October 8, 2002: Maj. Gen. Perry Smith,
USAF Retd., "The Coming War with Iraq."
December 3, 2002: Amb. Yang Sung-chul,
ambassador to the US. (No notes submitted).
February 4, 2003: Dr.
Robert Gallucci, "The Axis of
Evil -- What Next?"
Images, low-res: [Gallucci];
students]; [Hi-res images List].
March 11, 2003: Dr. Michael Ledeen, "War
Against Terrorism", author and former
Reagan administration national security council official.
May 13, 2003: Air War College
Regional Studies Program Report.
(Limited to Middle East this year.)
Dr. Robert Galucci, "The Axis of Evil -- What
Next?" 4 Feb. 2003
Dean of Georgetown University's School of Foreign
Service. He served the US Government for 21 years, e.g., as Assistant
Secretary of State for Political-Military Affairs, and in the lead role
dealing with nuclear proliferation and the disarmament of Iraq, and well
as the negotiations with North Korea.
Organized UNSCOM to inspect Iraq.
Negotiated Agreed Framework w/ N. Korea.
During Desert storm, instructor at National War College. Reconstruction
Speech: "Axis of Evil"
1814 precedent, Brits burned our
capital, defenseless -- but oceans protected, neighbors posed no threat.
Post 9/11/01 changes
Defense by denial (of access to shores).
Isolationist v engagement debate in WW1.
AIr power began in WW1, had ability to shrink oceans and hit battleships
WW2 Pearl, but end of WW2 brought intercontinental
range aircraft & rockets. 2nd was atomic bomb.
End of defense by denial, even with air
Offense needed, w/ Triad. Deterrence,
not denial. Psych concept.
1960s return to ABM for denial, various architectures.
Offense -Defense cost exchange ratio (offense
cheaper). ABM Treaty. President Reagan returned to President
Kennedy and President Johnson interesting defense if tech could reverse
ratio. But didn't work.
SDI: research but not deployment.
President Bush 43 interested in defense
by denial, strategic goal of dominance.
Dec 2002 doc declares this forces stronger than
any other state could hope to match.
- end arms control agreements.
- Russia no threat as power, but does leak
fissile material, bio tech & scientists -- and does transfer e.g. to
Iran nuke power program.
- China only traditional threat, esp Navy
subs, nuke weapons modernizing.
- rogue states not negotiable. Appeasement,
ineffective because cheating -- so use force.
- SORT Treaty not a traditional Treaty. Withdrew
from ABM Treaty. Test ban ended, because US has the means.
Vulnerable to unconventionally
delivered weapons, & fanatics.
Intersection of 2 sets: fanatics and weapons.
13-14M containers opened in ports per yr.
Might not know who attacked, from where -- and
they might not care.
Back to 1814.
Nuke weapons still too complex except for Govts,
w/ plutonium (Nagasaki) -- but two enriched uranium masses are simple to
force together like Hiroshima.
Continuity of govt. program -- weekends
n moountain and now not just an exercise.
NEST now deployed to Washington.
National Security Document indicates nuke to be
dropped on MidEast countries in event of war.
Preventive [not Pre-emptive] strike right in Bush
Preventive war now asserted: before they
even threaten them. Not used by President Kennedy or President Reagan
even. "Provocative and not prudent" because could be claimed by other
nations e.g. india or Pakistan.
Iraq lines to terror are faint.
Inspections found mustard, Sarin, VVX evidence.
Bio weapons, certainly some. Nukes -- only a year away.
Almost certainly leftovers from 1991-98, plus
opportunity to regenerate. Iran, Libya, syria Pakistan, India, N.
Korea have bio weapons.
Nuclear -- lack material & facilities so long
Iraq however violated 1441.
N. Korea: mid '80s developed nuke facilities.
Crisis '93. Choices: contain N. Korea, 2 bomb nuke program 3 negotiate
(did so). 3 years later N. Korea cheated as Clinton left office.
Still best to negotiate.
Bush: don't negotiate w/ rogue states.
Now N. Korea has enrichment program. Bush generally rejects negotiation
-- major crisis. N. Korea might transfer weapons to terrorist groups.
IRAN: may be most imp. Has medium
range missiles, nuke weapons program from Russia, has transferred to terrorists
to past -- but now a dem.
W/o negotiations, will have to accept. Far
preferable to negotiate than to whack 'em.
