Foreign Policy Chat - Are The Generals Liars And Is It Time For UN Reform?

Who's Lying? The GOP or the Generals?

Representative Paul Ryan, speaking at a National Journal Event about the defense budget, said that "We don't think the generals are giving us their true advice." Ryan is part of the chorus of Republicans who have moved from advocating for the absolute discretion of "the generals" during the Don't Ask Don't Tell debate, to openly calling those same commanders liars when it comes to the Pentagon's budget request. Ryan, of course, wants to dramatically increase the defense budget above even what the General's have requested. And he proposes to pay for this, along with his regressive tax cuts, by dramatically cutting social services and income supports for poor and middle income Americans. Ryan claims that his gripe with the latest Pentagon request is that it is not "Strategy Driven," which is a strange attack from a Member whose budget proposal cuts every part of the US national security infrastructure and operations that can't be deployed for war-fighting. A spokesman for the DoD, after reiterating that the Joint Chiefs strongly support proposed defense budget, corrected Ryan: "The secretary of Defense has been very clear with the military leadership in this department that they should provide independent military advice and be as straightforward as possible with members of Congress." Rep. Adam Smith, ranking Democrat on the House Armed Services Committee, made it clear that while he also opposes sequestration, the responsible way to pay for our national security is to actually raise sufficient revenue to meet our commitments. That is the real point where the Republicans and Democrats diverge. It certainly is not a disagreement about military strategy. 

Security Council Reform

The Swiss, today,  introduced a UN resolution outlining "concrete and pragmatic steps designed to improve the work of the Security Council" by making deliberations and decisions more open to non-members and limiting the use of the veto. The recommendations were supported by a large number of General Assembly members, including the so-called "small 5." UN reform in general, and Security Council reform in particular tend to be perennial issues that never tend to garner support from the powerful countries whose support would be critical to their adoption. The recent veto by the Russian and Chinese delegations of a resolution on Libya was undoubtedly a contributing factor behind the provision of this latest reform proposal which bars veto for issues of genocide or crimes against humanity. Limitations on veto authority have always faced stiff opposition from the members who possess the ability to veto, but the other portions of the resolution aimed and opening more meetings and incorporating more countries into deliberations are more realistic. 

As the global system becomes  marked by the relative economic and political ascension of more middle-income countries, global institutions will need to democratize in order to allow these newly empowered states to express themselves on the world's stage. The US and other western powers should lead the way on this front as preserving the credibility and strength of these institutions will be essential for creating and maintaining the kind of stable international system that serves a full range of US interests. Lack of strategic vision on this front runs the risk of allowing the UN and other IGOs to become anachronistic and less relevant. Averting this fate should be a real goal for US policymakers in the near and medium term.