as advanced remote sensing, long-range precision strike
capabilities, and transformed maneuver and expeditionary forces. This
broad portfolio of military capabilities must also include the ability to
defend the homeland, conduct information operations, ensure U.S. access to
distant theaters, and protect critical U.S. infrastructure and assets in
outer space.
Innovation within the armed forces will rest on experimentation with
new approaches to warfare, strengthening joint operations, exploiting U.S.
intelligence advantages, and taking full advantage of science and
technology. We must also transform the way the Department of Defense is
run, especially in financial management and recruitment and retention.
Finally, while maintaining near-term readiness and the ability to fight
the war on terrorism, the goal must be to provide the President with a
wider range of military options to discourage aggression or any form of
coercion against the United States, our allies, and our friends.
We know from history that deterrence can fail; and we know from
experience that some enemies cannot be deterred. The United States must
and will maintain the capability to defeat any attempt by an enemy -
whether a state or non-state actor - to impose its will on the United
States, our allies, or our friends. We will maintain the forces sufficient
to support our obligations, and to defend freedom. Our forces will be
strong enough to dissuade potential adversaries from pursuing a military
build-up in hopes of surpassing, or equaling, the power of the United
States.
Intelligence - and how we use it - is our first line of defense against
terrorists and the threat posed by hostile states. Designed around the
priority of gathering enormous information about a massive, fixed object -
the Soviet bloc - the intelligence community is coping with the challenge
of following a far more complex and elusive set of targets.
We must transform our intelligence capabilities and build new ones to
keep pace with the nature of these threats. Intelligence must be
appropriately integrated with our defense and law enforcement systems and
coordinated with our allies and friends. We need to protect the
capabilities we have so that we do not arm our enemies with the knowledge
of how best to surprise us. Those who would harm us also seek the benefit
of surprise to limit our prevention and response options and to maximize
injury.
We must strengthen intelligence warning and analysis to provide
integrated threat assessments for national and homeland security. Since
the threats inspired by foreign governments and groups may be conducted
inside the United States, we must also ensure the proper fusion of
information between intelligence and law enforcement.
Initiatives in this area will include:
* strengthening the authority of the Director of Central Intelligence
to lead the development and actions of the Nation's foreign intelligence
capabilities;
* establishing a new framework for intelligence warning that provides
seamless and integrated warning across the spectrum of threats facing the
nation and our allies;
* continuing to develop new methods of collecting information to
sustain our intelligence advantage;
* investing in future capabilities while working to protect them
through a more vigorous effort to prevent the compromise of intelligence
capabilities; and
* collecting intelligence against the terrorist danger across the
government with all-source analysis.
As the United States Government relies on the armed forces to defend
America's interests, it must rely on diplomacy to interact with other
nations. We will ensure that the Department of State receives funding
sufficient to ensure the success of American diplomacy. The State
Department takes the lead in managing our bilateral relationships with
other governments. And in this new era, its people and institutions must
be able to interact equally adroitly with non-governmental organizations
and international institutions. Officials trained mainly in international
politics must also extend their reach to understand complex issues of
domestic governance around the world, including public health, education,
law enforcement, the judiciary, and public diplomacy.
Our diplomats serve at the front line of complex negotiations, civil
wars, and other humanitarian catastrophes. As humanitarian relief
requirements are better understood, we must also be able to help build
police forces, court systems, and legal codes, local and provincial
government institutions, and electoral systems. Effective international
cooperation is needed to accomplish these goals, backed by American
readiness to play our part.
Just as our diplomatic institutions must adapt so that we can reach out
to others, we also need a different and more comprehensive approach to
public information efforts that can help people around the world learn
about and understand America. The war on terrorism is not a clash of
civilizations. It does, however, reveal the clash inside a civilization, a
battle for the future of the Muslim world. This is a struggle of ideas and
this is an area where America must excel.
We will take the actions necessary to ensure that our efforts to meet
our global security commitments and protect Americans are not impaired by
the potential for investigations, inquiry, or prosecution by the
International Criminal Court (ICC), whose jurisdiction does not extend to
Americans and which we do not accept. We will work together with other
nations to avoid complications in our military operations and cooperation,
through such mechanisms as multilateral and bilateral agreements that will
protect U.S. nationals from the ICC. We will implement fully the American
Servicemembers Protection Act, whose provisions are intended to ensure and
enhance the protection of U.S. personnel and officials.
We will make hard choices in the coming year and beyond to ensure the
right level and allocation of government spending on national security.
The United States Government must strengthen its defenses to win this war.
At home, our most important priority is to protect the homeland for the
American people.
Today, the distinction between domestic and foreign affairs is
diminishing. In a globalized world, events beyond America's borders have a
greater impact inside them. Our society must be open to people, ideas, and
goods from across the globe. The characteristics we most cherish - our
freedom, our cities, our systems of movement, and modern life - are
vulnerable to terrorism. This vulnerability will persist long after we
bring to justice those responsible for the September eleventh attacks. As
time passes, individuals may gain access to means of destruction that
until now could be wielded only by armies, fleets, and squadrons. This is
a new condition of life. We will adjust to it and thrive - in spite of
it.
In exercising our leadership, we will respect the values, judgment, and
interests of our friends and partners. Still, we will be prepared to act
apart when our interests and unique responsibilities require. When we
disagree on particulars, we will explain forthrightly the grounds for our
concerns and strive to forge viable alternatives. We will not allow such
disagreements to obscure our determination to secure together, with our
allies and our friends, our shared fundamental interests and values.
Ultimately, the foundation of American strength is at home. It is in
the skills of our people, the dynamism of our economy, and the resilience
of our institutions. A diverse, modern society has inherent, ambitious,
entrepreneurial energy. Our strength comes from what we do with that
energy. That is where our national security begins.