National Security Part II

National Security Part II--Strategy and Such

By Craig S. Byrnes

The National Defense Strategy of the United States of America summarizes the current strategic environment as uncertain, stating the US is able to identify trends that may point to a looming attack, “but cannot predict specific events with precision.” Due to the extreme hyperpower status achieved by the United States in the post-Cold War period the nation was thrust into a precarious position. After the downfall of Soviet Communism and collapse of the Soviet Union a world existed where not one military came within striking distance of US armed forces, but instead of unchallenged peace, widespread terrorism emerged as the leading threat to peace and stability forcing the American people into global war on terrorism [GWOT] they would rather not have.

Fighting off the urge to embrace isolationism the nation moves forward with resolve, however, many new weaknesses now face them. Therefore, according to the defense strategy document, “While we work to avoid being surprised, we must posture ourselves to handle unanticipated problems—we must plan with surprise in mind.”

One of the greatest weaknesses of US national defense policy is the inability to respond to international security challenges unilaterally and remain successful. A coalition of allies—with the capabilities required to act along side the US in addressing global challenges—is the key ingredient to continued success, but as of late coalition members are dropping out of the action of the GWOT making it harder to produce evidence of a decisive victory, not to mention the fact that public enemy number one is not a state but one man—Osama Bin Laden—with a seemingly successful quasi-intelligence organization the world has come to know as al-Qaida.

In this new security environment it is increasingly harder to use the former US cold war strategy of containment, and even harder to use deterrence strategies against an adversary who claims the fundamental difference between the US and the terrorists is they have a love for death where the US has a love for life. According to US defense strategy for the 21^st century, “our leading position in world affairs will continue to breed unease, a degree of resentment, and resistance.”

US strength as a nation state will constantly be contested, not by the conventional military of another nation state, but by the few failing or undeveloped countries and radical extremists who seek to, “employ a strategy of the weak,” where they fraudulently put to use international judicial processes and terrorism to further their goal of defeating the “evil” Americans.

There is truly not another viable option on the table to suggest another way to combat this new threat without it being ruinous to the power and overall standing of the United States as actors on the world stage, and it is for this reason the consequences of our strategy will make us and our allies targets of extremism and terrorism—thus one more demoralizing cost to remain a free people and sustain vital national interests.

While sounding dreadful for the American and allied civilians, according to the Bush Administration, “This strategy focuses on safeguarding US freedoms and interests, while working actively to forestall the emergence of new challenges.” During times of war society tends shift like a roller coaster going up and down the track; the beginning almost always exemplifies total public support—the US invasion of Afghanistan and destruction of the Taliban government—for retaliatory purposes when they have been attacked. Currently on a dip in the track, society remains isolated from the conflict, I fear they will fall victim to the internal domestic political pressures brought on by critics of the current war to secure Iraq, and while most are good intentioned and desire a lasting fruitful, economically stable peace, they probably will end up doing such overwhelming damage US threats of force will be laughed at—as we saw with Saddam Hussein in 2003 and are seeing now as Iran refuses to stop enriching uranium and denies the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) access to some of its nuclear sites.

Weaknesses brought on by domestic political pressures are avoidable. If the politicians in the US Senate and Congress insist on bickering over past issues and debating the Iraq war—a war of obligation, not a war of choice in my opinion—while many more pertinent issues—such as health care, education and nuclear proliferation—continue to ferment like the whiskey in Edward Kennedy’s flask, then these unfortunate “vulnerabilities” will present an opportunity to our enemies to devastate our great country from within—an unacceptable outcome in every way.

As congress attempts to approve the 2008 Defense budget requests, many will attempt to weaken the Bush Administration, but they will do so at their own peril and at the peril of innocent men and women serving in the US armed forces abroad—a volunteer force—which selflessly secures the freedom and way of life Americans have come to know and love. Two thirds of the defense budget consists of controllable expenses—meaning the congress and others have more room to cut funding from certain areas of national security in order to divert funds to other government programs that constituents and lobbyist pull for daily. Some would like to see forces pulled from Iraq in order to use them to beef up military presence in Afghanistan. Think back. The Soviets occupied the region for more than a decade before finally having to give up and fall back due to the heavily fortified mountainous regions that gave cover to bin Laden then and continue to do so today just over the Pakistan border. If there were ever a conflict that held the potential to become another Vietnam it would be US troops bogged down in the melting snow on the mountains of Afghanistan.

Despite all the negative aspects and vulnerabilities resulting from the GWOT, it is still possible to recognize many opportunities for growth, improvement and adaptation within the realm of US national defense policy.