Winning the War on
Terror | Promoting American Interests Around
the World | China | Israel
Winning the war on terrorism must be our
nation’s top foreign policy priority. I strongly support
President Bush's commitment to eradicating the terrorist threat
and commend him for his success in forming a global alliance to
accomplish that goal. The threat posed by terrorism, however,
will not be the only challenge that faces the United States; nor
can combating terrorism be our sole international priority. The
national interest of the United States is affected by what happens
all around the world.
The war on terrorism requires America and our allies
to: 1) find terrorists and bring them to justice; 2) deny them
the capability of launching another attack against us; 3) disrupt
and eliminate terrorist cells throughout the world; and 4) confront
dictatorial regimes that encourage, harbor, train, or equip terrorists.
It also requires an increased commitment of resources to our military,
intelligence, and law-enforcement communities, and an unprecedented
degree of cooperation between law-enforcement and intelligence
agencies at home and abroad.
This effort has led to a much needed rethinking
of all of the assumptions that guided our actions during the Cold
War. We no longer confront an enemy at a fixed location whose
goals and activities are easily ascertained. Our new adversaries
make up a shadowy network of operatives that move across national
borders. We need to reconsider our military structure, the nature
of our alliances, and our action on the world stage so we can
meet the threat posed by this new enemy.
The war on terrorism will take us to many different
places, far beyond our shores. Some of our actions will be in
concert with foreign intelligence agencies to thwart potential
plots against our homeland. Others will involve freezing funds
or confronting “charities” that serve as a front for
funding terrorist operations.
While diplomacy and the peaceful resolution of
differences will always be the first choice of the United States,
military action will sometimes be required. The tragedy of 9/11
illustrated that the United States cannot always trust in others
for its security, nor can it retreat behind a paper-peace. I will
continue to support a policy of confronting challenges before
they fully develop.
I believe the United States should actively promote
the core American values of democracy, protection of individual
rights and freedoms, and respect for the rule of law. Nations
adhering to those principles will be better allies and partners
of America and contribute to global stability.
We have recently seen a succession of triumphs
for democracy. There have been peaceful revolutions in the former
Soviet Republics of Georgia and Kyrgyzstan. The “Orange
Revolution” in nearby Ukraine catapulted a new president
to power in the face of despotic attempts to thwart the popular
will. Elections in Iraq and Afghanistan saw citizens defy en masse
the intimidation and violence of Islamic extremists. It is imperative
that the United States and its allies support democracy wherever
it emerges.
In general, U.S. engagement with other nations
must first protect America's vital national interests. These interests
include: defeating terrorism; preventing or at least limiting
the spread of nuclear, chemical, and biological weapons and the
means to deliver them; checking the ambitions of potentially aggressive
nations; assisting the transition to democracy in the states of
the former Soviet Union and elsewhere; maintaining good relationships
with key allies in strategic regions, such as Israel and Taiwan;
and protecting American sovereignty.
I support expansion of the NATO alliance to include
those nations that want its protection, that are committed to
democracy, and that are willing to assume the alliance’s
obligations. I also support reform of the United Nations as a
condition of continuing America’s sizable financial support
of that organization. The United States must resist all efforts
by the U.N. to assert its authority over our sovereignty or national
interests.
I have consistently supported free and fair international
trade. Trade benefits both American consumers and producers, and
lifts up the economies of other nations, thus improving the global
economic and political climate. However, securing the mutual benefits
from trade require all nations to adhere to the rule of law. We
should insist on such adherence by countries with which we maintain
normal trade relations.
The United States will continue to face significant
challenges from the People’s Republic of China. While our
trade and economic relationship with China continue to expand,
we cannot allow these ties to distract us from the excesses of
that country’s communist regime. Engagement with the PRC
is inevitable, especially in regional matters such as North Korea,
where the Chinese also have a significant interest. However, this
should never keep the United States from maintaining a principled
stand in defense of basic human rights and the rule of law.
Bellicosity from Beijing and continued military
expansion implicate the long-standing U.S. commitment to our nation’s
strategic and democratic partner, Taiwan. The U.S.-China Economic
and Security Review Commission reports that recent and planned
military acquisitions by Beijing -- including mobile ballistic
missiles and improved air and naval forces capable of extended
range operations -- enable China to conduct offensive strikes
and military operations throughout the region. I will continue
to back efforts to strengthen the relationship between the United
States and Taiwan, codified in the Taiwan Relations Act. The entire
international community, not just the United States, has an interest
in keeping the Taiwan Strait peaceful.
It is just this interest that is being challenged
by the European Union as it considers lifting its arms embargo
on China – an embargo that has its roots in the Tiananmen
Square massacre of 1989. The President opposes a lifting of the
embargo, as do I. First, there has been no improvement in the
poor human rights situation that precipitated the embargo. The
European Parliament, the Dutch Parliament, and the German Parliament
have all passed cautionary resolutions for this reason.
Second, increased European military sales to China
would benefit China’s military and threaten peace in the
Taiwan Strait. China has refused to renounce the use of force
against democratic Taiwan – indeed the PRC passed a resolution
in March of 2005 reaffirming its right to use force. The United
States has pledged to help Taiwan defend itself. If the EU lifts
its embargo, the United States will have to consider the manner
in which it shares its military technology and equipment with
countries in the European Union (lest these materials find their
way to the PRC).
In a world where most international relationships
are forged for tactical reasons, the United States and Israel
enjoy a true friendship. The reason is not hard to find. Israel,
like the United States, represents something that our enemies
cannot tolerate: a thriving democracy which, in Israel’s
case, is right in their midst.
Israel, in fact, is the most well-established democracy
in that region. It accords rights to women and elects its leaders
by a true democratic vote. Israeli schools do not teach their
children to root for the destruction of Arab countries, or compare
the United States to Satan. The Israeli media is free to write
and report what it wants. Israeli citizens can say what they think,
can denounce their government policies, can stage protests, can
read and write whatever they please.
In order to better advance the relationship between
our countries, I serve as co-chairman of the U.S.-Israel Joint
Parliamentary Committee on National Security, a group consisting
of Members of Congress and the Knesset that continues to meet
and explore ways our two legislatures can work together to advance
our common security interests.
The January 2006 election of a Hamas-dominated
Palestinian government underscores the need to reaffirm our support
for Israel. Hamas is a U.S.-designated terrorist organization
that has committed countless acts of violence against the Israeli
people as part of their larger mission of destroying the Jewish
state. If the newly elected Hamas representatives are not willing
to renounce terrorism and demonstrate a commitment to peaceful
political activity, the United States must withdraw all financial
support from the Palestinian Authority and prevent it from attaining
statehood.
Israel’s decision to remove soldiers and settlements
from the Gaza Strip was a unilateral demonstration of Jerusalem’s
willingness to act boldly on behalf of peace.
If the Palestinian Authority is not willing to
honor its commitment to disarm militants and halt violence against
Israel, the United States should be prepared to reevaluate the
Middle East Peace Plan and all aspects of our relations with the
Palestinian Authority.
I invite you to visit the National
Security section of this website to learn more about my views
about defense and the security challenges that face the United
States.
