a national security strategy for a new century-pdf

7/30/2019 A National Security Strategy for a NEW CENTURY-PDF

1/61

A NATIONALSECURITYSTRATEGYFOR A

NEW CENTURY

THE WHITE HOUSEOCTOBER 1998


2/61

Contents

Preface ... iii

Introduction... 1

Challenges and Opportunities... 1

The Imperative of Engagement... 1

Implementing the Strategy... 2

. Advancing U.S. National Interests... 5

Enhancing Security at Home and Abroad... 6

Threats to U.S. Interests... 6

The Need for Integrated Approaches... 7

Shaping the International Environment... 8

Diplomacy... 8

International Assistance... 8

Arms Control... 9

Nonproliferation Initiatives... 11

Military Activities... 12

International Law EnforcementCooperation 13

Environmental Initiatives 13

Responding to Threats and Crises... 14

Transnational Threats 15

Terrorism 15

International Crime 16

Drug Trafficking 17

Emerging Threats at Home 19

Managing the Consequences of

WMD Incidents 19

Protecting CriticalInfrastructures 21

Smaller-Scale Contingencies... 21

Major Theater Warfare... 22

Preparing Now for an UncertainFuture... 23

Overarching Capabilities... 24

Quality People 24

Intelligence, Surveillance andReconnaissance... 24

Space... 25

Missile Defense... 26

National Security Emergency

Preparedness 26

Overseas Presence and PowerProjection 26


3/61

Promoting Prosperity... 27

Strengthening MacroeconomicCoordination... 27

Enhancing American Competitiveness... 29

Enhancing Access to ForeignMarkets... 29

Promoting an Open TradingSystem 29

Export Strategy and AdvocacyProgram... 31

Enhanced Export Control... 31

Providing for Energy Security... 32

Promoting Sustainable DevelopmentAbroad... 33

Promoting Democracy... 33

Emerging Democracies... 33

Adherence to Universal Human Rights aDemocratic Principles... 34

Humanitarian Activities... 35

III. Integrated Regional Approaches... 36

Europe and Eurasia... 36

East Asia and the Pacific... 41

The Western Hemisphere... 48

The Middle East, Southwest andSouth Asia... 51

Africa... 54

IV. Conclusions... 59


4/61

Preface

As we approach the beginning of the 21st century, theUnited States remains the worlds most powerfulorce for peace, prosperity and the universal valuesf democracy and freedom. Our nations challengend our responsibilityis to sustain that role byarnessing the forces of global integration for theenefit of our own people and people around the

world.

hese forces of integration offer us an unprece-ented opportunity to build new bonds among

ndividuals and nations, to tap the worlds vast humanotential in support of shared aspirations, and toreate a brighter future for our children. But they alsoresent new, complex challenges. The same forces

hat bring us closer increase our interdependence,nd make us more vulnerable to forces like extremeationalism, terrorism, crime, environmental damagend the complex flows of trade and investment thatnow no borders.

o seize these opportunities, and move against thehreats of this new global era, we are pursuing a

orward-looking national security strategy attuned tohe realities of our new era. This report, submitted inccordance with Section 603 of the Goldwater-

Nichols Defense Department Reorganization Act of986, sets forth that strategy. Its three corebjectives are:

To enhance our security.

To bolster Americas economic prosperity.

To promote democracy abroad.

Over the past five years, we have been putting thistrategy in place through a network of institutions andrrangements with distinct missions, but a commonurposeto secure and strengthen the gains ofemocracy and free markets while turning back theirnemies. Through this web of institutions andrrangements, the United States and its partners in

the international community are laying a foundationfor security and prosperity in the 21st century.

This strategy encompasses a wide range ofinitiatives: expanded military alliances like NATO, iPartnership for Peace, and its partnerships withRussia and Ukraine; promoting free trade through tWorld Trade Organization and the move toward fretrade areas by nations in the Americas andelsewhere around the world; strong arms controlregimes like the Chemical Weapons Convention an

the Comprehensive Nuclear Test Ban Treaty;multinational coalitions combating terrorism,corruption, crime and drug trafficking; and bindinginternational commitments to protect the environmeand safeguard human rights.

The United States must have the tools necessary tocarry out this strategy. We have worked diligentlywithin the parameters of the Balanced BudgetAgreement to preserve and provide for the readineof our armed forces while meeting priority militarychallenges identified in the 1997 Quadrennial

Defense Review (QDR). The QDR struck a carefubalance between near-term readiness, long-termmodernization and quality of life improvements forour men and women in uniform. It ensured that thehigh readiness levels of our forward-deployed and"first-to-fight" forces would be maintained. Thepriority we attach to maintaining a high-quality forcis reflected in our budget actions. This fiscal year,with Congress support for the Bosnia and SouthwAsia non-offset emergency supplemental funds, wewere able to protect our high payoff readinessaccounts. Next year's Defense Budget increases

funding for readiness and preserves quality of life fmilitary personnel.

Although we have accomplished much on thereadiness front, much more needs to be done. Oumilitary leadership and I are constantly reevaluatinthe readiness of our forces and addressing problemin individual readiness areas as they arise. I have


5/61v

nstructed the Office of Management and Budget andhe National Security Council to work with theDepartment of Defense to formulate a multi-year planwith the necessary resources to preserve militaryeadiness, support our troops, and modernize thequipment needed for the next century. I amonfident that our military isand will continue toecapable of carrying out our national strategy and

meeting America's defense commitments around theworld.

We must also renew our commitment to Americasiplomacyto ensure that we have the superbiplomatic representation that our people deserve andur interests demand. Every dollar we devote toreventing conflicts, promoting democracy, andtopping the spread of disease and starvation brings aure return in security and savings. Yet internationalffairs spending today totals just one percent of the

ederal budgeta small fraction of what America

nvested at the start of the Cold War when we chosengagement over isolation. If America is to continue

o lead the world by its own example, we mustemonstrate our own commitment to these priority

asks. This is also why we must pay our dues to theUnited Nations.

rotecting our citizens and critical infrastructures atome is an essential element of our strategy.otential adversarieswhether nations, terroristroups or criminal organizationswill be tempted toisrupt our critical infrastructures, impede

overnment operations, use weapons of massestruction against civilians, and prey on our citizensverseas. These challenges demand closeooperation across all levels of governmentfederal,tate and localand across a wide range ofgencies, including the Departments of Defense andtate, the Intelligence Community, law enforcement,mergency services, medical care providers andthers. Protecting our critical infrastructure requiresew partnerships between government and industry.orging these new structures will be challenging, but

must be done if we are to ensure our safety at homand avoid vulnerabilities that those wishing us illmight try to exploit in order to erode our resolve toprotect our interests abroad.

The United States has profound interests at stake the health of the global economy. Our futureprosperity depends upon a stable international

financial system and robust global growth. Economstability and growth are essential for the spread offree markets and their integration into the globaleconomy. The forces necessary for a healthy globeconomy are also those that deepen democraticliberties: the free flow of ideas and information, opeborders and easy travel, the rule of law, fair andeven-handed enforcement, protection for consumea skilled and educated work force. If citizens tire owaiting for democracy and free markets to deliver abetter life for them, there is a real risk that they willlose confidence in democracy and free markets. T

would pose great risks not only for our economicinterests but for our national security.

We are taking a number of steps to help contain thcurrent financial turmoil in Asia and other parts of tworld. We are working with other industrializednations, the International Monetary Fund and theWorld Bank to spur growth, stop the financial crisisfrom spreading, and help the victims of financialturmoil. We have also intensified our efforts to refointernational trade and financial institutions: buildinstronger and more accountable global trading

system, pressing forward with market-openinginitiatives, advancing the protection of labor and thenvironment and doing more to ensure that tradehelps the lives of ordinary citizens across the globe

At this moment in history, the United States is calleupon to leadto organize the forces of freedom anprogress; to channel the unruly energies of the gloeconomy into positive avenues; and to advance ouprosperity, reinforce our democratic ideals andvalues, and enhance our security.


6/61

. Introduction

We must judge our national security strategy by itsuccess in meeting the fundamental purposes set outn the preamble to the Constitution:

...provide for the common defence, promote thegeneral Welfare, and secure the Blessings ofLiberty to ourselves and our Posterity,...

ince the founding of the nation, certain requirementsave remained constant. We must protect the livesnd personal safety of Americans, both at home and

broad. We must maintain the sovereignty, politicaleedom and independence of the United States, withs values, institutions and territory intact. And, we

must promote for the well being and prosperity of theation and its people.

