Hichem Karoui…Papers

U.S. Foreign Policy: Dangerous – Destructive? Hubertus Hoffmann speech at Trinity College Dublin
written by: Dr. Hubertus Hoffmann, 25-Oct-07

“The foreign policy of the Bush Administration was not carefully, cleverly and deeply politically planned and handled – it was power-centric, mismanaged, and dominated by U.S.-centric provincialism.”

The world’s oldest debating society, the University Philosophical Society at the famous Trinity College in Dublin (Ireland) founded in 1684 (Honorary Patrons: Desmond Tutu, John McCain, Newt Gingrich, Al Pacino) has invited Dr. Hubertus Hoffmann*, President and Founder of the World Security Network, to discuss the question “The last six years have shown American Foreign Policy to be a dangerous and destructive force in the world” –Yes or No? .

Here is his speech:

I.

N o , the last six years have, in my opinion and experience, n o t shown that “American Foreign Policy is a dangerous and destructive force in the world”.

But as a friend of the United States of America who wants to strengthen the most important democracy on earth and the leader of the Free World, I feel we must analyse what has gone wrong with U.S. foreign policy in recent years and how a U.S. President can improve the effectiveness of the American foreign and security policy in the future.

• The Bush administration has successfully prevented another 9/11 in the United States for six years. The main reasons are the severe damage to Al Qaeda in Afghanistan, preventive strikes on possible terrorists, and the ending of the chaos in internal U.S. intelligence organizations like CIA, FBI, NSA or DIA. Decision-making is now clearer, learning from the many mistakes pre 9/11 when neither terrorism prevention organizations nor their actions were adequate to counter the threat. America is a giant who has woken up. (see 7 Bullet Point Plan to defend our Free World; 9/11 could have been avoided, but only very soon starting 1998)
• 9/11 was the turning point for the Bush administration. Never before in the history of American foreign affairs had the United States of America reached such a peak of internal and international solidarity, sympathy and support. The Senate voted 98-0, and the House of Representatives 420-1, to give George Bush maximum authority to act against terrorism. NATO declared for the first time in history, according to its Article 5, that 9/11 was considered an attack against all members states and started to invade Afghanistan side by side with Washington. But now, six years later, the extremely strong position Washington enjoyed has melted away like snow in the sun. Never before in American history has a President lost so much trust and influence in the world. What went wrong?
• The foreign policy of the Bush Administration was, in hot spots of foreign affairs, not cleverly and deeply politically planned and handled. It was mainly power-centric, mismanaged, and dominated by U.S.-centric provincialism.
• This approach to U.S. foreign policy has been more counterproductive to U.S. national interests and extremely unsuccessful in Iraq and Afghanistan. It has harmed many of the old friends and allies of the United States, and the image of the leader of the free world: 85 percent of people have a less favourable view of U.S. foreign policy than they had five years ago, according to the 2006 Pew Global Attitudes poll.
• The Bush Administration is still missing effective Grand Strategies for today’s key foreign affairs problems. A power ideology of “we Americans have to be strong and show maximum strength” is dominating thinking, wording, actions. This dominating Anglo-Saxon pragmatism is not a strategy. It bypasses fundamental analysis, denies the use of all means in world politics and is not a smart approach. The administration has forgotten the main lessons of great strategists like Carl von Clausewitz who wrote in his famous work “On War” in 1832 that war is “a continuation of politics by other means”, a new kind a language of politics which can never be separated from politics. This fundamentally political approach has been turned upside down by a pure security focus supporting maximum security measures without dominating global and local political objectives as the driving force. Ultimately, war in Afghanistan and Iraq and anti-terror activities became aims in themselves intellectual separated from a political analysis – and a pure technical and non-political approach to world politics. In this anti-Clausewitzian style lies the seed of U.S. problems in three important wars.
• The United States needs an U–turn in how they analyze, plan, implement and explain their foreign policy
• The traditional way of designing and deciding foreign policy in The White House has been overridden for too many years by the power circle of a too-influential Vice President, cooperating directly with a too-strong Secretary of Defence, over the head of a too-weak National Security Advisor and almost-impeached Secretary of State. The filters that a National Security Council would ideally provide, the input of State Department know how, and important inter-agency working groups have been out of order.

“The Bush administration has forgotten the main lessons of great strategists like Carl von Clausewitz who wrote in his famous work “On War” in 1832 that war is “a continuation of politics by other means”, a new kind a language of politics which can never be separated from politics. This fundamentally political approach has been turned upside down by a pure security focus supporting maximum security measures without dominating global and local political objectives as the driving force.”

This has been combined with a poor performing top team.

• Had Vice President Dick Cheney been misfocused? Was he very good at applying military strength, while forgetting to embed this into a wiser overall strategy? He made America lose credibility and ultimately left America weaker by opening Pandora’s Box and implementing all kinds of over-reactive security measures. I would like to mention one German saying: “Meant good is the opposite of done good”
• Condolezza Rice was disappointing. Has her desire to prove herself as a strong and accepted coloured woman in a Republican Administration made her weak and hesitating to balance the poor policies of the Vice President and Donald Rumsfeld? I have not heard one impressive new proposal from her in several years. Her agreements on the Israel withdrawal from the Gaza strip including destroying all houses there; missing the option of reconciliation with the Palestinians; the green light for Israel to destroy too much infrastructure in Lebanon; the mishandling of the days after victory in Iraq or in Afghanistan: all were her mistakes as National Security Advisor and later Secretary of State. She is a good professor but an underperforming politician at the top and in power struggles. She lacked strong leadership and the inner musicality needed by good politicians.
• CIA Director George Tenet was also disappointing. He worked too much ‘to rule’ and to please the President. He fed the President with wrong information about potential Iraqi WMD and he was not aggressive enough in eliminating Al Qaeda pre 9/11.
• Secretary of Defence Donald Rumsfeld was extremely influential but showed astonishing mismanagement. His background suggested to me that he would be a near-perfect administrator – but he proved to be both ignorant and arrogant. He failed to plan for post-invasion Iraq; indeed, he did not use enough troops in the first place. He failed to glue the Iraqi army to the new pro-American government, and he did not focus on regional peacemaking.

