Project For The New American Century Article Index for
Project For 		Website Links For
Project 		 

Information About

Project For The New American Century
  CATEGORIES ABOUT PROJECT FOR THE NEW AMERICAN CENTURY
   
neoconservative think tanks
   
imperialism
   
foreign policy political advocacy groups in the united states
   
new right united states
   
political and economic think tanks
   
APPAREL
BABY
BEAUTY
BOOKS
CAR TOYS
CELL PHONES
DVD'S
ELECTRONICS
GOURMET FOOD
GROCERIES
HEALTH & PERSONAL
HOME & GARDEN
JEWELRY
MUSIC
MUSIC INSTRUMENTS
OFFICE PRODUCTS
SOFTWARE
SPORTING GOODS
TOOLS & HARDWARE
TOYS
VIDEO GAMES
SHOPPING HOME
MORE SHOPPING...



The Project for the New American Century (PNAC) is an ( Center For Media And Democracy ), March 13 , 2003 , accessed June 1 , 2007 .


BACKGROUND AND HISTORY

An initiative of the of Milwaukee, Wisconsin is the country's largest and most influential right-wing foundation. As of the end of 2005, it was giving away more than $34 million a year Foundation 2005 IRS 99-PF ."

On , 1998 , ''newamericancentury.org'', accessed May 28 , 2007 .
The goal of , 1998 , ''newamericancentury.org'', ''web.archive.org'', accessed May 30 , 2007 .

On '', November 16 , 1998 , editorial, online posting, ''newamericancentury.org'', ''web.archive.org'', accessed May 30 , 2007 . Kristol states that Paul Wolfowitz and others believed that the goal was to create "a 'liberated zone' in southern Iraq that would provide a safe haven where opponents of Saddam could rally and organize a credible alternative to the present regime ... The liberated zone would have to be protected by U.S. military might, both from the air and, if necessary, on the ground."

The PNAC also supported the (Enrolled as Agreed to or Passed by Both House and Senate)", 105th Congress Of The United States , ''thomas.loc.gov'' ( THOMAS online database at the Library Of Congress ), January 27 , 1998 , accessed June 1 , 2007 .

In January of 1999, the PNAC circulated a memo that criticized the December 1998 bombing of Iraq in , 1999 , ''newamericancentury.org'', ''web.archive.org'', accessed May 30 , 2007 .

In September 2000, the PNAC published a controversial 90-page report entitled ''Rebuilding America's Defenses: Strategies, Forces, and Resources For a New Century''.

From 2001 through 2002, the co-founders and other members of the PNAC published articles supporting the United States' , 2002 , ''newamericancentury.org'', ''web.archive.org'', accessed June 1 , 2007 .

On September 20, 2001 (nine days after the September 11, 2001 Attacks ), the PNAC sent a letter to President George W. Bush , advocating "a determined effort to remove Saddam Hussein from power in Iraq ," or Regime Change :
...even if evidence does not link Iraq directly to the attack, any strategy aiming at the eradication of terrorism and its sponsors must include a determined effort to remove Saddam Hussein from power in Iraq. Failure to undertake such an effort will constitute an early and perhaps decisive surrender in the war on international terrorism., 2001 , ''newamericancentury.org'', n.d., accessed June 1 , 2007 .


In 2003, during the period leading up to the '', December 21 , 2006 , accessed May 29 , 2007 .

As quoted in Paul Reynolds ' BBC News report, David Rothkopf states:
Their Project for the New American Century's signal enterprise was the invasion of Iraq and their failure to produce results is clear. Precisely the opposite has happened. The US use of force has been seen as doing wrong and as inflaming a region that has been less than susceptible to democracy. Their plan has fallen on hard times. There were flaws in the conception and horrendously bad execution. The neo-cons have been undone by their own ideas and the incompetence of the Bush administration.


Gary Schmitt , former executive director of the PNAC, a resident scholar at the American Enterprise Institute and director of its program in Advanced Strategic Studies, countered that PNAC had come to a natural end:
When the project started, it was not intended to go forever. That is why we are shutting it down. We would have had to spend too much time raising money for it and it has already done its job. We felt at the time that there were flaws in American foreign policy, that it was neo-isolationist. We tried to resurrect a Reaganite policy. Our view has been adopted. Even during the Clinton administration we had an effect, with Madeleine Albright secretary of state saying that the United States was 'the indispensable nation'. But our ideas have not necessarily dominated. We did not have anyone sitting on Bush's shoulder. So the work now is to see how they are implemented.



