> 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.
Absolutely correct. Perhaps the most fundamental thing to realize about
life on Earth today.
The following is a fascinating document of official Government policy
that bears close reading. It is the aspirations of a wonderful nation in
an imperfect world.
>  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.
I was recently at a lecture about the surprising success of Radio Sawa,
our new music-and-news channel for 15-30 year old Arabs. It's #1 in
practically every market it's entered, nearing 90% listenership in
Amman. And it's even beginning to be trusted for news, well past BBC and
taking share from every other government broadcaster.
It is as hard to imagine America losing a war of ideas in the long-term
as it is to imagine America making any headway at all in the short term.
Many of you may disagree, but I found the document below surprisingly
centrist. If you know the code, you can hear clearly partisan tones, re:
ICC, Taiwan Relations Act, etc. But, still, this is as much a Democratic
platform as not. Africa and AIDS take up more mindshare than I feared
they might.
As you read, replace "United States" with "Roman Empire" and it may make
as much sense, in the long view of history. I don't know how proud to be
about that, but it is telling. Sometime I daydream that the President
might sit down with the nation with Perotista flip charts and explain to
our citizens the sheer vastness of our 700+ military installations
overseas and what they do for us. It would be a powerful education on
how engaged we are in the world around us.
Heck, I'd love to see a real-time map of Federal expenditures around the
globe, a softly glowing necklace of embassies, carriers, arctic research
stations, hotels, golf courses, warehouses, libraries, clinics and all
the rest of the influence a trillion dollars here or there can buy.
Of course, this still doesn't leave me any more comfortable with the
real news in this document: the Bush Doctrine for pre-emptive strikes.
I'd sooner repeal the Church amendments on covert action than permit
such a principle to be loosed upon the world.
Rohit
-----------------------------------------------------
September 20, 2002
Full Text: Bush's National Security Strategy
Following is the full text of President Bush's new national security
strategy. The document, entitled "The National Security Strategy of the
United States," will soon be transmitted to Congress as a declaration of
the Administration's policy.
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.


>>>>> "G" == Geege Schuman
writes:
G> SURELY you meant political extremes and not politics?  baisley?
G> help me out here.
OK, but only if you also meant religious and alcoholic extremes ;)
When the political canvassers come to my door during the campaigns,
I always wonder why cigarette packages are labelled with warnings
whereas political brochures are not; the statistics clearly show
which is the greater, more senseless, and more preventable killer.
>>>>> "R" == Russell Turpin
writes:
R> It's difficult to measure which is the greater liability in a
R> potential mate, religiosity or alcoholism.
G> Or politics.
--
Gary Lawrence Murphy - garym@teledyn.com - TeleDynamics Communications
- blog: ~teledyn - biz:  -
"Computers are useless. They can only give you answers." (Picasso)


GLM> whereas political brochures are not; the statistics clearly show
GLM> which is the greater, more senseless, and more preventable killer.
So outside of the occasional hit by a mafia-boy, where's the killing?
If you said mind-numbing, rights destroying, cynic-making force, I'd
agree.  But, does politics really kill?
I'm bitter atm.  Two reasons mostly:
1) I was listening to what I heard being the First Amendment
Foundation? on NPR releasing a poll noting that their
very-unscientific poll found that half the population thinks the first
amendment goes too far.   And (their quote was 1 in 5, but I'm finding
sources of 1 in 4) of the population don't even know what rights are
guaranteed in the first amendment.
2) I have a paper due that will make or break my law school career.  I
hate being a forced sheep.
baaaa....
>>>>>> "R" == Russell Turpin
writes:
GLM>     R> It's difficult to measure which is the greater liability in a
GLM>     R> potential mate, religiosity or alcoholism.
GLM>     G> Or politics.
--
Best regards,
bitbitch                            mailto:bitbitch@magnesium.net


And of course I forget the link that I did find.

Neither NPR nor the first amendment foundation seem to have the
article I was looking for declaring the study.
Even if its half true, its still frightening.
It makes me want to pass out CATO bibles...
--
Best regards,
bitbitch                            mailto:bitbitch@magnesium.net


Gary Lawrence Murphy:
>OK, but only if you also meant religious and alcoholic extremes ;)
Since it was my quip, I'll point out that I used
the term "alcoholism," implying addiction. I
drink. I'm not an alcoholic. Most people who drink
don't go to AA meetings. Most people who go to AA
meetings do (try very hard) not to drink.
As to religion, I think it is harmful and risky in
almost any degree. Were I single, I might consider
potential mates who partook of the less irrational
or more light-hearted religions. A Unitarian or
Buddhist might be an example of the first, a Wiccan
of the second. But someone who is both irrational
and serious about that irrationality strikes me as
a bad choice of partner, moreso than someone who
was addicted to some drug. Alcoholics and drug
addicts at least have the sense to battle their
problem, and to keep their children from suffering
it. The religious revel in their irrationality,
and want to raise their children in it. That's a
difficult difference for two parents to
reconcile.
Fortunately, I am long and happily enamored of
someone who has no religious tendencies.
_________________________________________________________________
Send and receive Hotmail on your mobile device:


You around?
C
--
"I don't take no stocks in mathematics, anyway" --Huckleberry Finn


> help me out here.
> You around?
Barely, but don't call me Shirley.  ;-)
I'm sleeping with one eye open.
I wouldn't have married me if I'd known how extremely shallow my
politics are.
"The ward lurks in Wisteria's maze."
Cheers,
Wayne