Project for the New American Century

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by TrogdorPolitiks (talk | contribs) at 17:57, 11 May 2007 (→‎Controversy: adding reference). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Template:BLPC You must add a |reason= parameter to this Cleanup template – replace it with {{Cleanup|reason=<Fill reason here>}}, or remove the Cleanup template.

The Project for the New American Century (PNAC) is an influential neo-conservative, U.S. think tank based in Washington, D.C.[1] Co-founded by William Kristol and Robert Kagan, the group was established in early 1997. The PNAC is an initiative of the New Citizenship Project, a 501(c)(3) organization that has been funded by the Sarah Scaife Foundation, the John M. Olin Foundation and the Bradley Foundation.[2]

PNAC was an advocate for the United States' invasion of Iraq[3], and strongly promoted a theory which stated that leaving Saddam Hussein in power would be "surrender to terrorism." A letter published 9 days after the September 11, 2001 attacks stated:

even if evidence does not link Iraq directly to the attack, any strategy aiming at the eradication of terrorism and its sponsors must include a determined effort to remove Saddam Hussein from power in Iraq. Failure to undertake such an effort will constitute an early and perhaps decisive surrender in the war on international terrorism.[4]

PNAC now only has one employee and is nearly defunct. Critic David Rothkopf states: "Their plan has fallen on hard times. Their signal enterprise was the invasion of Iraq and their failure to produce results is clear. Precisely the opposite has happened." Gary Schmitt, previous senior member, counters that PNAC is "shutting down because it has done its job.. our view (opposing isolationism) has been adopted."[5]

PNAC has supported efforts to establish and maintain a Pax Americana, a U.S. dominance in world affairs.[6] [7]

Members

Many of the organization's ideas, and its members, are associated with the neoconservative movement. PNAC, at one point, had seven full-time staff members in addition to its board of directors.

Current members include:[8]

Previous members and signatories to PNAC reports have included: Francis Fukuyama, Dan Quayle, Elliott Abrams, Midge Decter, Paula Dobriansky, Peter W. Rodman [9]

Core views and beliefs

The PNAC web site states the group's "fundamental propositions":[10]

  • "American leadership is both good for America and good for the world."
  • "such leadership requires military strength, diplomatic energy and commitment to moral principle"
  • "too few political leaders today are making the case for global leadership."

The PNAC also made a statement of principles at their 1997 inception.[11]

As the 20th century draws to a close, the United States stands as the world's pre-eminent power. Having led the West to victory in the Cold War, America faces an opportunity and a challenge: Does the United States have the vision to build upon the achievements of past decades? Does the United States have the resolve to shape a new century favorable to American principles and interests?

The PNAC advocates "a policy of military strength and moral clarity" which includes:

  • A significant increase of U.S. military spending.
  • Strengthening ties with U.S. allies and challenging regimes hostile to US interests and values.
  • Promoting the cause of American political and economic power outside the U.S.
  • Preserving and extending an international order friendly to U.S. security, prosperity and principles. .[12]

The PNAC has long called for the United States to abandon the Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty between the U.S. and the former Soviet Union, from which the U.S. withdrew in 2002. It also proposes controlling the new "international commons" of outer space and "cyberspace" and paving the way for the creation of a new military service — U.S. Space Forces — with the mission of space control.[13]

PNAC report: Rebuilding America's Defenses

In September 2000, the PNAC issued a 90-page report entitled Rebuilding America's Defenses: Strategies, Forces, and Resources For A New Century,[14] proceeding "from the belief that America should seek to preserve and extend its position of global leadership by maintaining the preeminence of U.S. military forces." The report has been the subject of much analysis and criticism.