Should we blame U.S. President George Bush for all this?

This is very popular everywhere but much too simple for me.

Even after reading the many books about Iraq and Bush’s foreign policy, I still do not know if he is the force behind the disaster, or the victim of his own mismanaging team.

George W. Bush was certainly affected by the extreme emotional circumstances of being U.S. President during and after 9/11. As a softer emotional man, this shook him to his core and he allowed Cheney and Rummy carte blanche to become pushy “pro-war American Patriots” ready to use their old plan to impeach Saddam Hussein instead of advising as cool-headed political strategists.
II.

Is American Foreign Policy a dangerous and destructive force in the world?

My answer: “For sure not”.

But America, and whoever wins the White House in 2008, must learn from the severe management mistakes of the last six years.

Let me summarize some of the lessons learned:

• 
  

  “The new U.S. foreign policy must include: brilliant strategies, imagination and creativity, excellency and best solutions, no carte blanche for the security forces,back to the roots of the U.S. constitution, new focus on the elite in the world and always balanced double strategies of power and diplomacy.”

  Brilliant Grand Strategies: No more U.S. military action abroad without a clear and deep analysis of all options, morning-after scenarios, regional forces, and allies. Act only with an intelligent grand strategy combining power, diplomacy, and reconciliation. We need such balanced analysis for Iran, Iraq, Israel-Palestine, Afghanistan, Islamic fundamentalist terrorism, China, and Russia. So far we only see pure pragmatism and a strategic vacuum. (see Afghanistan & NATO’s Mission Impossible: A Radical New Grand Design Needed or Defeat is Guaranteed; Afghanistan: A new Grand Strategy for NATO, EU and the U.S.; Israel-Palestine: Hubertus Hoffmann on a New Peace Strategy combining Hawk & Dove, Uzi & Olive Branch; The Christian Message of Peace, Reconciliation and Tolerance; The New Art of Peacemaking: Let’s Make Friends First — Use Arms only as an Ultima Ratio Regis; The West needs Holistic Formulas for Peace on the basis of Diplomacy plus Power plus Reconciliation; Iraq: Hubertus Hoffmann on Plan B for the U.S. and stabilizing the region; Iraq: U.S. Senate supports Sen. Joe Biden Plan for a Federal System)

• Imagination and Creativity: Learn from Albert Einstein, who often said “the significant problems we face cannot be solved at the same level of thinking we were at when we created them.” He also said “imagination is more important than knowledge.” We need a creative, flexible, and forward looking foreign policy. A security-focused approach is not enough to rule the world. U.S. foreign policy must look into the politico-psychology of the observed nations, the past history, into the mental makeup; it must have a real soul, and touch the heats and minds of the people in the countries of interest. (see Einstein’s Lessons for Today’s Foreign Policy: “Imagination Is More Important than Knowledge.” Therefore We Need a New Creative Strategy for More Freedom in the World; The Globalization of Foreign Policy)
• Need of Excellence and best solutions: We need more fresh air in the administration: accept more independent thinkers and new ideas in foreign and security affairs not only “Yes-men and -women” or bland opportunism in the Pentagon, State, or CIA. Too much is not debated but said simply to please bosses and promote personal careers and personal gains. We need man and women of excellence instead of mediocrities as leaders. We still need the intellectual input of the neocons – indeed, I think their basic concept of promoting a free world and a strong America is still correct – but we also need creative liberal ideas and pragmatic thinkers. We need creative pluralism in foreign affairs to find the best solutions in Washington DC; America and the world need the best solutions, not ideology being left or right or naïve neocon or naïve peace-loving only. We need a new smart creative foreign policy design in Washington DC. (see Progressive Patriotism or “I Love My Country!”; Moral Relativism; Fritz Kraemer on Excellence – Missionary, Mentor and Pentagon Strategist)
• The U.S. is not a superpower: Do not believe the U.S. is the only superpower on earth: this is wrong. The U.S. lacks enough soldiers to wage two wars simultaneously; yet such strength was the core requirement in the Pentagon for decades. America is only superior in navy, air force, and in space. Military power alone can not produce the security needed today. The President and his administration must therefore act with the needed support of as many strong allies as possible and moral strength and credibility to win.
• No carte blanche to security forces: get away from the blanket ideology of “be a good patriot” or “America is strong” or “show strength now.” Carl von Clausewitz demanded moral greatness as one of the main elements of war which have to be blended with physical strength (On War, Third Book, Part III.) American foreign policy always has to combine power, diplomacy, and reconciliation. American policy is not about strength or weakness, but about sharp or blunt. I prefer the Asian style martial arts to Western boxing or cowboy shoot-outs. The first always seeks maximum effect from minimum power; Washington has spent six years achieving just the opposite. We need a new vision of patriotism in the U.S.. The patriot should not be who shoots most, but – like an Asian martial art master I recently met in Kyoto – who shoots best. This means someone strong and relaxed, who does not only scare enemies away but finds new friends for America with a patriotic vision of a “loving mind and a thinking heart.” Charm, kindness, greatness, principles of human rights and law and openness have underlain all American victories and are important elements of a successful foreign policy.
• Back to the roots of the U.S. constitution: back to Washington, Franklin, Jefferson, Adams, Steuben, Lafayette, back to the Statue of Liberty, back to the heart of America and the soul of American foreign policy. As a great power, the U.S. will never have only friends. Yet she need not produce more enemies than necessary. The U.S. must be the Flag of Liberty and Democracy in the world and the Fire of Human Progress as the Founding Fathers demanded. Public diplomacy is essential for American foreign policy, as well as a clean, ethical image. America must believe and fight for “absolute values” and it is important for the soldiers to follow a code of honor (Fritz Kraemer). The U.S. needs a Holy Fire. The overreaction of her security bureaucrats – Guantanamo Bay, CIA renditions in Europe, suspects held without trial for years, and torture – must end now. Such actions are counterproductive and harm U.S. national interests. They may look strong and patriotic but they infect and paralyse the armed forces and CIA, fuel the PR-flames of Al Qaeda, and scare away both friends of America and potentially important sources within Muslim communities. The next potential 9/11 will probably be prevented by a young Moslem; one who hears something from fundamentalist al-Qaeda connections in their mosque and must decide to inform U.S. authorities or simply stay quiet. For example, crucial information about the German terrorist bombing attempts against the U.S. Air Force Base in Ramstein months ago came to the security forces from Muslims in Germany.

