by Julianne LaJeunesse- University of New Mexico

Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.) expressed concern Thursday that the recent decision by the Obama administration to scrap a long-range missile defense system in Eastern Europe could signal that the U.S. is willing to concede to Russian interests.

“There is very little doubt, that in most of the world, that this is viewed as an attempt to gain Russian concessions on the Iranian nuclear issue,” McCain said during a Senate Foreign Affairs Committee hearing. “That’s the interpretation. It was Machiavelli that said ‘It’s not what you do, it’s what you appear to do.’”

During the hearing, McCain questioned the Defense Department’s motives for changing the 2007 long-range missile plan in Poland and the Czech Republic. Secretary of Defense Robert Gates originally created the Bush administration’s plan, and Undersecretary of Defense for Policy Michele Flournoy said that she personally saw the deliberation Gates put into the Obama administration’s new short-range missile plan.

At the hearing, McCain said some of the newspaper accounts he’s read lead him to believe the international community doesn’t buy the Department of Defense’s arguments about the technological benefits of short-range missiles in Europe, noting that the time it will take to implement new technologies will be time the United States and European allies will be left with weakened military defenses.

McCain added that he’s curious about how new U.S. missile policies will affect Polish and Czech policies.

“I think it’s worth noting the Czech Republic currently have NATO forces deployed, as well as 100 personal deployed in Kandahar,” he said. “The Polish currently have 2, 000 troops in Afghanistan. I would be very interested in the future to see how firmly the Poles and the Czechs stand behind those commitments.”

McCain went on to argue that he agrees building and using defenses against short-range missiles are needed, but not because of the “belligerent threats the Iranian regime continues to pose to the United States and the rest of the world.”

Senate Armed Services Chairman Carl Levin (D-Mich.) said he believed the new short-range missile approach is positive because it “addresses more directly and effectively Iran’s missile threat, it maintains and expands our security commitment to Europe, including Poland and the Czech Republic, [and] it opens the door to working cooperatively with Russia on a missile defense system that could not only provide greater protection to Europe, but also make a strong statement to Iran, that Europe, including Russia will take unified action against Iran’s threat.”

Senators Joseph Lieberman (D-Conn.) and Jack Reed (D-R.I.) shared many of Sen. McCain’s views, with Lieberman asking why the U.S. cannot adopt a dual system with short and long-range missiles.

By Michael Ruhl, University of New Mexico – Talk Radio News Service

The most effective way to deal with piracy off of the Somali coast is for the sailors to defend themselves, according to a Defense Department representative testifying to the Senate Armed Services Committee today.

Michele Flournoy, Under Secretary of Defense for Policy, said that of the recent pirate attacks in Somalia the most effective means of fending off the pirates came from actions taken by the crews themselves.

“The single most effective short-term response to piracy will be working with merchant shipping lines to ensure that vessels in the region take appropriate security measures themselves,” Flournoy said. She continued that it is not possible for the U.S. military to prevent or intervene in every pirate attack, but if crews take appropriate measures, “the vast majority of pirate attacks can be thwarted without any need for military intervention.”

There were 122 attempted pirate attacks in 2008, of which only 42 resulted in crewmembers becoming captured. Of the unsuccessful attacks, 78 percent of them were stopped by the crews actions, with the others being stopped by military intervention, according to Flournoy.

Flournoy divided crew countermeasures into two categories: passive and active defense measures. Passive measures are those which don’t necessarily require direct confrontation with the pirates, and can include physical obstructions to boarding points, avoiding high-risk waters, creating fortified “safe rooms” in the ship, posting lookouts at all times, and maintaining contact with maritime security forces. Active defense measures can include using fire hoses and small arms to repel pirates and a military presence on the boat. Both of these defensive measures are important for crews to talk to defend themselves, Flournoy said.

She believes that the complexity of this situation necessitates a multifaceted approach, which is why the aforementioned measures should be combined with greater military patrols and economic development. Additionally, the Defense Department would like to see more states willing to prosecute the pirates. Presently, Kenya is one of the only nations to actually place Somali pirates on trial.

According to Flournoy, since August 2008 36 pirate vessels have been destroyed or confiscated, small arms have been seized, and 146 pirates have been turned over to law enforcement officers.

By Michael Ruhl, University of New Mexico – Talk Radio News Service

“We all have an inherent right to self defense in international waters,” according to Senator Jim Webb (D-VA). This remark came out of a Senate Foreign Relations Committee hearing that saw testimony from Richard Phillips, Captain of the Maersk Alabama. Phillips received international media attention several weeks ago while being held hostage by pirates off of the coast of Somalia.

Both the Senators and the witnesses acknowledged that Piracy off of the coast of Somalia has been on the rise recently. Committee Chairman John Kerry (D-Mass.) said that America’s “ability to project naval power and to help ensure the free passage of goods and humanitarian aid is as important as ever.”

Phillips acknowledged that more needs to be done to secure vessels of the merchant marine, specifically arming the crew.

