Robert Gates on assuming office of Secretary of Defense, 2006 g.
Book by Former U.S. Secretary of Defense (2006-2011 gg.) Roberta M. Гейтса «Exercise of Power: American Failures, Successes, and a New Path Forward in the Post-Cold War Period», dedicated to the successes and failures of American foreign policy in recent decades. Excerpt from this book published in the latest issue of Foreign Affairs, in which the former minister criticizes the foreign policy methods of the American authorities, and also offers alternative solutions.
Leadership problem
R. Gates notes, that the US retains the status of the most powerful economically and militarily power. However, there are objective factors, capable of leading to a loss of world leadership. Such an outcome threatens both the US itself, to the whole world. In this regard, it is necessary to take measures to maintain the desired position..
Former minister believes, that after graduation “cold war” Serious Mistakes Appear in Washington's Foreign Policy, hindering the achievement of goals. The main thing is the preference for military methods of resolving problems to the detriment of others.
As the experience of recent decades shows, use of military force instead of diplomacy, as well as improper planning of military operations can lead to the most serious consequences. First of all,, that the tasks set remain unresolved, and new challenges complement them. Problems are accumulating, and the situation is quickly getting worse.
Planning errors
R. Gates recalls several famous recent stories, in which the United States faced serious problems and were unable to complete the tasks. Similar examples cover the period from the end of the Cold War to our time..
AT 1993 g. Clinton's administration launched a humanitarian operation in Somalia to combat hunger. Then the operation grew into a peacekeeping operation with the parallel building of state structures. The situation was similar in Iraq - they started there by overthrowing Saddam Hussein, after which I had to capture the territory of the country, build a new state and fight rebels. Finally, at 2011 g. in Libya, it all started with the protection of civilians, and then grew into a struggle with the regime of Muammar Gaddafi - and plunged the country into chaos.
First mistake in these situations, according to P. Gates, was associated with improper planning. Before starting such an operation, the command must assess the real threat to US interests, set clear goals. It is also necessary to determine the necessary forces and means, possible consequences and losses. Only then can a decision be made on the use of the army.
The Pentagon is currently the main foreign policy instrument of the United States
celebrated, that the allocated forces and means must be consistent with the objectives. Besides, when changing the objectives of the operation, the selected grouping must also change. You can’t save or spray power, and the actions of the command should not be impulsive or insufficiently active - this is strategically unreasonable and immoral in relation to their own military.
Libyan example
Assad returned electricity to Hasak thanks to Russia's support
R. Gates examines the situation around Libya in detail and shows, why that operation led to the worst results. The reason for this was precisely the wrong planning. The former minister notes two main mistakes - the unjustified expansion of the humanitarian mission to a full-fledged military operation and the inability to establish the country's life after its military operations.
Initially, within the framework of NATO, it was planned to protect the population and opposition movements of Libya from government forces. Alliance had the opportunity to prevent clashes between the army and the rebels, but it was decided to destroy the government in Tripoli. After the fall of mode M. Gaddafi, US assistance was limited and did not cover a number of key areas. Washington did not help with the construction of new state institutions, with the restoration of the army, etc..
As a result, a coalition of NATO and the Arab countries “bombed Libya and went home”. Civilians, whose defense justified the invasion, left without help. All this led to well-known consequences.. The country is in ruins, and her former army’s arms spread across Africa and the Middle East, what became a problem including. and the US.
Not only the army
Former Minister recalls, that during the Cold War, superpowers opposed militarily indirectly, through third countries - and diplomatic structures played a big role in foreign policy. In recent history, the role of diplomats has declined, however, the situation in the world is changing again and demands to revive this sphere.
Except for a short period under President J. Boucher, Congress Provides Inadequate Funds to State Department Over Long Years. The White House often puts the State Department in the background, which also does not contribute to its normal operation. The Foreign Ministry is rightly criticized for bureaucracy and low efficiency, but without it it is impossible to build and strengthen the foreign policy.
After World War II, a developed economy became an important tool to attract allies for the United States. However, after the Cold War, everything changed, and in Washington decided, that the economy is needed not only for cooperation, but also to punish those who are objectionable. The policy of sanctions does not contribute to the development of good relations with third countries and can push potential partners.
State Department Central Office. Office is invited to reform and use more actively
To 1999 g. US News Agency existed and operated. It created representative offices and libraries., distributed various printed materials and supported radio stations. However it was shut down, and the remaining structures were transferred to the State Department. This was a serious blow to "public diplomacy" and to the promotion of American interests in third countries.. The Agency for International Development also fell under reductions.. It still exists, but forced to curtail programs due to reduced funding.
Real offers
R. Gates offers several measures, aimed at strengthening and optimizing foreign policy tools and methods while reducing negative consequences. Existing system, created under the National Security Act 1947 city, outdated and in need of adjustment. For example, departments, responsible for foreign economic activity, do not participate in it, but can be involved if necessary.
Military power remains an important component of the country's foreign policy capabilities. However, it should be developed, incl. due to proper use and proper planning of operations. Together with the army, diplomacy and economics must be the most important tools.. The State Department is proposed to make the main non-military means for interaction with other countries.
R. Gates notes excessive bureaucracy and undue attention to developed countries to the detriment of interaction with developing. A restructuring of this structure is needed., as well as a change in the internal culture of the department. In the structure of the State Department it is necessary to revive a full-fledged Information Agency, loose in the past.
Maintain leadership
According to P. Gates, all available methods and means are needed to maintain global leadership - the military, diplomatic and other. The army must maintain its role, but it should be applied sparingly and for appropriate reasons. Non-military forces will take on all other work in peacetime. All these funds need to be developed equally..
Will the militias go to war in the ranks of the people's militia?
As the former minister notes, most Americans want to see not only the economic and military successes of their country. Another important desire is for everyone else to see the USA as a leading country and a freedom fighter. In the foreseeable future, a new multilateral confrontation is planned., and to obtain such results, new methods are needed.
In this way, Robert Gates suggests restructuring foreign policy systems and processes, making them as flexible and able to respond to any challenges. But the current US administration is of a different opinion. She maintains her current situation and prefers to solve problems as quickly and roughly as possible.. However, sanctions and threats of the use of force do not always help as in solving urgent problems, so in perspective. Whether Robert Gates is heard is a big question.. The same goes for maintaining global leadership in the future..
Kirill Ryabov
