HerbEly

Richard Rhodes on the War Scare, Neocon’s and Threat Inflation

The Style section of the Washington Post features Bob Thompon’s profile of author Richard Rhodes. His just published Arsenals of Folly: The Making of the Nuclear Arms Race, gives an account of the 1983 war scare - the incident precipitated by exercise Able Archer 83 that might have led to a nuclear war. Rhodes apparently thinks the incident to be more important that did Melvin Leffler in his lecture at the University of Virginia’s Miller Center. Leffler saw it as important, but not a turning point.

The Tompson profile also links the Neoconservative's Reagan era “threat inflation” to the current war in Iraq. (As a civilian analyst of Soviet Weapons Programs, who served through 1996, I felt that the whole neocon “Team B” approach was better described as “threat exaggeration.’) Based on this profile, and the Amazon review – I haven’t yet read the book – Rhodes connects this threat inflation to the justification for the war in Iraq. While the neocon’s and their approach certainly played a role, there were both good reasons and analytical errors that led to overstating the WMD threat in Iraq. My own view is that the administration, under fear of another 9/11 overstated the threat, and (deliberately?) ignored evidence that would have dissuaded them, or at least led them to fight the war differently.

Miller Center Forum: History of the CIA

Tim Weiner, author of Legacy of Ashes: the History of the CIA spoke at the Uva’s Miller Center on October 12 (video link) (This fifty seven minute video is well worth the time.) Weiner, a Pulitzer Prize-winning reporter for the New York Times, has covered the American intelligence community for two decades. In researching his new book, he conducted on-the-record interviews with ten Directors of Central Intelligence, examined more than 50,000 documents (many of them declassified in the past five years), and drew upon more than 2,000 oral histories of American diplomats, spies, and presidential aides.”

He started out by quoting the CIA motto “You shall know the truth and the truth shall make you free.” This motto is quoted out of context. Not that I know how the CIA could live up to this biblical quote.

Weiner stated that CIA directors often lied to their presidents, damaging the Kennedy and Reagan in particular. Ethics has to start at the top

Chuck Colson on Ayn Rand

It is the 50th anniversary of the publication of Atlas Shrugged by Ayn Rand. Like many adolescents of my era, I was very much captured by Rand. Later I learned that one was considered sophomoric when he could explain the entire world in terms of a favorite book.

It took a few more years to realize that Rand’s version of human nature made love – of neighbor, self, God, and country - impossible. The word solidarity made no sense in Rand’s philosophy of objectivism.

Rand’s book was widely read. As Colson notes

A 1991 Book-of-the-Month Club and Library of Congress survey asked members which book had most influenced their lives. As expected, the Bible finished first. Unexpectedly, Rand’s most famous book, the novel Atlas Shrugged, finished second.

Fifty years after its publication and 25 years after Rand’s death, Atlas Shrugged is still read everywhere from college campuses to Wall Street. Given its popularity and its impact, Christians ought to be acquainted with Rand’s work and, especially, her worldview.
…
In Atlas Shrugged and her other writings, Rand articulated a philosophy she called “objectivism.” Among other things, objectivism teaches that man’s “highest value” and “moral purpose” is his own happiness. ...By “happiness” Rand meant “rational self-interest.” For her, “virtue” consisted of doing what “secured” your life and well-being....

Where did that leave altruism and self-sacrifice? As vices….But without altruism and self-sacrifice, how do people relate to one another? Ayn Rand says through exchanges that promote mutual advantage, what she called a “trade.” In other words, as if each of the parties were businesses, not people.

Many, maybe most, people do not only on rational self-interest. If they did, it would be a cold and forbidding world, much like the hellish totalitarian society Rand claimed to be refuting. Fortunately, the human heart is capable of building connections with one another, even to the point of laying down one’s life for another John 10:11 It’s is called unconditional love.. Given the demands of unconditional love, it is easy to see why many would be drawn to a philosophy which does not require it.

