Afghanistan & Iraq | Iran | North Korea | People’s Republic of China | Russia | Israel
United States foreign policy should 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 not only are better allies, but contribute to greater global stability.
Our foreign policy should be designed to:
- defeat terrorism;
- limit the spread of nuclear, chemical, and biological weapons and the means to deliver them;
- check the ambitions of potentially aggressive nations;
- maintain good relationships with key allies, such as Israel and Taiwan, in strategic regions; and
- protect American sovereignty.
I also support a foreign policy that promotes:
- a missile defense system capable of defending our country and our allies against the threat of ballistic missile launch by terrorists or rogue nations, like North Korea and Iran, and accidental or authorized launches from countries such as China;
- expansion of the NATO alliance to include those nations that want its protection, are committed to democracy, and are willing to assume the alliance’s obligations; and
- reform of the United Nations as a condition of continuing America’s sizable financial support of that organization.
I support free and fair trade with other nations because it benefits both American consumers and producers, and promotes economic and political stability abroad that serves our national interests. The mutual benefits of free trade will only be fully realized, though, if our trading partners adhere to the rule of law, including the protection of intellectual property rights, and adversaries are denied sensitive technologies with military applications that may be turned against us.
I oppose efforts by the United Nations and other international bodies that would infringe on our nation’s sovereignty or threaten national interests.
I believe the American people are generous and are willing to support those in need around the world with foreign aid; however, their generosity is not limitless, especially in tough economic times.
For in-depth information about the commitment of U.S. forces in Afghanistan and Iraq, please visit the National Security page of my website or click here.
Iran is ruled by a radical regime that is hostile to the United States and our allies, particularly the state of Israel, which it has threatened on numerous occasions to “wipe off the face of the map.” Its zealous and illegal pursuit of nuclear weapons – and its leaders’ propensity to violence – threatens the very security of the Middle East, and could put U.S. troops and our European allies within range of a nuclear strike.
The ruthlessness of the Iranian regime can be seen even in its treatment of its own citizens, who were met with violence after they took to the streets to peacefully protest the validity of Iran’s presidential election in June 2009. The world will never forget the image of young Neda Soltan, who was murdered by paramilitary police at a protest in Tehran. Tragically, many others lost their lives as well. The regime suppressed press coverage of the protests in Iran and expelled many foreign journalists from the country.
Nine people have been sentenced to death in connection with the post-election protests, and two others were publicly executed in January 2010 after being convicted of “enmity against God” for opposing the regime. One international organization estimated that more than 5,000 people in all have been arrested in connection with the protests, and many of them were tortured or otherwise abused by the regime. The United States must oppose these despicable acts by the Iranian government. A regime that brutalizes its own people cannot be trusted to deal honestly with other countries.
President Obama has given the Iranian regime a full year to negotiate. Now, his one-year deadline has passed with no meaningful response from Iran. It continues its belligerent behavior and pursuit of nuclear weapons, rather than negotiate in good faith with the U.S. and our European allies.
Writing in the Washington Times in December about Iran’s construction of a secret nuclear enrichment facility near the city of Qom, William Cohen, President Clinton’s Secretary of Defense, wrote:
With President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad's announcement that his country intends to build 10 new uranium enrichment facilities, it should now be patently clear that the effort to dissuade Iran from developing nuclear weapons has failed. For Tehran, the negotiations have been nothing more than one long stall – a ruse to buy time, conduct more tests, and hasten the day Iran becomes a nuclear power.
The same sentiment was expressed by Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, who said, “We’ve been at the table. But I don’t think anyone can doubt that our outreach has produced very little in terms of any kind of positive response from the Iranians.” She went on to say that international pressure is key to persuading Iranian officials to change “their actions and decisions concerning the nuclear program.”
Perhaps the most effective sanctions would be those that target Iran’s dependence on foreign sources of refined petroleum products. Despite its abundant oil supplies, Iran actually has limited refining capacity, rendering it dependent on other countries for as much as 40 percent of the gasoline it consumes. Disrupting the flow of gasoline supplies into Iran could have a dramatic and immediate effect on the Ahmadinejad regime.
With that in mind, Senators Bayh and Lieberman and I sponsored a bill, which ultimately attracted the cosponsorship of more than 75 Senators, to impose sanctions on companies that export gasoline to Iran or invest in that country’s energy sector. In effect, the legislation presents those who supply energy to Iran with a choice: either do business with Iran’s $250 billion a year economy or our $13 trillion economy, but not both.
Pressuring suppliers to reduce their exports of fuel to Iran could also force the Ahmadinejad regime to choose between fuel for the Iranian people and its expensive agenda of developing nuclear weapons, financing global terrorist networks, and developing and proliferating missile technology.
Our bill passed the Senate as part of a more comprehensive Iran sanctions bill on January 28, 2010. The House passed a separate version, and final action by both bodies is expected before the end of the year.
