This article first appeared in the St. Louis Beacon, Jan. 19, 2009 - WASHINGTON – Tuesday’s inauguration of Barack Obama as the nation’s 44th president will take place under a blanket of security that this city -– accustomed though it is to high-profile events -– has rarely, if ever witnessed.
More than 40,000 local, state and federal law-enforcement officers, National Guard troops and active-duty soldiers will watch every movement from air, land and water. Several bridges connecting Washington to Virginia will be closed, as will numerous city streets. Guards in the subway system, which expects to break all passenger records, will be vigilant for backpacks that look out of place.
Communication command centers throughout Washington will be staffed by the Secret Service, FBI, police and fire departments, intelligence agencies and federal emergency officials. And an Army brigade at Fort Stewart, Ga., will be prepared to respond to a chemical or biological attack, sending hundreds of planes and helicopters to Washington if needed. The unprecedented inaugural security reflects three factors:
- anticipated record crowds of more than 2 million,
- fear that the installation of the nation’s first African-American president might become a target for extremists,
- the continuing terrorist threat.
And it’s a reminder that for all the talk of jobs and trillion-dollar stimulus programs, of political change and toning down partisanship, as soon as he assumes the presidency Obama’s first responsibility will be to protect the country.
Attacks or Wars Could Change Focus
A sudden reversal of the improvements in Iraq or a takeover by fundamentalist religious forces in nuclear-armed Pakistan would knock economic news below the fold in the nation’s newspapers and Web sites -– while a terrorist attack on U.S. soil would knock it off the front page entirely.
A miscue or an event beyond Obama’s control in the coming weeks or months could not only cost the lives of Americans, it could derail his presidency and torpedo the plans he has to enact changes on which he spent a year campaigning.
“There’s no question that as soon as he’s commander-in-chief of our armed forces, his No. 1 job is the security of the citizens of America, and that can’t take second place to anything,” says Rep. Ike Skelton, D-Mo., chairman of the House Armed Services Committee.
“If the country isn’t safe, isn’t protected, it doesn’t matter what’s going on in the economy,” says Sen. Christopher “Kit” Bond, R-Mo., vice chairman of the Senate Intelligence Committee.
A terrorist attack “is the worst thing that can happen to us -– and it’s a disaster for the economy,” Bond added.
While Obama has sharply criticized some of the monitoring and security programs of the Bush administration, including those involving warrantless surveillance, Bond contends that they have helped keep Americans safe.
As one of the leading congressional voices on intelligence, Bond says he’ll do his own monitoring -– of the new administration’s practices.
“If they start undoing some of the things that worked, then I’m going to be very much concerned,” he says.
From his vantage point as the top military official in the House, Skelton sees a world “more dangerous now than at any time since World War II. Needless to say, I’m very concerned. That’s why we have to have a strong military second to none.” There are threats “both known and unknown,” Skelton warns, with the former including Iraq, Afghanistan, North Korea and Pakistan, which is “on the verge of being a failed state.” And on our southern border, Mexico faces a growing threat from drug lords. To meet those threats, the U.S. military needs “the best people, in sufficient number, fully equipped, fully trained,” he says.
Skelton was asked whether he expects to have to pressure Obama on these counts. “No,” he said. “As far as I can tell, the people he’s appointed are outstanding.” Skelton cited Michele Flournoy, Obama’s choice as the Pentagon’s top strategic thinker, “a longtime friend” whom Skelton introduced to a Senate panel a few days ago. Flournoy, a former professor at the National Defense University, was a senior defense official in the Clinton administration.
Despite the dangers to national security, Skelton expresses optimism about Obama’s presidency, saying, “There’s a lot of hope, not just in America but across the globe, for a successful administration.”
That’s a sentiment shared by Rep. Russ Carnahan, D-Mo., of the House Foreign Affairs Committee, where he sits on the Middle East and South Asia subcommittee and is vice chairman of the panel on international organizations, human rights and oversight.
“Keeping our country safe and rebuilding our image around the world (are) going to be a big focus of the new administration and the Congress,” Carnahan says, adding that there is a “tremendous amount of good will around the world for Barack Obama.” Committee hearings and polling done last year about attitudes overseas toward the United States showed “pretty much the lowest ratings our country has had” but also reflected “a deep reservoir” of support for American ideals such as international cooperation, human rights and the rule of law, Carnahan said.
The problem has been a belief that “the United States was not following these principles,” while also failing to display leadership on issues such as climate change, Carnahan says.
'Smart Power'
Obama’s leadership as well as his focus on “smart power” – which includes diplomacy and leading by example, as opposed to relying on military power – will improve America’s national security by building stronger alliances, Carnahan contends.
The geopolitical area to watch both for possible dangers but also for improvement, according to Carnahan, is the “I-axis," or “Israel to Iraq to Iran to India,” with the latter including the India-Pakistan relationship.” A key to success overseas, Carnahan says, will be an early U.S. focus on the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, something President George W. Bush didn’t address directly until late in his second term, but which the current Gaza fighting will make an immediate priority.
Obama campaigned heavily on reducing American forces in Iraq and increasing them in Afghanistan, the source of the Sept. 11 terrorist attack, and Carnahan says that will be a useful shift in U.S. policy, particularly given the tinderbox that includes several countries in South Asia.
Another key St. Louis-area legislator on national security issues, Rep. Todd Akin, R-Mo., shares the belief of fellow delegation members that despite candidate Obama’s strong rhetoric against the Iraq war, he is unlikely to hastily withdraw U.S. troops from Iraq and risk the recent progress, particularly with the reduction in U.S. casualties.
Akin, a member of the House Armed Services Committee and ranking member of its seapower subcommittee, sees a different risk facing the new administration: that foreign adversaries will try to take advantage of Obama.
“The nature of his international leadership is unknown now, and people are going to test it,” Akin said. “Can they push him around, or is he going to be tough with them?”
Along with the obvious trouble spots, Akin worries about China and its possible designs on Taiwan. And he’s concerned that Obama might seek to cut military spending, as several congressional Democrats have proposed. Akin plans to monitor any such moves.
Keep Intelligence Tough
Bond, meanwhile, intends to do the same with any changes in intelligence and espionage efforts. He says that Obama has chosen good people for top security and intelligence posts, including retired Gen. Jim Jones, retired Adm. Dennis Blair, former U.S. Rep. Leon Panetta and Defense Secretary Robert Gates.
Bond, who’s also a senior defense appropriator, says he’s had “in-depth discussions” with Jones, Blair and Panetta about existing intelligence programs. He said Panetta, nominated to be CIA director, is “a smart man” but “there are a lot of things he doesn’t understand” about intelligence operations.
“I’m going to work with them as much as I can,” Bond said, “and I told them that if they start doing things that hurt our national security or undo our intelligence capabilities, they’re going to hear and see a whole lot of me.”
Philip Dine, a Washington-based national security and labor reporter, is author of “State of the Unions: How Labor Can Strengthen the Middle Class, Improve Our Economy and Regain Political Influence.”