Harlan Ullman<\/p>\n
The current US National Security Strategy is based on a Great Power Competition with China and Russia<\/p>\n
A year ago, I proposed six recommendations for the incoming Biden administration to consider as it developed its policies. The administration did not. As it begins its second year, on the current course, the administration is in or close to extremis.
\nInflation is at thirty-year highs. The filibuster seems here to stay. The Build Back Better Bill (BBB) is foundering. Vaccine mandates were rejected by The High Court. Omicron is raging. Russia is threatening Ukraine and taunting the US and NATO. And presidential popularity polls are tanking.
\nWhat can the administration do? Exploring some new ideas is a good start. Of my original six recommendations, five are still relevant as eliminating the filibuster appears to have failed.
\nThe first was to IMPLEMENT A 21st CENTURY VERSION OF IKE\u2019S SOLARIUM PROJECT. Following Stalin\u2019s death in March 1953, President Eisenhower ordered an outside review called Project Solarium, named for the White House\u2019s top floor. Completed in four months, the conclusions led to sweeping policy changes incorporating containment and nuclear deterrence that formed Ike\u2019s strategic New Look.
\nThe administration\u2019s newest National Security and Defense Strategies are soon to be released. It may be too late to make major revisions. But commissioning a \u201cRed Team\u201d to study these strategies given recent events seems imperative. The solarium is a good model.
\nThe second was to JETTISON GREAT POWER COMPETITION AS A STRATEGY. The current US National Security Strategy is based on a Great Power Competition with China and Russia. However, that strategy was deeply flawed. Its requirement to compete, deter, and if war arose defeat either power was never defined; was unrealistic, unaffordable and unexecutable; and offered no off-ramp to prevent repeating 1914 and an earlier Great Power Rivalry provoking a world war. Perhaps the Great Power Competition will be modified by the new review.
\nThe third was to create A NATIONAL INFRASTRUCTURE INVESTMENT FUND. Some will argue that passage of the $1.2 trillion Infrastructure Bill, combined with Build Back Better, fit that need. But BBB looks dead on arrival and the $1.2 trillion has two fatal flaws.
\nThe first is that it is not large enough to upgrade and modernize America\u2019s infrastructure, much of which is falling or coming apart. The second is lacking adequate oversight and coordination.
\nThe solution is to establish a private-public partnership for an infrastructure investment fund. Private investment would be incentivized through 30-year bond issues at two to three per cent above prime interest rates guaranteed by the USG and with oversight coming from both sectors. A total amount of $3-4 trillion would be the target including the $1.2 trillion already funded infrastructure bill added to private sector investment.
\nThe fund would invest in advanced technologies in health care, AI and related areas, g-nome, environmental, renewable energy, cyber and infrastructure modernization focused on universal 5G and broadband access and repaid by user fees, tolls, and returns on investment.
\nThe fourth was to REVISE THE NATIONAL SECURITY ACT, THE UNIFIED COMMAND PLAN (UCP), AND GOLDWATER-NICHOLS (GN) LAW. While seemingly arcane, all three are bureaucratic and budgetary concrete walls that have become \u201cclear and present dangers\u201d to provide for the common defense. One example makes this case.
\nBefore the passage of the first National Security Act in 1947, since 1815, the US was victorious in every war it fought. After 1947, the nation failed to win a single war (with the possible exception of the 1991 Iraq War that was in essence a military campaign). The UCP organizes the military operational chain of command. GN incorporates \u201cjointness\u201d across the force. Both represent last-century thinking. To win future conflicts, all these must be revised for the 21st century.
\nThe final recommendation was to UPGRADE AMERICAN ALLIANCES. Under the past administration, America First policies diminished the importance and priority of alliances in Europe and Asia, often undermining them. Doubtless, the Biden administration swept into office intending to reestablish and strengthen relations with allies. Despite the intent, the White House has not succeeded so far.
\nThe administration has followed the Trump policy of confronting China but relying on European and Asian partners to help.
\nIt is unclear whether this has worked or that America\u2019s international standing has improved and made much impact on Beijing. The current Ukraine situation has challenged several NATO states over whether or how to confront Russia given its dependence on Russian energy supplies. Hence, the administration must rejuvenate its alliances as a first-order matter now.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Harlan Ullman The current US National Security Strategy is based on a Great Power Competition with China and Russia A year ago, I proposed six recommendations for the incoming Biden administration to consider as it developed its policies. The administration did not. As it begins its second year, on the current course, the administration is […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":2,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[10],"tags":[3328,1915,759],"class_list":{"0":"post-240505","1":"post","2":"type-post","3":"status-publish","4":"format-standard","6":"category-article","7":"tag-extremis","8":"tag-harlan-ullman","9":"tag-white-house"},"yoast_head":"\n