Organization: University of Illinois at Chicago
Date: Thursday, 8 Oct 1992 22:09:56 CDT
From: <U56503@uicvm.uic.edu>
Newsgroups: alt.politics.clinton
Subject: ==> Clinton/Gore On National Security

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Information in the public interest which does not imply that it
is the opinion of UIC.  Contact 75300.3115@compuserve.com for
further information.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
         CLINTON/GORE ON NATIONAL SECURITY

We cannot go four more years without a plan to lead
the world.  With the end of the Cold War, we need a
team in the White House whose goal is not to resist
change, but to shape it.  The defense of freedom
and the promotion of democracy around the world not
only reflect our deepest values; they serve our
national interest.

We must define a new national security policy to
build on the victory of freedom in the Cold War.
It must express rights and responsibilities that
challenge our people, our leaders, and our allies
to work together to build a safer, more prosperous,
and more democratic world.

The Clinton/Gore Plan

A security strategy

Our vision for U.S. foreign policy which is based
on a simple premise: At a time of fundamental
change, America must lead the world we have done so
much to make through foreign policies that address
the challenges and opportunities of the next
decade.  And to provide that leadership we must:


*    Rebuild America's economic strength.  We
     cannot lead abroad if we are weak at home.

*    Remain engaged in the international arena and
     ready to counter threats to stability from
     former communist countries and from continuing
     regional conflicts.  The end of the Cold War
     does no mean the end of threats to our
     interests.  If our challenge is no longer to
     bear every burden, it is still to tip the
     balance.

*    Use the power of American values in shaping
     the post Cold War era.  Guided by these
     principles, we will pursue three clear
     objectives: to re-establish America's economic
     leadership at home and abroad, to encourage
     the spread and consolidation of democracy
     abroad, and to prepare our military forces for
     a new era.

Restoring economic growth

Our plan to revive America's economic growth will
put America back on track and restore America's
economic leadership abroad.  The job of regaining
America's competitive edge begins at home. Economic
strength is a central element of our national
security policy.

Growth

Lead the world into a new era of global growth -
because without growth abroad, our own economy
cannot thrive.

Trade

Open and expanding global markets benefit all
Americans.  Bill Clinton and Al Gore strongly
support free, fair, open and expanding trade,
including the GATT negotiations.

*    Avoid protectionism but respond to other
     nations' unfair trading practices and protect
     America's interests.  Support a strong "Super
     301" to achieve that goal.

*    Favor freetrade agreements, so long as they
     are fair to American workers and farmers,
     protect the environment, and promote decent
     labor standards at home and abroad.

A technological edge

The private sector must maintain the initiative,
but government has an indispensable role.

*    Maintain our ability to compete with Europe
     and Japan in emerging technologies like
     biotechnology, superconductors and computer-
     integrated manufacturing.

*    Utilize the extraordinary talent at our
     national laboratories to keep the U.S. at the
     forefront of civilian and military technology.

*    Work with private companies and universities
     to advance technologies that will improve our
     lives and create jobs.

*    Help develop a commitment between business and
     labor to make world-class products.

*    Create an Economic Security Council, similar
     to the National Security Council, to
     coordinate our international economic policy.

Restructuring our military forces

We will not shrink form using military force
responsibly, and a Clinton/Gore Administration will
maintain the forces needed to win, and win
decisively, should that necessity arise.  We
supported Operation Desert Storm and the use of
force, if necessary, to enforce U.N. resolutions on
Iraq and to ensure delivery of humanitarian aid in
the former Yugoslavia.

Today's defense debate centers too narrowly on the
size of the military budget.  The real questions
are: What threats do we face?  What forces do we
need to counter them?  How must we change?

A five year plan


*    Maintain military forces - including a
     survivable and stable nuclear deterrent -
     strong enough to deter and defeat any threat
     to our essential interests.

*    Set the level of our defense spending based
     not on old habits but on what we need to
     protect our interests.  We can reduce
     substantially our military forces and still
     protect U.S. interests.

*    Shift the focus of our conventional forces
     from defending against Soviet invasion of
     Western Europe to projecting power whenever
     and wherever our national interests are
     threatened.

*    Preserve the two attributes that have made the
     American military the best in the world - the
     outstanding quality of our personnel and the
     overwhelming superiority of our technology.

*    Improve our intelligence capabilities to
     achieve a more sophisticated and accurate
     understanding of political, economic and
     cultural conditions.

Conventional forces


*    Maintain our commitment to NATO as further
     European security arrangements evolve.

*    Meet our NATO responsibilities in Europe with
     75,000 to 100,000 U.S. troops, rather than the
     150,000 troops now proposed by George Bush.

