Page:11
JPRS0
f 1
BRS Assigned Document Number:
Number: Classification: Language: Document Date: Report Type: Report Number: Report Series: Report Division:
UNCLASSIFIED
Russian
un 90
JPRS Report
Soviet Union
Entry Date: Status: Country: Category: Report Date: UDC Number:
Start Page: End Page:
[CAT]ep
1 5
90
of Document:
SSHA: EXONOMIKA 1DEOLOGIYA
Yuriy Alexsandrovich Shvedkov, candidate of historical
sciences and senior scientific associate at Institute. and Canadianassages in boldface as published]
Report Name: USA: ECONOMICS, POLITICS, IDEOLOGY Headline: National Security and National Priorities
SourceOSCOW SSHA:IKA, IDEOLOGIYA in Russian Nounsigned to press
Subslug: (Article by Yuriy Aleksandrovlch Shvedkov, candidate of historical sciences and senior scientific associate at Institute. and Canadian Studies; passages in boldface as published]
PULL TEXT OF ARTICLE:
1. [Article by Yuriy ALeksandrovich Shvedkov, candidate of historical sciences and senior scientific associate at Institute. and Canadian Studies; passages in boldface as published]
. [Text] At the beginning of this new decade, the world is clearly entering the initial periodew non-confrontational era, but it willomplex and contradictory period: The past is trying to assert its influence, and the future could bring previously unforeseen dangers. From the standpoint of the possible annihilation of all life on earth, nuclear arsenals are beginning to appear senseless, but they are still being improved. Modern communication systems have almost erased national borders, but violent outbursts of nationalism are spreading throughout the world. Scientific and technical progress is crossing new frontiers in production, the improvement of public health care, and the enhancement of the welfare
of all mankind, but this has been accompanied by the threat of the catastrophic devastation of the environment, radiation and toxic poisoning, the pandemic spread of AIDS and drug addiction, poverty, and hunger.
All of this is naturally affecting many countries of the world to an equal extent and in different spheres, including the major powers--the USSR and the United States. In these countries it has become essential to set future national priorities and determine the place of national security concerns among these priorities, or, to put it more simply, to accomplish the sound and thoroughly considered distribution of the far from unlimited budget funds.
We mustar from abstract interest in the increasingly heated debates. national priorities, and especially the relative significance of national security issues, whichind of idol to which trillions of dollars were sacrificed in earlier decades.
The indisputable improvement of the international situation has not produced significant results in this sphere yet. After all, the Presidentillion dollars for military needs in fiscalrercent of all federal expenditures, and received congressional authorization toillion. The administration's request for fiscal1 amountedillion dollars, which will cut expenditures byercent with adjustments for inflation. Furthermore, allocations for the most dangerous programs, like the SDI, are to be increased. Now, however, congressional leaders are suggesting that national security requests will be cut severely from now on, and four out of every five Americans polled have expressed the opinion that the administration should pay more attention to such problems as the declining quality of education, environmental pollution, drug addiction, and the increasing number of poor and homeless Americans.
6*. Etymology of the Term "National Security'
7. Theational security" made its-appearance in American politicalelatively short timen the first postwar years. Before this, the prevailing term. terminology, just as in the terminology of other states, wasr "defenseeflecting the natural desire to defend one's own territory and borders. It was even used during the years of the two world wars, although this wasatter of the defense of the territory of the United States, which was protected by two vast oceans, than of the defense of friendlyeset>
B. The new term came into national use with the passage of7
National Security Act, providing for the establishmentational Security Councilresidential advisory body. It was responsible for the substantiation of decisions on foreign, defense, and economic policy and the defense of national security interests against foreign threats. This attested that the term had transcended the boundaries of military policy, not to mention defense policy. It is Indicative that the same act envisaged the creation of the Central Intelligence Agency as part of the NSC with extensive authority to carry out and coordinate all of the subversive intelligence activities of government agencies. These innovations were connected with the globalization of American strategy, which caused the "cold war" toonfrontation between opposing socioeconomic systems and military blocs. The assigned purpose of this confrontation was not only military, although this was the main purpose, but also political, economic, ideological, and even subversive. As time went on, the scales of the military confrontation, based on the escalation of the arms race, actually grew instead of contracting and acquired self-generating properties.
this reason, now that the cold war policy has becomethe United States is facing many new internal threats as welldangers, it is understandable that fierce argumentsout in the American political community. The focus ofis the question of whether the term "nationalbecome obsolete after more thanears, and whether thecome to update the term, supplementing it with newthe security of Americans. After all, today many ofdying not on battlefields, butesult of the spread ofdrug addiction,esult of traffic andesult of the AIDS epidemic, and the welfare andfuture generations are being attacked by competitors fromEurope, and the new industrial nations, whichstrength with the help ot* the Americans themselvescold war.
