Captain's Chair - Winter 1998
I wonder how many Americans know that the rudderless foreign policy
of the Clinton administration includes extending NATO membership to
three former Soviet satellite nations: Hungary, Poland, and the Czech
Republic. How many of our citizens are aware that these same three East European
nations hold answers to some of the questions about American POWs from the Korean and
vietnam wars - and that they have steadfastly refused to give those answers to U. S.
authorities?
I'm not certain that most americans have even heard about the possibility of
NATO expansion into the former Soviet bloc. The lack of public debate or thoughtful
discussion of this issue is distressing to me because I consider
the expansion of NATO one of the more serious post-Cold War foreign
policy issues. And, I have led the American Defense Institute to join with
other organizations, both liberal and conservative, to form The Coalition Against NATO
Expansion (CANE) in a call for more open discussion
between policy-makers and the American people before committing U. S. funds and personnel
to expand NATO.
Expansion of NATO means expansion of American military commitment
to europe - at a time in historywhen I believe we should be decreasing our
commitment there, including the removal of American ground troops.
After the formation of NATO, President Eisenhower warned against a permanent U. S.
military presence in Europe, saying that such permanency would discourage European
countries from developing their own military strength after recovering from World War
II. To this day, European nations
are still relying on the U. S. military to carry the larger burden in protecting
the Continent, and the burden will be greater with the addition of new
NATO members. Since the three East European candidates for NATO admission cannot
afford to pay their own way and the present European members are either unable or
unwilling to increase their financial commitments, it would be the american taxpayer who
could have to foot
the bill, estimated by some to be as high as $125 billion.
Also, while President Clinton obviously sees NATO expansion as a step toward a
"new world multilateral order," many policymakers from both
sides of the congressional aisle oppose the expansion because it would
draw a new "dividing line" in Europe and risk restarting the Cold War,
with an obvious common enemy: Russia. Some of the opponents fear
that the expansion would give anti-western politicians in Moscow a way
to undermine the struggling freemarket democracy in Russia. As the Founding
Declaration of CANE states, "The las great unfinished business
of the 20th century is the reintegration of Russia with the West. With the proposal
to expand NATO, we have turned our back on it. The future will
not fogive us; nor will the more than 50 million people who died in Europe's previous wars
in this century."
As far as the issue of missing Americans is concerned, I do not believe we should even
be talking about possible NATO membership with nations
who are withholding vital information which could help put an end to the lingering
uncertainty which haunts POW/MIA families and the rest of us
who refuse to allow our missing men to be forgotten. On the other hand,
if the Senate would openly debate the POW issue during the Senate debate
on NATO expansion and hold hearings on the matter, with testimony from government
officials and dissenting outside experts, the Soviet-era
exploitation of American POWs perhaps might be exposed, and the nations desiring Senate
ratification of their admission into NATO might be
encouraged to be more forthcoming. At the very least, such open discussion would
send the strong message that our State Department seems unwilling
to send: we will keep our national commitment to our missing men!
As a member of CANE, the American Defense Institute is actively
encouraging public debate of possible NATO expansion through contacts
with Washington policy- makers, ADI members, and the news media.
With CANE, the right joins the left across the political spectrum to decry
this latest post-Cold War folly which has no merit that I can ascertain, other than to
open discussion once moreabout the "Soviet connection" in the unresolved POW/MIA
tragedy. I want to urge ADI members to contact
your elected representatives and let them know that you are very much
aware of this matter, which must not be railroaded through the Congress without the
serious discussion it deserves. Insist that the issue of missing Americans who were
taken from Korea and Vietnam through East
European nations on their way to the former USSR be a partof any
discussion expanding NATO.
In my opinion, one of the primary reasons for opposing the expansion of NATO is the
lack of involvement by the american people in a policy discussion which affects our vital
interests, our tax money, and potentially
the lives of our children and grandchildren in defense of an expanding
number of countries throughout the world. It's a serious matter with serious
implications for our nation's future.
