DeM Banter: As mentioned in the ABSTRACT POST, Chapter 1, 2, 3 and now in Chapter 4 in 2007-08 I was fortunate enough to be selected a a National Security Affairs Fellow at the Hoover Institution at Stanford University. An outstanding year spent with some of the foremost personalities in National Security on both the Right and the Left sides of the aisle. While there we were required to present a paper… the DeMarco paper focused on Leadership and National Security Strategy.
As with any work, I look back on the last several years and the paper to see a ton of wishful thinking. However, given that the paper was written before the last election it was a bit of a plea to our incoming 2008 POTUS (then unknown) to develop a strategy in light of not only the “War on Terror” but to also stare into the next two decades and establish a strategic vision to guide our country. The paper was relatively short, maybe 50 pages…but not really a blog post. A PDF of the paper is here. Please share any thoughts… on the blog, Facebook, twitter… anything. Thank you
“Quantum Look”—A Rough Sketch
“What do you want to achieve or avoid? The answers to this question are objectives. How will you go about achieving your desired results? The answer to this you can call strategy.”–William E Rothschild
“Perception is strong and sight weak. In strategy it is important to see distant things as if they were close and to take a distanced view of close things.” – Miyamoto Musashi
Michelangelo once pled “Lord, grant that I may always desire more than I can accomplish.” Without a challenge, many people, companies, nations tend to fall or fade away. Charles Noble observed, “You must have a long-range vision to keep you from being frustrated by short-range failures.” Someone said that only people who can see the invisible can do the impossible. That illustrates the power of vision. But it also indicates that vision can be an elusive quality. 52 America needs a vision for its future, vision gives a country direction and confidence—two things it can not do without.
What does America represent in this globalized world? Is the U.S. the proverbial city on the hill or simply a hybrid of the British and Roman Empires with better dentistry and plumbing?53 Even a global colossus requires leadership and a competent strategy. The goals and objectives of the NSS must always be directed toward achieving the fundamental purposes set out in the US Constitution: “provide for the common defense, promote the general welfare, and secure the blessings of liberty to ourselves and our posterity”.
The history of empires and great powers provides many important lessons. First: Power must be husbanded carefully. Second: National might is limited. Third: Choices matter and without leadership, a clear vision, and strategy a country cannot differentiate between preferences and priorities—between what is essential to preserve a nation’s security and what is merely desirable.
America’s current NSS is a strategy of military dominance that diminishes the policies of deterrence, containment, and collective security.54 Instead, this “grand strategy” stresses offensive military intervention, preemptive/preventative strikes, and proactive counter- proliferation measures against rogues and other enemies. Put simply, the U.S. security strategy is no longer one of defense but offense. This strategy was satisfactory in 2002 and 2006 when it was first updated. But as the nation stands on the precipice of a national election and the beginning of what indeed will be a long war, are these the ideals that America represents at home and abroad? What Eisenhower knew to be true, is true today… it is about the hearts and minds.
According to recent surveys, over 80 percent of Americans believe that the country is headed in the wrong direction.55 It is not geography that is in question, but rather our national purpose, spirit, credibility, competence and leadership.56 When American leaders closely examine issues of purpose, spirit, and credibility—questions can be as important as the answers… Senators Sam Nunn and Bill Cohen57 asked a series of questions in a Boston Globe article including: How do we restore our government’s credibility and competence? How do we rebuild our physical and human capital so that we can face a dynamic world of change with confidence in our ability to compete? How do we promote energy security and reduce our vulnerabilities to the most unstable regions of the world? How do we operate in a complicated world where other nations will not always be “with or against us”? How do we restore America’s international leadership role and renew the values for which we have been so long admired? How do we engage and use “smart power” that combines economic, diplomatic, and military strength to achieve national security and foreign policy goals? How do we encourage citizens of every age, race, and creed to act on the premise that we have not just inherited our wonderful country from our parents, but we have borrowed it from our children?
