Team Infidel
Forum Spin Doctor
USA Today
March 27, 2008
Pg. 11
Why two retired military officers believe it's essential that the next president use outreach, good deeds and a strong military to make the United States safer.
By Anthony C. Zinni and Leighton W. Smith Jr.
As voters consider their choices for president, much is already weighing on their minds: talk about a U.S. recession, lack of affordable health care, and the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. But another concern should be front and center — the candidates' vision for a better, safer America and world.
Our experience, both in and out of uniform, leads us to make a direct, personal appeal to all the presidential candidates that what the U.S. urgently needs is a new and vibrant strategic agenda for its national security and foreign policy. The reality is that many of the threats we face today — illegal immigration, radical jihadism and terrorism, public health and environmental problems — originate from complicated circumstances beyond our borders. And we know that young people who live in countries where they feel disenfranchised and without hope are prime recruiting targets for our adversaries.
We cannot inoculate our nation from these threats. Instead, we must address the roots of these complex problems. Simply put, it is time to repair our relationship with the world and begin to take it to the nextlevel — a level defined not only by our military strength, but also by the lives we save and the opportunities we create for the people of other nations. We call upon the next president to elevate the use of tools such as development assistance and diplomacy as integral parts of our national security strategy.
Whether it's taking the lead in increasing funding for and using innovation to expand access to potable water in the Middle East, decreasing rates of HIV/AIDS in Africa and Southeast Asia, building international partnerships to put impoverished kids in school or addressing climate change, the next administration must reframe and restructure our foreign policy and national security architecture. We must match our military might with a new commitment to investing in improving people's lives overseas.
Why would two retired military officers, a Marine and a Navy attack pilot, support increased investment in these non-military tools? Because we understand that the U.S. cannot rely on military power alone to keep us safe from terrorism, infectious disease and other global threats that recognize no borders.
The next commander in chief must be ready at the start of his or her administration to articulate a comprehensive strategy for how America is going to chart a new course by elevating the use of our non-military tools, followed by hard commitments of people and resources to the task. He or she must be ready to do what any military commander would do going into battle: Make sure your troops understand the mission and its importance and then work to execute the plan.
Today's battle for peace requires the same seamless coordination, and the troops the next president must prepare include Defense, State, U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID) and the National Security Council.
An example of a country where greater investments in development are making a difference to our security is Yemen. It's one of the least developed countries in the world and a ripe recruiting ground for terrorists. Today, U.S. aid programs are building health clinics there, supplying medical equipment, training midwives and doctors to improve pre- and post-natal care, and expanding counseling services and health education to rural areas. Increased efforts such as these will help mitigate the extreme poverty and accompanying hopelessness that often fuel terrorist recruitment.
Or consider Liberia, where, after decades of conflict, development assistance is reintegrating and revitalizing communities by accelerating learning opportunities for ex-combatant and non-combatant youth,creating jobs through microcredit and small enterprise initiatives — and promoting human rights.
In both countries, significant non-military investments help mitigate societal discontent, which promotes stability internally with the potential to remove destabilizing influences in the surrounding regions.
Such leadership and shift in strategy are not without precedent. President Harry Truman signed the National Security Act of 1947 to realign the U.S. armed forces, foreign policy and intelligence community apparatus after World War II. This act and the changes that followed were instrumental in helping presidents from Truman to Ronald Reagan devise and implement strategies to deal with the Cold War threats of the time.
Both of us entered service to our country in the Cold War era, when strategic threats were more easily defined. Today, our "enemies" are often conditions — poverty, infectious disease, political instability and corruption, global warming — which generate the biggest threats. By addressing them in meaningful ways, we can forestall crises.
The great Chinese military general and strategist Sun Tze got it right in sixth century B.C. when he said, "The supreme art of war is to subdue the enemy without fighting." We urge our next commander in chief to accept this sage advice. The American people should expect nothing less.
General Anthony C. Zinni and Admiral Leighton W. Smith Jr. retired from the Marine Corps and the Navy, respectively. They are co-chairs of the Center for U.S. Global Engagement's National Security Advisory Council.