The increasingly belligerent and unpredictable behavior of the North Korean regime threatens peace on the Korean peninsula, the security of other nations in the region, and indeed the very security of the United States. The North Koreans have pulled out of the Six-Party negotiations, and rebuffed efforts as recently as December, when the President’s Special Representative for North Korea Policy travelled to North Korea to urge it to rejoin the talks. They have restarted their nuclear program, test-launched several ballistic missiles, and conducted two suspected underground nuclear tests. The regime of Kim Jong Il has even declared in 2009 that it was abandoning the armistice that brought a cease fire to the Korean War.
The international community can be helpful in persuading North Korea to change its behavior, but we should not rely solely on other countries or the United Nations to protect our national interests or the security of our citizens. Russia and China, for example, have consistently shielded North Korea from strong measures in the U.N. Security Council, and North Korea has generally disregarded United Nations resolutions in the past, in any event.
With that in mind, I have encouraged President Obama to take unilateral steps to increase pressure on North Korea, including: returning North Korea to the state sponsor of terrorism list; reimposing financial sanctions on both high-level North Korean officials and banks affiliated with the North Korean government; and expanding defense and nonproliferation initiatives, such as interdicting illegal North Korean arms shipments to the Middle East and Africa.
The United States must also recommit to the development and deployment of an effective missile defense system as soon as possible. General James Cartwright, Vice-Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, testified before the Senate Armed Services Committee in June 2009 that the North Korean regime could have a missile capable of hitting the United States in as few as three years. Clearly, the United States must be prepared for this threat, and continue to test and deploy a robust missile defense system that can protect American citizens from any attack.
Engagement with the People’s Republic of China (PRC) is inevitable, especially in regional matters such as those involving North Korea’s nuclear program. Unfortunately, though, China has not been particularly helpful in preventing nuclear proliferation, as it continues to block efforts in the U.N. Security Council to sanction Iran and North Korea. Moreover, state-owned Chinese firms have recently invested significantly in Iran’s energy sector, signing contracts worth billions of dollars with the Iranian government. And, of course, China’s human rights record is dismal.
A 2009 Defense Department report about China's military power indicates that China is continuing to build its forces at a growing rate in an effort to achieve a more powerful position in the region. The report, along with others on the Chinese military expansion, documented China’s relentless pursuit of asymmetric military capabilities designed specifically to counter American military superiority. For example, it found that China has successfully designed and tested anti-satellite weapons that could disrupt U.S. military capabilities, and there is evidence of a significant and concerted program of cyber warfare run by the People’s Liberation Army that is trying to gain access to American military, industrial and government systems. In fact, Chinese cyber attacks on Google this year forced the company to announce plans to abandon its business there.
Bellicosity from Beijing and continued military expansion threaten the security of our strategic and democratic partner, Taiwan, as well. I support efforts to maintain and strengthen the relationship between the United States and Taiwan that is codified in the Taiwan Relations Act. I also support the longstanding policy that commits the U.S. to provide Taiwan with the military resources essential to its defense.
When President Obama took office in January 2009, he pledged to “reset” relations with Russia and work cooperatively with it on the basis of shared interests. In an apparent concession to Russia’s objection to U.S. cooperation with our NATO allies in Eastern Europe, the President abandoned commitments to build missile defenses in Poland and the Czech Republic. This action sent a clear message to our allies that their interests were less important than appeasing Russia. It also dealt a severe setback to U.S. efforts to build a missile defense shield capable of protecting Europe and U.S. troops stationed there.
If these actions were undertaken in an effort to secure Russia’s help in getting Iran to give up its nuclear program, they failed. Russia is still providing Iran’s nuclear program with vital support, Russian entities continue to cooperate with Iran’s ballistic missile program, and the nation still sells sophisticated military systems to the regime in Tehran.
Moreover, Russia has not been particularly helpful in the ongoing talks to replace the Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty (START) – which expired last December – with a follow-on agreement. START, considered by many to be the most important nuclear arms reduction treaty in history, dramatically reduced the number of nuclear warheads in the U.S. and Russian arsenals, and provided the means for each country to effectively verify the other’s nuclear activities.
With the expiration of the treaty last year, the United States and Russia have lost key means to monitor one another’s nuclear forces.
In a world where most international relationships are forged for strategic or political reasons, the United States and Israel enjoy a true friendship. The reason is not hard to understand. 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 the Middle East. It accords rights to women and elects its leaders by a true democratic vote. Schools in Israel do not teach children to support the destruction of Arab countries, or compare the United States to Satan. The Israeli media are free to write and report what they want. Israeli citizens can say what they think, denounce their government’s policies, stage protests, and read and write whatever they please.
I believe it is imperative that the United States continue to support Israel, not only because our two nations share common values and political interests, but also because we are facing a common threat from international terrorists. With Hamas in control of the Gaza Strip and Hezbollah operating in southern Lebanon, Israel’s citizens face continuing attacks by terrorist groups dedicated to its destruction. Hostile nations, such as Iran, also continue to threaten Israel’s existence and undermine the Middle East peace process.
Recognizing that it is in our mutual interest to maintain and strengthen the relationship between our two countries, members of the United States Congress and the Israeli Knesset cooperate regularly on a range of issues. Senator Dianne Feinstein and I serve as cochairmen of the U.S.-Israel Joint Parliamentary Committee on National Security and work with our counterparts from the Knesset to advance our countries’ common security interests.