Challenges and Opportunities

he security environment in which we live is dynamicnd uncertain, replete with a host of threats andhallenges that have the potential to grow moreeadly, but also offering unprecedented opportunities

o avert those threats and advance our interests.

Globalizationthe process of accelerating economic,echnological, cultural and political integrationmeans that more and more we as a nation are

ffected by events beyond our borders. Outlawtates and ethnic conflicts threaten regional stabilitynd economic progress in many important areas of

he world. Weapons of mass destruction (WMD),errorism, drug trafficking and organized crime are

lobal concerns that transcend national borders.Other problems that once seemed quite distantuch as resource depletion, rapid population growth,nvironmental damage, new infectious diseases andncontrolled refugee migrationhave important

mplications for American security. Our workers andusinesses will suffer if foreign markets collapse or

ock us out, and the highest domestic environmentaltandards will not protect us if we cannot get otherso achieve similar standards. In short, our citizens

have a direct stake in the prosperity and stability ofother nations, in their support for international normand human rights, in their ability to combat interna-tional crime, in their open markets, and in their effoto protect the environment.

Yet, this is also a period of great promise. Globaliztion is bringing citizens from all continents closertogether, allowing them to share ideas, goods andinformation at the tap of a keyboard. Many nationsaround the world have embraced Americas core

values of representative governance, free marketeconomics and respect for fundamental human rigand the rule of law, creating new opportunities topromote peace, prosperity and greater cooperationamong nations. Former adversaries now cooperatwith us. The dynamism of the global economy istransforming commerce, culture, communicationsand global relations, creating new jobs and economopportunity for millions of Americans.

The Imperative of Engagemen

Our strategic approach recognizes that we must leabroad if we are to be secure at home, but we canlead abroad unless we are strong at home. We mube prepared and willing to use all appropriateinstruments of national power to influence the actioof other states and non-state actors. Today'scomplex security environment demands that all ouinstruments of national power be effectivelyintegrated to achieve our security objectives. Wemust have the demonstrated will and capabilities to

continue to exert global leadership and remain thepreferred security partner for the community of statthat share our interests. We have seen in the pastthat the international community is often reluctant tact forcefully without American leadership. In maninstances, the United States is the only nationcapable of providing the necessary leadership andcapabilities for an international response to sharedchallenges. American leadership and engagemen


7/61

n the world are vital for our security, and our nationnd the world are safer and more prosperous as aesult.

he alternative to engagement is not withdrawal fromhe world; it is passive submission to powerful forcesf changeall the more ironic at a time when ourapacity to shape them is as great as it has ever

een. Three-quarters of a century ago, the Unitedtates helped to squander Allied victory in World Warby embracing isolationism. After World War II, and

n the face of a new totalitarian threat, Americaccepted the challenge to lead. We remainedngaged overseas and worked with our allies toreate international structuresfrom the Marshalllan, the United Nations, NATO and other defenserrangements, to the International Monetary Fundnd the World Bankthat enabled us to strengthenur security and prosperity and win the Cold War. Byxerting our leadership abroad we have deterred

ggression, fostered the resolution of conflicts,trengthened democracies, opened foreign marketsnd tackled global problems such as protecting thenvironment. U.S. leadership has been crucial to theuccess of negotiations that produced a wide rangef treaties that have made the world safer and moreecure by limiting, reducing, preventing the spread of,r eliminating weapons of mass destruction and otherangerous weapons. Without our leadership andngagement, threats would multiply and ourpportunities would narrow.

Underpinning our international leadership is theower of our democratic ideals and values. Inesigning our strategy, we recognize that the spreadf democracy supports American values andnhances both our security and prosperity.

Democratic governments are more likely to cooperatewith each other against common threats, encourage

ee trade, and promote sustainable economicevelopment. They are less likely to wage war orbuse the rights of their people. Hence, the trend

oward democracy and free markets throughout theworld advances American interests. The United

tates will support this trend by remaining activelyngaged in the world. This is the strategy to take us

nto the next century.

mplementing the Strategy

Our global leadership efforts will continue to beuided by President Clinton's strategic priorities: to

foster regional efforts led by the community ofdemocratic nations to promote peace and prosperiin key regions of the world, to increase cooperationconfronting new security threats that defy bordersand unilateral solutions, to strengthen the military,diplomatic and law enforcement tools necessary tomeet these challenges and to create more jobs andopportunities for Americans through a more open a

competitive economic system that also benefitsothers around the world. Our strategy is temperedrecognition that there are limits to Americasinvolvement in the world. We must be selective inthe use of our capabilities and the choices we makalways must be guided by advancing our objectivesof a more secure, prosperous and free America.

We must always be prepared to act alone when thais our most advantageous course. But many of ousecurity objectives are best achievedor can only achievedthrough our alliances and other formal

security structures, or as a leader of an ad hoccoalition formed around a specific objective. Durabrelationships with allies and friendly nations are vitato our security. A central thrust of our strategy is tostrengthen and adapt the security relationships wehave with key nations around the world and createnew relationships and structures when necessary.Examples include NATO enlargement, thePartnership for Peace, the NATO-Russia PermaneJoint Council, the African Crisis Response Initiativethe regional security dialogue in the ASEAN RegioForum and the hemispheric security initiatives

adopted at the Summit of the Americas. At othertimes we harness our diplomatic, economic, militarand information strengths to shape a favorableinternational environment outside of formalstructures. This approach has borne fruit in areas diverse as the elimination of nuclear weapons fromUkraine, Kazakhstan and Belarus, ourcomprehensive assistance package for Russia andother Newly Independent States (NIS), theadvancement of peace in Northern Ireland, andsupport for the transformation of South Africa.

Protecting our citizens and critical infrastructures ahome is an intrinsic and essential element of oursecurity strategy. The dividing line between domeand foreign policy is increasingly blurred. Globaliztion enables other states, terrorists, criminals, drugtraffickers and others to challenge the safety of ourcitizens and the security of our borders in new wayThe security challenges wrought by globalizationdemand close cooperation across all levels of


8/61

overnmentfederal, state and localand across awide range of agencies, including the Departments ofDefense and State, the Intelligence Community, law

nforcement, emergency services, medical careroviders and others. Protecting our critical infra-tructure requires new partnerships between govern-

ment and industry. Forging these new structures andelationships will be challenging, but must be done if

we are to ensure our safety at home and avoidulnerabilities that those wishing us ill might try toxploit in order to erode our resolve to protect our

nterests abroad.

Engagement abroad rightly depends on the willingness of the American people and the Congress tobear the costs of defending U.S. interestsin dollaenergy and, when there is no alternative, the risk olosing American lives. We must, therefore, foster tbroad public understanding and bipartisancongressional support necessary to sustain ourinternational engagement, always recognizing that

some decisions that face popular opposition mustultimately be judged by whether they advance theinterests of the American people in the long run.


9/61

I. Advancing U.S. National Interests

he goal of the national security strategy is to ensurehe protection of our nations fundamental andnduring needs: protect the lives and safety of

Americans, maintain the sovereignty of the Unitedtates with its values, institutions and territory intact,nd promote the prosperity and well-being of theation and its people. In our vision of the world, the

United States has close cooperative relations with theworlds most influential countries and has the ability tonfluence the policies and actions of those who canffect our national well-being.

We seek to create a stable, peaceful internationalecurity environment in which our nation, citizens andnterests are not threatened. The United States willot allow a hostile power to dominate any region ofritical importance to our interests. We will work torevent the spread of nuclear, biological andhemical weapons and the materials for producinghem, and to control other potentially destabilizingechnologies, such as long-range missiles. We willontinue to ensure that we have effective means forountering and responding to the threats we cannot

eter or otherwise prevent from arising. This includesrotecting our citizens from terrorism, internationalrime and drug trafficking.

We seek a world in which democratic values andespect for human rights and the rule of law arencreasingly accepted. This will be achieved throughroadening the community of free-marketemocracies, promoting an international community

hat is willing and able to prevent or respondffectively to humanitarian problems, andtrengthening international non-governmental

movements committed to human rights andemocratization. These efforts help preventumanitarian disasters, promote reconciliation intates experiencing civil conflict and address migrationnd refugee crises.

We seek continued American prosperity throughncreasingly open international trade and sustainablerowth in the global economy. The health of the

international economy directly affects our security,just as stability enhances the prospects for prosperProsperity ensures that we are able to sustain ourmilitary forces, foreign initiatives and global influenIn turn, our engagement and influence helps ensurthat the world remains stable so the internationaleconomic system can flourish.

