A New National Security Strategy in an Age of Terrorists, Tyrants, and Weapons of Mass Destruction: Three Options Presented as Presidential Speeches

A New National Security Strategy in an Age of Terrorists, Tyrants, and Weapons of Mass Destruction: Three Options Presented as Presidential Speeches

A New National Security Strategy in an Age of Terrorists, Tyrants, and Weapons of Mass Destruction: Three Options Presented as Presidential Speeches

A New National Security Strategy in an Age of Terrorists, Tyrants, and Weapons of Mass Destruction: Three Options Presented as Presidential Speeches

Synopsis

Almost exactly one year after the September 11 attacks, President Bush unveiled a new National Security Strategy for the United States. This document, which articulates what some have called the most profound shift in US strategy since the 1950s, has spawned much debate around the world about how it should be implemented. national security, this book lays out the best case for the different ways this strategy can be applied. It presents the options as presidential speeches, preceeded by a memo explaining the strengths, weaknesses and politics of each one. The president's original National Security Strategy is also included as an addendum.

Excerpt

From the fall of the Berlin Wall in 1989 to the fall of the Twin Towers in 2001, and even after the 2003 Iraq war, the United States has not had a consistent national security strategy that enjoyed the support of the American people and our allies. This situation is markedly different from the Cold War era, when the United States had a clear, coherent, widely supported strategy that focused on containing and deterring Soviet communist expansion.

The tragic events of September 11, the increase in terrorism, and possible threats from countries that are capable of developing weapons of mass destruction now make it imperative to develop a new security strategy to safeguard the United States. Americans are beginning to recognize the need for a vigorous debate about what that new strategy should be. Three approaches suggest themselves to us at the Council, each of which would lead our country in a different direction. in brief, these choices call for leveraging American dominance with preventive military action, creating stability by using American military superiority for deterrence and containment, and working toward a more cooperative, rule-based international system backed by American power that is used in genuine concert with U.S. friends and allies.

We are still far from agreement on which of these approaches to pursue. So, instead of establishing a CFRTask Force and seeking an unlikely consensus, we decided to employ another Council vehicle, which we call a Council Policy Initiative (CPI). It is designed to foster debate by making the best case for each of the alternatives. We’ve tried the same approach on defense policy twice before: the first time in 1998, to address concerns about the readiness of our forces to meet the challenges of the post–Cold War world, and again in 2002, in response to the new lineup of threats to homeland security after September 11. This third cpi builds on the defense strategies discussed in the previous two but also aims to define an . . .

Search by... Author
Show... All Results Primary Sources Peer-reviewed

Oops!

An unknown error has occurred. Please click the button below to reload the page. If the problem persists, please try again in a little while.