• “Back to the Statue of Liberty, back to the heart of America and the soul of American foreign policy. The world needs a strong United States of America, not a paper tiger: It needs U.S. power, as there can be no diplomacy without the threat of power behind it. Nothing works without power. The U.S. must avoid “provocative weakness” (Fritz Kraemer) by being morally or militarily too weak.”

  New focus in U.S. foreign affairs on the young elite in the 194 countries of the world: on the next generation. U.S. foreign policy will only be successful if it wins the hearts and minds of these new global movers and shakers. In our new era of globalization, this holds true for the Moslem world as much as for the Christian-centric West.

• The world needs a strong United States of America, not a paper tiger: It needs U.S. power, as there can be no diplomacy without the threat of power behind it. Nothing works without power, as long time Pentagon strategist Fritz Kraemer said. The world needs as well the U.S. will to use power if necessary. There are still many unstable authoritarian regimes and terrorists out there that must be contained with power, not paper. Washington must strengthen the understaffed U.S. Army and invest in new equipment and security.
• Washington also needs a balanced double strategy of power and diplomacy: something applied successfully with the 1967 NATO Harmel Report (Deterrence and Détente) against the Warsaw Pact, or the 1979 NATO Two Track Decisions (Pershing/Cruise Missiles and Zero Option to dismantle the Russian SS-20 missiles). (see A New NATO Double-Track Decision Against Terror – Only a new combination of containment and dialog can defeat terrorism)
• The U.S. must avoid “provocative weakness” (Fritz Kraemer) by being morally or militarily too weak. The United States has to be strong in both pillars of foreign affairs: being neither simply dangerous and destructive, but a flame of peace and freedom in a dangerous world.

This new foreign policy combining power and moral credibility based on international strength is very important for the future of our global village in an ongoing struggle between the traditional legitimate order and the new revolutionary order and against terrorism.

We are in a world of fragmenting state order, where almost 60 failing states contain 2 bn inhabitants.

There is an upcoming grand competition of the best vision for mankind, between a strong new block of capitalist non-democratic states like Russia or China vs. capitalistic and open democratic societies like the U.S., EU or India.

Without such a fresh new more credible and effective and clever U.S. foreign policy implementing the pillars discribed above, the U.S. will loose those important historic battles -like in Iraq- and the negative forces in the world will prevail. This is something neither the American people nor the Free World can afford.

* German entrepreneur and geostrategist Dr. Hubertus Hoffmann is Founder and President of the independent World Security Network Foundation in New York (www.worldsecuritynetwork.com)

Is Islam tolerant ?
written by: Dr. Hubertus Hoffmann, 20-Oct-06

Dr. Hubertus Hoffmann, Founder and President of the World Security Network Foundation visiting the Vatican promoting tolerance between Islam and Christianity: “Both in the West as well as in the Muslim world, the central aspect of Islam as a progressive and tolerant religion has come to be forgotten. The Islamic nations need an “Islamic Renaissance”, a return to a true, original teaching of a tolerant and cosmopolitan religion as well as a constitutional safeguarding of rights and freedom for its citizens, encompassing the protection of other religions and value systems.”

Both in the West as well as in the Muslim world, the central aspect of Islam as a progressive and tolerant religion has come to be forgotten.

Radical, self-styled but false prophets have even usurped and falsified the original teachings of the Prophet Mohammed, transforming them into their very opposite- an intolerant doctrine preaching death to Christians and Jews.

In this respect, they have essentially betrayed the Prophet Mohammed, just as centuries before those who burned witches at the stake and carried out the Inquisition perverted the Christian teachings of charity and reconciliation. Hundreds of thousands of men and women were killed in the name of Jesus, whose teachings expected exactly the opposite.

In 628 C.E. Prophet Muhammad granted a Charter of Privileges to the monks of St. Catherine Monastery in Mt. Sinai.

It consisted of several clauses covering all aspects of human rights including such topics as the protection of Christians, freedom of worship and movement, freedom to appoint their own judges and to own and maintain their property, exemption from military service, and the right to protection in war:

“This is a message from Muhammad ibn Abdullah, as a covenant to those who adopt Christianity, near and far, we are with them.

Verily I, the servants, the helpers, and my followers defend them, because Christians are my citizens; and by Allah! I hold out against anything that displeases them.

No compulsion is to be on them.

Neither are their judges to be removed from their jobs nor their monks from their monasteries.

No one is to destroy a house of their religion, to damage it, or to carry anything from it to the Muslims’ houses.

Should anyone take any of these, he would spoil God’s covenant and disobey His Prophet.

Verily, they are my allies and have my secure charter against all that they hate.