We seek a cleaner global environment to protect thhealth and well-being of our citizens. A deterioratinenvironment not only threatens public health, it

impedes economic growth and can generate tensiothat threaten international stability. To the extent thother nations believe they must engage in non-sustainable exploitation of natural resources, ourlong-term prosperity and security are at risk.

Since there are always many demands for U.S.action, our national interests must be clear. Theseinterests fall into three categories. The first includevital intereststhose of broad, overriding impor-tance to the survival, safety and vitality of our natioAmong these are the physical security of our territo

and that of our allies, the safety of our citizens, oureconomic well-being and the protection of our criticinfrastructures. We will do what we must to defendthese interests, includingwhen necessaryusingour military might unilaterally and decisively.

The second category includes situations in whichimportant national interestsare at stake. Theseinterests do not affect our national survival, but thedo affect our national well-being and the character the world in which we live. In such cases, we will uour resources to advance these interests insofar as

the costs and risks are commensurate with theinterests at stake. Our efforts to halt the flow ofrefugees from Haiti and restore democracy in thatstate, our participation in NATO operations in Bosnand our efforts to protect the global environment arrelevant examples.The third category is humanitarian and otherinterests. In some circumstances our nation may because our values demand it. Examples include


10/61

esponding to natural and manmade disasters oriolations of human rights, supporting democratiza-on and civil control of the military, assistingumanitarian demining, and promoting sustainableevelopment. Often in such cases, the force of ourxample bolsters support for our leadership in the

world. Whenever possible, we seek to avertumanitarian disasters and conflict through diplomacy

nd cooperation with a wide range of partners,ncluding other governments, international institutionsnd non-governmental organizations. This may notnly save lives, but also prevent the drain onesources caused by intervention in crises.

Our strategy is based on three national objectives:nhancing our security, bolstering our economicrosperity and promoting democracy abroad.

Enhancing Security atHome and Abroad

Our strategy for enhancing U.S. security recognizeshat we face diverse threats requiring integratedpproaches to defend the nation, shape the

nternational environment, respond to crises andrepare for an uncertain future.

Threats to U.S. Interests

he current international security environmentresents a diverse set of threats to our enduringoals and hence to our security:

Regional or State-Centered Threats: A numberof states still have the capabilities and the desireto threaten our vital interests through coercion oraggression. They continue to threaten thesovereignty of their neighbors and internationalaccess to resources. In many cases, thesestates are also actively improving their offensive

capabilities, including efforts to obtain or retainnuclear, biological or chemical weapons and, insome cases, long-range delivery systems. InSouthwest Asia, both Iraq and Iran have thepotential to threaten their neighbors and the freeflow of oil from the region. In East Asia, NorthKorea maintains its forward positioning ofoffensive military capabilities on its border withSouth Korea.

Transnational threats: Terrorism, internationacrime, drug trafficking, illicit arms trafficking,uncontrolled refugee migrations andenvironmental damage threaten U.S. interests,citizens and the U.S. homeland itself. Thepossibility of terrorists and other criminals usinWMDnuclear, biological and chemical

weaponsis of special concern. Threats to thnational information infrastructure, ranging fromcyber-crime to a strategic information attack onthe United States via the global informationnetwork, present a dangerous new threat to ounational security. We must also guard againstthreats to our other critical nationalinfrastructuressuch as electrical power andtransportationwhich increasingly could take tform of a cyber-attack in addition to physicalattack or sabotage, and could originate fromterrorist or criminal groups as well as hostile

states. International drug trafficking organizatihave become the most powerful and dangerouorganized crime groups the United States hasever confronted due to their sophisticatedproduction, shipment, distribution and financialsystems, and the violence and corruption theypromote everywhere they operate.

Spread of dangerous technologies: Weaponof mass destruction pose the greatest potentiathreat to global stability and security. Proliferatof advanced weapons and technologies threate

to provide rogue states, terrorists andinternational crime organizations the means toinflict terrible damage on the United States, itsallies and U.S. citizens and troops abroad. Wemust continue to deter and be prepared tocounter the use or threatened use of WMD,reduce the threat posed by existing arsenals ofsuch weaponry and halt the smuggling of nuclematerials. We must identify the technicalinformation, technologies and materials thatcannot be allowed to fall into the hands of thosseeking to develop and produce WMD. And w

must stop the proliferation ofnon-safeguarded dual-use technologies thatplace these destructive capabilities in the handof parties hostile to U.S. and global securityinterests.

Foreign intelligence collection: The threatfrom foreign intelligence services is more divercomplex and difficult to counter than ever befo


11/61

This threat is a mix of traditional and non-traditional intelligence adversaries that havetargeted American military, diplomatic,technological and commercial secrets. Someforeign intelligence services are rapidly adoptingnew technologies and innovative methods toobtain such secrets, including attempts to use theglobal information infrastructure to gain access to

sensitive information via penetration of computersystems and networks. These new methodscompound the already serious threat posed bytraditional human, technical and signalsintelligence activities.

Failed states: We can expect that, despiteinternational prevention efforts, some states willbe unable to provide basic governance, servicesand opportunities for their populations, potentiallygenerating internal conflict, humanitarian crisesor regional instability. As governments lose their

ability to provide for the welfare of their citizens,mass migration, civil unrest, famine, masskillings, environmental disasters and aggressionagainst neighboring states or ethnic groups canthreaten U.S. interests and citizens.

The Need for IntegratedApproaches

uccess in countering these varied threats requires

n integrated approach that brings to bear all theapabilities and assets needed to achieve ourecurity objectivesparticularly in this era whenomestic and foreign policies are increasingly blurred.

o effectively shape the international environmentnd respond to the full spectrum of potential threatsnd crises, diplomacy, military force, our other foreignolicy tools and our domestic preparedness efforts

must be closely coordinated. We must retain atrong foreign assistance program and an effectiveiplomatic corps if we are to maintain American

eadership. We must maintain superior military forcest the level of readiness necessary to effectively deterggression, conduct a wide range of peacetimectivities and smaller-scale contingencies, and,referably in concert with regional friends and allies,

win two overlapping major theater wars. The successf all our foreign policy tools is critically dependent onmely and effective intelligence collection andnalysis capabilities.

International cooperation will be vital for buildingsecurity in the next century because many of thethreats we face cannot be addressed by a singlenation. Globalization of transportation andcommunications has allowed international terroristsand criminals to operate without geographicconstraints, while individual governments and their

law enforcement agencies remain limited by nationboundaries. Unlike terrorists and criminals, governments must respect the sovereignty of other nationAccordingly, a central thrust of our strategy is toenhance relationships with key nations around theworld to combat transnational threats to commoninterests. We seek to address these threats byincreasing intelligence and law enforcement coopetion, denying terrorists safe havens, preventing armtraders from fueling regional conflicts and subvertininternational embargoes, and cracking down on drutrafficking, money laundering and international crim

Building effective coalitions of like-minded nations not enough. We are continuing to strengthen andintegrate our own diplomatic, military, intelligence alaw enforcement capabilities so we can act on ourown when we must as well as more effectively leadthe international community in responding to thesethreats.

Potential enemies, whether nations, terrorist groupor criminal organizations, are increasingly likely toattack U.S. territory and the American people in

unconventional ways. Adversaries will be tempted disrupt our critical infrastructures, impede continuitof government operations, use weapons of massdestruction against civilians in our cities, attack uswhen we gather at special events and prey on ourcitizens overseas. The United States must act todeter or prevent such attacks and, if attacks occursdespite those efforts, must be prepared to limit thedamage they cause and respond decisively againstthe perpetrators. We will spare no effort to bringattackers to justice, ever adhering to our policy towterrorists that "You can run, but you cannot hide," a

where appropriate to defend ourselves by striking aterrorist bases and states that support terrorist acts

At home, we must have effective capabilities forthwarting and responding to terrorist acts, counterininternational crime and foreign intelligence collectioand protecting critical national infrastructures. Ourefforts to counter these threats cannot be limitedexclusively to any one agency within the U.S.


12/61

Government. The threats and their consequencesross agency lines, requiring close cooperationmong Federal agencies, state and local govern-

ments, the industries that own and operate criticalational infrastructures, non-governmentalrganizations and others in the private sector.

Shaping the InternationalEnvironment

he United States has a range of tools at its disposalwith which to shape the international environment inways favorable to U.S. interests and global security.

haping activities enhance U.S. security by promotingegional security and preventing or reducing the wideange of diverse threats outlined above. These

measures adapt and strengthen alliances andiendships, maintain U.S. influence in key regions

nd encourage adherence to international norms.When signs of potential conflict emerge, or potentialhreats appear, we undertake initiatives to prevent oreduce these threats. Our shaping efforts also aim toiscourage arms races, halt the proliferation of

weapons of mass destruction, reduce tensions inritical regions and combat the spread of internationalriminal organizations.