What are the biggest security concerns for America? Nina Hachigian from the Center for American Progress notes the most dire threat to America is a large scale terrorist incident involving WMD.58 Polls indicate the economy is a concern, terrorism, WMD, energy, climate change—is there something the US can do?59
Given a future Solarium III scenario comprised of the historic three task forces—optimally one team will serve as the “out of the box” group. This team is tasked to develop a strategy utilizing all the various tools of power the US holds in its quiver—the military, diplomatic, economic, industrial, and informational and further address the concerns of Senator Nunn and Cohen. If America were to look at the global landscape, and given its power and leadership in all of the above—how could it be shaped? Ultimately; America desires security—which may be on the side of impossible, yet worthy of effort. In some minds, security for the U.S. equates to insecurity for others—is it possible for one nation to develop a strategy of security for many nations? If the nation could minimize conflict, open trade and economic channels, deepen global understanding, and minimize coercion and threats from wrong- doers—would the country find it a worthy strategy? In today’s globalized world, America’s National Security Strategy must go beyond defense and cover prosperity as well.
Given the above ends—the ways, entitled “Quantum Look (QL),” is offered. Of course a gathering such as Solarium III demands the greatest minds and leaders in the nation to compile their strategies given the President’s guidance on what he or she saw as a possible future. As Eisenhower provided the original Solarium cast with three options, the next US President must present his/her options to the teams as well. As the name implies—QL would introduce a sudden and significant change, and assist the US in ends, a world in which US and allied interests are secure—ending avoidable rivalry.
Each of the three overarching focus areas of Quantum Look is much broader than National Security. Each of the three focus areas is a book in and of itself; and touched on for illustration purposes. This concept branches National Strategy from purely foreign policy into the domestic arena as well. In broad terms QL deals with education, energy, and weapons of mass destruction (WMD). Each focus area is a metaphorical pyramid of sorts, with the pinnacle focused on national security and the base in domestic arena (see diagram below).
Yes, America faces daunting issues in Iraq and Afghanistan that must be worked with a coherent operational plan. QL does not ignore those operational fronts, but seeks to reach beyond the operational to the strategic. The question is: how to best use American power in ways that advance our interests and values while avoiding strategic overreach? The key is to be watchful, thoughtful, and engaged, vice reactive—yet always watching over the strategy for opportunities and course corrections.
EDUCATION: International Cultural/Spiritual Understanding and Education (National Defense Education Act II)
Education is the cornerstone of Quantum Look, a key to national security, and a historic focus area. The pinnacle of the educational pyramid focuses on a global understanding of cultures different from the west, especially the Muslim culture and religion. Religion is life to many, not just Muslims, but Christians, Jews, Buddhists, etc—their life and world view is based on how their religion, their spirituality sees the world. Further, America is a religious nation, but neither US foreign policy scholars nor practitioners have taken religion very seriously.60
Failure to acknowledge this spiritual world view quickly leads to disenfranchised relationships. The second piece—and a deeper foundation of this educational pyramid requires a focus on maintaining a global educational edge.
Cultural Understanding: The US needs to understand Islamic culture… and the Muslim world must understand the West. Bruce Hoffman of Georgetown University has testified that until America recognizes the importance of understanding its enemy, it will remain forever on the defensive, unable to neutralize terrorist propaganda, to successfully penetrate terrorist ranks to sow dissention from within, nor prevent operations.61 One important aspect to national security is Islamic Studies. Today there are few universities, if any, that offer anything close to programs the country saw in Soviet Studies. Gen John Abizaid, former CENTCOM Commander, notes there were hundreds of thousands of soviet experts during the Cold War. When he took command of CENTCOM and tasked with overseeing the war effort in the mid east, he asked for Islamic experts to assist in the war effort and found there were maybe 200.62 America does not understand the Muslim world as a whole. This is by no means an apology. The Muslim world possesses a poor understanding of the West as well, but who will lead the effort to educate both sides? America is a country of leaders and needs to invest intellectually just as the country did at one time to understand Lenin, Stalin, and Marx. Does the average American relate to the names of Abdullah Yusuf Azzam, Ayman Al Zawahiri, Muqtada Al-Sadr, Ali Al Sistani and Osama Bin Laden the same as we did the Communist leaders of the past?