No one is to force them to travel or to oblige them to fight.
The Muslims are to fight for them.

If a female Christian is married to a Muslim it is not to take place without her approval. She is not to be prevented from visiting her church to pray.

Their churches are to be respected. They are neither to be prevented from repairing them nor the sacredness of their covenants.

No one of the nation (Muslims) is to disobey the covenant till the Last Day.”

“In 628 C.E. Prophet Muhammad granted a Charter of Privileges to the monks of St. Catherine Monastery in Mt. Sinai.”

This charter of privileges has been honored and faithfully applied by Muslims throughout the centuries in all lands they ruled.

At the beginning of Islam and at its zenith as an international power in the early Middle Ages, the teachings of Allah promoted tolerance with respect to other religions, cultures, and races, whereas the Christian fanatics—the Crusaders and later those who carried out the Inquisition—treated those of other religions with intolerance, going against the doctrine of charity in a perversion of the Christian faith.

Today, it is the Islamic fanatics from the now weak Islamic countries who are, as opposed to the original teachings of their Prophet, the ones who are intolerant and it is the world-dominating Christians who are notably tolerant.

This paradigm shift along with its strength can be credited to European Christianity and above all the Age of Enlightenment combined with the separation of the State and its citizens and the constitutional safeguarding of the rights and freedom of its citizens

The Islamic nations need an “Islamic Renaissance”, a return to a true, original teaching of a tolerant and cosmopolitan religion—the obvious opposing model to that put forth by a minority of fanatic radicals preaching their own style of Islamic Inquisition and Crusade against those with differing beliefs—as well as a constitutional safeguarding of rights and freedom for its citizens, encompassing the protection of other religions and value systems.

Obama’s new Foreign Policy needs a Double Strategy of Power and Diplomacy – a mix of creativity, imagination, excellency, brilliant strategies & power – to be better than Bush
written by: Dr. Hubertus Hoffmann, 10-Nov-08

Dr. Hubertus Hoffmann, President and Founder of the World Security Network Foundation: “The foreign policy of the Bush Administration was, in hot spots of foreign affairs, not cleverly and deeply politically planned and handled. It was mainly power-centric, mismanaged, and dominated by U.S.-centric provincialism. America and whoever wins the White House in 2008, must learn from the severe management mistakes of the last six years. The United States needs a U-turn in how it analyzes, plans, implements and explains its foreign policy. This new foreign policy combining power and moral credibility based on international strength is very important for the future of our global village in an ongoing struggle between the traditional legitimate order and the new revolutionary order and against terrorism.”

A year ago Dr. Hubertus Hoffmann, President and Founder of the World Security Network Foundation, delivered a speech about U.S. Foreign Policy at the famous University Philosophical Society at the Trinity College in Dublin in Ireland – where John McCain is a patron – which contained a sharp criticism of the Bush style of foreign affairs and several proposals for a better U.S. foreign policy for his successor – President-elect Barack Obama.

Here is his speech about the question “The last six years have shown American Foreign Policy to be a dangerous and destructive force in the world” –Yes or No?”, which is a guideline for a new foreign policy of the new U.S. president, as well.

I.

N o , the last six years have, in my opinion and experience, n o t shown that “American Foreign Policy is a dangerous and destructive force in the world”.

But as a friend of the United States of America who wants to strengthen the most important democracy on earth and the leader of the Free World, I feel we must analyse what has gone wrong with U.S. foreign policy in recent years and how a U.S. President can improve the effectiveness of the American foreign and security policy in the future.

• The Bush administration has successfully prevented another 9/11 in the United States for six years. The main reasons are the severe damage to Al Qaeda in Afghanistan, preventive strikes on possible terrorists, and the ending of the chaos in internal U.S. intelligence organizations like CIA, FBI, NSA or DIA. Decision-making is now clearer, learning from the many mistakes pre 9/11 when neither terrorism prevention organizations nor their actions were adequate to counter the threat. America is a giant who has woken up. (see 7 Bullet Point Plan to defend our Free World; 9/11 could have been avoided, but only very soon starting 1998)
• 9/11 was the turning point for the Bush administration. Never before in the history of American foreign affairs had the United States of America reached such a peak of internal and international solidarity, sympathy and support. The Senate voted 98-0, and the House of Representatives 420-1, to give George Bush maximum authority to act against terrorism. NATO declared for the first time in history, according to its Article 5, that 9/11 was considered an attack against all members states and started to invade Afghanistan side by side with Washington. But now, six years later, the extremely strong position Washington enjoyed has melted away like snow in the sun. Never before in American history has a President lost so much trust and influence in the world. What went wrong?
• The foreign policy of the Bush Administration was, in hot spots of foreign affairs, not cleverly and deeply politically planned and handled. It was mainly power-centric, mismanaged, and dominated by U.S.-centric provincialism.
• This approach to U.S. foreign policy has been more counterproductive to U.S. national interests and extremely unsuccessful in Iraq and Afghanistan. It has harmed many of the old friends and allies of the United States, and the image of the leader of the free world: 85 percent of people have a less favourable view of U.S. foreign policy than they had five years ago, according to the 2006 Pew Global Attitudes poll.
• The Bush Administration is still missing effective Grand Strategies for today’s key foreign affairs problems. A power ideology of “we Americans have to be strong and show maximum strength” is dominating thinking, wording, actions. This dominating Anglo-Saxon pragmatism is not a strategy. It bypasses fundamental analysis, denies the use of all means in world politics and is not a smart approach. The administration has forgotten the main lessons of great strategists like Carl von Clausewitz who wrote in his famous work “On War” in 1832 that war is “a continuation of politics by other means”, a new kind a language of politics which can never be separated from politics. This fundamentally political approach has been turned upside down by a pure security focus supporting maximum security measures without dominating global and local political objectives as the driving force. Ultimately, war in Afghanistan and Iraq and anti-terror activities became aims in themselves intellectual separated from a political analysis – and a pure technical and non-political approach to world politics. In this anti-Clausewitzian style lies the seed of U.S. problems in three important wars.
• The United States needs a U-turn in how it analyzes, plans, implements and explains its foreign policy.
• The traditional way of designing and deciding foreign policy in The White House has been overridden for too many years by the power circle of a too-influential Vice President, cooperating directly with a too-strong Secretary of Defence, over the head of a too-weak National Security Advisor and almost-impeached Secretary of State. The filters that a National Security Council would ideally provide, the input of State Department know how, and important inter-agency working groups have been out of order.