Many of our international shaping activities, oftenndertaken with the cooperation of our allies andiends, also help to prevent threats from arising that

lace at risk American lives and property at home.xamples include countering terrorism, drug andrearms trafficking, illegal immigration, the spread of

WMD and other threats. Increasingly, shaping theecurity environment involves a wide range of Federalgencies, some of which in the past have not been

hought of as having such an international role.

Diplomacy

Diplomacy is a vital tool for countering threats to our

ational security. The daily business of diplomacyonducted through our missions and representativesround the world is a irreplaceable shaping activity.hese efforts are essential to sustaining our alliances,

orcefully articulating U.S. interests, resolving regionalisputes peacefully, averting humanitarianatastrophe, deterring aggression against the Unitedtates and our friends and allies, creating trade and

investment opportunities for U.S. companies, andprojecting U.S. influence worldwide.

One of the lessons that has been repeatedly drivenhome is the importance of preventive diplomacy indealing with conflict and complex emergencies.Helping prevent nations from failing is far moreeffective than rebuilding them after an internal crisi

Helping people stay in their homes is far morebeneficial than feeding and housing them in refugecamps. Helping relief agencies and internationalorganizations strengthen the institutions of conflictresolution is far less taxing than healing ethnic andsocial divisions that have already exploded intobloodshed. In short, while crisis management andcrisis resolution are necessary tasks for our foreignpolicy, preventive diplomacy is obviously farpreferable.

Credible military force and the demonstrated will to

use it are essential to defend our vital interests andkeep America safe. But force alone cannot solve aour problems. To be most effective, force, diplomaand our other policy tools must complement andreinforce each otherfor there will be manyoccasions and many places where we must rely ondiplomatic shaping activities to protect and advanceour interests.

International Assistance

From the U.S.-led mobilization to rebuild post-warEurope to the more recent creation of exportopportunities across Asia, Latin America and AfricaU.S. foreign assistance has assisted emergingdemocracies, helped expand free markets, slowedthe growth of international crime, contained majorhealth threats, improved protection of theenvironment and natural resources, slowedpopulation growth and defused humanitarian crisesCrises are avertedand U.S. preventive diplomacyactively reinforcedthrough U.S. sustainabledevelopment programs that promote voluntary fam

planning, basic education, environmental protectiondemocratic governance and rule of law, and theeconomic empowerment of private citizens.

When combined effectively with other bilateral andmultilateral activities, such as through our cooperascientific and technological programs, U.S. initiativereduce the need for costly military and humanitariainterventions. Where foreign aid succeeds in


13/61

onsolidating free market policies, substantial growthf American exports has frequently followed. Whererises have occurred, actions such as the Greater

Horn of Africa Initiative have helped stanch massuman suffering and created a path out of conflictnd dislocation through targeted relief. Other foreignid programs have worked to help restore elementaryecurity and civic institutions.

Arms Control

Arms control efforts are an essential element of ourational security strategy. Effective arms control iseally defense by other means. We pursue verifiablerms control agreements that support our efforts torevent the spread and use of weapons of massestruction, halt the use of conventional weapons thatause unnecessary suffering, and contribute toegional stability at lower levels of armaments. By

ncreasing transparency in the size, structure andperations of military forces, arms controlgreements and confidence-building measureseduce incentives and opportunities to initiate anttack, and reduce the mutual suspicions that ariseom and spur on armaments competition. They helprovide the assurance of security necessary totrengthen cooperative relationships and directesources to safer, more productive endeavors.

Agreements that preserve our crisis responseapability shape the global and regional securitynvironments, and simultaneously reinforce our

ommitment to allies and partners. Our arms controlnitiatives are an essential prevention measure fornhancing U.S. and allied security.

Verifiable reductions in strategic offensive arms andhe steady shift toward less destabilizing systemsemain essential to our strategy. Entry into force ofhe START I Treaty in December 1994 charted theourse for reductions in the deployed strategicuclear forces of the United States and the Formeroviet Union (FSU). START I has accomplished

much to reduce the risk of nuclear war and strength-

n international security. On the third anniversary ofTART I entry into force, the United States and

Russia announced that both were two years ahead ofchedule in meeting the treatys mandatedeductions.

Once the START II Treaty enters into force, theUnited States and Russia will each be limited toetween 3,000-3,500 total deployed strategic nuclear

warheads. START II also will eliminate destabilizinland-based multiple warhead missiles, a truly histoachievement. Russian ratification of START II willopen the door to the next round of strategic armscontrol.

At the Helsinki Summit in March 1997, PresidentsClinton and Yeltsin agreed that once START II ente

into force, our two nations would immediately beginnegotiations on a START III agreement. They agreto START III guidelines that, if adopted, will cap thenumber of strategic nuclear warheads deployed ineach country at 2,000-2,500 by the end of 2007reducing both our arsenals by 80 percent from ColdWar heights. They also agreed that START III willfor the first time, require the U.S. and Russia todestroy nuclear warheads, not just the missiles,aircraft and submarines that carry them, and openethe door to possible reductions in non-strategicnuclear weapons. On September 26, 1997, the U.

and Russia signed a START II Protocol codifying thagreement at Helsinki to extend the end date forreductions to 2007 and exchanged letters on earlydeactivation by 2003 of those strategic nucleardelivery systems to be eliminated by 2007.

At Helsinki, the two Presidents recognized the NunLugar Cooperative Threat Reduction (CTR) Prograas the vehicle through which the United States woufacilitate the deactivation of strategic nuclear delivesystems in the FSU nations. The CTR Program haassisted Ukraine, Kazakhstan and Belarus in

becoming non-nuclear weapons states and willcontinue to assist Russia in meeting its STARTobligations. The program has effectively supportedenhanced safety, security, accounting and centralizcontrol measures for nuclear weapons and fissilematerials in the FSU. CTR is also assisting FSUnations in measures to eliminate and prevent theproliferation of chemical weapons and biologicalweapon-related capabilities. It has supported manongoing military reductions and reform measures inthe FSU, and has contributed to a climate conducivfor further progress on non-proliferation.

Also at Helsinki, the Presidents reaffirmed theircommitment to the Anti-Ballistic Missile (ABM) Treand recognized the need for effective theater missidefenses in an agreement in principle on demarcatbetween systems to counter strategic ballisticmissiles and those to counter theater ballisticmissiles. On September 26, 1997, the U.S. Secretof State and Russian Foreign Minister, along with


14/610

heir counterparts from Belarus, Kazakhstan andUkraine, signed or initialed five agreements relating tohe ABM Treaty. The agreements on demarcationnd succession will be provided to the Senate for itsdvice and consent following Russian ratification ofTART II.

By banning all nuclear test explosions for all time, the

Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty (CTBT) constrainshe development of dangerous nuclear weapons,ontributes to preventing nuclear proliferation and tohe process of nuclear disarmament, and enhanceshe ability of the United States to monitor suspiciousuclear activities in other countries through a

worldwide sensor network and on-site inspections.Nuclear tests in India and Pakistan in May 1998 make

more important than ever to move quickly to bringhe CTBT into force and continue establishment ofhe substantial verification mechanisms called for inhe treaty. The President has submitted the treaty,

which 150 nations have signed, to the Senate andas urged the Senate to provide its advice andonsent this year. Prompt U.S. ratification willncourage other states to ratify, enable the Unitedtates to lead the international effort to gain CTBTntry into force and strengthen international normsgainst nuclear testing. Multilateral and regionalrms control efforts also increase U.S. and globalecurity. We seek to strengthen the Biological

Weapons Convention (BWC) with a new internationalegime to ensure compliance. At present, we areegotiating with other BWC member states in an

ffort to reach consensus on a protocol to the BWChat would implement an inspection system to deternd detect cheating. We are also working hard to

mplement and enforce the Chemical WeaponsConvention (CWC). The United States Senate

nderscored the importance of these efforts with itsApril 24, 1997 decision, by a vote of 74-26, to give its

dvice and consent to ratification of the CWC. Theext key step is legislation to implement fullompliance with the commercial declarations and

nspections that are required by the CWC.

n Europe, we are pursuing the adaptation of the 1990Conventional Armed Forces in Europe (CFE) Treaty,onsistent with the Decision on Certain Basiclements adopted in Vienna on July 23, 1997 by all0 CFE states. Success in this negotiation willnsure that this landmark agreement remains aornerstone of European security into the 21

stcentury

nd beyond. We continue to seek Russian, Ukrainiannd Belarusian ratification of the 1992 Open Skies

Treaty to increase transparency of military forces inEurasia and North America. We also promote,through international organizations such as theOrganization for Security and Cooperation in Europ(OSCE), implementation of confidence and securitybuilding measures, including the 1994 ViennaDocument, throughout Europe and in specific regioof tension and instabilityeven where we are not

formal parties to such agreements. The agreemenmandated by the Dayton Accords demonstrate howinnovative regional efforts can strengthen stability areduce conflicts that could adversely affect U.S.interests abroad.