Samuel P. Huntington mentioned—it was “The West and the Rest”: the West standing alone, and eight civilizations dividing the rest – Latin American, African, Islamic, Sinic, Hindu, Orthodox, Buddhist and Japanese. And in this post-cold-war world, Islamic civilization would re-emerge as a nemesis to the West. Huntington put the matter in stark terms: “The relations between Islam and Christianity, both Orthodox and Western, have often been stormy. Each has been the other’s Other. The 20th-century conflict between liberal democracy and Marxist- Leninism is only a fleeting and superficial historical phenomenon compared to the continuing and deeply conflictual relation between Islam and Christianity.”63
Huntington notes demography best tells the story: where more than 40 percent of the world population was “under the political control” of Western civilization in the year 1900, that share had declined to about 15 percent in 1990, and is set to come down to 10 percent by the year 2025. Conversely, Islam’s share has risen from 4 percent in 1900 to 13 percent in 1990, and could be as high as 19 percent by 2025.64
It is not pretty at the frontiers between societies with dwindling populations – Western Europe being one example, Russia another – and those with young people making claims on the world. Huntington predicted this gathering storm. A “Clash of Civilizations” is Huntington’s term. America has the intellectual power to stand in the gap and address the issues through mutual understanding and education.
Global Educational Edge: American leadership in science and technology is challenged by powers in Asia and Europe.65 The U.S. has known for some time that it needs to improve pre K- 12 education, especially in math and science. As a share of GDP, U.S. federal funding for research in the physical sciences and engineering has been on a steady decline by half since 1970.66 55% of America’s doctoral students in engineering are foreign born.67 It has been twenty-five years since Ronald Reagan released A Nation at Risk in 1983. In that report the President stated, “The educational foundations of our society are presently being eroded by a rising tide of mediocrity that threatens our very future as a Nation and a people.”68 Since then there have been a number of panels, studies, commissions, and books pointing out US shortcomings, but no political will or security direction behind it.
There is a very real prospect that the U.S. is losing its innovation edge.69 Technological improvements have accounted for up to 50% of U.S. GDP growth and some 65% of productivity growth since World War II.70 Education is the bellows that fans the fires of America’s technological edge.
NDEA II: In 1958, in response to the Soviet launch of Sputnik, President Eisenhower proposed the National Defense Education Act (NDEA). The NDEA inspired generations of US students to pursue study in fields vital to national security and aided the nation in establishing its dominance in science and technology for the next half century. The program also led to the establishment of Soviet Studies Programs all over America. The NDEA has largely expired, approaching its 50th anniversary, the national security and economic challenges facing the nation are as daunting as ever. To meet them, the US needs to inspire a new generation of students to pursue degrees in areas critical to national defense and homeland security. In January 2009 the next president has an opportunity to grab the ideas of Eisenhower and form an NDEA II. An NDEA II might include: portable graduate fellowships; institutional traineeships; incentives to create Islamic Studies Programs, professional science and engineering programs; undergraduate loan assistance; grants to support new and innovative undergraduate curriculum and research programs; grants to expand K-12 education outreach; summer training and research opportunities for K-12 teachers; and foreign language educational tax breaks; national laboratory and federal service professional incentives; and additional funds for program evaluation.
Education beyond the security implications are of incredible importance. The importance of improving US human capital and as Nunn and Cohen questioned—How do we rebuild our physical and human capital so that we can face a dynamic world of change with confidence in our ability to compete? The answer in light of Quantum Look: develop educational trade space with the Muslim world, a formalized exchange program between the West and the Muslim world, one of International Cultural/Spiritual Understanding and Education. Universities and government education programs must develop programs and curriculum to assist in bridging this cultural gap. Second, the U.S. must posture itself to recapture the technological edge it once had. Finally education takes a long time… this is a generational issue, patience, a plan, and leadership are key.
Education and a technological edge enable America to develop systems that not only protect the continental United States, but the world. Education dovetails into the second area of Quantum Look.
WMD: Nuclear Weapon Nullification/Open Sourcing
The world first learned of nuclear weapons in 1945 when the United States dropped two atomic bombs on Japan in an effort to bring about the swift end of World War II. This was followed by the shock of the Soviet Union’s first nuclear test, in 1949, far more quickly than US experts had predicted. The nuclear arms race was born. Vice President Dick Cheney noted in a recent presentation, “In 1972, nine countries had ballistic missiles, today, it is at least 27. And that includes hostile regimes that oppress their own people, seek to intimidate and dominate their neighbors and actively support terrorist groups.”71 Stopping the spread of WMD to terrorists is thus an urgent goal, perhaps the most urgent goal, in regards to immediate US security interests.