This has been combined with a poor performing top team.

• Had Vice President Dick Cheney been misfocused? Was he very good at applying military strength, while forgetting to embed this into a wiser overall strategy? He made America lose credibility and ultimately left America weaker by opening Pandora’s Box and implementing all kinds of over-reactive security measures. I would like to mention one German saying: “Meant good is the opposite of done good”
• Condoleeza Rice was disappointing. Has her desire to prove herself as a strong and accepted black woman in a Republican Administration made her weak and hesitating to balance the poor policies of the Vice President and Donald Rumsfeld? I have not heard one impressive new proposal from her in several years. Her agreements on the Israel withdrawal from the Gaza strip including destroying all houses there; missing the option of reconciliation with the Palestinians; the green light for Israel to destroy too much infrastructure in Lebanon; the mishandling of the days after victory in Iraq or in Afghanistan: all were her mistakes as National Security Advisor and later Secretary of State. She is a good professor but an underperforming politician at the top and in power struggles. She lacked strong leadership and the inner musicality needed by good politicians.
• CIA Director George Tenet was also disappointing. He worked too much ‘to rule’ and to please the President. He fed the President with wrong information about potential Iraqi WMD and he was not aggressive enough in eliminating Al Qaeda pre 9/11.
• Secretary of Defence Donald Rumsfeld was extremely influential but showed astonishing mismanagement. His background suggested to me that he would be a near-perfect administrator – but he proved to be both ignorant and arrogant. He failed to plan for post-invasion Iraq; indeed, he did not use enough troops in the first place. He failed to glue the Iraqi army to the new pro-American government, and he did not focus on regional peacemaking.

Should we blame U.S. President George Bush for all this?

This is very popular everywhere but much too simple for me.

Even after reading the many books about Iraq and Bush’s foreign policy, I still do not know if he is the force behind the disaster, or the victim of his own mismanaging team.

George W. Bush was certainly affected by the extreme emotional circumstances of being U.S. President during and after 9/11. As a softer emotional man, this shook him to his core and he allowed Cheney and Rummy carte blanche to become pushy “pro-war American Patriots” ready to use their old plan to impeach Saddam Hussein instead of advising as cool-headed political strategists.
II.

Is American Foreign Policy a dangerous and destructive force in the world?

My answer: “For sure not”.

But America, and whoever wins the White House in 2008, must learn from the severe management mistakes of the last six years.

Let me summarize some of the lessons learned:

