The US government's recent National Security Strategy (NSS)
Report has aroused strong dissatisfaction from many countries
including China who has lodged a strong representation to the US.
The report has again stressed 'preemptive' military attack to some
countries and irresponsibly comment other countries' domestic
policies. But compared with the report in 2002, there are some
noteworthy changes.
First of all, the report didn't mention to 'change government
with military force', indicating a weaker bellicose strategy.
Obviously, the huge military expenditure and moral dilemma brought
about by the Iraq war and the reconstruction in Iraq have taught
the US a serious lesson. It has to face the fact that it is not
conducive to solving the US security problem only to rely on
military force.
The report says that 'anti-terrorism is not only a military war
but also a war of thought.' 'The most effective long-term measure
for conflict prevention and resolution is the promotion of
democracy'. However, because the election results in Palestine and
Latin America didn't satisfy America, the report gave a special
adjective to democracy, that is effective democracy, meaning
elections through ballot votes in those countries are not effective
ones.
Secondly, the new report prioritizes diplomatic solution to
international disputes. Analysts hold that although the words
'preemptive attack' are still there, they are only for putting
pressures to countries like Iran.
It says 'to avoid confrontation, diplomatic efforts must be
successful.' The report on the one hand admits that as long as Iran
fulfills its relevant obligations, it will have the right to
utilize nuclear energy for peaceful purposes, on the other hand,
distinguishes the Iranian government from its people. The purpose
of attempting to realize domestic evolution through subversive
diplomatic means is quite obvious.
On the Korean nuclear issue, the report expresses the same
mindset, holding 'regional cooperation has provided the best hope
to solve the problem through diplomatic and peaceful solution.'
A political science professor in Chicago calls it 'Wilsonism
with teeth' and points out that 'here there is a subtle but very
important shift, that is to go away from resort to arms.'
Some commentators point out that the report also shows the
weakening of unilateralism. The report has such titles like
'Strengthen Alliances to Defeat Global Terrorism and Work to
Prevent Attacks Against Us and Our Friends'; 'Work with Others to
Defuse Regional Conflicts'; 'Develop Agendas for Cooperative Action
with the Other Main Centers of Global Power'.
Obviously, the US government has realized that the global
challenge has surpassed the military and security issue of any
single country and effective multinational efforts are essential to
solve these problems. People still remember the US politicians'
despising words to the United Nations and the European Union, but
now they have to use the UN and EU to help solve the Iranian
nuclear issue.
The preface of the report says the US power should also be
strengthened by the strong allies, friendship and international
organizations.
The development of the international situation, especially the
three year Iraq war has finally made the US draw such a conclusion,
an ambitious national strategy is required, but it has to admit
that even as strong as the US, there is limitation to rely on its
own strength to achieve any achievements.
Thus an analyst says the current US administration is not that
neo-conservative government four years ago, it tends to be more
pragmatic.
(People's Daily March 28, 2006)