President Clinton is committed to ending the tragicdamage to innocent civilians due to anti-personnellandmines (APLs). The United States has alreadytaken major steps in the spirit that motivated theOttawa Convention, while ensuring our ability to meinternational obligations and provide for the safety

and security of our men and women in uniform. OnJune 30, 1998, we metone year ahead ofschedulethe President's May 1996 commitment tdestroy all of our non-self-destructing APLs by 199except those we need for Korea and deminingtraining. To expand and strengthen theAdministration policy on APLs that he announced oSeptember 17, 1997, President Clinton signedPresidential Decision Directive 64 in June 1998. Itdirects the Defense Department to end the use of aAPLs, even of self-destructing APLs, outside Koreaby 2003 and to pursue aggressively the objective o

having APL alternatives ready for Korea by 2006. Wwill also aggressively pursue alternatives to our mixanti-tank systems that contain anti-personnelsubmunitions. We have made clear that the UnitedStates will sign the Ottawa Convention by 2006 if wsucceed in identifying and fielding suitablealternatives to our self-destructing APLs and mixedanti-tank systems by then. Furthermore, in 1997 thAdministration submitted for Senate advice andconsent the Amended Landmine Protocol to theConvention on Conventional Weapons, which bansthe unmarked, long-duration APLs that caused the

worldwide humanitarian problem. We haveestablished a permanent ban on APL exports and aseeking to universalize an export ban through theConference on Disarmament in Geneva. In 1998 ware spending $80 million on humanitarian deminingprograms, more than double that of the previous yeand through our "Demining 2010" initiative havechallenged the world to increase the effectiveness


15/61

nd efficiency of removing landmines that threatenivilians.

Nonproliferation Initiatives

Nonproliferation initiatives enhance global security byreventing the spread of WMD, materials for

roducing them and means of delivering them. Thats why the Administration is promoting universaldherence to the international treaty regimes thatrohibit the acquisition of weapons of massestruction, including the Nuclear Non-Proliferationreaty (NPT), the CWC and the BWC. The NPT wasn indispensable precondition for the denuclearizationf Ukraine, Kazakhstan, Belarus and South Africa.

We also seek to strengthen the International Atomicnergy Agency (IAEA) safeguards system andchieve a Fissile Material Cutoff Treaty to cap theuclear materials available for weapons. A

oordinated effort by the intelligence community andaw enforcement agencies to detect, prevent andeter illegal trafficking in fissile materials is alsossential to our counter-proliferation efforts.he Administration also seeks to prevent destabiliz-

ng buildups of conventional arms and limit access toensitive technical information, equipment andechnologies by strengthening multilateral regimes,ncluding the Wassenaar Arrangement on ExportControls for Conventional Arms and Dual-Use Goods

nd Technologies, the Australia Group (for chemicalnd biological weapons), the Missile Technology

Control Regime (MTCR) and the Nuclear SuppliersGroup. We are working to harmonize national exportontrol policies, increase information sharing, refineontrol lists and expand cooperation against illicitansfers.

Regional nonproliferation efforts are particularlymportant in three critical proliferation zones. On theKorean Peninsula, we are implementing the 1994Agreed Framework, which requires full compliance byNorth Korea with nonproliferation obligations. In theMiddle East and Southwest Asia, we encourage

egional arms control agreements that address theegitimate security concerns of all parties andontinue efforts to thwart and roll back Iransevelopment of weapons of mass destruction andaqs efforts to reconstitute its programs. In South

Asia, we seek to persuade India and Pakistan to bringheir nuclear and missile programs into conformitywith international nonproliferation standards and toign and ratify the CTBT.

Through programs such as the Nunn-LugarCooperative Threat Reduction Program and otherinitiatives, we aim to strengthen controls overweapons-usable fissile material and prevent the theor diversion of WMD and related material andtechnology. We are working to strengthen theConvention on the Physical Protection of Nuclear

Material to increase accountability and protection,which complements our effort to enhance IAEAsafeguards. We are purchasing tons of highlyenriched uranium from dismantled Russian nucleaweapons for conversion into commercial reactor fuand working with Russia to redirect former Sovietfacilities and scientists from military to peacefulpurposes.

To expand and improve U.S. efforts aimed atdeterring proliferation of WMD by organized crimegroups and individuals in the NIS and Eastern

Europe, the Defense Department and FBI are


16/612

mplementing a joint counter proliferation assistancerogram that provides appropriate training, materialnd services to law enforcement agencies in thesereas. The programs objectives are to assist instablishing a professional cadre of law enforcementersonnel in these nations trained to prevent, deternd investigate crimes related to the proliferation andiversion of WMD or their delivery systems; to assist

hese countries in developing laws and regulationsesigned to prevent the illicit acquisition or traffickingf WMD, and in establishing appropriate enforcement

mechanisms; and to build a solid legal andrganization framework that will enable theseovernments to attack the proliferation problem atome and participate effectively in internationalfforts.

Military Activities

he U.S. military plays an essential role in buildingoalitions and shaping the international environmentn ways that protect and promote U.S. interests.hrough overseas presence and peacetimengagement activities such as defense cooperation,ecurity assistance, and training and exercises withllies and friends, our armed forces help to deterggression and coercion, promote regional stability,revent and reduce conflicts and threats, and serves role models for militaries in emergingemocracies. These important efforts engage everyomponent of the Total Force: Active, Reserve,

National Guard and civilian.

Deterrence of aggression and coercion on a dailyasis is crucial. Our ability to deter potentialdversaries in peacetime rests on several factors,articularly on our demonstrated will and ability tophold our security commitments when they arehallenged. We have earned this reputation throughoth our declaratory policy, which clearlyommunicates costs to potential adversaries, and ourredible warfighting capability. This capability ismbodied in ready forces and equipment strategically

tationed or deployed forward, in forces in the Unitedtates at the appropriate level of readiness to deploynd go into action when needed, in our ability to gainmely access to critical regions and infrastructureverseas, and in our demonstrated ability to form and

ead effective military coalitions.

Our nuclear deterrent posture is one of the mostisible and important examples of how U.S. military

capabilities can be used effectively to deteraggression and coercion, as reaffirmed in aPresidential Decision Directive signed by PresidentClinton in November 1997. Nuclear weapons serveas a hedge against an uncertain future, a guaranteof our security commitments to allies and adisincentive to those who would contemplatedeveloping or otherwise acquiring their own nuclea

weapons. Our military planning for the possibleemployment of U.S. nuclear weapons is focused ondeterring a nuclear war rather than attempting to figand win a protracted nuclear exchange. We continto emphasize the survivability of the nuclear systemand infrastructure necessary to endure a preemptivattack and still respond at overwhelming levels. ThUnited States must continue to maintain a robust trof strategic forces sufficient to deter any hostileforeign leadership with access to nuclear forces anto convince it that seeking a nuclear advantage wobe futile. We must also ensure the continued viabi

of the infrastructure that supports U.S. nuclear forcand weapons. The Stockpile Stewardship Programwill guarantee the safety and reliability of our nucleaweapons under the Comprehensive Test Ban Trea

While our overall deterrence posturenuclear andconventionalhas been effective against mostpotential adversaries, a range of terrorist and criminorganizations may not be deterred by traditionaldeterrent threats. For these actors to be deterred,they must believe that any type of attack against thUnited States or its citizens will be attributed to them

and that we will respond effectively and decisively tprotect our national interests and ensure that justicis done.

Our military promotes regional stability in numerousways. In Europe, East Asia and Southwest Asia,where the U.S. has clear, vital interests, the Americmilitary helps assure the security of our allies andfriends. The reinforcement of U.S. forces in the Gufrom Fall 1997 to Spring 1998 clearly illustrates theimportance of military power in achieving U.S.national security objectives and stabilizing a

potentially volatile situation. The U.S. buildup madclear to Saddam Hussein that he must comply withUN sanctions and cease hindering UNSCOMinspections or face dire consequences. It


17/61

lso denied him the option of moving to threaten hiseighbors, as he had done in past confrontations with

he international community. Saddams agreement topen the so-called "presidential sites" to UN

nspection was a significant step toward ensuring thataqs WMD have been eradicated. It would not haveeen achieved without American diplomacy backedy force. Our decision maintain a higher continuous

orce level in the Gulf than we had before this mostecent confrontation with Iraq will help deter Saddamom making further provocations and strengthen theesolve of our coalition partners in the Gulf.

