Dateline: above the garage in Portsmouth RI, 6 July 2004
A while back I gave an interview to Kevin Ferris of the Philadelphia Inquirer, who had read the book prior to calling me. He said he wanted to write an op-ed pivoting off the book toward the presidential campaign. Here is what he said, with my commentary to follow:
Posted on Tue, Jun. 29, 2004COMMENTARY: Not a bad little summary of the book, remembering the guy only had 500 or so words to work with. He doesn't render a judgment of the vision (agree or disagree), but clearly he likes it, otherwise he wouldn't be bringing it up as an example of what's legitimately put up for debate in terms of a grand strategy in the global war on terrorism. Better yet, he doesn't use my book to beat on the current administration so much as to prod them into a better, more complete explanation. Best, he suggests that such an explanation is supremely required if Bush expects another four years from the American public. Implicitly, he throws down the gauntlet to Kerry as well in terms of the campaign vision he offers, but by not naming him the piece comes off a little bit like advice to the Bush-Cheney camp: use a vision like that of Barnett's book and you'll win my vote.
In campaign, where are the plans to deal with rogue states, terrorists?
Kevin Ferris
is a member of The Inquirer Editorial Board
What's after Iraq?
Say, after yesterday's handover, the Iraqis pull it off: A one-time rogue state becomes a democratic, rights-respecting regime.
How does the war on terror proceed? And how will we know when we've won?
An election year would seem to be a good time to look ahead—if it weren't for the politics and the finger-pointing.
Enter Thomas P.M. Barnett, a strategic researcher at the U.S. Naval War College who has spent years studying defense and globalization, taking note of the relative peace and stability among countries most connected to the global economic system. His book The Pentagon's New Map: War and Peace in the 21st Century offers a grand strategy, in turns disturbing and hopeful. Here's a summary:
We can win a war on terror, just as we won the Cold War. Our measure of success will not be the number of terrorists killed or countries liberated—though terrorists will be killed and countries liberated—but the number of people we connect with the globalized world. After World War II, we connected Europe and Japan to our economy and the international institutions designed to ensure a flow of people, energy, investments and security. By the end of the Cold War, what Barnett calls the interconnected "functioning core" had expanded to Eastern Europe, Russia, China, India, and much of South America.
What was left? The same countries that we've had to be involved with militarily over the last decade. They are ideal places to promote anti-globalization and use as bases to attack the core. Barnett says the goal is to get the two billion people living in this gap connected, denying these countries to the forces of "disconnection."
But connecting would take more than fast-food franchises and international aid. It would mean a two-pronged military, one force that takes down regimes, and a second that, supplemented by allies, helps a society rebuild and connect. It would mean securing ties to allies in the core, and developing new ones, including a NATO for the Pacific rim. It would mean tactical flexibility: In the core, deterrence and multilateralism prevail, but in the states whose dysfunctions threaten others, preemption or unilateralism.
Agree or not, at least Barnett offers something to debate: Here's the difference between us and them, here's how we've won wars in the past, and how we can build on that success to win now, using a revamped military as the cornerstone for success.
The Bush team has a grand strategy. The liberation of Afghanistan and Iraq, troop redeployments, the focus on spreading democracy, all point to a superpower adjusting to the post-9/11 world.
But what Bush hasn't done well or consistently enough is take us through the steps: Here's how this danger relates to 9/11. Here's why it's important that we act now. Here's where we think that action will take us. And here's how we win.
That's why, in part, there's a debate in one corner about WMDs in Iraq. In another corner, questions about Iraq-al-Qaeda links. Without the bigger picture, individual events can overwhelm, the connection between issues is lost. Sure, some of this is politics, but there are real fears, too.
No single strategy answers all questions or erases all fears. But a common purpose keeps a people grounded. It's something to cling to when war's inevitable setbacks strike. President Bush has the strategy. If he wants four more years, he should do a better job of explaining it.
I get that sort of thing a lot from people who've read the book—from both camps. It would have been nicer if Ferris had framed the question a bit more broadly—not just Bush, or just Bush and Kerry, but the election as a whole. But I'm complaining over nits here. It was a nice presentation of the book that linked the material to the campaign, which was a key hope of Putnam. Ferris probably sold more than a few books for me by rendering my stuff in such an intelligent fashion. So hats off to him.
Here's today's catch:
"Waterworld" to replace "Mad Max" as favorite Pentagon sci-fi movie
"15 Miles Offshore, Safeguarding Iraq's Oil Lifeline," by James Glanz, New York Times, 6 July, p. A1.
MS&T = Military Simulation and Training
"Virtual Camp Trains Soldiers in Arabic, and More," by Margaret Wertheim, NYT, 6 July, p. D3.
In Core, politics of boredom, in Gap, politics of life and death
"Voters in Much of Europe Seem to Want the Ins Out," by Richard Bernstein, NYT, 6 July, p. A3.
"Former General Wins Most Votes in Indonesia Election: A runoff election with second-place finisher is set for September," by Jane Perlez, NYT, 6 July, p. A6.
Bush White House backtracking on generic drugs in Gap
"In New Trade Pacts, U.S. Seeks To Limit Reach of Generic Drugs," by Marilyn Chase and Sarah Lueck, Wall Street Journal, 6 July, p. A1.
China's demand reshaping global mining industry
"Mining Companies Are Poised to Reap Profits: Strong Demand for Steel in China Increases Raw-Materials Prices; Analysts Expect Yet More Growth," by Paul Glader, WSJ, 6 July, p. C1.
