Author: Tim J. Clark

SECDEF Gates, Iran, Smart Power

Secretary of Defense Gates referenced the need for the application of Smart Power in a Nov 26, 2007 speech in which he stated: 

 “…  I am here to make the case for strengthening our capacity to use “soft” power and for better integrating it with “hard” power.  ….    or as John Hamre once put it, to combine the tools of “intimidation” with the tools of “inspiration,” also called smart power

Examples on the application of Smart Power provided in the following articles:

Gates: U.S. Should Engage Iran With Incentives, Pressure(Washington Post)
…Karen DeYoung. The United States should construct a combination of incentives and pressure to engage Iran, and may have missed earlier opportunities to begin a useful dialogue with Tehran, Defense Secretary Robert M. Gates said yesterday.

Gates Urges More Nongovernmental Contacts With Iran (Reuters.com)…Arshad Mohammed, Reuters
… Defense Secretary Robert Gates called on Wednesday for more unofficial contacts with Iran, saying this might eventually open a pathway to more substantive dialogue between the governments.

US Defense Secretary Urges More Private US Contacts With Iran (Yahoo.com)…Agence France-Presse
…”We need to figure out a way to develop some leverage with the Iranians and then sit down and talk with them,” he said in a talk at the American Academy of Diplomacy, referring to general US relations with Tehran.

 

Cold War with Iran – Team America Losing

ARTICLE:  The New Cold War (New York Times)…Thomas L. Friedman, May 14, 2008

As the May 11 editorial in the Iranian daily Kayhan put it, “In the power struggle in the Middle East, there are only two sides: Iran and the U.S.” For now, Team America is losing on just about every front. How come?

When you have leverage, talk. When you don’t have leverage, get some — by creating economic, diplomatic or military incentives and pressures that the other side finds too tempting or frightening to ignore.

Reinforces the need for “Smart”  Power. 

Army Future Combat Systems (FCS)

ARTICLE:  Army Defends Progress On Modernization Program
(Reuters.com)…Andrea Shalal-Esa, Reuters

A senior U.S. Army official on Tuesday defended progress on a mammoth modernization program known as the Future Combat Systems (FCS), saying it was on cost and on schedule despite some technological challenges.

Lt. Col. Scott Turner, the Army’s deputy director for FCS integration, said he was confident that the overall program and its 44 critical technologies were “on track” to allow the fielding of the four systems in 2011 and the overall roll-out of the first FCS brigade combat team in 2015.

He said Gates was questioning the system because of its overall cost, but he remained convinced that the additional capabilities it would give the Army were well worth the investment.

Technology Readiness Levels (TRLs) used  in helping to assess the program risks associated with developing the new technologies required by FCS.   Good news for the Taxpayers in that it provides a more objective indicator of progress. Also useful in determining priorities — a good thing for the warfighters.

The war we must win

SPEECH: Remarks to the Heritage Foundation (Colorado Springs, CO) As Delivered by Secretary of Defense Robert M. Gates, Colorado Springs, Colorado, Tuesday, May 13, 2008

The risk of overextending the Army is real. But I believe the risk is far greater – to that institution, as well as to our country – if we were to fail in Iraq. That is the war we are in. That is the war we must win.

Speech by the SECDEF inspired a few headlines:

Gates Says New Arms Must Play Role Now (New York Times)…Thom Shanker

Defense Secretary Urges Military To Mold Itself To Fight Iraq-Style Wars, (Washington Post)…Josh White

Defense Secretary Robert Gates Urges Military To Focus On Needs In Iraq, Afghanistan, (Los Angeles Times)…Julian E. Barnes

Gates: Focus On Today’s Military, (Philadelphia Inquirer)…Lolita C. Baldor, Associated Press

Gates Questions Military’s Focus, (Colorado Springs Gazette)…Tom Roeder

U.S. Must Focus On Iraq, Less On Future Wars: Gates(Reuters.com)…Andrew Gray,

Alternative to the Long War

ARTICLE:  The ‘Long War’ Fallacy
(Los Angeles Times)…Andrew J. Bacevich, May 13, 2008
Pg. 17

Donald Rumsfeld is today a discredited and widely reviled figure. Robert Gates, Rumsfeld’s successor as Defense secretary, is generally admired for manifesting qualities that Rumsfeld lacked — a willingness to listen not least among them. Yet on one crucial point, the two see eye to eye: Both believe that the United States has no alternative but to wage a global war likely to last decades.

Challenges the mindset about waging “a global war likely to last decades.”  What kind of change will lead to better outcomes?

NK: Food, Trust, Pressure

ARTICLE:  U.S. To Send Food To N. Korea Under New Deal (Financial Times)…Demetri Sevastopulo, May 13, 2008

The US has agreed to give North Korea 500,000 tonnes of food aid under a new deal that would allow monitors unprecedented access to oversee distribution in the Stalinist state.

The food aid deal comes as the US holds separate negotiations with Pyongyang towards completing the second phase of the six-party talks aimed at denuclearising the Korean peninsula. Officials rejected suggestions that there was any link between the issues.

The US official said North Korea had agreed to the more intrusive inspection regime because there was a higher level of trust between the governments because of the six-party talks. He added that North Korea was also feeling pressure because of the global food crisis, and the fact that South Korea and China had curtailed aid. A second official said the food deal had been closely coordinated with the South Korean government.

Almost need a scoreboard. Does NK win if they get more than they give up?

NK Nukes: "It’s the plutonium, stupid"

ARTICLE:  The Right Path With N. Korea
(Washington Post)…Siegfried S. Hecker and William J. Perry, May 13, 2008, Pg. 15

The Bush administration’s North Korea strategy is being criticized from the right and the left for letting Pyongyang off the hook. Some advocate scuttling the six-party talks. Others suggest slowing our own compliance with the agreement to get North Korea to make a full declaration of its nuclear program first. We disagree with both positions. Our mantra should be: It’s the plutonium, stupid.

Aim is creating the conditions that will prevent nuclear export and lead to the peaceful elimination of nuclear weapons.  Authors recognize a transformation in the U.S. relationship with NK is needed starting with building trust.