Obama's Stance on National Security

The following analysis is based on several indicators: Senator Obama's U.S. Senate voting records; his national security platforms as laid out in articles and op-eds; and his responses to queries in debates, public appearances, and questionnaires. Although campaign pledges and voting records do not always accurately translate into actual policy, they can provide important clues as to the future president's policy inclinations.

Iraq War

In 2002, when he was an Illinois state senator, Barack Obama opposed the war. After he was elected to the U.S. Senate, he voted against early proposals by Sen. Russ Feingold (D-WI) and others to set a timetable for withdrawal; now both Obama vote consistently in favor of establishing a timetable. Obama's plan for exiting Iraq would send home one or two combat brigades a month, with all combat troops out by the end of 2009.[1] However, at an MSNBC debate in September 2007, Obama would guarantee that they would have all U.S. forces out of Iraq by the end of their first term.[2] He also opposes permanent bases in Iraq.

Policy toward Iran

President Bush has displayed unremitting hostility toward the radical regime dominating Iran, a country that U.S. intelligence sources report had previously been pursuing a nuclear weapons program. He branded Iran part of the "axis of evil" and promoted regime change as the preferred U.S. policy. With a few limited exceptions, the United States under Bush has refused to talk directly with Iran.

Obama has delivered messages on Iran that were more mixed. Obama has promised to open a dialogue with Iran without preconditions to attempt to work out a solution.[3] However, he has called Iran "a threat to all of us" and suggested in March 2007 that the military option should remain on the table.[4] At the same time, he has said that it "would be a profound mistake for us to initiate a war with Iran" and condemned the administration's "saber-rattling" on Iran.[5]

In 2007, a bipartisan group of senior and former government officials called for moving toward a "world free of nuclear weapons."[6] In their article by that name, former Secretary of State Henry Kissinger, former Secretary of State George Shultz, former Sen. Sam Nunn (D-GA), and former Secretary of Defense William Perry urged the United States to lead an international effort to rethink traditional deterrence, reduce nuclear weapon stockpiles, and take other steps toward the longer term goal of a nuclear-weapon-free world.

Obama has been clear in his support of their effort. In response to a Council for a Livable World questionnaire, he promised: "As president, I will take the lead to work for a world in which the roles and risks of nuclear weapons can be reduced and ultimately eliminated."[7]



New Nuclear Weapons

The Bush administration has forwarded proposals to build a new generation of nuclear weapons; however, these plans might be seen as conflicting with U.S. efforts to restrain other states' nuclear ambitions.

Obama, only in the Senate for the fourth vote, also opposed the new weapons. He was less categorical to the council's queries, responding that he did not support "a premature decision to produce the [Reliable Replacement Warhead]."[8]

Comprehensive Nuclear Test Ban Treaty

One of the longest sought goals of the nuclear age has been a global ban on all nuclear test explosions as an important step to advance nuclear nonproliferation. In 1996, after 50 years of work, the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty was signed and opened for ratification. However, three years later, the Senate decisively rejected the treaty. Although the United States has not conducted a nuclear test explosion since 1992, the Bush administration has not put the treaty forward for a new vote.

Obama was not in the Senate at the time of the 1999 vote, however he promised to make the test ban treaty a priority of his first term in office and pledged to work to rebuild bipartisan support for the treaty.[9]

National Missile Defense

In 2001, the Bush administration withdrew from the 1972 Anti-Ballistic Missile (ABM) Treaty and since then has moved swiftly to deploy national missile defense interceptors in Alaska and California. The latest fiscal budget request for 2009 is $12.3 billion for all forms of missile defense.

Obama has been critical of the Bush missile defense plans: "The Bush Administration has in the past exaggerated missile defense capabilities and rushed deployments for political purposes."[10] Obama voted for an amendment offered by Sen. Carl Levin in 2005 (the last major vote on missile defense).[11] Obama has indicated plans for missile defense upon assuming the presidency.

Missile Defense Site in Europe

Obama has not been clear what he would do with the Bush proposal, but indicated that he would not allow the program "to divide 'new Europe' and 'old Europe.'"[12]

In the above video in which Obama called for major cuts in defense spending, slowing the development of future combat systems, and cutting investments in America's ballistic missile defense program. I thought it was ironic at the end of the video he actually had the audacity to say, "My soul priority for defense spending will be to protect the American people". Now, it doesn't take a rocket scientist if you set up the military where they do not have anything - they can't protect America!

Obama clearly stated:

  • I will cut investments in unproven missile defense systems.
  • I will not weaponize space
  • I will slow development of future combat systems
  • I will set a goal of a world without nuclear weapons and to seek that goal, I will not develop nuclear weapons

On an early September morning, several simultaneous attacks against the United States of America occurred. The terrorist action targeted thousands of innocent lives, the Twin Towers, the Pentagon, and more. Multiple hijackings, explosions, horror, devastation, death, along with a certain amount of fear instilled in the American public.

How soon some of us forget.

Less than seven years later Democratic presidential candidate B. Hussein Obama proposes to weaken America's conventional and nuclear military capability and leave America defenseless against nuclear attack.