The group states that when diplomacy or sanctions fail, the United States must be prepared to take military action.[citation needed] PNAC argues that the current Cold War deployment of forces is obsolete. Defense spending and force deployment must reflect the post-Cold War duties that US forces are obligated to perform. Constabulary duties such as peacekeeping in the Balkans and the enforcement of the No Fly Zones in Iraq have put a strain upon, and reduced the readiness of US forces. The PNAC recommends the forward redeployment of U.S. forces at new strategically placed permanent military bases in Southeast Europe and Southeast Asia. Permanent bases ease the strain on U.S. forces, allowing readiness to be maintained and the carrier fleet to be reduced. [citation needed]

PNAC advocates enlarging the U.S.-globalized military and equipping and restructuring it for a "constabulary" role. The report sets out goals of "maintaining US pre-eminence, thwarting rival powers and shaping the global security system according to US interests".[15]

Position on the Iraq invasion and occupation

In 1998, following perceived Iraqi unwillingness to co-operate with UN weapons inspections, members of the PNAC, including former defense secretary Donald Rumsfeld and Paul Wolfowitz, wrote to President Bill Clinton urging him to remove Saddam Hussein from power using U.S. diplomatic, political and military power. The letter argued that Saddam would pose a threat to the United States, its Middle East allies and oil resources in the region if he succeeded in maintaining his stockpile of Weapons of Mass Destruction. The letter also stated "we can no longer depend on our partners in the Gulf War to continue to uphold the sanctions or to punish Saddam when he blocks or evades UN inspections" and "American policy cannot continue to be crippled by a misguided insistence on unanimity in the UN Security Council." The letter argues that an Iraq war would be justified by Hussein's defiance of UN "containment" policy and his persistent threat to U.S. interests.[16]

The 2000 Rebuilding America's Defenses report recommends improved planning. The report states that "while the unresolved conflict in Iraq provides the immediate justification [for US military presence], the need for a substantial American force presence in the Gulf transcends the issue of the regime of Saddam Hussein" and "Over the long term, Iran may well prove as large a threat to U.S. interests in the Gulf as Iraq has. And even should U.S.-Iranian relations improve, retaining forward-based forces in the region would still be an essential element in U.S. security strategy given the longstanding American interests in the region".

Controversy

The PNAC has been the subject of considerable criticism and controversy, both among members of the left and right. [citation needed] Critics dispute the premise that US "world leadership" is desirable for the world or even for the United States itself. [citation needed] The PNAC's harshest critics say the goal is world dominance by the United States[17], [18]motivated by an imperial and globalist agenda of US military expansionism. Critics take issue with the PNAC's unabashed position of maintaining the nation's privileged position as sole world superpower.

Some critics maintain that PNAC's goals of military hegemony or ascendancy are overrated. They maintain that exercise of military might comes with side effects; it requires huge financial commitments, strong domestic and international support, plus skillful management to beneficial.[19][20] President Jimmy Carter, along this line maintained that Bush initailly responded effectively to the events of September 11 "but...(referring to PNAC) a group of conservatives worked to get approval for their long held ambitions under the mantle of 'the war on terror'. This entire unilateralism", he warned, "will increasingly isolate the US from those nations that we need in order to do battle with terrorism".[21]

Supporters of the project reply that the PNAC's goals are not fundamentally different from past conservative foreign policy assessments.[citation needed] US conservatives have traditionally favored a militarily strong United States, and advocated the country take aggressive positions when its interests are threatened. Supporters thus see the PNAC as the target of conspiracy theories. [22]

A line frequently quoted by critics from Rebuilding America's Defenses (September 2000) famously refers to the possibility of a "catastrophic and catalyzing event — like a new Pearl Harbor (PDF)".[23] This quote appears in Chapter V, entitled "Creating Tomorrow's Dominant Force", which discusses the perceived need for the Department of Defense to "move more aggressively to experiment with new technologies and operational concepts”.[24] The full quote is as follows: "Further, the process of transformation, even if it brings revolutionary change, is likely to be a long one, absent some catastrophic and catalyzing event — like a new Pearl Harbor." Some have used this quote to support the argument that the U.S. government was complicit in the 9/11 terrorist attacks.[citation needed]