“In my opinion, arming the crew cannot and should not be viewed as the best or ultimate solution to the problem. At most, arming the crew should only be one component of a comprehensive plan and approach to combat piracy,” he said.

The comprehensive approach the committee discussed could include increased U.S. Navy presence in the most dangerous areas, the creation of a protected corridor that civilian ships can travel within, the rooting out of pirates in their land based sanctuaries and the “hardening” of ships, to make the ships structurally more resistant to pirates. “Hardening” measures include razor wire on railings, fire hoses to repel the pirates, and unbolting ladders that lead onto the boat. Phillips does not believe this will stop the pirates, but rather, that they will find a way to adapt.

Maersk Chaiman John Clancey, also present at the hearing, does not believe that arming the crews is a good idea.

“Our belief is that arming merchant sailors may result in the acquisition of even more lethal weapons and tactics by the pirates, a race that merchant sailors cannot win. In addition, most ports of call will not permit the introduction of forearms into their national waters,” Clancey said.

Clancey also posed that greater liability may be assumed by the companies if sailors are traveling with weapons. Neither Chairman Kerry nor Phillips felt that this argument was strong, because of the intense amount of training that mariners go through already. Kerry, a former member of the U.S. Navy, feels that the benefits outweigh the risks, and that multinational agreements can be reached to work out the issue of bringing weapons into port.

Richard Phillips is scheduled to testify next week before the Senate Armed Services Committee.

By Suzia van Swol-University of New Mexico, Talk Radio News Service
Senator Joseph Lieberman (I-Conn.) said that “for over nearly eight years of war in Iraq and Afghanistan we’ve watched with pride and gratitude the magnificent performance of America’s land forces,” and that we have not done enough to support our ground forces transformation or to prepare them to meet future threats.

At the Senate Armed Services Committee hearing on the current and future goals of the U.S. military land power, Lieberman said that it is the intent of these hearings to identify requirements for land and air power as part of the committee’s primary responsibility to authorize funding for the programs for air and land power that they conclude are necessary to provide for the common defense.

Lieberman said that the question we need to ask is, “What is the future of the future combat systems program?” He said that the defense budget faces pressure because of the need to reset the equipment that has been used in our ongoing wars while also shifting new resources to support the fight in Afghanistan.

Andrew Krepinevich, President for the Center for Strategic and Budgetary Assessments said that “what we need is a rebalanced army, but the kind of army that we are looking at right now is in my estimation far too rebalanced and oriented on traditional conventional military operations.”

Thomas Donnelly, Resident Fellow at the American Enterprise Institute for Public Policy Research, said that administrations of both parties have wanted to preserve American leadership in a global sense. Donnelly said that “the outcome of this war is critical to us” and “the primary instrument that we have to achieve that success is our land forces.”

Donnelly says that we need to have an active duty army that is somewhere about the size that it was at the end of the Cold War, which was approximately 780,000.

By Michael Ruhl, University of New Mexico – Talk Radio News Service

Director of National Intelligence Dennis Blair testified before the Senate Armed Services Committee on threats to the United States. In his written statement, he said that, “the primary near-term security concern of the United States is the global economic crisis and its geopolitical implications.” Blair said that time was of the essence, because “statistical modeling shows that economic crises increase the risk of regime-threatening instability if they persist over a one to two year period.” The threat to nations both politically and economically could affect regional stability, and could prevent America’s allies from fully meeting their defense and humanitarian responsibilities.

Blair highlighted a number of nations which have specific security concerns to the United States, including Iran and Afghanistan, but Blair brought up broader security concerns. Among these broader concerns were resource scarcity, overpopulation, and climate change. Blair said that by 2025 more than one billion people will be added to the world population, which will exacerbate the food and water shortages in some areas. Blair continued that this larger world population will use more energy, which would fuel climate change. This could lead to a quicker rise in sea-levels, as well as widespread health problems and agricultural losses. He said, “such a complex and unprecedented syndrome of problems could cause outright state failure, or weaken the important pivotal states counted on to act as anchors of regional stability.”

Chief Pentagon Correspondent Meredith MacKenzie will attend a Pen and Pad Briefing with House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer. Chief White House Correspondent Lovisa Frost will be covering today’s White House Briefing. Legal Affairs Correspondent Jay Tamboli will cover the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee hearing on the “Impact of Proposed Legislation on the District of Columbia’s Gun Laws.” The Washington Bureau will also be covering the Senate Armed Services Committee hearing on the current military situation in Georgia.

Pentagon spokesman Geoff Morrell says that Senators John McCain and Barack Obama have the same access to military operations and intelligence briefings from the Defense Department if they request briefings through their Senate offices. (1:07)

 

 Standard Podcast: Play Now | Play in Popup | Download

Secretary Gates discusses progress in Iraq and the decision making process(1:05)

 

 Standard Podcast [1:05m]: Play Now | Play in Popup | Download