HERBERT LONDON
August 14, 2013
Whether directly or tacitly, nations offer signals about their
strength, willingness to act, weakness, and appeasement. At the moment,
the United States is in a state of "preemptive surrender," a condition
manifest by several recent events.
When Russia granted asylum to National Security Agency leaker Edward
Snowden, Putin defied and embarrassed the Obama administration.
Lawmakers across the land scorned Moscow for this obvious slap in the
face, but Putin knew intuitively that there were unlikely to be any real
consequences. White House spokesman Jay Carney said, "We are extremely
disappointed that the Russian government would take this step..." But
all that happened was a decision to withdraw from Obama's one-on-one
meeting with Russian President Vladimir Putin.
The message is loud and clear to friends and foes alike: a nation, as
well as a terrorist group, can get away with hostile actions against
the United States. There is simply no price to pay for attacking the
U.S. in these Obama years. While no one will say so directly, American
security is now more fragile than at any point since Pearl Harbor. The
U.S. still has some power and influence but as Putin's decision and the
Chinese unwillingness to prevent Snowden from fleeing Hong Kong suggest,
the limits of power are apparent.
Moreover, frustration with Mr. Putin has been building on another
front. Moscow's support for Syrian President Bashar al-Assad, including a
transfer of advanced antiship missiles over U.S. objections, indicates
Russian ambitions cannot be thwarted by U.S. power. Government officials
contend that the U.S. can push Moscow only so far without jeopardizing
"mutual" interests in other areas, i.e. the Iran nuclear program. But
this claim merely demonstrates how far U.S. interests have been
compromised.
Not only has the Snowden affair weakened U.S. anti-surveillance and
anti-terror activity it has invited copycats to do the same. For
detractors of American policy the door of disclosure is open and secrets
are for sale with virtual impunity. In addition, the U.S. government
has averted its gaze from the release of terrorists from jails at an
alarming rate. Last month, al Qaeda freed 600 terrorists - including
many on death sentences - from two prisons near Bagdad. Terrorists also
pulled off a massive jailbreak in Benghazi that included 1200 inmates.
Yet even as tensions across the world are rising and China and Russia
are daily challenging America's national will, the U.S. military is
conducting sweeping overhaul of its war plans and capability. Recent
Pentagon proposals unveiled deep cuts in the size of the Army and Marine
Corps and further cuts in naval forces already decimated by recent
retrenchment. Pentagon officials maintain that these force reductions
still provide adequate contingency plans for dealing with hypothetical
conflicts around the world. But every officer knows that the revised
plans mean "achieve the mission with fewer forces."
Surely these new plans require technological innovations to
compensate for force reductions. Where these innovations come from is
anyone's guess. Moreover, projecting power when and where it is needed
becomes an exercise in priority building. The military can no longer do
what it once did.
Here is yet another signal from the Obama administration. Mutual
defense pacts that depend on an American military umbrella can no longer
be relied on. President Obama has discussed a pivot to Asia, but it is a
pivot without substance. Allies in the Pacific wonder whether the U.S.
government has the will to act, and even if it does, no longer has the
naval assets to project power. Is it any wonder that there are continual
debates in the councils of Asian governments from Japan to India about
the U.S. commitment to the region.
For enemies of the U.S., there isn't the fear of apprehension and
retaliation. Despite all the talk about Bin Laden, the terrorists
responsible for the attack on the U.S. embassy in Benghazi walk the
streets without any concern. As they see it, the United States is a
paper tiger, toothless and without the will to defend itself. Even if
this is exaggerated, the perception is dangerous because it can become a
reality that triggers terrorist activity wherever American interests
are vulnerable.
Herbert London is a Senior Fellow at the Manhattan
Institute and the President of the London Center for Policy Research.
He is president emeritus of Hudson Institute and author of the book
The Transformational Decade (University Press of America).
Read more:
Family Security Matters http://www.familysecuritymatters.org/publications/detail/the-emerging-us-weakness?f=must_reads#ixzz2bwuoSDBG
Under Creative Commons License:
Attribution
No comments:
Post a Comment