Roanoke Times
Copyright (c) 1995, Landmark Communications, Inc.
DATE: FRIDAY, December 31, 1993 TAG: 9401140037
SECTION: EDITORIAL PAGE: A15 EDITION: METRO
SOURCE: SAUL LANDAU
DATELINE: LENGTH: Long
The forced resignation of Defense Secretary Les Aspin and the nomination of his successor, Bobby Ray Inman, a retired Navy admiral, amounted to a white flag from Clinton - his public surrender of control over military and intelligence policy.
Inman, a Republican, former director of the National Security Agency, former deputy director of the CIA, and former arms contractor, embodies the forces that hold Clinton captive. When Inman accepted the nomination, he announced in Clinton's presence that he was doing so only after the president had assured him a free hand.
But Inman's assertion of power only caps Clinton's yearlong abdication of civilian authority over the military.
Last January, Clinton took advantage of a budget-cutting climate to diminish the military's share. But despite the tight fiscal atmosphere and the absence of a formidable enemy, the Pentagon retained $261 billion - down from about $290 billion. The Pentagon's reproductive organs were still outperforming the government's civilian brain in policy skirmishes.
The next battle was over admitting homosexuals to the military. Here, the military fomented a controversy and forced Clinton to compromise his initially principled policy. It was the first open revolt, and Clinton caved in - instead of commanding the military to follow orders.
In the spring, the CIA and military advisers persuaded an initially hesitant Clinton to authorize the bombing of Baghdad to retaliate against Iraqi leader Saddam Hussein's alleged role in an assassination plot against former President George Bush. Although Bush had previously ordered hit teams to get Saddam, national-security advisers counseled Clinton that failure to go after Saddam would show U.S. weakness. But what the bombing showed was Clinton's willingness to kill Iraqi civilians.
On Bosnia, candidate Clinton talked a tough, humanitarian line and received strong liberal backing for U.S. intervention to stop the carnage. But Gen. Colin Powell summed up the military consensus: ``We do deserts, not mountains.'' Clinton's moral resolve evaporated in the face of military opposition. The military may have had a point about the feasibility of intervention, but Clinton still looked bad backing down.
On his summer trip to Asia, emboldened by advice from the CIA and some defense intellectuals, Clinton threatened North Korea with virtual demolition should it continue to keep hidden its nuclear program. But Clinton backed down after other military officials explained the imprudence of the course he had outlined. Once again, initial saber-rattling led to subsequent retreat.
In Somalia, the military played the poor-little-victim game with Clinton after 18 GIs died in an attack. Aspin was the fall guy, with the implication that civilians could not run the show. But it was the U.S. commander in Somalia who did not fortify the exposed unit with other troops. And it was the U.S. military that cheerfully took on the disastrous role of chasing after Mohammed Farah Aidid.
The military and intelligence community further embarrassed Clinton in Haiti. Clinton had pledged to restore democracy by helping to return ousted President Jean-Bertrand Aristide to power. But the Pentagon resisted playing an assertive role. When a ship carrying U.S. military trainers was turned away by Haitian hoodlums, the president looked weak and foolish.
But the CIA's role in the Haiti fiasco was even worse, amounting almost to sabotage. Brian Latell, a CIA analyst for Latin America, cast doubt on the wisdom of Clinton's backing for Aristide. Stunned senators heard Latell impugn Aristide's character and praise the Haitian military and police, who had committed documented cases of human-rights violations.
Latell's disinformation created anti-Aristide headlines, diluted his support, and undermined Clinton's policy. But the embarrassed Clinton did not order CIA Director James Woolsey to fire Latell or station him to Maracaibo to clean toilets at the U.S. consulate. Instead, the White House appeared to waffle on Aristide.
These incidents were cleverly trumpeted by pro-military columnists and politicians to demonstrate that Clinton cannot handle foreign policy. But what the incidents actually demonstrated was that Clinton cannot handle the military and the CIA; they are handling him.
Sensing his weakness, the Pentagon has again reasserted itself, demanding an additional $50 billion for ``military needs.'' Outraged budget director Leon Panetta cried foul, but then granted 60 percent of the request, which will bring the Pentagon's budget to nearly $300 billion - just where it was before the congressional cuts at the beginning of the year.
Bill Clinton's New Year's Resolution should be to act like the commander-in-chief. Unless he summons the will and the courage to wrest control of military and intelligence matters, his ability to govern will be greatly impaired - as will the cherished notion of civilian authority in our democracy.
\ Saul Landau is a fellow at the Washington, D.C., Institute for Policy Studies.
Knight-Ridder/Tribune News Service
by CNB