Former Secretaries of State Henry Kissinger and George Schultz, former Secretary of Defense William Perry and former chair of the Senate Armed Services Committee Sam Nunn jointly declare: “The world is now on the precipice of a new and dangerous era. We endorse the goal of a world free of nuclear weapons.” These leaders have set out a very detailed plan on how to achieve a very admirable goal. Two jointly published Wall Street Journal articles and several meetings with global leaders illustrate there is significant interest in their plan. Whether the elimination goal is realized or not nuclear weapon nullification is of strategic importance.
If nuclear weapons could not be eliminated, could they be nullified? What if nuclear weapons just did not matter…what would that take? This is another dual pronged effort. In March 1983, President Reagan sought a way to render nuclear weapons “impotent and obsolete.” The Strategic Defense Initiative (SDI) was indeed a bold and audacious proposal. SDI sought to use ground-based and space-based systems to protect the United States from attack by strategic nuclear ballistic missiles. With the demise of the USSR, America’s chances of being attacked by multiple Intercontinental ballistic missiles (ICBMs) has lessened, but not disappeared. First, the National Missile Defense program needs to continue and grow to a Global Missile Defense system. Second, R&D must be conducted on how to track radioactive material world wide.
Proliferation of nuclear weapons into terrorist hands is a nightmare scenario. Michael Levi, a fellow at the Council on Foreign Relations, and author of the book On Nuclear Terrorism, notes “We should be skeptical if we’re told that pulling off a nuclear attack is easy, but we should be smart about making it even harder.” Further, with energy and environmental concerns growing globally—nuclear power is an easy choice. As countries look to nuclear power, the nuclear fuel cycle can enable certain groups to weaponize the material. In turn we face the possibility of making the planet green while at the same time making it glow through proliferation of nuclear material.
Global Missile Defense: The QL nullification process takes form in two steps. First, Global Missile Defense or US National Missile Defense (NMD) proliferated into a global missile defense system of open sourced technology. The NMD program posses to develop and maintain an effective, and Anti-Ballistic Missile (ABM) Treaty compliant system that will protect the United States against limited ballistic missile threats, including accidental/unauthorized launches or Third World threats.
A key component in Global Missile Defense proposal is the sharing of technology to all interested states. Further, an agreement to share new technology as it is developed. The arguments for and against such a shield are legend, but a shared technology and a shared shield is good for all nations. In the end, only an attack from a myriad of missiles would stand any chance of success. This limits the ability of small, rouge, or emerging countries from directly threatening even their closest neighbors with shield technology.
America’s determination to build a missile defense system is perceived by many, including China and Russia, as a means to neutralize their nuclear deterrent. The technology must be open sourced, from the beginning, the way President Ronald Reagan envisioned it. Reagan offered to share the original SDI technology with the Soviet Union.72 Once the technology is developed, interested countries would be free to develop their own defense. The US has embarked on cooperative missile defense design with Germany, Italy, Israel, and Japan. France is experimenting with its own defensive capability as well.73 Other options are in development to include advanced laser technology; both ground and aircraft based systems hold great promise in missile defense. Sharing the technology openly only adds to the nullification of such weapons.
Global Nuclear Tracking: Once the missile threat is diminished or mitigated, enemies will seek to insert nuclear weapons into countries via other means. It is highly unlikely that Al Qaeda or Hezbollah will acquire sophisticated missiles for an attack against the US. However, such groups may seek other delivery methods. The threat of a human or vehicle borne weapon would remain, not as disastrous, but still a threat. Fortunately, the combination of tools and materials needed for fashioning a nuclear bomb, and the chemical residues, are unique, and can in theory, be tracked.74 The US leads in development of technology to track radioactive products and waste. What QL proposes is United Nations International Atomic Energy Agency (UN IAEA) level laws that would require all countries to insert a tracking mechanism or isotope into nuclear material. This, in theory, would enable agencies to track nuclear material world wide (preferably from space-based assets). The IAEA would conduct inspections for compliance of all nuclear facilities and be alerted when material was moved in a suspicious manner.