We are continuing to adapt and strengthen ourlliances and coalitions to meet the challenges of anvolving security environment. U.S. military forcesrevent and reduce a wide range of potential conflicts

n key regions. An example of such an activity is oureployment to the Former Yugoslav Republic of

Macedonia to help prevent the spread of violence to

hat country. We assist other countries in improvingheir pertinent military capabilities, includingeacekeeping and humanitarian response. Withountries that are neither staunch friends nor knownoes, military cooperation often serves as a positivemeans of engagement, building security relationshipsoday that will contribute to improved relationsomorrow.

Our armed forces also serve as a role model formilitaries in emerging democracies around the world.Our 200-year history of strong civilian control of the

military serves as an example to those countries withistories of non-democratic governments. Through

military-to-military activities and increasing linksetween the U.S. military and the militarystablishments of Partnership for Peace nations, for

nstance, we are helping to transform militarynstitutions in Central and Eastern Europe, as well asn the Newly Independent States of the former SovietUnion.

nternational Law Enforcement

Cooperation

As threats to our national security from drugafficking, terrorism and international crime increase,evelopment of working relations U.S. and foreign

aw enforcement and judicial agencies will play a vitalole in shaping law enforcement priorities in thoseountries. Law enforcement agencies must continue

to find innovative ways to develop a concerted, globattack on the spread of international crime.

Overseas law enforcement presence leveragesresources and fosters the establishment of effectivworking relationships with foreign law enforcementagencies. U.S. investigators and prosecutors drawupon their experience and background to enlist the

cooperation of foreign law enforcement officials,keeping crime away from American shores, enablinthe arrest of many U.S. fugitives and solving seriouU.S. crimes. This presence develops substantiveinternational links by creating personal networks oflaw enforcement professionals dedicated to bringininternational criminals to justice.

In addition, training foreign law enforcement officeris critical to combating international crime. Suchtraining helps create professional law enforcementorganizations and builds citizen confidence in law

enforcement officers, who understand and operateunder the rule of law. Training also builds a commperspective and understanding of investigativetechniques that helps shape international lawenforcement priorities. The FBI and other federal lenforcement agencies have provided extensive lawenforcement training at the International LawEnforcement Academy in Budapest, Hungary andelsewhere around the world. This training has provto be enormously effective in developing professionlaw enforcement and security services in emergingdemocracies.

Environmental Initiatives

Decisions today regarding the environment andnatural resources can affect our security forgenerations. Environmental threats do not heednational borders and can pose long-term dangers tour security and well-being. Natural resourcescarcities can trigger and exacerbate conflict.Environmental threats such as climate change, ozodepletion and the transnational movement of

hazardous chemicals and waste directly threaten thhealth of U.S. citizens.We have a full diplomatic agenda, working bilateraand multilaterally to respond aggressively toenvironmental threats. The Global EnvironmentalFacility (GEF) is an important instrument for thiscooperation. With 161 member nations, the GEF ispecifically focused on reducing cross-borderenvironmental damage. Our Environmental Secur


18/614

nitiative joins U.S. agencies with foreign partners toddress regional environmental concerns and therebyeduce the risk to U.S. interests abroad. We havelso undertaken development of an environmentalorecasting system to provide U.S. policymakersdvance warning of environmental stress situations

which have the potential for significant impact on U.S.nterests.

At Kyoto in December 1997, the industrialized nationsf the world agreed for the first time to binding limitsn greenhouse gases. The agreement is strong andomprehensive, covering the six greenhouse gases

whose concentrations are increasing due to humanctivity. It reflects the commitment of the Unitedtates to use the tools of the free market to tackle

his problem. It will enhance growth and create newncentives for the rapid development of technologieshrough a system of joint implementation andmissions trading. The Kyoto agreement was a vital

urning point, but we still have a lot of hard workhead. We must press for meaningful participationy key developing nations. Multilateral negotiationsre underway and we will pursue bilateral talks withey developing nations. We will not submit the Kyotogreement for ratifica-tion until key developingations have agreed to participate meaningfully infforts to address global warming.

Additionally, we seek to accomplish the following:

achieve increased compliance with the Montreal

Protocol through domestic and multilateral effortsaimed at curbing illegal trade in ozone depletingsubstances;

ratify the Law of the Sea Convention, implementthe UN Straddling Stocks Agreement and help topromote sustainable management of fisheriesworldwide;

implement the Program of Action on populationgrowth developed at the 1994 Cairo Conference,lead a renewed global effort to address populationproblems and promote international consensus forstabilizing world population growth;expand bilateral forest assistance programs andpromote sustainable management of tropicalforests;

achieve Senate ratification of the Convention toCombat Desertification;

negotiate an international agreement to bantwelve persistent organic pollutants, includingsuch hazardous chemicals as DDT;

promote environment-related scientific researcin other countries so they can better identifyenvironmental problems and develop indigenousolutions for them;

increase international cooperation in fightingtransboundary environmental crime, includingtrafficking in protected flora and fauna, hazard-ous waste and ozone-depleting chemicals;

ratify the Biodiversity Convention and take stepto prevent biodiversity loss, including support foagricultural research to relieve pressures onforests, working with multilateral developmentbanks and others to prevent biodiversity loss inkey regions, and use of the Convention on

International Trade in Endangered Species toprotect threatened species; and

continue to work with the Nordic countries andRussia to mitigate nuclear and non-nuclearpollution in the Arctic, and continue to encouragRussia to develop sound management practicefor nuclear materials and radioactive waste.

Responding to Threats and

CrisesBecause our shaping efforts alone cannot guarantethe international security environment we seek, theUnited States must be able to respond at home anabroad to the full spectrum of threats and crises thamay arise. Our resources are finite, so we must beselective in our responses, focusing on challengesthat most directly affect our interests and engagingwhere we can make the most difference. Ourresponse might be diplomatic, economic, lawenforcement, or military in natureor, more likely,some combination of the above. We must use themost appropriate tool or combination of toolsactiin alliance or partnership when our interests areshared by others, but unilaterally when compellingnational interests so demand. At home, we mustforge an effective partnership of Federal, state andlocal government agencies, industry and other privsector organizations.


19/61

When efforts to deter an adversarybe it a rogueation, terrorist group or criminal organizationoccur

n the context of a crisis, they become the leadingdge of crisis response. In this sense, deterrencetraddles the line between shaping the internationalnvironment and responding to crises. Deterrence inrisis generally involves signaling the United Statesommitment to a particular country or interest by

nhancing our warfighting capability in the theater.orces in or near the theater may be moved closer tohe crisis and other forces rapidly deployed to therea. The U.S. may also choose to make additionaltatements to communicate the costs of aggressionr coercion to an adversary, and in some cases mayhoose to employ U.S. forces to underline the

message and deter further adventurism.

he American people rightfully play a central role inow the United States wields its power abroad. The

United States cannot long sustain a commitment

without the support of the public, and closeonsultations with Congress are important in thisffort. When it is judged in Americas interest to

ntervene, we must remain clear in purpose andesolute in execution.

Transnational Threats

oday, American diplomats, law enforcementfficials, military personnel, members of the

ntelligence community and others are increasingly

alled upon to respond to growing transnationalhreats, particularly terrorism, drug trafficking andnternational organized crime.

Terrorism

o meet the growing challenge of terrorism, PresidentClinton signed Presidential Decision Directive 62 inMay 1998. This Directive creates a new and moreystematic approach to fighting the terrorist threat ofhe next century. It reinforces the mission of the

many U.S. agencies charged with roles in defeatingerrorism; it also codifies and clarifies their activities inhe wide range of U.S. counter-terrorism programs,ncluding apprehension and prosecution of terrorists,ncreasing transportation security, and enhancingncident response capabilities. The Directive will helpchieve the Presidents goal of ensuring that we meethe threat of terrorism in the 21

stcentury.

Our policy to counter international terrorists rests othe following principles: (1) make no concessions tterrorists; (2) bring all pressure to bear on all statesponsors of terrorism; (3) fully exploit all availablelegal mechanisms to punish international terroristsand (4) help other governments improve theircapabilities to combat terrorism. Following theseprinciples, we seek to uncover and eliminate foreig

terrorists and their support networks in our countryeliminate terrorist sanctuaries; and counter state-supported terrorism and subversion of moderateregimes through a comprehensive program ofdiplomatic, law enforcement, economic, military anintelligence activities. We are working to improveaviation security at airports in the United States andworldwide, to ensure better security for all U.S.transportation systems, and to improve protection four personnel assigned overseas.

