Chapter 20 Foreign and Military Policy The Shape of the Twentieth Century The history of the twentieth century can be summarized--excessively briefly--in five propositions: First, that the history of the twentieth century was overwhelmingly economic history. Second, that the twentieth century saw the material wealth of humankind explode beyond all previous imagining. Third, that because of advances in technology, productivity, and organization-and the feelings of social dislocation and disquiet that these advances generated--the twentieth century’s tyrannies were the most brutal and barbaric in history. Fourth, that the twentieth century saw the relative economic gulf between different economies grow at a rapid pace. . Fifth and last, that economic policy-the management of their economies by governments--in the twentieth century was at best inept. Little was known or learned about how to manage a market or a mixed economy. Globalization Write a short paragraph about what the term means to you? Listen to Definition Given By Tom Friedman, New York Times http://www.lexusandtheolivetree.com/a udiolist.htm Effects of the September 11 attacks Public consciousness about international terrorism Outbursts of patriotism Confidence in government Emergence of important fundamental questions How to wage a "war" against terrorism? How to hold other nations accountable? How to act when other nations fight terrorism? Does such a war require military to be redesigned? Reemergence of classic questions Do we only support nations that are reasonably free and democratic? Are we the world's policemen? Foreign Policy THEME A Foreign Policy As Majoritarian Politics To many outside observers, democracies can not apply the firmness of purpose, efficiency of execution, secrecy, and patience that effective foreign policy requires. Majoritarian politics concerns itself with the issues of war, peace, and global diplomacy. Majoritarian politics Perceived to confer widespread benefits, impose widespread costs Examples War Military alliances Nuclear test ban or strategic arms limitation treaties Response to Berlin blockade by Soviets Cuban missile crisis Covert CIA operations Diplomatic recognition of People's Republic of China Interest group politics tariff battles in which the user of imports as well as their opponents (workers) are well organized. Interest group politics Identifiable groups pitted against one another for costs, benefits Examples Cyprus policy: Greeks versus Turks Tariffs: Japanese versus steel Client Politics Providing aid to corporations or American historical support of Israel Client politics Benefits to identifiable group, without apparent costs to any distinct group Example: Israel policy (transformation to interest group politics?) Entrepreneurial politics: Congress the central political arena When a multinational corporation is caught in a scandal Free Trade Negotiations Removal of Tariffs/Domestic Subsidies Who has power? Majoritarian politics: president dominates; public opinion supports but does not guide Interest group or client politics: larger congressional role Entrepreneurial politics: Congress the central political arena The Supreme Court has fairly consistently held that the conduct of foreign policy is a political question to be decided between the president and congress. The president is commander in chief of the armed forces, appoints ambassadors, and negotiates treaties. The Senate approves treaties and ambassadorial appointments. Congress must appropriate money to fund military ventures and it alone can declare war. Congressional limitations on the president: 1. Limits economic aid to other countries. 2. War Powers Act - which requires congressional approval of any commitment of troops over 60 days. Chadha case - the Supreme Court struck down a portion of the act that authorized legislative vetoes to control arms sales abroad. 3. Congressional intelligence oversight committees to control CIA activities, including covert operations In times of crisis the public supports the president. Mass opinion supports war policies as long as they appear successful. Presidential box score - No Declaration of War 1801: Jefferson sends navy to Barbary 1845: Polk sends troops to Mexico 1861: Lincoln blockades Southern ports 1940: FDR sends destroyers to Britain 1950: Truman sends troops to Korea 1960s: Kennedy and Johnson send forces to Vietnam 1983: Reagan sends troops to Grenada 1989: Bush orders invasion of Panama 1990: Bush sends forces into Kuwait 1999: Clinton orders bombing of Serbian forces 2001: Bush sends troops to Afghanistan 2003: Bush Sends troops to Iraq THEME B The Foreign Policy Elite Public opinion provides support for presidential initiatives in foreign policy but no specific direction. In foreign policy, more than in other policy areas elite worldviews. THEME B The Foreign Policy Elite A world view is a more or less comprehensive picture of critical problems facing the United States in the world and the appropriate ways of responding Mass versus elite opinion Mass opinion Generally poorly informed Generally supportive of president Conservative, less internationalist Elite opinion Better informed Opinions change more rapidly (Vietnam) Protest on moral or