Foreign Policy and Defense in a Second Term
John Kerry and Chuck Hagel–two of the best mainstream nominees that President Obama could have selected for Secretaries of State and Defense, respectively–will soon face Senate confirmation. With these nominees, hopefully Obama is signaling a veering away from interventionism to a long overdue, restrained foreign policy. During the first term, to his credit, Obama ended the Iraq war with thankfully no American troops remaining in that country, set an end date to American combat in Afghanistan, and has apparently signaled an accelerated withdrawal of U.S. forces from there.
Unfortunately, the downside to Obama’s first term foreign policy was his expanded, and therefore unconstitutional, "secret" drone war against Islamists in many countries, which included killing American citizens without any due legal process. Also, Obama was dragged by the newly aggressive France into a primarily air war in Libya to overthrow a Muammar Gaddafi, a dictator who had already agreed to play ball with the West.
Although during his second term, Obama again risks being sucked in by the French to another brushfire war in the developing world—this time in the African nation of Mali—Obama has been headed down the right path of lessening U.S. involvement in unnecessary wars. Obama must warn France that American help will be confined to intelligence and U.S. aircraft to transport French soldiers and that the United States will not bail out France from any future quagmire on the ground (Vietnam all over again), which seems likely.
Hopefully, Obama’s negotiation with Hamid Karzai to keep some American troops in Afghanistan after the U.S. "withdrawal" date in 2014 will fail. The main trunk of al Qaeda (the perpetrators of the 9/11 attacks) in Afghanistan and Pakistan has largely been wiped out, and the current drone campaign is simply making new Islamist enemies for the United States. Besides, if the United States needed an emergency military strike against such remnants of al Qaeda, it could be taken from outside those countries using long-range Air Force bombers or carrier-based naval aircraft. Obama should also cease drone attacks in Yemen and Somalia, thus halting the generation of new Islamist enemies in those countries. (Furthermore, the Senate should veto Obama’s nominee to direct the CIA, John Brennan, who is the architect of the drone program.)
Scaling back or eliminating the drone campaign in these countries would save a little money, but many more savings are needed to battle the nation’s monstrous debt of more than $16 trillion. First of all, the United States no longer needs to plan to fight and to size its ground forces for more than one war at a time. Second, because no need exists for a "greater than one war" capability and because the All Volunteer Force has become too costly, expensive active Army and Marine divisions need to be reduced and National Guard and Reserve forces need to be trained to a higher standard. Third, to reduce the costs of all military forces, cutting the soaring health care costs of active and retired forces is a must; thus, those currently serving and those who are retired must pay a greater share of their health care costs. In addition, the luxurious retirement of U.S. military personnel at a very early age (which is even much earlier than the infamous low retirement age in Greece), compared with that of the general American population, must be ended. Finally, excessive benefits, such as subsidizing military housing and grocery bills, need to be curtailed. Contrary to conventional wisdom, compared to civilians working in the general economy, military personnel during peacetime receive lavish pay and benefits; these excessive perks need to be cut back.
Recently, Leon Panetta, the current Secretary of Defense argued that the U.S. needed a military presence in Europe, Africa, and Latin America. Yet no real threat exists to Europe, Africa is not strategic to the United States, and no other great power could challenge U.S. dominance of Latin America, even if U.S. forces operated from the continental United States. In fact, in the current low threat environment worldwide, to save money, the United States could reduce the number of its military bases all over the world, decommission many of the military units stationed there, and rely more on forces projected from the United States.
Drastic cuts in the defense budgets will be needed, especially if President Obama adheres to his apparent irresponsible Second Inaugural pledge to hold fast on reforming rapidly growing entitlement programs, such as Social Security and Medicare. At minimum, the president should endorse additional defense cuts of about $500 billion over nearly a decade, which will take effect if nothing is changed (what has been heretofore called the "fiscal cliff"). In reality, to put the nation on a better fiscal footing, and thus to ensure its long-term security, defense cuts should go even deeper than that.
Read more by Ivan Eland
- An Ally Out of Control – January 15th, 2013
- Split Decision on Obama’s National Security Nominees – January 8th, 2013
- Reducing Defense … Cuts – December 18th, 2012
- America’s Wars: The Gifts That Keep on Giving – December 11th, 2012
- US Intelligence: Redundancy Increases as Budget Pressure Mounts – December 4th, 2012
Foreign Policy and Defense in a Second Term | The Business Defense News Network
January 23rd, 2013 at 1:47 am
[...] Read more… [...]
tadzio
January 23rd, 2013 at 4:05 am
John Kerry has a military record of over 100 pages. Most are 1 or 2. The public has a right to know what is in the record. He should not be confirmed or even voted on until the full record has been made public. Court records of crimes and civil lawsuits are open to public gaze. His military record should be too.
The length of it is compatible with a Court Martial proceeding and multiple appeals. He did not seek replacement of his medals until after Carter issued a blanket pardon of Vietnam era crimes. But the president cannot pardon aiding an enemy which some contend is what Kerry would have been charged with. The 14th amendment gives that power to the Congress alone.
Kerry's nomination cries out for transparency. He may be ineligible to hold a government position. That the Senate never properly vetted him does not void the ban.
Bruce Richardson
January 23rd, 2013 at 7:51 am
The overiding question is not who Obama nominates to head Secretary of State and Defense positions, but whether or not this country is to continue on the seemimgly perpetual and legally challenged trajectory and question of killing by drone. Each and every strike seems to take the innocent along with the suspected so-called "insurgents." And each and every strike seems destined to expand the ranks/numbers of those who resist the US. This is not the way to "win hearts and minds."
Fiscal challenges aside for the moment, and those are undoubtedly astronomical…this is a question of morality and what we, as a nation, have become.
michaelhamrin
January 23rd, 2013 at 8:47 am
Mr. Eland, it is categorically not true that there are no "strategic interests" in Africa — at least from the vantage point of greedy transnational corporate interests or from the position of neocons who dream of endless world domination. Africa is resource-rich. Whomever controls their resource development has leverage on the rest of the world. We are already lavishing various African elites with major $$$ and arms and milary training. China also has developmental inroads throughout Africa, and surprise, surprise, the Africans like doing business with the canny Chinese better than arrogant Americans.
@charleycaruso
January 23rd, 2013 at 11:05 am
If Obummer picked Hagel and Kerry, they'll play his game. Wait and see.
JLS
January 23rd, 2013 at 11:21 am
"During the first term, to his credit, Obama ended the Iraq war…"
I don't see how it's to his credit when he did everything short of threatening another invasion to stay in Iraq. The US left Iraq (to the extent that it did) because the Iraqi government refused to be pressured into extending the status if forces agreement.
Larue
January 23rd, 2013 at 8:05 pm
Wow, Ivan Edland goes all in Wall St austerity wise on reducing our military.
What a crock of shit Mr. Edland.
We need to do a lot of what you initially suggest but cutting the rest on the backs of the retired and have served their times vets who desperately need every dime of assistance in healthcare and housing and any other service they need, is beyond your pale.
Never thot I'd see Ivan Edland gutting the heart of our America and it's service members. What horrid examples to forment in solving our empire problems abroad. Just horrid.
stop lying
January 24th, 2013 at 11:02 pm
"During the first term, to his credit, Obama ended the Iraq war…"
I am telling you, this site supports the first black "president', Obama the assassin and baby killer. The writer knows shit otherwise would have not write such a stupid sentence. Even children would laugh.
Antiwar.com Newsletter | January 25, 2012 - Unofficial Network
January 25th, 2013 at 4:04 pm
[...] Eland made some predictions and recommendations about Obama’s foreign policy in the second [...]