|March 18, 1999|
There are many reasons:
1. In today’s society, where hundreds of stories compete for attention, a story must be reported over and over again, and repeated by several different types of media (such as TV and newspapers and news magazines) before it penetrates the public consciousness.
2. The establishment press has not regularly reported on military developments in Russia. Most media have unthinkingly swallowed the Clinton line that "Russia and China are our friends,” hook, line and sinker.
3. Media omissions and distortions, coupled with Clinton administration propaganda about "our friend, Russia” and "our friend, China,” has left the overwhelming majority of those in Congress and the military totally ignorant of the new military threat posed by the Russians and Chinese.
4. US military leaders who are aware Russian rearmament and US disarmament in their particular area of expertise (for instance strategic bombers), may be unaware of the big picture, i.e., how extensive those trends are.
Further, military officials may want to speak out, may fear being fired or blacklisted from employment by defense contractors after they leave the military. Many probably also buy the official line that "the Cold War is over” so there’s no reason to be concerned about Russian military exercises or overflights of the US or the closure of US military bases.
Others may believe, with some justification, there is no one in the mainstream they can turn to who will honestly report Russian rearmament and US disarmament.
5. Russia appears to be making most of its preparations in the open, so as not to arouse suspicion, lulling US observers into a false sense of security. After all, if the Russians are conducting military exercises out in the open and announcing redeployment of missiles to the seas, there can’t be anything sinister about it, can there?
6. The idea of a REAL nuclear war that would destroy America is so alien to most Americans, that most can’t even imagine it, much less try to stop it. Unfortunately this is not the case in Russia, which discussed and threatened nuclear war against the United States for 50 years. Russian strategic military planning has been based on a nuclear war with the US for decades. Unlike Americans who believe that "there are no winners in nuclear war,” Russia’s leaders believe they can win a nuclear confrontation. Having lived through repeated invasions by foreign enemies, such as the Nazi destruction of Stalingrad, the Russian people know from first-hand experience they and their nation can survive and recover from enormous military devastation.
7. America’s Intelligence Agencies can not be totally relied upon. Clinton has drastically reduced the number of CIA personnel in covert operations -- the cloak-and-dagger spies necessary for getting first hand information.
The United States has unquestioned technical spying ability. However, there are limits to what we can discern about Russian intentions and plans from spy satellites. That’s when it counts to have a man in the Kremlin.
However, the US has never had a top-level spy in Russia’s intelligence services above the rank of colonel. No senior members of the Politburo or any members of the Russian general staff have ever defected to the West. Even in East Germany and Cuba, all our "top” spies have all turned out to be double agents for the communists.
Spy agencies, like the CIA, also are often wrong. The CIA didn’t know Saddam Hussein was planning to invade until his tanks were crushing Kuwait. The CIA was caught completely by surprise when India detonated several nuclear explosions. If we don’t know for sure what Iraq and India are up to, how can we be sure about Russia?
FAMOUS RUSSIAN DISSIDENTS WARN AMERICA
Writing in the Wall Street Journal after the recent economic upheaval in Russia and resurgence of totalitarianism, former Russian chess champion Garry Kasparov notes, "Strangely enough, few Western policy makers seem willing to acknowledge the implications of the drastic political changes underway in Russia. The immediate signs of a shift are unmistakable.”
Kasparov further notes that since the apparent breakup of the Soviet Union, no real "reforms” or "real liberalization” has taken place in Russia. That is certainly not the perception of Russia here in the West. Kasparov’s views are not entirely different than those of Alexander Solzhenitsyn, who wrote in 1997 that the West’s perception of Russia is skewed, and doesn’t examine "Russia’s overall condition and the forces at work in that country, but on the latest developments, such as elections to the Duma, the firing of Alexander Lebed and Boris Yeltsin’s heart surgery. Any broad, deep view of what’s happening gets lost.”
Solzhenitsyn sees clearly. He writes: "As far as I can judge, two strongly held opinions are widely shared in the West: that during the last few years democracy has unquestionably been established in Russia, albeit one under a dangerously weak national government, and that effective economic reforms have been adapted to foster the creation of a free market, to which the way is now open.”
"Both views are mistaken,” Solzhenitsyn concludes.
Totalitarians with nuclear weapons remain firmly in charge of Russia and the other states of the former Soviet Union. Communist governments in China, and, most likely in North Korea, also have nuclear weapons and have repeatedly threatened to use them against the United States if we try to thwart their plans or do anything to diminish their power. For instance, it was reported in the New York Times in 1996 that China had warned that if the US interfered in an showdown between China and Taiwan, China would destroy Los Angeles and other American cities.
There is growing evidence that Russia and China are planning for a major war with the United States, and that they could deliver a killing blow anytime in the next two years. The Y2K problem has significantly increased the possibility of war during 1999 or just after the turn of the clock to the year 2000.
WHAT THE US CAN DO
The end of the Cold War and US victories against that third-rate dictator Saddam Hussein, have lulled America into a false sense of complacency. Most Americans -- including our leaders in Congress and the military -- believe that our power is unchallengeable and all-out war with communist nations is no longer possible. When you combine that misperception with a president who seems more concerned about the satisfaction of his libido than the fate of America, you have a recipe for disaster.
Russia may not launch an attack on the US, but the weaker the US, the stronger the temptation. How can we reduce that temptation? By bringing the troops home, returning to launch on warning, and keeping more ballistic missile submarines operational and at sea, and returning our strategic bombers to the US where they can be quickly armed with nuclear weapons. We should also return to our policy of keeping some strategic bombers in air at all times. The removal from office of Bill Clinton will also be a positive step toward re-building America’s defense posture and the morale of her troops.
Those steps would make the US far better prepared for war and would make an attack on US soil too costly for the Russians to even contemplate.