philosophical grounds More internationalist Four Worldviews 1. Isolationism - prior to Munich and Pearl Harbor 2. Containment and Antiappeasement 3. Vietnam Paradigm - Disengagement or Neo-isolationism 4. Human Rights Isolation paradigm Opposes involvement in European wars Adopted after World War I because war accomplished little Containment paradigm Reaction to appeasement of Hitler in Munich Pearl Harbor ended isolationism in United States Postwar policy to resist Soviet expansionism Disengagement ("Vietnam") paradigm Reaction to military defeat and political disaster of Vietnam Crisis interpreted in three ways Correct worldview but failed to try hard enough Correct worldview but applied in wrong place Worldview itself wrong Requires Complex Cost Benefit Analysis Human rights Paradigm Clinton had a disinterest in foreign policy and his advisors believed in disengagement. Clinton's strongest congressional supporters argued against the Gulf War but advocated military intervention in Kosovo. Change in view explained by concern for human rights and belief that situation in Kosovo amounted to genocide Conservatives who supported containment in Gulf War urged disengagement in Kosovo New Paradigm – Disarmament The politics of coalition building Should the United States act "alone?" If so, in what circumstances? See National Security Policy of the United States at: http://www.whitehouse.gov/nsc/nss.html THEME C Radical Revisionism and American Imperialism In general, revisionists tend to place most of the blame for the cold war and subsequent international tensions upon the United States. According to them it was America's inordinate (and unrealistic) fears of Soviet communism. THEME C Radical Revisionism and American Imperialism They claim American military strength and diplomacy are oriented toward protecting those markets at any costs. This view is contradicted by examples from Vietman, Korea and Israel. Military Policy From the beginning of U.S. history the basic principle has been to ensure civilian control of the military. Waging Modern War Interview with General Wesley Clark http://www.pbs.org/newshour/conversatio n/jan-june01/clark_06-15.html# Military power more important after collapse of Soviet Union and end of Cold War Military force used to attack Iraq, defend Kosovo, maintain order in Bosnia, and occupy Haiti and Somalia Several nations have long-range rockets and weapons of destruction Many nations feel threatened by neighbors Russia still has nuclear weapons THEME A - How Are Military Decisions Made The conventional view of national defense policy making is that it is an example of majoritarian politics, with cost and benefits widely distributed. The rival theory of the military industrial complex holds that spending for national defense is the result of client politics. Majoritarian or Client Majoritarian view of military Almost all Americans benefit, almost all pay President is the commander-in-chief Congress plays largely a supportive role Client view of military Real beneficiaries of military spending--general, admirals, big corporations, members of Congress whose districts get fat defense contracts--but everyone pays Military-industrial complex shapes what is spent National Security Act of 1947 Department of Defense Secretary of Defense (civilian, as are secretaries of the army, navy, and air force) Joint Chiefs of Staff (military) Reasons for separate uniformed services Fear that unified military will become too powerful Desire of services to preserve their autonomy Interservice rivalries intended by Congress to receive maximum information 1986 defense reorganization plan Joint Chiefs of Staff Joint Staff Officers from each service assisting JCS Since 1986 serves chair; promoted at same rate The services Composed of uniformed head of each service with a chair and vice chair appointed by the president and confirmed by the Senate Chair since 1986 principal military adviser to president Each service headed by a civilian secretary responsible for purchasing and public affairs Senior military officer oversees discipline and training The chain of command Chair of JCS does not have combat command Uncertainty whether 1986 changes will work What do we get for our money? 1. Personnel including pensions Pensions hardest to control 2. Big Ticket Items - Cost overruns "Fly before you Buy" 3. Small ticket items - $435 hammer 4. Readiness - first to get cut 5. Bases Personnel From draft to all-volunteer force in 1973 Volunteer force improved as result of: Increases in military pay Rising civilian unemployment Changes in military More women in military Ban of women on combat ships lifted in 1993 but Congress to be consulted if ground combat involved "Don't ask, don't tell" compromise adopted by Clinton on homosexuals in military Big-ticket hardware Main reasons for cost overruns Unpredictability of cost of new items Contractor incentives to underestimate at first Military chiefs want best weapons money can buy "Sole sourcing" of weapons without competitive bids Holding down budget by "stretching out" production Latter four factors can be controlled; first cannot Small-ticket items Seemingly outrageous prices come from allocation of overhead,($435 hammer) small run of