News-Letter

Retired General Wesley Clark kicks off the Milton S. Eisenhower Symposium with a speech about U.S. military strategy in Iraq and the Cold War. (Nathan Bates/News-Letter) [Click to enlarge]

Retired four-star General Wesley Clark spoke in Shriver last Thursday, as the first speaker in the Milton S. Eisenhower symposium, on "strategic leadership in the information age."

He spoke about military strategy, the war in Iraq and Afghanistan, and the upcoming election, topics he called "some of the key issues our nation faces."

Clark, who ran unsuccessfuly for the democratic nomination for president and is the former NATO Supreme Allied Commander, started off on a somber note, reminding the audience that "just yesterday we got the word in the newspaper that we've reached 1,000 dead."

Continually touching on how the country was in a "period of transition," Clark referred to his own transition, from life as a military man for 37 years to that of a private citizen.

The majority of the speech was focused on military strategy -- how the United States had a strong strategy during the cold war but lost any real sense of strategy after the fall of the Soviet Union, and how, after September 11, the Bush administration is creating a new strategy.

"The real story doesn't start with the birth of Muhammad or the founding of the state of Israel," Clark said. "It really starts with the lessons America took from the Second World War."

Clark said these lessons were that "the United States needed to be engaged in the world, that we needed a strategy that would build alliances, that we would never leave our allies defenseless and ... would do our best never to fight alone, [and] that we would work to build a world that was guided by rules of behavior [and] international law ... promulgated by an international body whose resolution had the force of international law: the United Nations."

Clark called this strategy "a vision that successive presidents built on and drew upon."

He mentioned the strategies of deterrence, dialogue, détente, lowering the rhetoric, and containment.

The strategy was so successful, according to Clark, that "suddenly, in 1989, it was over; the whole cold war was finished and, presto, we had won."

"But at the same time we won, we lost our strategy in the world," Clark said. "We lost our sense of purpose in the world as Americans. We lost the guiding principle of American conduct in the world."

Clark said that in the 1990s America had no military strategy, and when he came to Washington in the spring of 1994 he got "big briefing books filled with problems" and was asked to develop a strategy.

Clark went over the United States' military problems in North Korea, Rwanda, Haiti and the Balkans.

Clark said the main problem was that "we were more active in the late 1990s than we've ever been since Vietnam, but we didn't have any strategy and the public didn't appreciate it ... but the only thing agreed on between the Democrats and Republicans was that the defense budget was too large and the defense budget should be cut."

Clark said people felt safe and instead focused on the expanding economy, which was "the most remarkable thing" but "led people away from the military."

"We were the envy of the whole world in our economic policy ... our culture and even our language," Clark said.

"It looks so different today," he continued. "Today after 9/11; today after a stock market crash and an anemic recover; after we've gone from a $2.5 billion projected budget surplus after five years to a $2.5 trillion deficit; after we've lost more than a million jobs, and with our armed forces committed in Iraq and Osama bin Laden still on the loose."

What happened was we didn't have a strategy to cope with the problems of globalization. We took advantage of the benefits, we did not understand the risks."

But "in the wake of 9/11," Clark said, "a strategy did emerge...the strategy of the administration that's in office. It's a strategy that replaces deterrence, containment and dŽtente ... through pre-emptive military action. It is a strategy that is unilateral by preference."

Clark was very critical of the Bush administration but said that it is "up to those who oppose them to provide a more compelling...option."

Clark also touched on Afghanistan, saying "Hamid Karzai is not winning, he's hanging on" and referencing the opium trade and the constant presence of the war lords and the Taliban.

He then turned his attention to Iraq, and said the government "does not control Bagdad, Fallujah, Ramadi, Najaf and most other major cities."

He also referenced the problems between the Kurds and the Shiites, the slow training of the Iraqi army and the deaths of Americans.

Referring to thetroops still in Iraq, Clark said, "I honor them and their families, and I hope you do, but they're in a fight."

Clark turned to the upcoming presidential election, and said, "This election will define the future of America's place in the world."

He said the strategy of the Bush administration "is not anchored," but "it will be America's strategy after another four years, so this is an election about strategy, about leadership and personality, but most of all it is an election that will decide America's place in the world."

In the question and answer session following his speech, Clark was asked a variety of questions fielded by members of the audience.

When asked how he feels about the recent attacks on John Kerry's Vietnam service, Clark said the attacks on Kerry's service "shouldn't be done," and also warned that "if the public votes for the people who do the dirty politics, they'll get more of it."

He also answered questions on racial profiling, the differences between the two presidential candidates, John Kerry and George W. Bush, and limitations on corporate power.

Article Tools