George Washington: Peace through Strength

George C. Landrith

George Washington, the only U.S. President to be elected by a unanimous vote – not once, but twice – wisely said: “To be prepared for war is one of the most effectual means of preserving peace.” George Washington understood that peace is achieved through strength and conversely that weakness invites attack.

Today George Washington’s counsel is wiser than ever before. Even a casual review of current events makes it clear that the risk of a missile attack is greater than ever. North Korea and China have, and continue to develop, missiles that can strike the United States. North Korea has threatened on more than one occasion to use its weapons – with those threats being aimed primarily at the United States. China has made not so subtle threats as well. Additionally, terrorists are scouring the black markets to purchase such missiles and missile technology.

On September 11, 2001, Al Queda did not have real missiles so they used airliners filled with jet fuel as their missiles. It takes little imagination to determine what terrorists intend to do with the weapons they seek. A single missile packs a much greater punch than a mere airliner loaded with jet fuel. As horrific as September 11th was, if missiles had been used instead of airliners, it would have been much worse – unimaginably worse.

The risks are real and they are increasing every day. These are not wild-eyed pessimistic fears – they are legitimate risk assessments. Given these risks, what should we do? George Washington’s advice provides the only sensible solution – get prepared and be strong. We have the ability to build and deploy a robust layered missile defense system. Technologically, we can do it. Those who argue that building a missile defense system is not feasible simply do not understand our capability.

It is not a question of technological ability, but rather of political will. We have the technological ability, but we have lacked the political will to do what is necessary. We could have had a missile defense system in place now, had the 1990s not be squandered. During most of the previous decade, the White House and many in Congress argued that missile defense was not needed and thus, it was not seriously funded or pursued. As a result, to this day, we cannot protect Americans from missile attack.

Fortunately, President Bush and many in Congress today understand that having an effective defense against missile attack has never been more important. The President has said that by 2004, we will have the first elements of a missile defense in place and functional. But there are still too many in the halls of Congress who would rather pursue their pet pork projects than adequately fund missile defense.

Thus, one of the most important issues facing America is whether we will allow a vocal minority of politicians to weaken our national security with their opposition to missile defense. I am one American who hopes missile defense will finally receive the long-term commitment it deserves – and that we, as Americans, deserve.

At some point, all Americans will be sufficiently motivated to prepare for, and defend against missile attack. The only question is when will we become motivated? Will it be in time to prevent the attack? Or the day after? The answer to these questions will shape history and change our lives in ways we can only imagine.

On September 10, 2001, few Americans were focused on the threat of terrorism even though it was real and about to reveal itself. By mid-morning on September 11, we all had become very focused. Will we repeat this error?

We could have avoided the devastation of September 11 had the leaders of the 1990s accepted George Washington’s advice to obtain peace and security through preparation and strength. Unfortunately, for most of the 1990s, the White House could not muster any real or sustained interest in preparing America’s defense against terrorism or missile attack. As a result, Americans witnessed terrorists in 1993 bomb the World Trade Center, killing six and wounding scores of others in an unsuccessful attempt to topple the towers with trucks loaded with explosives. This was treated as a run-of-the-mill crime, but not as a national security threat.

Later in 1993, warlords killed 28 American soldiers and wounded 133 others who had been sent to keep the peace and distribute food to a war-ravaged Somalia. On October 4, 1993 mobs desecrated the bodies of three of American soldiers who been killed and dragged their bodies through the streets of Mogadishu. In 1998, we saw terrorists bomb and level two of our embassies in Kenya and Tanzania, killing 257 people and wounding over 5,000. In 2000, terrorist cells bombed the U.S.S. Cole, killing 17 sailors, and nearly sinking the ship. The While House denounced these attacks in the press, but did little else. As a result, our enemies became emboldened and stronger and we became comparatively weaker and less prepared.

The weakness America projected during most of the 1990s came home to roost on September 11th, 2001. Great harm is done when we communicate to our enemies that we are not prepared or willing to defend ourselves.

The question is whether we will repeat this mistake. Will some politicians continue to make missile defense a third-tier priority – or worse yet, openly oppose it? Will we have the wisdom to focus here and now on the need to defend ourselves from missile attacks? Or will it take a missile attack to wake us up and focus our efforts?

Let’s hope the vocal minority in Congress can set aside its lust for pork and its desire to fight President Bush on every point. We simply cannot afford to wake-up one morning and have the events of the day force us to focus us on the need for missile defense. At that point, it would be too little, too late.

George Washington did not know anything about missiles or missile interceptors, but he would have known exactly what we must do because he understood that “to be prepared for war is one of the most effectual means of preserving peace.” Let’s hope Congress is listening.

###

Mr. Landrith is a graduate of the University of Virginia School of Law, where he was Business Editor of the Virginia Journal of Law and Politics. He had a successful law practice in business and litigation. In 1994 and 1996, Mr. Landrith was a candidate for the U.S. House of Representatives from Virginia's Fifth Congressional District. He served on the Albemarle County School Board. Mr. Landrith is an adjunct professor at the George Mason School of Law. He is recognized as an authority on constitutional law and jurisprudence, federalism, global warming, and property rights.

george@ff.org