Talking Points: Threats and Opportunities

Threats and Opportunities: Crafting Realistic Foreign Policy Alternatives in an Era of Mass Casualty Terrorism

World Policy Institute at the New School

October 2006

Introduction

Wars in Iraq and Afghanistan; veiled military threats against Iran; North Korea’s nuclear test; continuing terrorist threats; and record military budgets – these are challenging times for U.S. security policy. A fresh approach is needed if U.S. policies are to be both practical and effective.

Current Threats: North Korea and Iran

North Korea’s nuclear test is the most recent threat to global security.
The test was weaker than other first-time tests by nuclear powers like India and Pakistan, as suggested by the fact that it took days to determine whether it was a nuclear test at all. The immediate military impact of the test is less ominous than the headlines on the subject would lead us to believe. Targeted sanctions may be appropriate, but ultimately negotiations are the only solution to this problem.

There is no indication that Kim Jong Il would share bombs or bomb materials with a terrorist group – something that has never been done before by any nation. There is also no indication that North Korea is even close to achieving the difficult task of developing a missile-deliverable nuclear weapon. North Korea’s nuclear program was shut down during the 1990s by the Agreed Framework negotiated between Washington and Pyongyang. That agreement was premised on a US pledge to normalize economic and diplomatic relations and end military threats against the North. Washington has not kept its end of the bargain. Until it does – based on direct talks between the U.S. and North Korea – Pyongyang will continue its dangerous and erratic behavior.

In Iran, a similar diplomatic approach is needed. As long as the United States refuses to renounce the option of “regime change” against Iran, there will be no possibility of a deal curbing Tehran’s nuclear program.

Withdrawing from Iraq

According to a consensus of U.S. intelligence agencies, the Iraq war is generating additional recruits for Al Qaeda and like-minded organizations. Majorities of the American people, the Iraqi people, and U.S. troops in Iraq favor a U.S. withdrawal. The only remaining question is how and how soon.

Rep. John Murtha has suggested a redeployment of U.S. troops to other parts of the region within a six month time frame. The troops would return only in the event that terrorist training camps of anti-U.S. groups are set up in Iraq. Sen. Joseph Biden has proposed a regional conference that would involve the key factions in Iraq and the key countries in the region in crafting a pact that would provide the best chance for stability and genuine rebuilding in Iraq. These proposals form the beginnings of a plan to get U.S. troops out of Iraq sooner rather than later.

Here are a few other examples of the U.S. can do to make the world a safer place:

End Nuclear Hypocrisy: While it threatens Iran and North Korea for their nuclear programs, the United States has 10,000 strategic nuclear warheads, including 5,700 on active status. Washington supports Israel, Pakistan, and India, all nations that have developed significant nuclear arsenals while the U.S. stood by and watched. The only way to be safe from nuclear weapons is to get rid of them, starting with deep cuts by the U.S. and Russia, and followed by talks aimed at getting rid of the world’s other nuclear arsenals.

Prevention, Not Intervention: The U.S. needs to spend more on underutilized security tools such as diplomacy, economic aid, law enforcement and intelligence cooperation. This should involve a major shift of resources from the $550-plus billion per year currently being spent for military purposes to non-military tools of security. A top priority should be to invest more funding in destroying and securing nuclear weapons and nuclear materials in Russia and other nations of concern. This is the best way to ensure that nuclear weapons stay out of the reach of terrorist groups.