US National Security Strategy in the 21st Century: The Princeton project

The Princeton project for the design and development of the US National Securty Strategy for the 21st centuray has published its final report entitled "Forging a World of Liberty Under the Law". This is a major effort in which more than 400 US national security "experts" participated for more than 3 years. The final report reflects a balanced and objective way of analysis and some reasonable recommendations. It seems to me, but still not sure that the virus of the neo-cons did not infilterate this work. If the next US administration can make good use of this report we might end up in a better world at the end.

The full report can be downloaded here, but let me highlight some major findings.

The objective of the report is to protect the American people and the American way of life. Good for them and I hope Arab countries will be able to come up with such strategies to defend their interest. Now how does the protection of American people and way of life can reflect on the rest of the world?

The report says American strategy must meet six basic criteria which are:

1) multidimensional, operating like a Swiss army knife, able to deploy different tools for different situations on a moment’s notice;

2) integrated, fusing hard power – the power to coerce – and soft power – the power to attract

3) interest-based rather than threat-based, building frameworks ofcooperation centered on common interests with other nations rather than insisting that they accept our prioritization of common threats;

4) grounded in hope rather than fear, offering a positive vision of the world and using our power to advance that vision in cooperation with other nations;

5) pursued inside-out, strengthening the domestic capacity, integrity, and accountability of other governments as a foundation of international order and capacity

6) adapted to the information age, enabling us to be fast and flexible in a world where information moves instantly, actors respond to it instantly, and specialized small units come together for only a limited time for a defined purpose.

I particularly like the 3rd point but can never see people like Bush, Cheney, Rumsfield, Rice or Bolton adopting at any given moment in time and space.

Now, what does the new strategy think about the Middle East? it goes like this:

" Preventing the cradle of civilizations from becoming the cradle of global conflict must be a top priority. Any long-term solution in the Middle East must include a comprehensive two state solution in Israel and Palestine; the United States should take the lead in doing everything possible to advance this goal or get caught trying. This push for peace should be accompanied by a steady process of institution building to establish a framework of liberty under law among Middle Eastern nations. In an effort to combat radicalization in Middle Eastern states, the United States should make every effort to work with Islamic governments and Islamic/Islamist movements, including fundamentalists, as long as they disavow terrorism and other forms of civic violence."

"America must take considerable risks to ensure that Iran does not develop a nuclear weapons capacity. However, we must also be prepared to offer Iran assurances that assuage its legitimate fears, such as a negative security assurance, the reliable provision to it of peaceful fissile materials, and international influence commensurate with its position. On the other hand, the United States should make it clear that life as a nuclear weapons power, if it came to pass, would be a thoroughly miserable experience for Iran."

"The United States should make it clear to Iraqis that we remain willing and ready to do everything we can to rebuild Iraq and to train and support a government that is up to PAR, but that this will not be sustainable in the context of a full-scale civil war. In cooperation with the Iraqi government, America should establish a series of benchmarks that would allow U.S. forces to redeploy inside Iraq – to places where they can be useful in building order and avoid becoming entangled in internecine civil conflict – and outside Iraq. The United States must also work with the European Union and Russia to prevent a spillover of the Iraqi conflict into the rest of the region; this effort should include the provision of incentives to regional powers to behave responsibly and the imposition of costs on those countries that exacerbate the crisis.".

In comparison to the current Neo-con based US vision, or lack of it, this strategy seems very reasonable since it is based on three important pillars:

1- Two state solution in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict (sorry hamas but there is no other way out!).

2- Identification with Iran's legitimate claims for peaceful nuclear power and not nuclear aresenal. (some will disagree since they want Iran to balance the nuclear superiority of Israel) and;

3- Prevent spillover from the Iraq crises (this lacks the committment to a unified Iraq which can be a door to confideration).

Again I do not see Mr Bush interested in such statements and I think only a democrat administration can take this strategy seriously.