PNAC members have been criticized as chickenhawks for promoting policies which vociferously support an idealized version of war, even though only a handful of PNAC members have served in the military, let alone seen combat.[25][26] [27] An early story on the 2000 PNAC report by Neil MacKay, investigations editor for the Scotland Sunday Herald quoted Tam Dalyell, Labour MP, Father of the House and opponent of the 2003 Invasion of Iraq as saying:

This is garbage from right-wing think-tanks stuffed with chicken-hawks -- men who have never seen the horror of war but are in love with the idea of war. Men like Cheney, who were draft-dodgers in the Vietnam war. 'This is a blueprint for US world domination -- a new world order of their making. These are the thought processes of fantasist Americans who want to control the world.[28]

Criticisms of position on the Iraq invasion and occupation

Many critics of the U.S.-led invasion of Iraq claim the U.S.' "bullying" of the international community into supporting the 2003 Iraq war, and the fact that the war went ahead despite much international criticism, stem from the positions of prominent conservatives in the Bush administration. Some critics of the Bush administration see the 1998 letter to President Clinton as a "smoking gun", showing that the invasion of Iraq was a foregone conclusion.[citation needed] These critics see the letter as evidence of Rumsfeld's, Wolfowitz's and Richard Perle's opinions, five years prior to the Iraq invasion. Other signatories of the letter include John Bolton and Zalmay Khalilzad, as of this writing the United States' former and current ambassador to the United Nations , respectively. Rory Bremner, citing the letter, said "that's what they want — regime change — and nothing, not Blair, not the UN, not Hans Blix, not France, Germany, Russia, China, not the threat of terrorism, or Arab reservations, or lack of evidence, or the Peace March, not even our own brave Jack Straw is going to stand in their way."[29] George Monbiot, citing the letter, said "to pretend that this battle begins and ends in Iraq requires a willful denial of the context in which it occurs. That context is a blunt attempt by the superpower to reshape the world to suit itself."[30]

Members in Bush administration

After the 2000 election of George W. Bush, many of the PNAC's members were appointed to key positions within the new President's administration:

Name Department Title Remarks
Elliott Abrams National Security Council Representative for Middle Eastern Affairs President of the Ethics and Public Policy Center.
In 1991 - Pled Guilty to witholding evidence from Congress in Iran-Contra Affair. Pardoned by George H.W. Bush
Richard Armitage Department of State (2001-2005) Deputy Secretary of State Disclosed Valerie Plame's identity (Plamegate scandal).
John R. Bolton Department of State (2001-2006) U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations(2005-2006) Previously Undersecretary of State for Arms Control and International Security Affairs(2001-2005).
Rudy Boschwitz Department of State(2005- Head of the U.S. Delegation to the U.N. Commission on Human Rights[31]
Richard Cheney Bush Administration Vice President
Seth Cropsey International Broadcasting Bureau
(12/2002-12/2004) 		Director Voice of America was under his purview
Paula Dobriansky Department of State Undersecretary of State for Global Affairs
Francis Fukuyama President's Council on Bioethics Council Member Professor of International Political Economy at Johns Hopkins University
Bruce Jackson U.S. Committee on NATO President Former Lockheed Martin VP for Strategy & Planning[32]
Zalmay Khalilzad Department of State U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations Previously served as U.S. Ambassador to Iraq(6/2005 - 3/2007) and prior to that U.S. Ambassador to Afghanistan (11/2003 - 6/2005)
I. Lewis "Scooter" Libby Bush Administration (2001-2005) Chief of Staff for the Vice President Resigned October 28, 2005. On March 6, 2007, Libby was found guilty on two counts of perjury, one of obstruction of justice, and one of making false statements to the FBI.
Richard Perle Department of Defense (2001-2003) Chairman of the Board, Defense Policy Board Advisory Committee resigned as chairman in March 2003, under accusations of bribery
Peter W. Rodman Department of Defense Assistant Secretary of Defense for International Security
Donald Rumsfeld Department of Defense (2001-2006) Secretary of Defense Former Chairman of the Board of Gilead Sciences, the firm that developed Tamiflu®