a joint statement entitled "American Priorities inrominent American political scientists R. Barnet,S. Cohen, and others remarked that the subordinationaspects. security to the idea of confrontationUSSRangerous warping of Washington strategyand foreign affairs. "We havehe documentissue this statement because we are deeply concerned aboutof our country. For decades America spent lavish sums onpotential, ignoring the economic, social, andon which its security and strengthationdepend.esult of our own actions, we are on theruin, and if we stay on this road, we will soon become aand more vulnerableeset>
11. Xn accordance with the current Interpretation of national priorities, American political scientists are already singling out aspects of security other than military and confrontational ones--tconomic, social, ecological, and demographic aspects. These include not only direct threats to the health and life of the present generation of Americans, but also threats capable of displaying thair destructive force in the future. Obviously, this means that the Washington administration will have to consider the thorough reordering of national priorities both within the country and abroad.
ia. Military Aspects of National Security
defense is the chief enemy of nationalhis seemingly paradoxical remark waa made by American researcher K. Boulding. He was trying to explain that the arms race was undermining national defense potential instead of strengthening it.
In fact, the country which was the first to develop and use nuclear weapons and which then worked tirelessly on the improvement of all types of weapons of mass destruction, does not have absolute security ln the military sense today. Furthermore, the use of its arsenals would put America and the rest of the world on the verge of total annihilation.
The critics of Bush's national security strategy have pointed out the fact that current budget priorities are essentially the same as they always were and do not take changing realities into account. Researchers who nave analyzed the designated purposes of military expenditures have concluded that they ara largely inconsistent with
Strategic arms: Large sums are to be spent on the development and deployment ofozen new nuclear systems, including the MX and Midgeeman missiles, which will duplicate one another and for which funds have already been allocatedillion dollars in theost of the advanced systems are designed not to deter attack, but to be used in complex war scenarios involving conventional and nuclear weapons. They are to be used toar. and not to strengthen peace. It is widely acknowledged in the United States that the deterrence of nuclear attack would requiremall fraction of. nuclear arsenal, no moreew hundred single nuclear warheads, especially if the other side has tho same weapons.
17. Ally cximmitroents: Even according to official admissions, more than half of the United States' current military expenditures are connected with its commitment to the defense of Western Europe.
UNCLASSIFIED
Renowned American historian and political scientist G. Kennan has described these expenditures accurately as "indefensible"e remarked that "the military confrontation in Europe is disproportionate to the threat the two sides face. It is too expensive, burdensome, and dangerous to keep so many weapons and troops in the middle ofeset>
American experts have cited the following arguments in support of this conclusion. Western Europe already has military-industrial potential comparable to that of the United States and could defend itself if necessary. Part of. contribution to NATO is helping Nest European competitors challenge the position of American businessmen in world markets and even in. market. Furthermore, under the conditions of substantial reductions in the armed forces of the USSR and other Warsaw Pact states in western Europe, the sense of the "Soviet threat" is disappearing, and attitudes in favor of closer economic and technological cooperation with the East are growing stronger.
Finally, any war in Europe would be suicidal for both sides because of the many nuclear power plants there, but little has been written about this in America. As American author E. Janeway stressed, "The economy of Western Europe has installed its own deterrent in the form of an entire network of commercial nuclear power plants. Any attack on Western Europe willhernobyl reaction of gigantic proportions, which will be all the more lethal because it will be more difficult for Russia to defend itself against this than against the invasions of Genghis Khan, Napoleon, andeset>
As for the Asian-Pacific region, which also takes aroundillion dollars out of. budget, American experts do not doubt the ability of Japan, and now of South Korea as well, to defend themselves without Washington's help in the eventocal conflict. The buildup. air and naval forces in East Asia and the Pacific would make sense, they feel, if therehanceew world war and if there were some reason for military operations against the USSR in Europe and the Far East, but this prospect is clearly improbable at this time.
Military potential in the Third World: Large sums are also being spent on the maintenance of American military bases and armed forces in the developing countries, but, as American experts have pointed out, the shift in Soviet foreign policy in favor of the peaceful resolution of regional conflicts could turn the USSRartner insteadival of the United States, and, what is more, artner interested in the settlement of local disputes.
Besides this, thererowing awareness in the united States that the many different threats. interests in the Third world are primarily non-military in nature and are connected largely with the economic and sociopolitical effects of the debt crisis in the Latin American and African countries. "The standard of living ishe previously cited statement of the American researchers says, "ond dissatisfaction is growing. This is threatening democracy and stability in such key countries as Brazil, Mexico, Peru, and Argentina. The strict austerity measures connected with the debts are enough in themselves to reduce American exports to the Latin American countries and increase the flow of illegal immigrants to the United States from those countries. In this. economic policy, especially the particularly high interest rates, due partially to the deficit financing of military expenditures, has. interests more than any hypothetical USSR-incited aggressioneset>
This means that the American expenditures on the maintenance and support. armed forces abroad, whichuge portion of the national military budget, have had at least two extremely negative effeets on the security of the Americans themselves. First of all, the presence of these forces in different parts of the world increases the danger of unplanned and. possibly, unpremeditated conflict with unpredictable consequences. Second, the maintenance of these forces hasaste of colossal material and human resources that would be far from superfluous in the safeguarding of other aspects of the American people's security.