These systems will never give any country a 100% effective defense, at least not in the near future. Reagan wrote in his autobiography, he “never viewed the SDI as an impenetrable shield—no defense could even be expected to 100% effective.” 75 The deterrent aspect is, however, huge. Once an enemy knows missiles can be shot down and radioactive material can be tracked—they will be forced to look at other avenues of attack. Professor Scott Sagan, political science professor and co-director of Stanford’s Center for International Security and Cooperation, proposes a “defense in depth” to counter the nuclear threat. Sagan offers seven steps including the physical security offered at nuclear facilities, second line defenses on nuclear plants, transportation surveillance, border security, monitors in cities, and enhanced emergency response capabilities. He notes that each level alone enhances the chances of nuclear material falling in the wrong hands by about 10%, yet when one combines all levels together statistically reduces the enemies’ chance of success. “Defense in depth” combined with the two steps proposed in Quantum Look (defense shield and tracking) may offer such a small chance of success that nuclear weapons are in essence nullified.
Of course the technology is key—a technological edge enabled by education, but given a global push to truly nullify these weapons, it is a matter of time, funds, energy and leadership. First the shield, followed with tracking technology—all the while perfecting Dr Sagan’s “defense in depth” and eventually the dream of a world free of nuclear weapons will be realized once the weapons are no longer effective.
Education, cultural understanding, and the ending of America’s constant game of “whack-a-mole” with any country perceived of gaining a nuclear arsenal, further enables the third step in Quantum Look—this greatly assists in the third realm of QL.
ENERGY: Alternative Energy Materialization
Energy security is a huge issue on a global scale, another topic that fills volumes of books and articles. The world faces issues with possible climate change, state controlled oil companies, and massive pollution issues in China and India—naming only a few. Energy security is radio- active politically and polls very high in concern for potential voters in America. Yet it is not clear any leader really knows what energy security is and the potential issues are far enough in the future that most political leaders will be out of office before having to deal with any fallout. The US can develop regulatory and policy issues, but the key is to offer options for energy—A matrixed approach to energy…nuclear, solar, winds, hydro, all while looking for new opportunities to exploit new concepts. The issues are many, but what is the global leader doing to shape the out come? Or how does America answer the Nunn and Cohen question—how do we promote energy security and reduce our vulnerabilities to the most unstable regions of the world?
When America truly focuses its efforts on military and industrial research and development the results are usually quite astounding. Technological development fostered the American moment, increasing military capabilities and economic growth. The U.S. has the opportunity to do the same on the energy front. Innovation is almost always dual use helping the nation in both hard and soft power terms. Ground breaking innovations are scattered throughout the landscape of US ingenuity; the 1951 development of a nuclear power plant in Idaho—a direct offshoot of nuclear weapons. The advent of the personal computer in the 1980 and the development of the internet and satellite technologies are all based on military research and development. Often time the defense establishment takes the lead and alters the market place of an initial US monopoly on the advances.76
This nation must constantly ponder that better mouse trap, especially in terms of energy. In his 1974 State of the Union address—President Nixon proposed 1980 as the year of American energy independence.77 When the gas shortages of the early and mid 1970s were over, the country lost interest. Assuming there is genuine national interest and political will generated by a President focusing on the myriad of benefits from alternative energy sources—the US could further shore up power on the world stage. The nation that breaks the hydrocarbon monopoly rules the 21st century. On the national security front; America is shaping the international landscape.78 Depriving the oil-producing countries of their major coercive tool also goes a long way to ensuring America’s position as a global leader. The challenge to the next President is to set and hold a date, through a bi-partisan effort, at which point America is 51% energy independent.
Currently the Department of Defense is leading an impressive charge in alternative energy. The US Air Force is flying aircraft today with hybrid fuels and looking to use solar and wind power at bases.79 80 An upcoming Air Force energy summit will also explore powering bases with on-site miniature nuclear power plants.81 The Army is using solar powered shelters, micro fuel cells, solar cells, experimenting with a hybrid combat vehicle and a diesel-electric scout vehicle.82 Once perfected by the military the market opens up in a huge manner. Civilian companies are already looking to use the USAF’s hybrid fuel on commercial airlines.83
The concept of “green” power is attractive to both the “right” and the “left.” Global warming aside, that debate has no place in this paper; taking care of the environment is a very real concern. Proper stewardship of the planet is a concern for all, coupled with the security issues—both parties have a vested interest in seeing alternative energy materialization through.