Resigned from office December 15, 2006

Abram Shulsky Department of Defense (2002-2003) Director, Office of Special Plans ad-hoc department (2002-2003) created by Donald Rumsfeld, reporting to Douglas Feith
Randy Scheunemann U.S. Committee on NATO, Project on Transitional Democracies, International Republican Institute Member Founded the Committee for the Liberation of Iraq.
Paul Wolfowitz Department of Defense (2001-2005) Deputy Secretary of Defense Became President of the World Bank in 2005
Dov S. Zakheim Department of Defense Comptroller Former V.P. of System Planning Corporation[33]
Robert B. Zoellick Department of State Deputy Secretary of State Office of the United States Trade Representative (2001-2005);

See also

References

  1. ^ http://www.csmonitor.com/specials/neocon/spheresInfluence.html
  2. ^ http://www.mediatransparency.org/funderprofile.php?funderID=1
  3. ^ http://www.twf.org/News/Y2004/0111-Before911.html
  4. ^ http://www.newamericancentury.org/Bushletter.htm
  5. ^ Reynolds, P. (2006). "End of the neo-con dream". BBC News, December 21, 2006.
  6. ^ http://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/HL0312/S00161.htm
  7. ^ http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Middle_East/DI10Ak03.html
  8. ^ http://www.newamericancentury.org/aboutpnac.htm
  9. ^ http://www.newamericancentury.org/statementofprinciples.htm
  10. ^ http://www.newamericancentury.org/
  11. ^ http://newamericancentury.org/statementofprinciples.htm
  12. ^ http://www.newamericancentury.org/RebuildingAmericasDefenses.pdf
  13. ^ http://newamericancentury.org/RebuildingAmericasDefenses.pdf
  14. ^ http://newamericancentury.org/RebuildingAmericasDefenses.pdf
  15. ^ http://www.smh.com.au/articles/2003/03/07/1046826528748.html
  16. ^ http://www.newamericancentury.org/iraqclintonletter.htm PNAC letter to President Bill Clinton] Accessed May 7, 2007.
  17. ^ http://service.spiegel.de/digas/servlet/find/ON=SPOX-238643
  18. ^ http://www.smh.com.au/articles/2003/03/07/1046826528748.html
  19. ^ http://www.theleftcoaster.com/archives/000992.php
  20. ^ http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/nation/shoulders/report011204.pdf
  21. ^ http://www.smh.com.au/articles/2003/03/07/1046826528748.html
  22. ^ http://www.americanfreepress.net/12_24_02/America_Pearl_Harbored/america_pearl_harbored.html
  23. ^ Rebuilding America's Defenses, page 51
  24. ^ Rebuilding America's Defenses, page 50
  25. ^ http://www.signonsandiego.com/news/op-ed/vandeerlin/20020904-9999_1e4deerlin.html
  26. ^ http://www.freedomcentralusa.com/
  27. ^ http://www.pentagonresearch.com/who.html
  28. ^ http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article1221.htm
  29. ^ http://www.channel4.com/news/2003/special_reports/images/bremner_transcript_5.doc
  30. ^ http://www.monbiot.com/archives/2003/03/11/a-wilful-blindness
  31. ^ http://geneva.usmission.gov/humanrights/usdel.html
  32. ^ http://rightweb.irc-online.org/profile/1233
  33. ^ http://www.sysplan.com/Radar/FTS

External links

Analysis of PNAC

  • In November 2003 a private worldwide initiative was launched to interfere with the PNAC neo-conservatives. For example: Indymedia-Washington ; Indymedia-Italy; Indymedia-Japan. And many more.
  • The PNAC website Welcome to the Project ... today (March 2006) does not seem to be in operation anymore. (1. last article placed, dates back to December 19, 2005; 2. sending an E-mail triggers a ‘mail delivery failure/mailbox is full’ message; 3. the search engine is out of order).
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Project_for_the_New_American_Century&oldid=130138159"