The economic implications of the arms buildup: The soaring military expenditures, financed by the taxpayers and also by foreign loans to some extent, during the years of the Reagan administration lowered the level of capital investments in production and slowed down the growth of labor productivity. Tho tax reforms of these years did not lead to the modernization of industry. Insurmountable deficits in the federal budget and in foreign trade and international payments reflected the assault of Japanese and West European competitors on. economy.
Of course, administration spokesmen like to point out the fact that the United States is now experiencing its longest period of economic growth in many years (but, we must say, at slower rates) and that there are many new jobs in the country (but these are almost exclusively in the sphere of non-industrialhese arguments have been questioned by respected economists and financiers. Here ia what S. Schlosstein, who vas until recently the vice president of Morgan Guarantyell-known investment bank on Wall Street, has to say. for example, in his book "The End of the Americanoday Americaountry "which has watched
UNCLASSII-rfc:i:
Page: 11
its population's standard of living decline, its industrial influence threatened by foreign competitors, its political system undermined by the nearsightedness (and money) of pressure groups, the indicators of its public education fallisastrously level, its children suffering from the emotional trauma of divorce and the absence of one parent, its society disintegrating under the influence of drugs, its national defense weakened by fraud and mismanagement, and its status as the global leaderall within the lifetimeingleeset?
Expenditures onose fromillion dollars00 billionum exceeding total government expenditures on the development of new power engineering technologies, public health care, the enhancement of agricultural productivity, and environmental monitoring. The countriesower volume of, especially Japan and the FRG, were at an advantage. Foreign competitors acquired stronger positions in the American high technology market and even in the country's financial markets arid its leading commercial and investment banks.
This situation is now regardederious threat to the well-being of the United States. This is attested to, for example,EWSWEEK public opinion poll. When Americans were asked whatigger threat to the United States, the military strength of the USSR or the economic strength of Japan, most ofercent) said it was Japan, and onlyercent said it was the
These feelings are motivating researchers to analyze other, non-military components of national security.
Non-Military Priorities
President D. Eisenhower once described the reciprocal connection between the military and socioeconomic elements of security quite eloquently. *'Each weapon wee said, "each naval ship we launch, and each missile we build ultimatelyheft from those who are hungry and have nothing to eat and from those who are cold and have nothing toeset> This statement is still relevant-today, it has-been acknowledged that the gap between wealth and poverty has never been as great in all of the postwar years as it is today. The burden on military expenditures has begun to threaten the health of the American economy and society.
The spokesmen of the Bush administration try to address the new problems of American society, but without cuts in the military budget it will be impossible to find enough money to solve them. This is why most of the arguments in the American Congress today focus on tho redistribution of budget allocations.
Page:11
Economic security, in the opinion of American experts, should meet at least two conditions. The first is the preservation of the country's economic autonomy and its ability to make decisions on economic development in the United States' own interest. The second is the maintenance of the present standard of living and its continued elevation. Many American experts are worried about the prospects for the fulfillment of these conditions.
The large budget deficits and the practice of covering them with borrowed funds are constantly increasing the national debt.9 it had alreadyrillion dollars.9 the interest on this debt cost theillion dollars, orercent above0 figure. These interest payments have become the second largest budget item, surpassed only by military expenditures. It is obvious that in the eventecession, this accumulation of debts by the federal government will seriously complicate its financial operations and willeavy burden on the standard of living of subsequent generations over the long range.
The gap between imports and exports has ledituation in which the dollars the Americans spend on foreign goods have begun to return to the United States in the form of direct and portfolio investments. At the end8 the latter amounted9 trillion dollars, as compared to5 trillion in American investments abroad. Japanese and other foreign businessmen have begun buying real estate in the United States. banks and industrial corporations. Direct foreign capital investments in the United States rose fromillion dollars1illion at the endfold increase. How they exceed the direct capital investments of American firms abroad, whichillion dollars in thatarticularly irate wave of dissatisfaction was aroused in the United States when Japanese concerns purchased the controlling stock in such prestigious American firms as Rockefeller Center, Columbia System Records, and Columbia Pictures at the endne of the editors of the influential magazine FOREIGN POLICY, T. Omerstead, had this to say about the takeovers in his articleSale of America": "The most common apprehension regarding foreign-capital investments is that they will restrict the economic and political autonomy of America. Foreign indebtedness and foreign ownership mean dependence and vulnerability. Ownership goes along with control over economic decisions and influence on politicalreset> Obviously, it is too early to speak of the United States' dependence on foreign owners, but events in the American economy, just as in many other spheres, are developing at great speed. The United States already cannot make decisions as freely as it didouple of decades ago in ot least the fields of international finance and trade.
unc:.ass:fied
The social aspect of public security, as the last few decades. history have demonstrated, consists of the pronounced property inequalities in the richest Western country, which became much more apparent under the Reagan administration, the tense relations with ethnic minorities, which occasionally turn Into open conflicts, organised crime, and drug addiction.