Of course every one of the three issues above has unintended consequences that must be managed and taken into account. Muslim education must encompass the actual religious ideas—best taught by clerics, priests, etc. The same applies to any attempt to educate on Christian concepts—universities must employ pastors, preachers, etc. This is all about religion, like it or not, and to understand the concepts it must be presented by a believer. This leads to a myriad of issues. The issues with a global defense shield can add to instability in nations that may not possess such a capability. Alternative energy realization, over the long term, could lead to failed states in oil producing nations. Each issue requires leadership, discussion, debate and action—but none is so big as to negate the positive effects of the program.
“I think the magic is over.” French foreign minister Bernard Kouchner recently said about the United States’ global reputation. But as preeminent author, thinker and Stanford scholar, Victor Davis Hanson notes… “It’s never been a great idea to rely on the assessments of French politicians, but the daily news coming out of the U.S. — in terms of our image overseas and beyond — does indeed seem bleak.”84 Think for a moment—America is still extremely strong, U.S. problems pale in comparison to its past world wars and depressions, or those of its current competitors. America is still the world’s third-largest petroleum producer with vast amounts of untouched oil and it has the world’s largest coal reserves. Its universities remain the world’s best, and lead the world in cutting-edge technological innovation. America remains a meritocracy where no one is above the law. The U.S. must awaken its national purpose, spirit, credibility, and competence. What America needs is leadership, strategy, boldness, innovative new concepts to propel the nation into the 21st century…the U.S. needs a lion.
Ronald Reagan—one of the greatest world leaders—David Keene notes was idealistic, intractable and optimistic, but he knew where to draw the line. He believed like the founders, that in the end ideas are more powerful than guns and bombs, and while the United States must be strong enough to resist any enemy and defeat aggression, we should resist the temptation to use our power aggressively. Reagan harbored few illusions about the world beyond US shores or American ability to remake the globe in its image. He knew freedom must be won buy those who want it and that democracy can not be force-fed to nations and people who neither understand it nor are prepared to exercise it.85
Quantum Look is not about becoming isolationist, it is about strategy, priorities, ideas and how to get the best concepts forward to policy makers. It is about leadership…about lions. Early in this manuscript it was noted the American/Soviet game of checkers in now a multi- dimensional game of chess where ones moves are sometimes made while looking in the mirror—nonetheless—it is still a game of chess. Chess is a game of leadership that teaches strategy, patience, boldness, and the importance of sacrifice. If US leadership can learn these important principles and incorporate these lessons into our national security strategy…America will continue to be the greatest nation ever to grace the planet… if not, she may be doomed to repeat the lessons of history, the lessons of empires. The choice belongs to the lions.
I had another dream about lions at the door
They weren’t half as frightening as they were before But I’m thinking about eternity
And I’m wondering where the lions are…
I’m wondering where the lions are…86
52 John C. Maxwell, The 17 Indisputable Laws of Teamwork: Embrace Them and Empower Your Team (Thomas Nelson Inc, Nashville, TN 2001) 60.
53 Grover G. Norquist, “Wild Parties“ The National Interest, , (Washington DC) Sep/Oct 2007 7.
54 Jonathan Kirshner, Barry Strauss,Maria Fanis, and Matthew Evangelista, Iraq and Beyond: The New U.S. National Security Strategy, CORNELL UNIVERSITY PEACE STUDIES PROGRAM
OCCASIONAL PAPER #27, Jan 2003, iv, internet, online, 23 March 2008, http://126.96.36.199/search?q=cache:N9eqqnZPq_kJ:www.comw.org/qdr/fulltext/0301kirshner.pdf+%E2%80%9CIraq+and+Beyond:&hl=en& ct=clnk&cd=3&gl=us&client=firefox-a
55 Unknown, Poll: 81 Percent think US on the Wrong Track, Associated Press, 3 April 2008, on line, internet, 3 April 2008 http://ap.google.com/article/ALeqM5gNpUhHI3vSmaLFR-Xli0AsbnuSlwD8VQSSD80.