UN inspectors did return because of Bush
unilateral policy, but real threat is in Asia, not midEast.
Bush skeptical of Nunn-Lugar threat reduction
programs (securing fissile material in Russia).
Not worth it to label country evil if intend to
negotiate -- unless simply intend to bomb.
Detonation of WMD in a city? Tech cannot
be uninvented, must live with this indefinitely.
Great Framework, N. Korea: series of interlocking
steps, each observable. Big nuke program, 3 peer year capability
-- frozen for 2K Megawatt light water reactors & interim fuel oil supplies.
But N. Korea cheating w/ new secret enrichment program w/ Pakistan tech.
Can't imagine Bush handling crisis worse -- no negotiation, then axis of
evil, then targetted publicly with nuclear weapons. SK now feels
Washington is problem, not N. Korea.
AWAC 8 October 2002, Raw Notes.
Maj. Gen. Perry Smith, "The Coming War with
Gen. Smith was Commandant of the National War College,
a combat fighter pilot, a high level planner, a noted author, a military
analyst and media commentator with CNN (in the Gulf War) NBC and CBS.
He also is noted for having protested the false media reports about Operation
Tailwind during the Vietnam War.
1970 Viet Nam war, Tailwind into Laos, 150 SF
& Montagnards, faced tremendous resistance by NVN, almost overrun,
air strikes w/ tear gas, saved the mission.
1998 Times & CNN story was nerve gas Sarin
dropped on enemy & American defectors. Bogus story. -- Gen. Cleveland.
Perry on CNN at time. resigned in protest.
Raising money fr Medal of Honor foundation to
fund their speakers.
Born at West Point, mil family.
Saw Pearl attack at age 6.
Parrallels between Pearl & 9-11:
surprise, tactical success, operational &
strategic level though a huge mistake -- joined US together, defeated fascism.
90 countries now support US against terror.
Unlike Pearl, everyone saw the event (via TV).
"If not me, who? If not now, When?"
Must do something about Saddam -- has to be US
Will be Jan - Feb. next year, following overwhelmingly
Congressional Resolution, stronger than in 1990. Assumes inspectors
will not have full access.
UN Resolution will be passed, authorizing force.
Unlikely Saddam would be killed quickly, so war
War very different from 1991: must take down Saddam,
his clan, the Republican guard -- but must leave country in good shape
SInce Kosovo we can take down electrical system
for any length of time with temporary putty bomb -- & select bridges,
transport, allowing for quick rebuilding.
FOcus on Saddam, not infrastructure, or most of
Most of Iraqi forces will stand aside.
Some SF, much air power. Couple of weeks
Who will put country together, how long?
Iraq has no history of dem or free enterprise
-- and little tradition in mid E.
Iraq has 10% of world oil, with good capacity
-- don't need marshall plan, just restart pumping.
Iraqi secular state since 1932 -- not fundamentalist.
Remember in youth Italians were seen as undemocratic
-- but it worked.
Best analysis: Kenneth Pollock book very careful.
Franks will run war.
SF Operations Command large role as in afghan..
SF Command and Central Command are neighbors in
J-3 is Nordie Schwartz, strong SF background.
SF coming to fore these days.
Gulf War used Sf very little -- more now.
What if Iraq attacks Israel? Saddam will
fire Scuds -- while Israel has both high and low alt interceptor missiles.
Sharon may not fire back.
N. Korea just as bad? Saddam has used
Weapons of Mass Destruction -- only one since WW2.
Long peace? Possible except for mini
US has not acted unilaterally for a long time -- media
myth. Will have a coalition before acting.
Porbably will go alone if no coalition -- but
countries are quietly joining coalition signing on line.
analogy to Japanese invasion of Manchuria 1930s,
Abyssinia, Rhineland, austria -- no coalition because US not providing
leadership -- but now US is leading, Colin Powell will get almost as large
Gulf war not a political success in region --
Triumph without victory book. This time, in 5 years Iraq could look
good -- and have promised countries in region will stay course and rebuild.
Lack of support form EU allies? Lack of long
After Falklands, Latins told him to ignore their public
protests against Brits -- hated Argentines. Difference between Public
and private alliances.
Countries want inspectors back to Iraq once more,
to give cover in local politics.
Have stayed in Bosnia and Kosovo, Macedonia.
Must have post war strategy in advance, unlike
Can we push UN owing to our money deficit with
Sec General does get way ahead of Sec Council.