Things that need to be looked at closely are:

  • Slowing the development of future combat systems would weaken America's conventional military preparedness.
  • Not developing new nuclear weapons and placing deep cuts in America's nuclear arsenal would leave America left with an increasingly obsolete nuclear capability and will have little to no nuclear option in case of a threat to our survival.
  • If America's ICBMs are off "hair trigger alert," then any response to a nuclear attack may come too late to do any good at all. This at a time when nations such as Iran and/or North Korea have been working to arm themselves with nuclear weapons.
  • The cancellation of America's missile defense program or not weaponizing space would lead to across-the-board unilateral disarmament. This makes about as much sense as taking all weapons away from your local police department and expecting the bad guys to no longer do bad things.

Is the U.S. missile defense system fully functional yet? Of course not. Is it foolproof? No. It's new technology, still in the process of development. Is it "unproven"? Yes, but only in the same way every other useful invention in the history of mankind was unproven before it was proven and then became commonplace - taken for granted. Case points are the wheel, the telephone, the airplane and the computer to just name a few. Every useful invention that man has invented was unproven at first.

The question about missile defense is not whether it is proven, but whether it is necessary. The answer to that is absolutely yes. Mutually assured destruction won't stop terrorists and rogue states. They may launch sneak attacks anonymously. Without missile defense, we are simply biding our time until our eventual destruction. If you think Ground Zero was bad, you haven't seen anything yet

Other Issues in Brief

Closing Guantanamo Bay prison: Obama wants to close the prison.[13]

U.S.-India nuclear deal: Obama voted for the U.S.-India nuclear deal in 2006, but Obama also voted for amendments to condition the deal on India ending military cooperation with Iran and a presidential certification that nuclear cooperation with India will not aid India in making more nuclear weapons.[14]

Military forces: Obama has called for expanding the size of our active duty military forces.[15]

North Korea: Obama has called for "sustained, direct, and aggressive diplomacy" with North Korea.[16]

Nuclear nonproliferation: Obama has committed to securing all vulnerable nuclear weapons materials around the world within four years of taking office.[17]

See John McCain's stance on the issue of Iraq

See John McCain's stance on the issue of National Security.

References:

[1] Obama 2008 Presidential Campaign, “Obama’s Plan to Responsibly End the War in Iraq,” http://www.barackobama.com/issues/pdf/IraqFactSheet.pdf
[2] Democratic debate transcript, Hanover, New Hampshire, September 26, 2007, http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/21013767/
[3] Virtual Town Hall Meeting on Iraq, Transcript, April 10, 2007, http://pol.moveon.org/townhall/iraq/transcripts_p.html
[4] Dave Newbart, “Obama: Iran Threatens All of Us,” Chicago Sun-Times, March 3, 2007, http://www.suntimes.com/news/politics/281249,CST-NWS-OBAMA03.article
[5] “The Democrats’ First 2008 Presidential Debate,” New York Times, April 27, 2007, http://www.nytimes.com/2007/04/27/us/politics/27debate_transcript.html?_r=2&adxnnl=1&oref=slogin&adxnnlx=1203307674-alKjvdTsDuCBRqWHcNX3ow&pagewanted=all and “Transcript: NPR Democratic Candidates’ Debate,” National Public Radio, December 4, 2007, http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=16898435
[6] George P. Schultz, William J. Perry, Henry A. Kissinger, Sam Nunn, “A World Free of Nuclear Weapons,” Hoover Digest, No.1, Winter 2007, http://www.hoover.org/publications/digest/6731276.html
[7] Council for a Livable World, “Seven Key Questions: Summary and Analysis,” 2008 Presidential Candidates Questionnaire, http://www.clw.org/assets/pdfs/2008_presidential_candidates_questionnaire_responses.pdf
[8] Ibid.
[9] Council for a Livable World, “Seven Key Questions: Summary and Analysis.”
[10] “Obama Statement on Visit of Polish President Lech Kaczynski,” July 16, 2007, http://obama.senate.gov/press/070716-obama_statement_73/
[11] U.S. Senate, Roll Call Voting Record, 109th Congress, 1st Session, http://www.senate.gov/legislative/LIS/roll_call_lists/roll_call_vote_cfm.cfm?congress=109&session=1&vote=00311
[12] “Obama Statement on Visit of Polish President Lech Kaczynski,” July 16, 2007.
[13] “Obama Says Gitmo Facility Should Close,” June 24, 2007, Washington Post, http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/06/24/AR2007062401046.html
[14] U.S. Senate, Roll Call Voting Record, 109th Congress, 2nd Session, http://www.senate.gov/legislative/LIS/roll_call_lists/roll_call_vote_cfm.cfm?congress=109&session=2&vote=00270
[15] “Remarks of Senator Barack Obama to the Chicago Council on Global Affairs,” Council on Foreign Relations, April 23, 2007, http://www.cfr.org/publication/13172/
[16] Council for a Livable World, “Seven Key Questions: Summary and Analysis.”
[17] The Center for Arms Control and Non-Proliferation; http://www.armscontrolcenter.org/policy/nuclearweapons/articles/presidential_candidates_positions/