"FUNDAMENTAL PROPOSITIONS"

The Project for the New American Century website states the following "fundamental propositions": "that American leadership is good both for America and for the world; and that such leadership requires military strength, diplomatic energy and commitment to moral principle."

Its original "Statement of Principles" of June 3 , 1997 , posted on its current website, begins by framing a series of questions, which the rest of the document proposes to answer:
As the 20th century draws to a close, the United States stands as the world's pre-eminent power. Having led the West to victory in the Cold War, America faces an opportunity and a challenge: Does the United States have the vision to build upon the achievements of past decades? Does the United States have the resolve to shape a new century favorable to American principles and interests?, 1997 , ''newamericancentury.org'', accessed May 28 , 2007 .


In response to these questions, the PNAC states its aim to "remind America" of "lessons" learned from American history, drawing the following "four consequences" for America in 1997:

• we need to increase defense spending significantly if we are to carry out our global
responsibilities today and modernize our armed forces for the future;

• we need to strengthen our ties to democratic allies and to challenge regimes hostile to our interests and values;

• we need to promote the cause of political and economic freedom abroad; {Link without Title}

• we need to accept responsibility for America's unique role in preserving and extending an international order friendly to our security, our prosperity, and our principles.


While "Such a Reaganite policy of military strength and moral clarity may not be fashionable today {Link without Title} ," the "Statement of Principles" concludes, "it is necessary if the United States is to build on the successes of this past century and to ensure our security and our greatness in the next."


Open letter to President Clinton on Iraq

On , 1998 , accessed May 28 , 2007 .


''Rebuilding America's Defenses''

''Rebuilding America's Defenses: Strategies, Forces, and Resources For a New Century'' (2000), which lists as Project Chairmen Donald Kagan and Gary Schmitt and as Principal Author Thomas Donnelly , quotes from the PNAC's June 1997 "Statement of Principles" and proceeds "from the belief that America should seek to preserve and extend its position of global leadership by maintaining the preeminence of U.S. military forces."It is important to note that at the end of the list of "Project Participants", on page 90 of ''Rebuilding America's Defenses'', there appears the following statement: "The above list of individuals participated in at least one project meeting or contributed a paper for discussion. The report is a product solely of the Project for the New American Century and does not necessarily represent the views of the project participants or their affiliated institutions."

The report argues:
The American peace has proven itself peaceful, stable, and durable. It has, over the past decade, provided the geopolitical framework for widespread economic growth and the spread of American principles of liberty and democracy. Yet no moment in international politics can be frozen in time; even a global , 2007 .


After its title page, the report features a page entitled "About the Project for the New American Century", quoting key passages from its 1997 "Statement of Principles":



In its "Preface", in highlighted boxes, ''Rebuilding America's Defenses'' states that it aims to:
ESTABLISH FOUR CORE MISSIONS for the U.S. military:

• defend the American homeland;

• fight and decisively win multiple, simultaneous major theater wars;

• perform the “constabulary” duties associated with shaping the security environment in
critical regions;

• transform U.S. forces to exploit the “ Revolution In Military Affairs ”;

and that
To carry out these core missions, we need to provide sufficient force and budgetary
allocations. In particular, the United States must:

MAINTAIN NUCLEAR STRATEGIC SUPERIORITY, basing the U.S. deterrent upon a global, nuclear net assessment that weighs the full range of current and emerging threats, not merely the U.S.-Russia balance.

RESTORE THE PERSONNEL STRENGTH of today’s force to roughly the levels anticipated in the “Base Force” outlined by the Bush Administration, an increase in active-duty strength from 1.4 million to 1.6 million.