We have leverage w/ UN -- but being behind on
dues, we have less leverage.
What if Iraq cooperates with inspectors thru March.?
1998 UN Resolution lacks power to enter without permission
to palaces etc.
Saddam expects to die violently -- not likely
to open up.
Scott Ritter? Wrote good book -- but
now strange. WSJ claimed Ritter is paid by a saudi now.
Jordan to play role in seeking new leaders for
Difficult because splintered community -- but some
expatriate Iraqis have dem credentials.
Iraq v Iran as demon? Iranians have not
used nerve gas, on mass scale. Should not impose dem on all -- but
should consider dem as a choice for people. General t ...
Public leadership of Bush?
Bush on learning curve. Now speeches at UN and
to public better, if late. Team around him much better than Clinton’s.
Bush rhetoric was worrisome last year: axis of
evil not a good fit., Unilateralism poor.
December 3, 2002
Amb. Yang Sung-chul,
Korean ambassador to the US, member of Korean Economic
Institute, former Professor of Political Science at the University of Kentucky,
expert on Korean reunification and economic affairs, e.g. Hyundai.
(No notes submitted).
Dr. Michael A. Ledeen, March 2003.
The War Against Terrorism.
Notes by Jamie Jordan.
Because of what he considers the “two scandals”
the intelligence agencies have little or no
Because of this we cannot penetrate terrorist organizations
We have not only been prohibited from assonating heads of state, but also
assignations and fraternizing with known or planning assigns.
Scandal involving a man captured by guerilla forces in a South American
whom was tortured and killed. One of the men involved was a paid
the CIA. Senator Toracelli brought this information to light and
scandal imposed new rules on intelligence agencies.
Because of this our intelligence agencies are not allowed to work with
have “bad” human rights.
As of September 10, 2001…
The FBI was not able to
clip newspaper articles about terrorist organizations or enter
mosques to listen to
anti-Christian or anti-U.S. conversations.
The only options available to the CIA: to
Interpol and have known terrorists arrested when
they move (country to country) or bomb the entire
camp, thus killing other people.
This is because they could
not assonate anyone.
Regardless of what they
knew about them.
They also cannot follow
a known terrorist around as long as they have not committed a
crime in the U.S.
The Soviet Union was the biggest sponsor
of terrorism for a long time.
A terrorist organization cannot be made out of
money, one needs a country to help back it.
Iran, Iraq, Afghanistan
and Syria were the four biggest sponsors of terrorism at the time
of 9-11. (North Korea
not far behind, and even closer today.)
That is why we make no
distinction between the country and terrorist group.
In the beginning we liked
Saddam—because he wasn’t a religious fanatic.
Terrorism will not end as long as there is tyranny.
This is because the U.S.
is a treat to their control.
Their people look up
to us as far as wealth and happiness and freedom which
undermines their control.
These countries are all
bound by tyranny and hatred for the United States.
When polled by the Iraqi
government hired polers 70% of the Iraqi people said that they
were dissatisfied with
their government and would like to see a change.
Taking into consideration that all knew they were being polled by the government,
we can reasonably assume that the percentage is much higher than that.
NATO nations wanted to help us when we said
“We are going over there whether you like it or
This is because they
knew that they could not fight a war on their own, they need to
“help” us so that they
will not seem to be letting the U.S. take control.
The European countries
are not able to fight a war because they do not possess the
manpower or equipment
to do so.
A majority of European
nations spend 1% of their GDP on their military, this is not even
enough to pay and clothe
While we are waiting around on the U.N. to
decide what we need to do and who will help us
the “axis of evil” countries are banning together.
“My biggest worry is that before we act the ‘axis
of evil’ nations will band together and make
the job messier than it has to be.”
AWC Briefing, 13 May '03 (raw notes)
Senior War College instructors report on their
visits to international hot spots. (Often one of the best received
presentations of the year).
Modified in 2003: Owing to the cancellation of
trips, Dr. Record and Dr. Sorenson spoke on the Middle East.
Cleveland: German Consul General coming
to AL Power, lunch @ Cap city Tues. June 3rd, noon, first 50 taken.
240-9430 chamber of commerce.
Lawrence Grinter, China expert.
Preemption: first US attack on recognized govt.
Had an ambassador did 1990, and sold weapons to Saddam regime.
How far might Bush go? Decapitation issue: legitimate going
after foreign leader if you have gone to war with country. Crossed
Costs: no one estimated within $40 Bn before the
war.. CBO est $60 Bn. Budget requests higher than that.