March 27, 2008
Pg. 11
Why two retired military officers believe it's essential that the next president use outreach, good deeds and a strong military to make the United States safer.
By Anthony C. Zinni and Leighton W. Smith Jr.
As voters consider their choices for president, much is already weighing on their minds: talk about a U.S. recession, lack of affordable health care, and the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. But another concern should be front and center — the candidates' vision for a better, safer America and world.
Our experience, both in and out of uniform, leads us to make a direct, personal appeal to all the presidential candidates that what the U.S. urgently needs is a new and vibrant strategic agenda for its national security and foreign policy. The reality is that many of the threats we face today — illegal immigration, radical jihadism and terrorism, public health and environmental problems — originate from complicated circumstances beyond our borders. And we know that young people who live in countries where they feel disenfranchised and without hope are prime recruiting targets for our adversaries.
We cannot inoculate our nation from these threats. Instead, we must address the roots of these complex problems. Simply put, it is time to repair our relationship with the world and begin to take it to the nextlevel — a level defined not only by our military strength, but also by the lives we save and the opportunities we create for the people of other nations. We call upon the next president to elevate the use of tools such as development assistance and diplomacy as integral parts of our national security strategy.
Whether it's taking the lead in increasing funding for and using innovation to expand access to potable water in the Middle East, decreasing rates of HIV/AIDS in Africa and Southeast Asia, building international partnerships to put impoverished kids in school or addressing climate change, the next administration must reframe and restructure our foreign policy and national security architecture. We must match our military might with a new commitment to investing in improving people's lives overseas.
Why would two retired military officers, a Marine and a Navy attack pilot, support increased investment in these non-military tools? Because we understand that the U.S. cannot rely on military power alone to keep us safe from terrorism, infectious disease and other global threats that recognize no borders.
The next commander in chief must be ready at the start of his or her administration to articulate a comprehensive strategy for how America is going to chart a new course by elevating the use of our non-military tools, followed by hard commitments of people and resources to the task. He or she must be ready to do what any military commander would do going into battle: Make sure your troops understand the mission and its importance and then work to execute the plan.
Today's battle for peace requires the same seamless coordination, and the troops the next president must prepare include Defense, State, U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID) and the National Security Council.
An example of a country where greater investments in development are making a difference to our security is Yemen. It's one of the least developed countries in the world and a ripe recruiting ground for terrorists. Today, U.S. aid programs are building health clinics there, supplying medical equipment, training midwives and doctors to improve pre- and post-natal care, and expanding counseling services and health education to rural areas. Increased efforts such as these will help mitigate the extreme poverty and accompanying hopelessness that often fuel terrorist recruitment.
Or consider Liberia, where, after decades of conflict, development assistance is reintegrating and revitalizing communities by accelerating learning opportunities for ex-combatant and non-combatant youth,creating jobs through microcredit and small enterprise initiatives — and promoting human rights.
In both countries, significant non-military investments help mitigate societal discontent, which promotes stability internally with the potential to remove destabilizing influences in the surrounding regions.
Such leadership and shift in strategy are not without precedent. President Harry Truman signed the National Security Act of 1947 to realign the U.S. armed forces, foreign policy and intelligence community apparatus after World War II. This act and the changes that followed were instrumental in helping presidents from Truman to Ronald Reagan devise and implement strategies to deal with the Cold War threats of the time.
Both of us entered service to our country in the Cold War era, when strategic threats were more easily defined. Today, our "enemies" are often conditions — poverty, infectious disease, political instability and corruption, global warming — which generate the biggest threats. By addressing them in meaningful ways, we can forestall crises.
The great Chinese military general and strategist Sun Tze got it right in sixth century B.C. when he said, "The supreme art of war is to subdue the enemy without fighting." We urge our next commander in chief to accept this sage advice. The American people should expect nothing less.
General Anthony C. Zinni and Admiral Leighton W. Smith Jr. retired from the Marine Corps and the Navy, respectively. They are co-chairs of the Center for U.S. Global Engagement's National Security Advisory Council.