• Brilliant Grand Strategies: No more U.S. military action abroad without a clear and deep analysis of all options, morning-after scenarios, regional forces, and allies. Act only with an intelligent grand strategy combining power, diplomacy, and reconciliation. We need such balanced analysis for Iran, Iraq, Israel-Palestine, Afghanistan, Islamic fundamentalist terrorism, China, and Russia. So far we only see pure pragmatism and a strategic vacuum. (see Afghanistan & NATO’s Mission Impossible: A Radical New Grand Design Needed or Defeat is Guaranteed; Afghanistan: A new Grand Strategy for NATO, EU and the U.S.; Israel-Palestine: Hubertus Hoffmann on a New Peace Strategy combining Hawk & Dove, Uzi & Olive Branch; The Christian Message of Peace, Reconciliation and Tolerance; The New Art of Peacemaking: Let’s Make Friends First — Use Arms only as an Ultima Ratio Regis; The West needs Holistic Formulas for Peace on the basis of Diplomacy plus Power plus Reconciliation; Iraq: Hubertus Hoffmann on Plan B for the U.S. and stabilizing the region; Iraq: U.S. Senate supports Sen. Joe Biden Plan for a Federal System)
• Imagination and Creativity: Learn from Albert Einstein, who often said “the significant problems we face cannot be solved at the same level of thinking we were at when we created them.” He also said “imagination is more important than knowledge.” We need a creative, flexible, and forward looking foreign policy. A security-focused approach is not enough to rule the world. U.S. foreign policy must look into the politico-psychology of the observed nations, the past history, into the mental makeup; it must have a real soul, and touch the heats and minds of the people in the countries of interest. (see Einstein’s Lessons for Today’s Foreign Policy: “Imagination Is More Important than Knowledge.” Therefore We Need a New Creative Strategy for More Freedom in the World; The Globalization of Foreign Policy)
• Need of Excellence and best solutions: We need more fresh air in the administration: accept more independent thinkers and new ideas in foreign and security affairs not only “Yes-men and -women” or bland opportunism in the Pentagon, State, or CIA. Too much is not debated but said simply to please bosses and promote personal careers and personal gains. We need man and women of excellence instead of mediocrities as leaders. We still need the intellectual input of the neocons – indeed, I think their basic concept of promoting a free world and a strong America is still correct – but we also need creative liberal ideas and pragmatic thinkers. We need creative pluralism in foreign affairs to find the best solutions in Washington DC; America and the world need the best solutions, not ideology being left or right or naïve neocon or naïve peace-loving only. We need a new smart creative foreign policy design in Washington DC. (see Progressive Patriotism or “I Love My Country!”; Moral Relativism; Fritz Kraemer on Excellence – Missionary, Mentor and Pentagon Strategist)
• The U.S. is not a superpower: Do not believe the U.S. is the only superpower on earth: this is wrong. The U.S. lacks enough soldiers to wage two wars simultaneously; yet such strength was the core requirement in the Pentagon for decades. America is only superior in navy, air force, and in space. Military power alone can not produce the security needed today. The President and his administration must therefore act with the needed support of as many strong allies as possible and moral strength and credibility to win.
• No carte blanche to security forces: get away from the blanket ideology of “be a good patriot” or “America is strong” or “show strength now.” Carl von Clausewitz demanded moral greatness as one of the main elements of war which have to be blended with physical strength (On War, Third Book, Part III.) American foreign policy always has to combine power, diplomacy, and reconciliation. American policy is not about strength or weakness, but about sharp or blunt. I prefer the Asian style martial arts to Western boxing or cowboy shoot-outs. The first always seeks maximum effect from minimum power; Washington has spent six years achieving just the opposite. We need a new vision of patriotism in the U.S.. The patriot should not be who shoots most, but – like an Asian martial art master I recently met in Kyoto – who shoots best. This means someone strong and relaxed, who does not only scare enemies away but finds new friends for America with a patriotic vision of a “loving mind and a thinking heart.” Charm, kindness, greatness, principles of human rights and law and openness have underlain all American victories and are important elements of a successful foreign policy.
• Back to the roots of the U.S. constitution: back to Washington, Franklin, Jefferson, Adams, Steuben, Lafayette, back to the Statue of Liberty, back to the heart of America and the soul of American foreign policy. As a great power, the U.S. will never have only friends. Yet she need not produce more enemies than necessary. The U.S. must be the Flag of Liberty and Democracy in the world and the Fire of Human Progress as the Founding Fathers demanded. Public diplomacy is essential for American foreign policy, as well as a clean, ethical image. America must believe and fight for “absolute values” and it is important for the soldiers to follow a code of honor (Fritz Kraemer). The U.S. needs a Holy Fire. The overreaction of her security bureaucrats – Guantanamo Bay, CIA renditions in Europe, suspects held without trial for years, and torture – must end now. Such actions are counterproductive and harm U.S. national interests. They may look strong and patriotic but they infect and paralyse the armed forces and CIA, fuel the PR-flames of Al Qaeda, and scare away both friends of America and potentially important sources within Muslim communities. The next potential 9/11 will probably be prevented by a young Moslem; one who hears something from fundamentalist al-Qaeda connections in their mosque and must decide to inform U.S. authorities or simply stay quiet. For example, crucial information about the German terrorist bombing attempts against the U.S. Air Force Base in Ramstein months ago came to the security forces from Muslims in Germany.
• New focus in U.S. foreign affairs on the young elite in the 194 countries of the world: on the next generation. U.S. foreign policy will only be successful if it wins the hearts and minds of these new global movers and shakers. In our new era of globalization, this holds true for the Moslem world as much as for the Christian-centric West.
• The world needs a strong United States of America, not a paper tiger: It needs U.S. power, as there can be no diplomacy without the threat of power behind it. Nothing works without power, as long time Pentagon strategist Fritz Kraemer said. The world needs as well the U.S. will to use power if necessary. There are still many unstable authoritarian regimes and terrorists out there that must be contained with power, not paper. Washington must strengthen the understaffed U.S. Army and invest in new equipment and security.
• Washington also needs a balanced double strategy of power and diplomacy: something applied successfully with the 1967 NATO Harmel Report (Deterrence and Détente) against the Warsaw Pact, or the 1979 NATO Two Track Decisions (Pershing/Cruise Missiles and Zero Option to dismantle the Russian SS-20 missiles). (see A New NATO Double-Track Decision Against Terror – Only a new combination of containment and dialog can defeat terrorism)
• The U.S. must avoid “provocative weakness” (Fritz Kraemer) by being morally or militarily too weak. The United States has to be strong in both pillars of foreign affairs: being neither simply dangerous and destructive, but a flame of peace and freedom in a dangerous world.

This new foreign policy combining power and moral credibility based on international strength is very important for the future of our global village in an ongoing struggle between the traditional legitimate order and the new revolutionary order and against terrorism.

We are in a world of fragmenting state order, where almost 60 failing states contain 2 bn inhabitants.

There is an upcoming grand competition of the best vision for mankind, between a strong new block of capitalist non-democratic states like Russia or China vs. capitalistic and open democratic societies like the U.S., EU or India.

Without such a fresh new more credible and effective and clever U.S. foreign policy implementing the pillars discribed above, the U.S. will loose those important historic battles -like in Iraq- and the negative forces in the world will prevail. This is something neither the American people nor the Free World can afford.

* German entrepreneur and geostrategist Dr. Hubertus Hoffmann is Founder and President of the independent World Security Network Foundation in New York (www.worldsecuritynetwork.com)

Hubertus Hoffmann: On the strategic importance of FATA

written by: Dr. Hubertus Hoffmann, 15-Dec-07

German entrepreneur and geostrategist Dr. Hubertus Hoffmann is Founder and President of the World Security Network Foundation: “We cordially invite you, as a representative of the global elite, to become a prominent supporter of the World Security Network as a Friend, Trustee or a Patron and actively assist us in expanding our elite network for a safer world with a contribution of $500, $1,000 or $5,000 annually or to support our Human Codes of Tolerance and Respect Project with a special donation.”

2007 has been one of the most active years yet for our independent World Security Network Foundation “Networking a Safer World”.

The World Security Network Foundation has focused on three goals:

• Networking the young global elite in foreign and defence affairs
• Providing fresh analysis, ideas, and visions for the world’s most pressing problems in foreign affairs.
• Promoting designs for a safer world in politics, media and academics.