*    Keep U.S. forces in Northeast Asia as long as
     North Korea presents a threat to our South
     Korean ally.

*    Defend the sea lanes and project force with 10
     carriers rather than 12.

*    Develop greater air and sea lift capacity;
     among other efforts, produce the C-17
     transport aircraft.

*    Enhance the rapid deployment capability of our
     Marines.

Defense Savings

Our defense plan will save more that $100 billion
through 1997.  The funds we save will be spent on
rebuilding America and reducing our deficit.  Our
cut is $60 billion more over five years than the
Cold War budget the Bush Administration still
advocates.

*    Force Structure.  We can save tens of billions
     of dollars by developing a smaller force
     structure, with fewer forces in Europe and a
     greater orientation to the mobile projection
     forces needed in the post-Cold War world.

*    SDI.  We should focus our research and
     development on goal of a limited missile
     defense system within the strict framework of
     the ABM treaty.  Deployment of a massive
     space-based defense, such as Brilliant
     Pebbles, is not necessary.

*    Nuclear Weapons Development.  With smaller
     nuclear arsenals and no need to develop new
     nuclear weapons designs, we will curtail
     spending on nuclear production and testing.
     This moderate reduction will enable us to
     retain our superior technology, high quality
     personnel and strong industrial base, and to
     meet threats that could either increase or
     decrease in the future.

Defense conversion

We must not forget the dedicated men and women
whose hard work helped win the Cold War.

*    Reinvest our military resources in the future
     of the people who won the Cold War.  We need
     to transfer these immeasurable human resources
     into our workforce and into our schools.

*    Train military personnel for critical civilian
     professions by expanding the Montgomery G.I.
     Bill.

*    Create an education fund to provide grants for
     professionals formerly engaged in defense
     work.

*    Insist on advance notification and help
     communities plan for a transition from a
     defense to a domestic economy.

*    Preserve the core elements of our defense
     industrial base to ensure that we can meet the
     challenges of the future.  For example, wind
     down Seawolf production in a manner that will
     preserve our crucial submarine construction
     capability.

*    Establish a new advanced research agency - a
     civilian agency modelled on the Department of
     Defense's research and development arm, the
     Defense Advance Research Projects Agency
     (DARPA) - that could help provide commercial
     work for America's scientists and engineers.

Burden sharing

While Desert Storm set a useful precedent for cost-
sharing, our forces still did most of the fighting
and dying.

*    Work to shift that burden to a wider coalition
     of nations of which America will be a part.

*    Support the recent more active role of the
     United Nations in troubled spots around the
     world.

*    Pursue the establishment of a voluntary U.N.
     Rapid Deployment Force to deter aggression,
     provide humanitarian relief and combat
     terrorism and drug trafficking.

Weapons Proliferation

We can do more to stop weapons of mass destruction
from spreading.

*    Strengthen the International Atomic Energy
     Agency and lead efforts to enable it to
     conduct surprise inspections.

*    Pursue stricter standards and better
     verification of the Nuclear Nonproliferation
     Treaty.

*    Work harder to get more countries to join the
     Missile Technology Control Regime.

*    Get tough with countries and companies that
     sell these technologies and work with all
     countries for tough, enforceable,
     international nonproliferation agreements.

*    Take the lead in negotiating a Comprehensive
     Test Ban Treaty through a phased approach.

Democracy

U.S. foreign policy cannot be divorced from the
moral principles most American share.  We cannot
disregard how other governments treat their won
people, whether their domestic institutions are
democratic or repressive, whether they help
encourage or check illegal conduct beyond their
borders.  It should matter to us how others govern
themselves.  Democracy is our interest.

The end od the Cold War presents America with
extraordinary opportunities for economic renewal at
home.  But that success is directly related to the
success of those still struggling for democracy,
human rights and free market economies around the
world.

The need for new leadership


*    President Bush has too often clung to the
     status quo and hesitated to support democratic
     forces. His failure to articulate clear goals
     or a rationale for an engaged foreign policy
     has fueled a dangerous new isolationism.

*    We need new leadership that will stand with
     the forces of democratic change.  We need a
     President who can set clear goals and explain
     to the American people the importance if
     international engagement - a President who
     will utilize our economic, political cultural
     resources to assist the new forces of freedom
     emerging around the world.

Failed Policies


*    The Administration waited too long to
     recognize and assist the new nations of the
     former Soviet Union.

*    The Administration sat on the sidelines for
     too long while the former Yugoslavia slipped
     into chaos and civil war.

*    The Administration pressured democratic Israel
     to make one-sided concessions in the Middle
     East peace talks, damaging our ability to act
     as an honest broker.