56 William S. Cohen and Sam Nunn, Changing Our Direction, Boston Globe, December 30, 2007.
57 William S. Cohen is a former secretary of defense and former Republican senator from Maine. Sam Nunn is a former Democratic senator from Georgia and former chairman of the Senate Armed Services Committee.
58 Nina Hachigian and Mona Sutphen, The Next American Century, How the U.S. Can Thrive as Other Powers Rise, (Simon and Schuster, New York, NY, 2008) 25.
59 Pew Global Attitudes Project, The Great Divide: How Westerners and Muslims View Each Other, Europe’s Muslims More Moderate, 22 June 2006, Pew Research Center, on line, internet, 23 February, 2008, http://pewglobal.org/reports/display.php?PageID=830.
60 Thomas Farr, “Diplomacy in an Age of Faith,” Foreign Affairs, March/April 2008, 110.
61 Hachigian and Sutphen, The Next American Century, 32.
62 John Abizaid, Interview and comments at West Point Alumni Meeting, 15 March 2008.
63 Samuel Hunnington, “The Clash of Civilizations,” Foreign Affairs, Summer 1993, volume 72, number 3,.22-49.
71 Tom Raum, Cheney Says US Needs Missile Defense, Washingtonpost.com, March 12, 2008.
65 Cohen and Nunn, Changing Our Direction.
66 Hachigian and Sutphen, The Next American Century, 126.
67 Hachigian and Sutphen, The Next American Century, 127.
68 William J Bennett, Williard Fair, Chester Finn Jr., Rev Floyd H. Flake, E. Donald Hirsch Jr. Will Marshall, and Diane Ravitch, “A Nation Still at Risk,” Policy Review (Hoover Institution, Stanford University), July and August 1998 on line, internet, 15 February 2008, http://www.hoover.org/publications/policyreview/3563967.html .
69 Hachigian and Sutphen, The Next American Century, 116.
70 Hachigian and Sutphen, The Next American Century, 117.
72 Thomas H. Henriksen, The Legacy of Reykjavik: “Preserving a Security Option for Dealing with Madmen, Missiles, and Missile Defense,” Implications of the Reykjavik Summit on Its Twentieth Anniversary, Conference Report (Hoover Institution, Stanford University, CA 2007) 34.
73 Henriksen, The Legacy of Reykjavik, 43.
74 Hachigian and Sutphen, The Next American Century, 35. 75 Henriksen, The Legacy of Reykjavik, 37.
76 Justine A Rosenthal, “The Closer,” The National Interest, Nov/Dec 2007, 7.
77 Richard M. Nixon, State of the Union Address, 30 January 2004, on line, internet, 112 March 2008, http://www.thisnation.com/library/sotu/1974rn.html
78 Justine A Rosenthal, The Closer, The National Interest, Nov/Dec 2007, 7.
79 Jenn Rowell, Air Force Testing Jets to Run on Synthetic Fuel, Montgomery Advertiser, 5 December, 2007.
80 Martin LaMonica, CNET News, Air Force Base in Nevada Goes Solar with 15-megawatt Array, 6 December 2007.
81 Patrick Winn, Mini-nuke Plants Eyed for Air Force Bases, Air Force Times 30 January 2008.
82 Katie Fehrenbacher, 7 Ways the Military is Using Eco Tech, Earth2Tech, on line, internet, 23 March 2008, http://earth2tech.com/2007/08/28/7-ways-the-military-is-using-eco-tech/.
83 Emma Vandore, A380 First Commercial Jet to Fly on Alternative Fuel, Aviation.Com, on line, internet, 2 March 2008, http://www.aviation.com/business/080201-ap-airbus-first-alternative-fuel.html.
84 Victor Davis Hanson, Hope and Change Amid Despair, Reports of America’s Demise are Greatly Exaggerated. National Review Online, 20 Mar 2008, on line, internet, 20 March 2008, http://article.nationalreview.com/?q=MDdjZjA3ZGExNjkzNTcxOWJkZjk1NmNhZDZmMTMwNmM=.
85 David Keene, A Conservative Continuum, The National Interest, Sep/Oct 2007, 23.