The outlook might be less grim if the Clinton presidency had not systematically squandered what Sen. John McCain has called America’s "most valuable asset" -- its credibility as a military power. It is the specter of America’s deterrent force that keeps aggressors at bay. If a potential aggressor -- Serbia, Iraq, North Korea, Iran, Libya, Syria, Russia, China -- takes America at its word, and believes that any aggression will be met with devastating force, the chances are good that the aggression will not take place in the first place. America’s military credibility is, in fact, an essential component of any global peace. If, however, an aggressor believes that America’s word is fluid, that its resolve is flabby and that its military response will be confined (as in Serbia and Iraq) to expensive pin-pricks, then the world has suddenly become a far more dangerous place for all of us.

Because America is the world’s only superpower, because it has stood up for decency against despotism and for international order against national aggression, America remains the top target for all of the world’s outlaw powers. As missile technologies spread to these nations, America’s own position becomes increasingly more vulnerable. Because the Clinton administration refused for six years to authorize resources for an anti-missile defense system on the grounds that it would violate arms control agreements made with the former Soviet bloc, this vulnerability will persist for some time.

The seven years of the Clinton presidency have seen the greatest erosion of American military credibility since the years of the Carter administration that ended with the invasion of Afghanistan and the taking of American hostages in Iran. It is for this reason that some conservatives like McCain, Chuck Hagel and Bill Kristol have called for the support of the inept war that the Clinton administration is waging in the Balkans. If you’re in it, and you’re America, as McCain likes to say, you have to win it. Or as Kristol and Robert Kagan put it in a recent Weekly Standard editorial, "Once the United States and NATO are engaged, there is absolutely no acceptable alternative to success."

But in order to "win it," Clinton is going to have to put 200,000 troops on the ground, and be prepared for a war (and subsequent occupation) that will inflict untold casualties on American forces and last many years. Are we, as a nation, prepared to take these risks, and accept these casualties, with the present occupant of the White House as our commander in chief? That is the unwelcome question the American people are going to have to answer in the weeks to come.
salon.com | April 12, 1999

- - - - - - - - - - - -

- - - - - - - - - - - -

  Get a printer-friendly version

  E-mail a friend about this article

- - - - - - - - - - - -

Search Salon