*    The Administration appeased Saddam Hussein
     when it shared intelligence with him, awarded
     him credits, and opposed sanctions against him
     to the eve of his invasion of Kuwait.

*    The Administration is poised to repeat that
     mistake as it casta blind eye on Syria's human
     rights abuses and on its support for
     terrorism.

*    The Administration lost an opportunity to
     promote democracy in Kuwait.

Engagement for democracy


*    A Clinton/Gore Administration will never forge
     strategic relationships with dangerous,
     despotic regimes.  It will understand that our
     foreign policy must promote democracy as well
     as stability.  We cannot - as this
     administration has too often done - ignore the
     link between the two.  A Clinton/Gore
     Administration will pursue a foreign policy of
     Engagement for Democracy:

*    Reform our foreign assistance programs in
     Africa, the Caribbean, Latin American and
     elsewhere to make our aid promote democracy,
     not tyranny.

*    Respond more energetically to help the people
     of the former Soviet empire demilitarize their
     societies and build free political and
     economic institutions.

*    Firmly support Israel and other democracies
     which face threats to their security.

*    Use our extensive economic and diplomatic
     leverage to increase material incentives to
     democratize and to raise the costs for those
     who don't.

     !    Maintain state and local sanctions
          against South Africa until there is an
          irreversible, full and fair accommodation
          with the black majority to create a
          democratic government.

     !    Toughen sanctions against Haiti's de
          facto government until democracy returns.

     !    Condition favorable trade terms with
          repressive regimes - such as China's
          communist regime - on respect for human
          rights, political liberalization and
          responsible international conduct.

*    Promote democratic development. Support
     organizations like the National Endowment for
     Democracy and encourage the U.S. Information
     Agency to channel more of its resources to
     promoting democracy.

*    Establish a Radio Free Asia. Just as Radio
     Free Europe and Voice of America helped bring
     the truth to the communist bloc nations, we
     should create a Radio Free Asia to carry news
     and hope to China, Vietnam and elsewhere.

*    Launch a Democracy Corps to send thousands of
     talented American professionals to countries
     that need their legal, financial and political
     expertise.

*    Support multilateral structures to assist
     countries struggling with the transition to
     democracy and the market economy.

*    Encourage private investment in the former
     Soviet Union, not only to help promote reforms
     but also to ensure that the U.S. is not shut
     out of future lucrative markets.


The Record


*    Senator Gore is a nationally recognized leader
     on defense and national security issues.  He
     has eloquently defended a foreign policy that
     both protects American interests and reflects
     American values.

*    As a member of the Senate Armed Services
     Committee, Gore has an intimate knowledge of
     national security issues.  His diverse
     knowledge reflected by his service on three
     subcommittees:  strategic forces and nuclear
     deterrence, projection forces and regional
     defense, and defense industry and technology.
     In the House, Gore served on the Intelligence
     Committee.

*    Even with the decline of communism, Gore has
     seen the continued need to defense American
     interests abroad.  He supported Operation
     Desert Storm to evict Saddam Hussein's forces
     from Kuwait, and has continued to support the
     efforts of the Iraqi people to overthrow the
     Ba'athist regime.

*    Gore voted for the Freedom Support Act to
     grant American financial aid to the fledgling
     democracies of the Commonwealth of Independent
     States.

*    Supported independence for the Baltic States
     and timely removal Russian troops.

*    Opposed George Bush's appeasement of the
     Chinese Communists, and voted to condition
     continuation of China's Most Favored Nation
     Status on improvement in its records on human
     rights, trade, and weapons proliferation.

*    Strongly supports Israel.  Gore opposed the
     Bush Administration's bullying of Israel over
     the issue of loan guarantees for Soviet
     refugees.  Gore believes that for both moral
     and strategic reasons, Israel is by far
     America's strongest ally in the Middle East.

*    Gore has earned a national reputation as an
     expert on arms control, advocating sharp
     reductions in weapons and a shift from
     destabilizing land-based multiple-warhead
     missiles - now core principles of America arms
     negotiating.

*    Wrote legislation to stop nuclear
     proliferation.

*    Resisted the weakening of the ABM treaty and
     worked to keep SDI from violating U.S.
     obligations.

*    Fought efforts to scrap SALT II limits and
     preserved them as the foundation for START.

*    Favored a ban on short-time of flight or
     depressed trajectory missiles - a year before
     U.S. negotiators adopted the position.

*    Advocates special treatment for sea-launched
     cruise missiles because of their unusual
     nature.

*    Monitored Geneva arms control talks as one of
     ten Senate observers.