|
Preemtive strikes become policy { March 18 2005 } Original Source Link: (May no longer be active)
http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/nation/la-031905defense_lat,0,5377772.story?coll=la-home-nationhttp://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/nation/la-031905defense_lat,0,5377772.story?coll=la-home-nation
'Preemptive Strikes' Become Policy
National defense now extends beyond U.S. borders to include acts of 'active deterrence.'
By John Hendren
Times Staff Writer
4:22 PM PST, March 18, 2005
WASHINGTON — A new "National Defense Strategy" for the first time makes the kind of preemptive strike used in Iraq part of the nation's military policy in dealing with rogue nations, Pentagon officials said today.
The plan that specifies the Bush administration's goals in protecting the nation describes a muscular policy of "active deterrence."
Under it, the United States will seek to expand its relationships with allies and "act with others when we can" to prevent growing regional problems from erupting into wars, according to an unclassified version of the document outlined at the Pentagon by Douglas Feith, the Defense Department's undersecretary for policy. The policy also reserves the right for the United States to act on its own when necessary.
"The president has the obligation to protect the country," Feith said. "And I don't think that there's anything in our Constitution that says that the president should not protect the country unless he gets some non-Americans' participation or approval of that."
The new strategy focuses the Pentagon's spending priorities on long-range budget plans. Feith confirmed reports that the United States would for the first time invite close allies, among them Britain, to review classified portions of U.S. defense strategy as part of the Quadrennial Defense Review, a four-year military policy and spending plan.
The document he described further shifts the nation from the Cold War strategy of "containing" Eastern Europe to a global strategy of taking on enemies that emerge unexpectedly — as the administration argues Afghanistan did following the terror attacks of Sept. 11, 2001 — and even terror organizations within friendly nations.
It appears to move the nation further from reliance on such international coalitions as NATO and more toward what Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld has called "coalitions of the willing" under clear American leadership, analysts said.
"NATO is kind of missing in action now in their strategy," said Loren Thompson, a military analyst with the Lexington Institute, an Arlington, Va., public policy group. "During the Clinton years, coalition warfare with the other members of NATO was a centerpiece to our strategy, and now the administration is expecting almost nothing from the Europeans. When it talks about partnering with other countries, it usually means Pakistan or Korea or countries outside of the western alliance."
In some cases, respected global organizations seem to be viewed with suspicion. In describing the vulnerabilities of the United States, the document uses strong language to list international forums — such as the International Court of Justice in the Hague, created under a treaty the United States has declined to sign — alongside terrorists.
|
|
