PUBLICATIONS               PLAYERS              PRIMER MAIN

______________________________________________________________________      

 

    -- PNAC --                         

       PRIMER

  BACKGROUND              

______________________________________________________________________

 

 

The men behind the Project for the New American Century (or PNAC), in a 1997 letter that served as their FOUnding document, wrote of the US’ foreign policy status quo:

 

They have allowed differences over tactics to obscure potential agreement on strategic objectives. And they have not fought for a defense budget that would maintain American security and advance American interests in the new century. We aim to change this. We aim to make the case and rally support for American global leadership.

 

PNAC is a think tank that since 2001 has become increasingly associated with a renewed strain of American political thought known as Neoconservatism, and whose membership is alarmingly well-positioned within the power structures that are most salient to its goals.

 

It is important to note that the connections between this organization, its membership, and the current government of the United States are neither perceived nor conspiratorial.  The entire corpus of PNAC’s offerings are available on its own website – look around, it’s all there in black and white.  Far from being based on “leaked documents” or speculation, the case against PNAC is easily made with primary source information.  The letter mentioned above, for example, bears the signatures of Paul Wolfowitz, Dick Cheney, Donald Rumsfeld, I. Lewis Libby, and Jeb Bush.  With the exception of Jeb Bush, all of the above currently occupy important seats in the executive branch.

 

Indeed, this little-known institution has engendered profound changes in the way that the United States relates to the rest of the world.  Today, several alumni of the Project make and influence a vast arena of American foreign policy decisions – in the terminology and rubric of a shared ideology of aggression and hegemony.  The terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001 created an environment of opportunity in which they were able to reframe the role of the US Government in the world at large and in the lives of its citizens.

______________________________________________________________________

______________________________________________________________________

 

What is Neoconservatism?

                                                              Here are a couple of links, both from 1996, to articles that give some summation and background information about what was then seen as a dead or dying political movement, with origins often attributed to political philosopher Leo Strauss .  They are both quite laudatory in tone, but present a good timeline for the development of Neoconservatism up to their publication.  Whether it is appropriate for the ideology being harnessed by the current hawks in power to share a moniker with this older political philosophy is up for debate.  However, in addition to a certain continuity in personalities, the two camps share some prominent talking points:

 

·        American unilateralism

·        Protection of the interests of Israel

·        The Straussian philosophical notion that “freedom is an essential good, but it must serve the larger end of societal virtue.”

·        That "a society that does not have the self- confidence to defend its principles will fall prey to the forces intent on subverting or altering those principles."

______________________________________________________________________

______________________________________________________________________

 

Following their election in 2000, President Bush and Vice President Cheney, himself a former member of the Project, appointed several alumni of PNAC to key cabinet posts, and they in turn opened the door for a number of their cohorts.  Perhaps the most significant of these appointments was Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld, who came with Paul Wolfowitz and Richard Perle in tow.  These four, together with John Bolton, “Scooter” Libby and others, formed the core of what was soon to become a potent political cabal. 

 

Examined in retrospect, the intellectual material they produced under the common banner of PNAC is an ideological and material blueprint for a very systematic project: wholly reorienting American foreign policy.  Perhaps most tellingly, in an interview during his tenure in the Reagen administration, Richard Perle revealed his belief that in order to launch what he even then saw as “a total war,” America needed "some catastrophic and catalysing event - like a new Pearl Harbor".  

 

Through much of 2000 and 2001, the influence wielded by the neoconservative contingent of the cabinet was largely held in check by the more moderate, internationalist leanings of Secretary of State Colin Powell.  The events of September 11, 2001 spurred the neoconservatives in the administration to contravene Powell and graft their template onto decision-making processes with far-reaching implications, and also provided a convenient justification for such a sweeping, lasting changes that were not reflective of an underlying cultural mandate.  The origins of a number of serious recent developments can be traced back to the writings of the Project for the New American Century.

______________________________________________________________________

 

·        The war in Iraq.  PNAC had been lobbying for the use of military force to affect Hussein’s ouster since their inception.  In this letter from 1998, Rumsfeld and Wolfowitz themselves sign on to the use of military force to accomplish regime change – and emphatically make the case for defying the UN – years before the tensions on 2002.

·        The USA PATRIOT Act.  The language, purpose, and structure of this controversial piece of legislation – passed under the guise of protecting Americans from terrorism – are all present in previous writings published by PNAC.  “Homeland Security” was a term that originally appeared in a PNAC tome in 2000. 

·        The Bush Doctrine.  The President’s national security strategy first broached the subject of unilateral military “pre-emption” as the core of a methodology for maintaining international power.  It bears immense resemblance to PNAC’s Rebuilding America’s Defenses and is said to have taken much from the classified 1992 Defense Planning Guidance, written by Paul Wolfowitz. 

­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­______________________________________________________________________

 

A bizarre and antidemocratic worldview formulated by a tiny group of ex-cold warriors has become the language and method of new, more aggressive United States.  With the daily rumblings about Iran and Syria – both of whom the Project has advocated invading – it is unclear where the doctrine of pre-emption and the broader consensus beliefs of the PNAC alumni will lead the United States and the world.

  ______________________________________________________________________

______________________________________________________________________

        

              Links and Resources                     

           

A tremendous number of online resources—though notably few from American mainstream media outlets—exist for those interested in learning more about PNAC, the Bush Doctrine, and our new de facto national ideology.  I have indexed a few of those that I found the most helpful.  Got more?  E-mail me.

 

The War Behind Closed Doors

This PBS Frontline documentary is more than aptly comprehensive for an hour of television, and you can watch the entire show online with Windows Media or Real One.  Some of the interviews are fantastic.

 

Foreign Policy in Focus

FPIF has created The Project Against the present danger.  A good general resource, they have prepared numerous relevant reports here are a few:

·        PNAC’s Present Dangers

·        Pump Up the Pentagon, Hawks Tell Bush

·       Attention, Right Face, Forward March

·       Washington goes to war