REPOSITION U.S. FORCES to respond to 21st century strategic realities by shifting permanently-based forces to Southeast Europe and Southeast Asia, and by changing naval deployment patterns to reflect growing U.S. strategic concerns in East Asia. (iv)


It specifies the following goals:
MODERNIZE CURRENT U.S. FORCES SELECTIVELY, proceeding with the F-22 program while increasing purchases of lift, electronic support and other aircraft; expanding submarine and surface combatant fleets; purchasing Comanche Helicopter s and medium-weight ground vehicles for the Army, and the V-22 Osprey “ Tilt-rotor ” aircraft for the Marine Corps .

CANCEL “ROADBLOCK” PROGRAMS such as the , updated October 15 , 2000 , accessed June 1 , 2007 . and Crusader Howitzer system that would absorb exorbitant amounts of Pentagon funding while providing limited improvements to current capabilities. Savings from these canceled programs should be used to spur the process of military transformation.

DEVELOP AND DEPLOY GLOBAL MISSILE DEFENSES to defend the American homeland and American allies, and to provide a secure basis for U.S. power projection around the world.In its emphasis on developing and deploying “ Global Missile Defenses ”, the PNAC renews its call for the United States to abandon the Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty between the U.S. and the former Soviet Union , from which the U.S. withdrew in 2002.

CONTROL THE NEW “INTERNATIONAL COMMONS” OF SPACE AND “ CYBERSPACE ,” and pave the way for the creation of a new military service – U.S. Space Forces – with the mission of space control.

EXPLOIT THE “ REVOLUTION IN MILITARY AFFAIRS ” to insure the long-term superiority of U.S. conventional forces. Establish a two-stage transformation process which

• maximizes the value of current weapons systems through the application of advanced technologies, and,

• produces more profound improvements in military capabilities, encourages competition between single services and joint-service experimentation efforts.

INCREASE DEFENSE SPENDING gradually to a minimum level of 3.5 to 3.8 percent of Gross Domestic Product , adding $15 billion to $20 billion to total defense spending annually. (v)


The report emphasizes:
Fulfilling these requirements is essential if America is to retain its militarily dominant status for the coming decades. Conversely, the failure to meet any of these needs must
result in some form of strategic retreat. At current levels of defense spending, the only option is to try ineffectually to “manage” increasingly large risks: paying for today’s needs by shortchanging tomorrow’s; withdrawing from constabulary missions to retain strength for large-scale wars; “choosing” between presence in Europe or presence in Asia ; and so on. These are bad choices. They are also false economies. The “savings” from withdrawing from the Balkans , for example, will not free up anywhere near the magnitude of funds needed for military modernization or transformation. But these are false economies in other, more profound ways as well. The true cost of not meeting our defense requirements will be a lessened capacity for American global leadership and, ultimately, the loss of a global security order that is uniquely friendly to American principles and prosperity. (v-vi)


In relation to the Persian Gulf , citing particularly Iraq and Iran , ''Rebuilding America's Defenses'' states that "while the unresolved conflict in Iraq provides the immediate justification U.S. military presence , the need for a substantial American force presence in the Gulf transcends the issue of the regime of Saddam Hussein " and "Over the long term, Iran may well prove as large a threat to U.S. interests in the Gulf as Iraq has. And even should U.S.-Iranian relations improve, retaining forward-based forces in the region would still be an essential element in U.S. security strategy given the longstanding American interests in the region."

The report ''Rebuilding America's Defenses'' has been the subject of much analysis and criticism.


CONTROVERSY


US World Dominance ("American Empire")

According to its critics, the PNAC promotes "'', September 13 , 2002 , online posting, ''newamericancentury.org'', accessed May 31 , 2007 .

Ebrahim Afsah, in "Creed, Cabal, or Conspiracy – The Origins of the Current Neo-Conservative Revolution in US Strategic Thinking", published in the ''German Law Journal'', cites Jochen Bölsche's view that the goal of the PNAC is '', March 7 , 2003 , accessed May 28 , 2007 .

'', February 21 , 2003 , accessed May 31 , 2007 .

'', March 11 , 2003 , accessed May 28 , 2007 .

PNAC co-founder Robert Kagan counters such criticism in his statement during a debate on whether or not "The United States Is, and Should Be, an Empire ":

"There is a vital distinction between being powerful--even most powerful in the world--and being an empire. Economic expansion does not equal Imperialism , and there is no such thing as "cultural imperialism." If America is an empire, then why was it unable to mobilize its subjects to support the war against Saddam Hussein ? America is not an empire, and its power stems from voluntary associations and alliances. American Hegemony is relatively well accepted because people all over the world know that U.S. forces will eventually withdraw from the occupied territories.