Countering terrorism effectively requires day-to-day

coordination within the U.S. Government and closecooperation with other governments and internationorganizations. Foreign terrorists will not be allowedenter the United States, and the full force of legalauthorities will be used to remove foreign terroristsfrom the United States and prevent fundraising withthe United States to support foreign terrorist activityWe have seen positive results from the increasingintegration of intelligence, diplomatic, military and laenforcement activities among the Departments ofState, Justice, Defense, Treasury, Energy,Transportation, the CIA and other intelligence

agencies. The Administration is working withCongress to increase the ability of these agencies combat terrorism through augmented funding andmanpower.

The United States has made concerted efforts todeter and punish terrorists and remains determinedapprehend and bring to justice those who terrorizeAmerican citizens. In January 1998, the UnitedStates signed the International Convention for theSuppression of Terrorist Bombings. The Conventiofills an important gap in international law by

expanding the legal framework for internationalcooperation in the investigation, prosecution andextradition of persons who engage in such bombingWhenever possible, we use law enforcement anddiplomatic tools to wage the fight against terrorismBut there have been, and will be, times when lawenforcement and diplomatic tools are simply notenough, when our very national security ischallenged, and when we must take extraordinary


20/616

teps to protect the safety of our citizens. As long aserrorists continue to target American citizens, weeserve the right to act in self defense by striking atheir bases and those who sponsor, assist or activelyupport them. We exercised that right in 1993 withhe attack against Iraqi intelligence headquarters inesponse to Baghdads assassination attempt againstormer President Bush. We exercised that right again

n August 1998.

On August 7, 1998, 12 Americans and nearly 300Kenyans and Tanzanians lost their lives, and another,000 were wounded when our embassies in Nairobind Dar es Salaam were bombed. Soon afterward,ur intelligence community acquired convincing

nformation from a variety of reliable sources that theetwork of radical groups affiliated with Osama binaden, perhaps the preeminent organizer andnancier of international terrorism in the world today,lanned, financed and carried out the bombings. The

roups associated with bin Laden come from diverselaces, but share a hatred for democracy, a fanaticallorification of violence and a horrible distortion ofheir religion to justify the murder of innocents. Theyave made the United States their adversaryrecisely because of what we stand for and what wetand against.

On August 20, 1998, our Armed Forces carried outtrikes against terrorist facilities and infrastructure in

Afghanistan. Our forces targeted one of the mostctive terrorist bases in the world. It contained key

lements of the bin Laden network's infrastructurend has served as a training camp for literallyhousands of terrorists from around the globe. Ourorces also attacked a factory in Sudan associatedwith the bin Laden network that was involved in the

roduction of materials for chemical weapons. Thetrikes were a necessary and proportionate responseo the imminent threat of further terrorist attacksgainst U.S. personnel and facilities. Afghanistannd Sudan had been warned for years to stoparboring and supporting these terrorist groups.

Countries that persistently host terrorists have no

ght to be safe havens.

lacing terrorism at the top of the diplomatic agendaas increased international information sharing and

aw enforcement efforts. At the June 1997 Denverummit of the Eight, the leaders of Canada, France,

Germany, Italy, Japan, Russia, the United Kingdomnd the United States reaffirmed their determination

o combat terrorism in all forms, their opposition to

concessions to terrorist demands and their determnation to deny hostage-takers any benefits from theacts. They agreed to intensify diplomatic efforts toensure that by the year 2000 all States have joinedthe international counterterrorism conventionsspecified in the 1996 UN resolution on measures tocounter terrorism. The eight leaders also agreed tostrengthen the capability of hostage negotiation

experts and counterterrorism response units, toexchange information on technologies to detect andeter the use of weapons of mass destruction interrorist attacks, to develop means to deter terrorisattacks on electronic and computer infrastructure, tstrengthen maritime security, to exchange informa-tion on security practices for international specialevents, and to strengthen and expand internationalcooperation and consultation on terrorism.

International Crime

International crime is a serious and potent threat tothe American people at home and abroad. Drugtrafficking, illegal trade in firearms, financial crimessuch as money laundering, counterfeiting, advancefee and credit card fraud, and income tax evasionillegal alien smuggling, trafficking in women andchildren, economic espionage, intellectual propertytheft, computer hacking and public corruption are alinked to international criminal activity and all have direct impact on the security and prosperity of theAmerican people.

Efforts to combat international crime can have amuch broader impact than simply halting individualcriminal acts. The efficiency of the market placedepends on transparency and effective lawenforcement, which limit distorting factors such asextortion and corruption. A free and efficient markeimplies not only the absence of state control but alslimits on unlawful activities that impede rationalbusiness decisions and fair competition. Additionathe integrity and reliability of the international financsystem will be improved by standardizing laws and

regulations governing financial institutions andimproving international law enforcement cooperatioin the financial sector.

To address the increasing threat from these diverscriminal activities, we have formulated anInternational Crime Control Strategy that provides aframework for integrating the federal government


21/61

esponse to international crime. The strategys majoroals and initiatives are to:

Extend our crime control efforts beyond U.S.borders by intensifying activities of lawenforcement and diplomatic personnel abroad toprevent criminal acts and prosecute selectcriminal acts committed abroad.

Protect U.S. borders by enhancing our inspection,detection, monitoring and interdiction efforts,seeking stiffer criminal penalties for smuggling,and targeting law enforcement resources moreeffectively against smugglers.

Deny safe haven to international criminals bynegotiating new international agreements forevidence sharing and prompt arrest andextradition of fugitives (including nationals of therequested country), implementing strengthened

immigration laws to prevent criminals fromentering the United States and provide for theirprompt expulsion when appropriate, andpromoting increased cooperation with foreign lawenforcement authorities.

Counter international financial crime bycombating money laundering and reducingmovement of criminal proceeds, seizing theassets of international criminals, enhancingbilateral and multilateral cooperation againstfinancial crime, and targeting offshore sources of

international fraud, counterfeiting, electronicaccess device schemes, income tax evasion andother financial crimes.

Prevent criminal exploitation of international tradeby interdicting illegal technology exports, prevent-ing unfair and predatory trade practices, protect-ing intellectual property rights, countering indus-trial theft and economic espionage, and enforcingimport restrictions on harmful substances,dangerous organisms and protected species. Infiscal year 1997, the Customs Service seized $59million in goods and $55 million in currency beingtaken out of the country illegally.

Respond to emerging international crime threatsby disrupting new activities of internationalorganized crime groups, enhancing intelligenceefforts, reducing trafficking in human beings(involuntary servitude, alien smuggling, documentfraud and denial of human rights), crimes against

children, and increasing enforcement effortsagainst high technology and computer-relatedcrime.

Foster international cooperation and the rule oflaw by establishing international standards, goaand objectives to combat international crime anby actively encouraging compliance, improving

bilateral cooperation with foreign governmentsand law enforcement authorities, expanding U.training and assistance programs in lawenforcement and administration of justice, andstrengthening the rule of law as the foundation democratic government and free markets.

The growing threat to our security from transnationcrime makes international law enforcement coopertion vital. We are negotiating and implementing updated extradition and mutual legal assistance treatthat reflect the changing nature of international crim

and prevent terrorists and criminals from exploitingnational borders to escape prosecution. Moreoversince the primary motivation of most internationalcriminals is greed, powerful asset seizure, forfeiturand money laundering laws are key tools for takingaction against the financial underpinnings of international crime. Increasing our enforcement powersthrough bilateral and multilateral agreements andefforts makes it harder for criminals to enjoy their ilgotten gains.At the Birmingham Summit in May 1998, the leadeof the G-8 adopted a wide range of measures to

strengthen the cooperative efforts againstinternational crime that they launched at their summin Lyon two years ago. They agreed to increasecooperation on transnational high technology crimemoney laundering and financial crime, corruption,environmental crimes, and trafficking in drugs,firearms and women and children. They also agreeto fully support negotiations on a UN Convention onTransnational Organized Crime, which will broadenmany of the efforts underway among the G-8 to therest of the international community.

No area of criminal activity has greater internationaimplications than high technology crime because othe global nature of information networks. Computhackers and other cyber-criminals are not hampereby international boundaries, since information andtransactions involving funds or property can betransmitted quickly and covertly via telephone andinformation systems. Law enforcement faces difficchallenges in this area, many of which are impossi


22/618

o address without international consensus andooperation. We seek to develop and implement newgreements with other nations to address high

echnology crime, particularly cyber-crime.