As members of the global elite, we do not want to leave the important area of foreign and defence affairs to a few extremists, the mediocre majority of politicians and bureaucrats, and primarily backwards-looking academics without an orientation toward action.

WSN promotes timely actions to implement double peace strategies: power on one side, diplomacy and reconciliation on the other.

The World Security Network’s broad action approach considers all three levels required to resolve a conflict: visions, structures, and actions. These must include innovative master plans, sufficient funding, and rapid implementation.

The World Security Network is:

• not American, Asian or European: we are the largest global-elite action network for foreign and defense affairs—focussing on the young, new elite of the world
• not left or right, not U.S. Republican or U.S. Democrat or an adherent to any other party-line: it is an independent, international and pluralistic non-profit organization.
• not a peace movement or an organization of warmongers: it promotes a realistic and credible balance of Realpolitik and Idealpolitik, of power and diplomacy, of necessary military actions and reconciliation—a Double Strategy of solid and realistic peacemaking
• not academic: it is solution-oriented, looking for concrete proposals for all conflicts
• not bureaucratic: we are creative and action-oriented, like businessmen
• not fanatical: we are engaged global citizens with the vision of networking a safer and better world for our children

WSN is a new kind of global foreign affairs action network in the age of globalization using the internet and local Task Force meetings.

Let me give you an overview of our work throughout 2007 and ask you to join and support us as a Friend, Trustee or Patron:

Our Weekly Electronic Newsletters

More than 303,000 members of the global elite receive our electronic newsletter once a week with fresh analysis and concrete proposals in foreign and defense affairs, including more than 125,000 members of foreign affairs networks, 65,000 business executives and lawyers, 40,000 professors and students of elite universities, 32,000 journalists, 19,000 foreign and defense specialists, 6,000 religious leaders and more than 3,000 members and staff of parliaments worldwide. This makes our newsletter the largest of its kind worldwide.

In 2007, we focused on the issue of dialogue between Christianity and Islam with fact-finding missions and meetings in locations including Rome/Vatican, Pakistan, Morocco and the United Arab Emirates. In Iraqi-Kurdistan I met with the regional President Barzani in Erbil as well as with representatives of the Christian minority in the largest Christian city Ankawa in Iraq. In July I presented the WSN concept of The Human Codes of Tolerance and Respect to an international conference in Mostar in Bosnia Herzegowina and in September I visited Japan including Hiroshima.

The Global Network of Editors

The WSN network grew in 2007 to 59 mostly young editors with 27 nationalities between them. They report from New York, Washington, D.C., Tokyo, Paris, Vienna, London, Rome, Moscow, Athens, Munich, Berlin, Ankara, Sweden, Finland, the Caucasus, Singapore, Beirut, New Delhi, Peshawar, Islamabad, China, Nepal, Mexico, Peru, and Australia. They are led by WSN Global-Editor-in-Chief Brig. Gen. (ret.) Dieter Farwick, former Director of Germany’s “Federal Armed Forces Intelligence Office” and close aide to former German Defense Minister and later NATO Secretary General Manfred Woerner.

The International Advisory Board

The International Advisory Board now consists of 55 well-known experts from 17 countries: the U.S., Germany, the United Kingdom, Russia, Turkey, France, Switzerland, Austria, Estonia, Kosovo, Hungary, Italy, Armenia, Lebanon, Israel, India and Pakistan. It includes 14 generals and admirals (Lord Peter Inge, Luigi Caligaris, Klaus Naumann, Peter Regli, Muhammad Aslam Khan Niazi, Klaus Reinhardt, Ed Rowny, Bill Odom, Götz Gliemeroth, Sir Sebastian Roberts, Chuck Saffell, Franco Apicella, Giovanni Bernadi, Wolfgang Plasche), journalists (Herbert Kremp, Jens Krüger, Thomas Lipscomb, Henning von Steuben), professors and scholars (Mensur Akgün, Ron Asmus, Rod Beckstrom, J.D. Bindenagel, Robert Dujaric, Mehmet Guercan Daimagueler, Peter Forster, Ortwin Gebauer, Amin Hashwani, Christian Hacke, Robert Hunter, Michael Inacker, Judith Apter Klinghoffer, Joachim Krause, Ludger Kühnhardt, Holger Mey, Mark Minevich, Mike Munson, John Nomikos, Ivo Paparela, Andreas Pruefert, Arben Qirezi, Sergey Rogov, Francis J. Kelly, Ruben Safrastyan), and politicians (George Fernandez, Samy Gemayel, Geza Jeszenszky, Tunne Kelam, Joe Schmitz, Peter Kurt Würzbach, Thomas Schneider).

We are proud that Queen Elizabeth II knighted our member Maj. Gen. Sebastian Roberts in July, now Sir Sebastian, and the former Indian Minister of Defense George Fernandez joined the Advisory Board.

The www.worldsecuritynetwork.com website

Our website, www.worldsecuritynetwork.com, reports daily on new developments around the globe and receives more than 2 million hits monthly. With the proposals we publish, WSN makes a contribution to the discussion of all of the hot topics in world politics. 158 media partners (including CNN, UPI and Newsweek) and 85 institutes (including RAND and IISS,) cooperate with WSN and make use of our analyses.