Casualties: no est on Iraqi side, hospitals in
chaos, media not peering too deeply. Assume 100 to one ratio, 13,000
Iraqis, equiv. to 150K Amer. proportionate to pop.
No WMD found so far - now saying may have been
destroyed before war ended. Powell saying they had a program.
Theories of Perle Wolfowitz, Ajami and Ledeen
that dem can be fashioned in Middle East are in question.
Assassination ban was E.O. of Ford. FDR
approved attack on Yamamoto, and would so on Hitler if had been possible.
Bush doctrine, Sep. 2002 nat sec strategy.
Threat Undeterrable enemy getting WMD (esp nuke)
Rome was only a regional superpower -- no precedent
for global superpower.
Bush sees threats from Terrorist organizations,
regimes that harbor them, and rogue states.
Solution is to strike first and clean them out.
Many Cons feel first Gulf war should have cleaned
out Baghdad. Saddam is deterrable.
Need to separate threats from different regimes
-- Nixon first pres. to separate communist states.
Rogue states constrained -- N.Korea and Iraq have
not used them against other states (even Israel) only against non-states.
N.Korea believed to have delivery systems.
Preemption when enemy attack is imminent.
Has legal standing.
Pearl Harbor justified to Japanese by feeling
war w/ US was inevitable.
Will other countries attack nations pre-emptively?
Easier to win war than peace -- but war was won
with few troops on ground-- but perhaps too few to win the peace. Occupation
of Japan not a good precedent.
No WMD -- either did not exist or got rid of them.
Sorenson: still trying to sort out mideast,
but where were anti-American mobs in mid east? Ended after a couple
of days -- not a dem trade in middle East. saddam hd little
pop support in Middle East, wars, drank alcohol, `bad Muslim.
Terrorism in WMD? if Iraq had the he would have
showed them to deter us.
Sea changes in Mid east -- Bush now paying attention
Pales & Is have given up on peace. Have
learned to live with violence.
Is election trounced Labor, party of peace --
Syria now has Amer. troops on one border and Israel
on another. Regime not as ruthless s Iraq. Might understand indirectly
Iran -- 60% under 30, and realize imams have destroyed
Both syria and Iran might improve regimes.
Shah's son pipes in radio rock, countered by imams' islamic rock.
Democratization not necessarily in interests of
US -- e.g. Turkey islamist party voted against US alliance.
Dem not progressive, e.g. Kuwait emir blocked
on women's rights by imams.
Some of our best friends are not democratic.
Iraq lost dem 1958 and few remember it.
Federal system is real possibility -- so is monarchy. 2d son of Jordan
king is available and Oxford educated -- for Iraq.
Linkage between 9/11 and saddam Hussein?
Sorenson worth it to get rid of Saddam
-- but little connection between Laden and Saddam. Both obnoxious
so doesn't matter if they had link.
Record: Saddam was effectively deterred.
Sorenson: royal family rules Saudi by combo
of brute force and benefits: eastern poor part of Saudi receieved newly
constructed palaces with no occupants just for the construction jobs.
Saudi most Bedouin country, most conservative.
Dem would sweep aside modernity, to 7th century.
Analogy to occupation of Japan?
Record: seen as legitimate, and emperor
legitimated Macarthur's policies; Japanese society homogeneous unlike mid
east . Took 7 yr. of mil rule -- and no act of violence against US.
Macarthur had 23 divisions and x00,000 men.
Sorenson: Stupidity index Saddam ignored
warnings that US would take him out. Syria smart -- Bashar Assad
a doctor; kicked out Arafat when threatened by Israel -- and Syrian mil
much worse than Iraqi now.
US recently declined to exempt N.Korea from preventive
war against rogue states. N.Korea has had uranium for 50 yr. till
got weapons 1992. 1992 Framework agreement cheated on but N.Korea
is deterrable. Searching for multilateral leverage to deter.
Political Islam did not rear till pan-arabism
failed in 1967 war of Nasser.
Extreme version adopted when frustrated when other
causes failed. Islamists fail when they take over a country (Afghan
Israelis (Sorenson) should desist from
targeted assassination and Palestinian govt. should arrest Hamas leaders.
The Israelis withdraw gradually including settlers.
Syria willing to discuss Golan and return -- less
thorny. Reduce fear factor.