We are making a concerted effort at home andbroad to shut down the illicit trade in firearms,mmunition and explosives that fuels the violence

ssociated with terrorism, drug trafficking andnternational crime. The President has signedegislation amending the Arms Export Control Act toxpand our authority to monitor and regulate thectivities of arms brokers and we have intensifiedeviews of applications for licenses to export firearmsom the United States to ensure that they are notiverted to illicit purposes. The Bureau of Alcohol,obacco and Firearms (ATF) has tightened up prooff residency requirements for aliens purchasingrearms from dealers in the United States, and ATFnd the Customs Service have intensified their

nterdiction and investigative efforts at U.S. borders.

n the international arena, the United States isworking with its partners in the G-8 and through theUN Crime Commission to expand cooperation onombating illicit arms trafficking. In November 1997,he United States and its partners in the Organizationf American States (OAS) signed the Inter-American

Convention Against the Illicit Manufacturing of andrafficking in Firearmsthe first internationalgreement designed to prevent, combat andradicate illegal trafficking in firearms, ammunition

nd explosives. We are now negotiating annternational agreement that would globalize the OASonvention. Additionally, the ATF and Customservice have provided training and assistance tother nations on tracing firearms, combating internalmuggling and related law enforcement topics.

Drug Trafficking

We have shown that with determined and relentlessfforts, we can make significant progress against the

courge of drug abuse and drug trafficking. In theUnited States, drug use has dropped 49 percentince 1979. Recent studies show that drug use byur young people is stabilizing, and in someategories, declining. Overall, cocaine use hasropped 70 percent since 1985 and the crackpidemic has begun to recede. Today, Americanspend 37 percent less on drugs than a decade ago.

That means over $34 billion reinvested in our socierather than squandered on drugs.

The aim of the U.S. National Drug Control Strategyto cut drug availability in the United States by halfover the next 10 yearsand reduce theconsequences of drug use and trafficking by 25percent over the same periodthrough expanded

prevention efforts, improved treatment programs,strengthened law enforcement and tougherinterdiction. Our strategy recognizes that, at homeand abroad, prevention, treatment and economicalternatives must be integrated with intelligencecollection, law enforcement and interdiction. Itsultimate success will require concerted efforts by thpublic, all levels of government and the private sectogether with other governments, private groups aninternational organizations.

Domestically, we seek to educate and enable

Americas youth to reject illegal drugs, increase thesafety of Americas citizens by substantially reducindrug-related crime and violence, reduce health andsocial costs to the public of illegal drug use, andshield Americas air, land and sea frontiers from thdrug threat. Working with Congress and the privatsector, the Administration has launched a majorantidrug youth media campaign and will seek toextend this program through 2002. Withcongressional support and matching dollars from thprivate sector, we will commit to a five-year, $2 billpublic-private partnership to educate our children to

reject drugs.

In concert with our allies abroad, we seek to stopdrug trafficking by reducing cultivation of drug-producing crops, interdicting the flow of drugs at thesource and in transit (particularly in Central and SoAmerica, the Caribbean, Mexico and Southeast Asand stopping drugs from entering our country. TheStrategy includes efforts to strengthen democraticinstitutions and root out corruption in source nationprosecute major international drug traffickers anddestroy trafficking organizations, prevent money

laundering and use of commercial air and maritimetransportation for drug smuggling, and eradicateillegal drug crops and encourage alternate cropdevelopment or alternative employment in sourcenations. We seek to achieve a counterdrug alliancin this hemisphere, one that could serve as a modefor enhanced cooperation in other regions.


23/61

he United States is aggressively engagingnternational organizations, financial institutions andon-governmental organizations in counternarcoticsooperation. At the Birmingham Summit in May998, the leaders of the G-8 endorsed the principle ofhared responsibility for combating drugs, includingooperative efforts focused on both eradication andemand reduction. They agreed to reinforce

ooperation on reducing demand and curbingafficking in drugs and chemical precursors. Theylso agreed on the need for a global strategy toradicate illicit drugs. The United States supports the

UN International Drug Control Programs goal oframatically reducing coca and opium poppyultivation by 2008 and the programs efforts toombat drug production, trafficking and abuse inome of the most remote regions of the world. At the

UN General Assembly Special Session on drugafficking and abuse in June 1998, President Clintonnd other world leaders strengthened existing

nternational counterdrug institutions, reconfirmed thelobal partnership against drug abuse and stressedhe need for a coordinated international approach toombating drug trafficking.

Emerging Threats at Home

Due to our military superiority, potential enemies,whether nations or terrorist groups, may be morekely in the future to resort to terrorist acts or otherttacks against vulnerable civilian targets in the

United States instead of conventional militaryperations. At the same time, easier access toophisticated technology means that the destructiveower available to terrorists is greater than ever.

Adversaries may thus be tempted to usenconventional tools, such as WMD or informationttacks, to threaten our citizens, and critical national

nfrastructures.

Managing the Consequences of WMDncidents

residential Decision Directive 62, signed in May998, established an overarching policy andssignment of responsibilities for responding to

errorist acts involving WMD. The Federal Govern-ment will respond rapidly and decisively to anyerrorist incident in the United States, working withtate and local governments to restore order andeliver emergency assistance. The Department ofustice, acting through the FBI, has the overall lead inperational response to a WMD incident. The

Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA)supports the FBI in preparing for and responding tothe consequences of a WMD incident.

The Domestic Terrorism Program is integrating thecapabilities and assets of a number of Federalagencies to support the FBI, FEMA and state andlocal governments in consequence management.

The programs goal is to build a capability in 120major U.S. cities for first responders to be able todeal with WMD incidents by 2002. In fiscal year1997, the Defense Department provided training tonearly 1,500 metropolitan emergency respondersfirefighters, law enforcement officials and medicalpersonnelin four cities. In fiscal year 1998, theprogram will reach 31 cities. Eventually, this traininwill reach all cities via the Internet, video and CDROM.

Under the Domestic Terrorism Program, the Defen

Department will maintain military units to serve asaugmentation forces for weapons of mass destructconsequence management and to help maintainproficiency of local emergency responders throughperiodic training and exercises. The National Guarwith its mission and long tradition of responding tonational emergencies, has an important role to playthis effort. The President announced in May 1998that the Defense Department will train Army NationGuard and reserve elements to assist state and locauthorities to manage the consequences of a WMDattack. This training will be given to units in

Massachusetts, New York, Pennsylvania, Georgia,Illinois, Texas, Missouri, Colorado, California andWashington.

The Domestic Terrorism Program enlists the suppoof other agencies as well. The Department of Eneplans for and provides emergency responder trainifor nuclear and radiological incidents. TheEnvironmental Protection Agency plans for andprovides emergency responder training for hazardomaterials and environmental incidents. TheDepartment of Health and Human Services, throug

the Public Health Service and with the support of thDepartment of Veterans Affairs and other Federalagencies, plans and prepares for a national responto medical emergencies arising from the terrorist uof weapons of mass destruction.

The threat of biological weapons is particularlytroubling. In his May 1998 commencement speechAnnapolis, the President announced a


24/610

omprehensive strategy to protect our civilianopulation from the scourge of biological weapons.here are four critical areas of focus:

First, if a hostile nation or terrorists releasebacteria or viruses to harm Americans, we mustbe able to identify the pathogens with speed andcertainty. We will upgrade our public health and

medical surveillance systems. Theseimprovements will benefit not only ourpreparedness for a biological weapons attackthey will enhance our ability to respond quicklyand effectively to outbreaks of emerginginfectious diseases.

Second, our emergency response personnelmust have the training and equipment to do theirjobs right. As described above, we will helpensure that federal, state and local authoritieshave the resources and knowledge they need to

deal with a crisis.

Third, we must have the medicines and vaccinesneeded to treat those who fall sick or preventthose at risk from falling ill because of a biologicalweapons attack. The President will propose thecreation of a civilian stockpile of medicines andvaccines to counter the pathogens most likely tobe in the hands of terrorists or hostile powers.

Fourth, the revolution in biotechnology offersenormous possibilities for combating biological

weapons. We will coordinate research anddevelopment efforts to use the advances ingenetic engineering and biotechnology to createthe next generation of medicines, vaccines anddiagnostic tools for use against these weapons.At the same time, we must continue our efforts toprevent biotechnology innovations from beingapplied to development of ever more difficult tocounter biological weapons.

Protecting Critical Infrastructures

Our

a national security strategy for a new century-pdf

Documents