Hillary, Please Read FM 22-103, then Fire Sandy Berger

US Army FM 22-103 Command and Leadership at Senior Level states the following on ethics:

"Senior leaders and commanders have specific ethical responsibilities to their organizations. These responsibilities flow directly from the attributes required of senior leaders to successfully implement their vision. First, they are worthy role models. Second, they promote the ethical development of their subordinates by teaching them how to reason clearly about ethical matters. Finally, they sustain an ethical climate that promotes trust and professional commitment."

Had this principle been observed, we never would have read this in the Examiner:

WASHINGTON - Sandy Berger, who stole highly classified terrorism documents from the National Archives, destroyed them and lied to investigators, is now an adviser to presidential candidate Hillary Rodham Clinton.
…
Berger, who was fired from John Kerry’s presidential campaign when the scandal broke in 2004, has assumed a similar role in Clinton’s campaign, even though his security clearance has been suspended until September 2008. This is raising eyebrows even among Clinton’s admirers.
….
Berger has admitted stealing documents from the National Archives in advance of the 9/11 Commission hearings in 2003. The documents, written by White House counterterrorism czar Richard Clarke, were a “tough review” of the Clinton administration’s shortcomings in dealing with terrorism, Clarke’s lawyer told the Washington Post.
….
At his sentencing in September 2005, Berger was fined $50,000, placed on probation for two years and stripped of his security clearance for three years.

Those of us who spent a career in intelligence should be forgiven if we experience a certain amount of resentment at Berger’s light sentence.

Those who care about establishing an ethical climate in the intelligence community (an all of the civil service) can only oppose Hillary as a result of this action.

Pat Lang on Crocker/Petreus

Col. Pat Lang spoke on The Crocker/Petraeus Report: What Does it Really Mean? (video) At the University of Virginia’s Miller Center on October 3, 2007. Well worth the hour to watch it. Sorry I didn’t take the time to go over and meet him.

He also offered a few comments on Iran. In assessing the nuclear threat, he suggested something that the Intelligence community failed to do on the question of Weapons of Mass Destruction in Iraq:perform a programmatic analysis. A through programmatic analysis would not just ask if Iran has a nuclear weapons program. It would ask, when it will test, and when it will have the weapon mounted on a delivery system. Lang suggests that this will be a matter of years. If this is the case – and I hope that this time the administration is asking this question – there is time before a military attack will be required.

Lang observes that the administration already has all the legal authority it needs to attack Iran. Let me ask, as I did on August 22, 2005, where are the bishops and theologians? We have politicians busy posturing on pro-choice vs. pro-life, gay marriage, etc. Can’t someone ask them how they reconcile the Bush doctrine of pre-emptive attack with the just war criteria of last resort and legitimate authority? Unfortunately, there is no reason to change my August 2005 statement:

My guess is that the Bishops will ignore the question – being busy with topics such as 1) who should decide whether a politician should receive communion; 2) whether or not Harry Potter is a threat to children’s faith; 3) closing parishes in order to pay for their dereliction of administrative duty; and 4) changing the language of the Mass.

Am I being too harsh?

Lecture on How the Cold War Ended

Melvin P. Leffler gave a one hour overview of his new book For the Soul of Mankind: The United States, the Soviet Union, and the Cold War. IMO, it is well worth downloading and watching the video. Leffler looks at US and Soviet leaders, in terms of international forces, domestic politics, and belief systems is revealing. Even from start, leaders on both sides recognized that the Cold War worked against their national interests. He asks why the cold war could not be ended until Reagan and Gorbachev.

In answer to a question at the very end, he places exercise Able Archer 83 and the “war scare” in context. The Soviets perceived Able Archer in the context of expectation of a preemptive nuclear attack. While no one knows how close we really came to a nuclear war, the incident clearly influenced Reagan and Gorbachev. Leffler views it as important, but apparently not a turning point. For my own view, see my June 2004 posting on How Carter Helped Reagan End the Cold War