WSN TV

In 2007 we included a brand new feature into our website, video on demand with another WSN TV website on YouTube. WSN TV provides online exclusive video statements on foreign and defense affairs from global figures such as former U.S. National Security Advisor Brent Scowcroft, Senators John McCain and Lieberman, Arch Duke Otto von Habsburg, Iraqi-Kurdish President Massoud Barzani, Secretary of Iran’s National Security Council Ali Larijani, Russian opposition leader Gary Kasparov as well as his communist counterpart Gennady Zuganov, former Ambassadors Richard Holbroke, Kornblum, Stein and J.D. Bindenagel, Czech Foreign Minister Karel Schwarzenberg, Norway’s Defense Minister Anne-Grete Erichsen, British Intelligence expert Sir Paul Lever and former Generals like James Jones, Klaus Naumann, Harald Kujat, Klaus Reinhardt, Rainer Schuwirth or German Chief of Staff Wolfgang Schneiderhan.

We now have WSN TV teams with cameras in New York including the UN, London, Moscow, Munich, Rome, and want to extend this network.

The Human Codes of Tolerance and Respect Project

The World Security Network Foundation has focused on three goals: Networking the young global elite in foreign and defence affairs; Providing fresh analysis, ideas, and visions for the world’s most pressing problems in foreign affairs; and Promoting designs for a safer world in politics, media and academics.

The main WSN project is researching, developing and promoting universal and practical “Human Codes of Tolerance and Respect” for families, educators, religious leaders, journalists, and politicians—the five affinity groups who have the most influence on promoting tolerance and respect towards other ethnic groups and religions.

The codes will—in the form of guidelines—have easy-to-understand wording and instructions on teaching children, pupils, religious believers, readers, TV viewers and voters about the fundamental moral standards of tolerance and respect toward ethnic minorities and other religions. It is also a project to counter ethnically or religiously motivated totalitarianism and the spread of Islamic fundamentalist terrorism.

This project includes deep research of the preaching of tolerance and respect by the Prophet himself during his lifetime, which runs contrary to the concept of Islamic totalitarianism and Al Qaeda. It involves several international research teams at the Humboldt University in Berlin and in Rome who have worked in the archives and library of the Vatican and the Pontifical Institute of Arabic and Islamic Studies PISAI of the Pères Blancs (White Fathers).

The Human Codes will be combined with more than ten best practice examples tailored for each target group to show how they could work throughout the world and how you can implement the Codes in your affinity group. Included is a toolbox with 20 examples for national and international policy makers.

The Codes will be promoted to the public via a worldwide presentation tour including global figures and celebrities, starting at the end of 2008 and lasting one year.

For the World Security Network, tolerance and respect are the lifeblood of peaceful coexistence and crucial elements of the soft powers of peacemaking. As Eric Hoffer said, “A war is not won if the defeated enemy has not been turned into a friend.” German philosopher Emmanuel Kant wrote: “The state of peace among men living side by side is not the natural state—a state of peace, therefore, must be established.”

We believe that these wise sayings are truer today than ever before. The soft factors of peacemaking are often put aside by the harder instruments of peacemaking in strategic planning, political implementation and action.

WSN, with its global network including 14 former generals, is convinced that this lack of soft factors cannot lead to success, but that a new, credible and balanced double strategy combining military containment and strength with an active reconciliation policy is needed—a holistic formula for peace based on diplomacy, power, and reconciliation—a new art of peacemaking effectively winning the hearts and minds of the people.

The Human Codes of Tolerance and Respect will be an important tool to develop a creative and more effective soft power peace policy in different conflict areas around the world, including the Balkans, Iraq, Afghanistan, Pakistan and the containment of Islamic totalitarianism in Moslem communities all over the world as the necessary second pillar of an overall peace strategy.

Regional Meetings

This year WSN organized regional meetings with Editors, Members of the International Advisory Board, politicians and experts in New York, Washington D.C., London, Moscow, Berlin, Munich, Sarajevo, Vienna, Rome, Lahore, Peshawar, Islamabad, Dubai and Tokyo promoting our visions of a safer world.

In October WSN hosted a dinner for 35 Junior Network members in the Carlton Club in London with a dinner speech about British politics.

Promoting Fresh New Ideas

Behind the scene WSN promoted several fresh new approaches with politicians, journalists and experts, including a federal system for Iraq (like that supported by U.S. Senator Joe Biden and 75 other Senators in a vote this year), a reconciliation approach between the Kurds and Turkey, a balanced new Afghanistan strategy including regional peace making on the tribal level, buying the poppy production and balancing civilian and military aims, a support for the tribal areas FATA and Pakistan to contain terrorism, a fresh dialogue with Moscow about human rights and common aims, a new double strategy of the Uzi and olive branch, hawk and dove, power and reconciliation in Israel/Palestine, support for the Rose Revolution in Lebanon with a WSN team there, and a dialogue and better understanding between Islam and Christianity.

What Can You Do?

It is our policy to minimize all costs on the administrative and editorial level and use all donations directly to fund our activities like our website, WSN TV or The Human Codes of Tolerance and Respect Project. All costs of the President are paid privately; the editors get a minimum cover fee and work mainly non-profit.

• We cordially invite you, as a representative of the global elite, to now become a prominent supporter of the World Security Network as a Friend, Trustee or a Patron and actively assist us in expanding our elite network for a safer world with a contribution of $500, $1,000 or $5,000 annually or to support our Human Codes of Tolerance and Respect Project with a special donation.
• Your contributions are tax deductible as a charitable contribution in the U.S. according to U.S. Internal Revenue Code 501(c).
• You may mail us a check ( World Securityx Network Foundation, c/o VP Hans Janitschek, Ap. 18 B., 945 Fifth Avenue, New York, N.Y. 10021, U.S.A.) or transfer your donation to the World Security Network Foundation account (JP Morgan Chase Bank New York, Swift Code Chasus 33, Account No. 987091436065) or charge your contribution online securely via credit card at www.worldsecuritynetwork.com in “Support us”.

Do not hesitate to write me if you have any more questions [email protected]

Let’s network a safer world now!

With best regards and many thanks for your support !