The effect of declaring that the United States is an empire would not only be factually wrong, but strategically catastrophic. Contrary to the exploitative purposes of the on July 17 , 2003 .



Excessive focus on military strategies, neglect of diplomatic strategies

'', January 15 , 2003 , accessed May 30 , 2007 . ( Paul Reynolds and Max Boot have made similar observations.)

'' The Sydney Morning Herald '' publishes an English translation of an article published in German in '' Der Spiegel '' summarizing former President Jimmy Carter 's position and stating that President Carter:
judges the PNAC agenda in the same way. At first, argues Carter, Bush responded to the challenge of September 11 in an effective and intelligent way, "but in the meantime a group of conservatives worked to get approval for their long held ambitions under the mantle of 'the war on terror'."


The restrictions on civil rights in the US and at Guantanamo, cancellation of international accords, "contempt for the rest of the world", and finally an attack on Iraq "although there is no threat to the US from Baghdad" - all these things will have devastating consequences, according to Carter.


"This entire unilateralism", warns the ex-President, "will increasingly isolate the US from those nations that we need in order to do battle with terrorism".



"New Pearl Harbor"


Section V of ''Rebuilding America's Defenses'', entitled "Creating Tomorrow's Dominant Force", includes the sentence: "Further, the process of transformation, even if it brings revolutionary change, is likely to be a long one, absent some catastrophic and catalyzing event––like a new Pearl Harbor" (51).

In his appearance on '''' and professor of Philosophy of Religion and Theology at the Claremont School Of Theology , in Claremont, California ; and Chip Berlet , Senior Analyst at Senior Research Associates, in Summerville, Massachusetts.

Though not arguing that Bush administration PNAC members were complicit in those attacks, other social critics such as commentator '', December 24 , 2002 , accessed June 1 , 2007 : "The cabal of war fanatics advising the White House secretly planned a 'transformation' of defense policy years ago, calling for war against Iraq and huge increases in military spending. A 'catalyzing event — like a new Pearl Harbor'—was seen as necessary to bring this about."

"When the Towers came down," William Rivers Pitt writes in his editorial in '' Truthout.org '', "these men saw, at long last, their chance to turn their White Papers into substantive policy."


Inexperienced in realities of war

Former US Congressman , 2002]], accessed June 1 , 2007 .

In discussing the '', September 15 , 2002 , rpt. '' Information Clearing House '' (ICH), accessed June 1 , 2007 .

), accessed June 1 , 2007 .


PNAC role in promoting invasion of Iraq

Commentators from divergent parts of the political spectrum––such as '''', May 1 , 2004 , accessed June 1 , 2007 . (1 of 3 pages.)

The television program '''', WGBH-TV ( Boston, Massachusetts ), Public Broadcasting Service (PBS), online posting February 20 , 2003 , accessed June 1 , 2007 . ( "Home page" includes menu of links to "Analysis", "Chronology", "Interviews", and "Discussion" as well as link to streaming video of the program.)

Media commentators have found it significant that signatories to the PNAC's January 16 , 1998 letter to President Clinton (and some of its other position papers, letters, and reports) include such Bush administration officials as Donald Rumsfeld , Paul Wolfowitz , Richard Perle , John Bolton , Richard Armitage , and Elliott Abrams .


PERSONS ASSOCIATED WITH THE PNAC


Project directors

currently listed on the PNAC website:





Project staff






Former directors and staff



Signatories to ''Statement of Principles''






Signatories or contributors to other significant letters or reports






Associations with Bush administration

After the 2000 election of George W. Bush , a number of PNAC's members or signatories were appointed to key positions within the President's administration:


SEE ALSO



NOTES




REFERENCES


External links

  • Project for the New American Century Website – Its home page includes a menu of links to full texts of its "Statement of Principles"; its history ("About" page); its "Publications/Reports" and "Letters/Statements"; and various related documents.



Further reading and media programs: Analysis and criticism