items produced Others result from "gold-plating" phenomenon Readiness, favorite area for short-term budget cutting Other cuts would hurt constituents Cuts here show up quickly in money saved Bases – Client Politics At one time, a lot of bases opened and few closed Commission on Base Realignment and Closure created to take client politics out of base closings THEME B - Politics and the Future of Military Spending See next several charts. American slowdowns in productivity, chronic budget deficits, and increasing foreign debt have militated against the continuing rates of military expansion. The collapse of the Soviet Union increased the decline. Public Sentiment on Defense Spending, 1960-1998 Updated from The Public Perspective (August/September 1997), 19. Public Sentiment on Defense Spending, 1960- 2002 Trends in Military Spending (in constant dollars) to 2000 Office of the Under Secretary of Defense (Comptroller), “National Defense Budget Estimates for FY 2000.” Trends in Military Spending (in constant dollars) to 2002 Welcome to the Department of Defense We are America’s ... Oldest company Largest company Busiest company Most successful company How we evolved 1775 1775 1775 1798 War Department (1789) 1947 Dept. of the Army Department of the Navy (1798) Dept. of the AF SecDef position created Nat’l Mil Estab DoD created (1949) Dept. of Defense America’s oldest company 5.3 million strong 1.4 million active duty 654,000 civilians 1.2 million Guard and Reserve 2.0 million retirees & families receiving benefits America’s largest company Our global infrastructure Operates from more than 6,000 locations Using more than 30 million acres More than 600,000 buildings and structures America’s largest company Worldwide presence More than 146 countries Some 473,881 personnel overseas or afloat America’s largest company In comparison ... Company DoD Budget/ Revenue* Employees* $371 billion 2,036,000 Wal-Mart 227 billion 1,383,000 ExxonMobil 200 billion 97,900 GM 181 billion 365,000 Ford 160 billion 354,400 America’s largest company We hire the best High school diplomas Masters degrees Most successful company Forces 95% 5.6% Work Force* 79% 4.9% Who we work for Chief Executive Officer The President of the United States Who we work for Board of directors The United States Congress Who we work for Stockholders The American people Office of the Secretary of Defense Military Departments Office, Chairman Joint Chiefs of the JCS of Staff Unified Commands Services train and equip Department of Defense Military Departments U.S. Army U.S. Air Force U.S. Navy U.S. Marine Corps Department of Transportation U.S. Coast Guard Office of the Secretary of Defense Military Departments Chairman of the JCS Unified Commands Guard & Reserve Wartime military support Humanitarian Peacekeeping Homeland Security All military departments Office of the Secretary of Defense Military Departments Unified Commands Chairman of the JCS Office of the Chairman, JCS Secretary of Defense Deputy Secretary of Defense Chairman, JCS Vice Chairman, JCS Chief of Staff, Army Commandant, Marine Corps Chief of Naval Operations Chief of Staff, Air Force J-1 Manpower and Personnel J-2 Intelligence (DIA) J-5 Strategic Plans & Policy J-6 Command,Control Communications Computers Plans and coordinates Director, Joint Staff J-3 Operations J-7 Operational Plans & Interoperability J-4 Logistics J-8 Force Structure, Resources & Assessment Office of the Secretary of Defense Military Departments Office, Chairman Joint Chiefs of the JCS of Staff Unified Commands Unified Commanders Direct link to President & Secretary of Defense 5 Commanders have geographical responsibility 4 Commanders have worldwide responsibility Secretary of Defense Deputy Secretary of Defense European Command Central Command Space Command Southern Command Special Operations Command Pacific Command Transportation Command Strategic Command Joint Forces Command What we do Warfighting Humanitarian Peacekeeping Evacuation Homeland Security Our most important resource It’s not tanks, planes or ships, it’s … people How the World Has Changed – World’s 5 Largest Urban Areas (million population) 1000 Cordova .45 Kaifeng (China) .40 Constantinople (Istanbul) .30 Angkor .20 Kyoto .18 How the World Has Changed – World’s 5 Largest Urban Areas (million population) 1800 Peking (Beijing) 1.1 London .86 Canton .80 Edo (Tokyo) .69 Constantinople (Istanbul) .57 How the World Has Changed – World’s 5 Largest Urban Areas (million population) 1900 London 6.5 New York 4.2 Paris 3.3 Berlin 2.7 Chicago 1.7 How the World Has Changed – World’s 5 Largest Urban Areas (million population) 2000 Tokyo 26.5 Sao Paulo 18.3 Mexico City 18.3 New York 16.8 Mumbai (Bombay) 16.5 David Gergen UNO ABC Breakfast October 2003 Today, the United States represents 5% of the world’s population. It produces 25% of the world’s gross domestic product (GDP). We are probably the greatest world power since Rome. We that power goes the responsibility of stewardship. Part of stewardship is listening to the rest of the world. For more information about this topic, link to the Metropolitan Community College Political Science Web Site http://socsci.mccneb.edu/pos/polsc main.htm http://www.state.gov http://www.dod.gov/ SELF TEST