Recent American statistics indicate1 percent of the Americans live below the poverty line (in comparison7 percenteset> The Bush administration's intention toillion dollars for aid to the poor and homeless was an official acknowledgement of their pitiful status. It is true thatear program will not begin until fiscalndthis will depend on the improvement of the state of the budget.
3C. The United States has turned into th* largest market for illegal drugs, and Washington has won the reputation ofurdermericans are already behind bars, and more and more flew prisons are being built.
37. Ecological security hasatter of increasing concern to th* American public along with national and international security. Accordingeport of th*or Public Opinion Research, 9 Americans named environmental protection as the highest priority in the distribution of budget allocations for the first time, relegating the problems of crime and public health careecondary position. ercent of the respondents said th* environment was the biggest problem, whereas only SI percent of the Americans expressed this opinion
30. Of course, it would be difficult to expect the American administration to cover all of the direct and indirect ecological costs connected with the production of nuclear and chemical weapon* and other military activity int few years, but it will have to allocate large suns for this purpose. At the end ofor example. Secretary of Energy J. Watkins published his plan to combat the radioactive pollution of th* areas surrounding enterprises producing nuclear warheads. Ityear prograo, requiringillion dollars just for theears.<sup>li<resct>
39. Tho demographic aspect of the security of Americans clearly has to presuppose satisfactory rates of Increase in the healthy, educated, and professionally trained population. American experts are also beginning to feel justifiable concern ln this area. An article by Professor G. Poster from the National Security University of the Armed Forces on demographic shifts on the global and national levels and their implications. security, for example, stresses that population growth in th* United States will stay below
the world average even after the addition of immigration figures. Whereas the population of the United Statesercent of the world population9 the indicator had decreasedercent, and0 it could fallercent. By that time, however, the percentages of Latin Americans and Asians in the total population will rise considerablyoercent andercent respectively0. Kost of these people, just as many black Americans, will have no chance of getting the necessary training for jobs in advanced fields ofeset> They can be described as lifetime dependants or permanent welfare recipients.esult, the education and professional training of the younger generation will be even more acute problems for the federal and local governments than they are today.
Therefore,rief summary of the non-military aspects. national security indicates that the government, in spite of its budget difficulties in the next few years, will have to cope with the need for new colossal investments within the country, without which the very survival of American society will be threatened.
. politicians and even experts on the military economy see the solution in sizable cuts in the military budget. The size of the proposed cuts rangesillionillion dollars. Obviously, the process could begin with coordinated unilateral reductions in the military budgets of the ussr and United States, followed by more specific agreements in this field. After all. the military budget of the USSR0 has already been reducedercent.
These cuts in the military budgets of the two powers would be all the more significant in view of the fact that the internal problems complicating their development, from the budget deficits and the related shortage of capital investments to the pollution of the environment, on which the health of the population largely depends, are closely interrelated and are common to both powers. Of course, there are significant differences as well. The American society is suffering more from drug addiction and crime, for example, whereas the ussr is experiencing the dramatic exacerbation of ethnic problems and difficulties in the consumer goods market.
It is clear that many of the items on the agenda of. dialogue will determine the future of all mankind. Broader Soviet-American cooperation in averting the new threats endangering not only the United States and USSR, but also the rest of the world, and in solving so- called transnational problems will provide strong momentum for the mobilization of the appropriate un mechanisms and for international cooperation in general.
SSHA: EKONCMIKA, POLITIKA,pWORLD POLICY JOURNAL..
3, ARMS CONTROL TODAY, eptember.
. Janeway. "The Economic* of Chaoe. On Revitalizing the Americanew York..
5. WORLD POLICY JOURNAL, .
. Schlosstein. "The End of the Americanew York.x.
EWSWEEK,
mm
Quoted in "State of th*" edited by L. BrownYork,
9. FOREIGN POLICY, Fall p.
10. INTERNATIONAL HERALD TRIBUNE.
11. BUSINESS WEEK, ugust
12. THE WASHINGTON QUARTERLY. Spring.
COPYRIGHT: Izdatelstvo "Nauka". kor-omika. politika. ldeologlya".0
Original document.
Comment about this article, ask questions, or add new information about this topic: