By Dawn's Early Light

US-South Korean relations: Where To?

Given South Korean government and youth opinion becoming increasingly negative towards the United States, and in some cases seeing the US as a larger threat than North Korea, I have given increased thoughts to a phased US pullout.

In attempting to reason through what is in the best interests of US foreign policy in Asia and secondly the best interests of our allies in the region, including South Korea, Japan, Taiwan and even Australia, I have looked at several areas.  The three main areas are 1) US strategic and military planning in the region 2) South Korea's newly announced Defense Reform Plan and 3) Effects on potential regional threats, including North Korea and China.

Preface - The Korean War

The Korean War started on June 25, 1950 as Communist North Korea launched a surprise attack against South Korea.  For over three years, until a cease-fire was agreed to in late July 1953, several million people died, including Koreans, Chinese, Americans, British, and Canadians, with massive civilian casualties.

Due to the surprise nature of the attack and the fact that South Korea was not prepared for war, the Communists nearly succeeded in overrunning the country.  The U.N. Security Council, at the time being boycotted by the Russians, condemned, by resolution, the action by North Korea and called for immediate withdrawal of the North Korean military from South Korea, requesting all members of the U.N. to render every assistance in support of the resolution, and, subsequently, to "furnish such assistance to the Republic of Korea as may be necessary to repel the armed attack."  President Truman interpreted the U.N. call for support as an authorization to commit United States troops, which he did, albeit without submission to Congress, the branch of government which, under the Constitution, has the duty to declare war.  U.S. and U.N. troops were placed under the command of American Five Star General Douglas MacArthur.  On September 13 to 15, 1950, Gen MacArthur led a daring and successful counter-attack against the enemy-held port city of Incheon (or Inchon), located 20 miles west of enemy-held Seoul, thereby cutting off the North Korean supply lines and turning the tide of the war.  As the allies pushed towards the Chinese border with North Korea, the Chinese entered the war in October, 1950. 

One of many heroic battles by U.S. troops took place as Army and Marine forces fought at the Chosin Reservoir after being encircled by a numerically superior Chinese Army. This brave and tragic battle is recounted well in Martin Russ's gripping "Breakout: The Chosin Reservoir Campaign, Korea 1950". 

Political influences and apparently personal failings in Washington, D.C. led to the abandonment of the customary tradition of fighting a war to victory, and by mid 1951, the Korean War had entered a stalemate as casualties, both military and civilian, mounted.  The War was stabilized along the 38th parallel that today is the Demilitarized Zone (DMZ) separating the two Koreas.  It is the most heavily armed and defended border in the world today.  The United States has kept its commitment to defending South Korea from any end to the cease-fire or from any attack by North Korea.

While there has not been active fighting between the two Koreas since 1953, the fact there is no negotiated peace makes the stability of the region a larger issue for US national security than other nations that enjoy a US security arrangement.

Prior to Sec of Defense Donald Rumsfeld's review and redeployment plans of US forces around the globe, the US had 37,000 soldiers committed to defending South Korea from within the country.  The Department of Defense will draw down this total by 12,000 military personnel by the end of 2008 to end up at 25,000 soldiers*, a reduction of nearly a third.  Along with the draw down, the US is transitioning greater responsibility for the defense of South Korea to South Korea's military and consolidating the remaining US forces between 2007 and 2008 in two bases further south. 

The reduction of US forces is likely motivated by some military and some political reasons.  Militarily, given the US technological supremacy on the battlefield, moving soldiers out of the way of an initial invasion by artillery and rockets is beneficial for a strong American and South Korean counterattack.  US weapons can increasingly fight at longer distances, reducing the need to be forward deployed.  From a political standpoint, American troops near Seoul were becoming more of a political liability as well as being expensive to base.  By moving the forces south, it allows an opportunity for US soldiers' families to potentially move to South Korea as well for the minimum year tour in the country, a net plus for a volunteer army seeking higher retention rates.  South Korean attitudes towards the Americans' presence does not have the same support among the younger generation as it does the elderly that remember the Korean War.  A Pew Global Research survey in 2003 demonstrated 71% of South Koreans aged 18-29 have an "unfavorable" view of the United States.  Even more shockingly, a majority of South Koreans were disappointed that Saddam Hussein's forces did not put up a greater resistance to the initial US invasion.  Given that over 53,000 Americans gave their lives in the Korean War and the US defends the country today, these are rather shocking results.

Why the Divide?

The current Roh administration has pursued a "Sunshine Policy" with North Korea, often at odds with US foreign policy goals for containing North Korea's weapons development, nuclear development, and exporting of weapons for hard currency.  South Korea is also pushing for operational control of military forces in their country (ie., control of US military forces under a unified South Korean commander instead of the current US unified command structure).  This position is unrealistic but could lead to two separate commands or, at the very least, an increase in friction in the alliance.  These differences between the Roh government and the Bush administration is putting a greater strain on the alliance.  Polls have shown a growing distrust of US unilateral action in the world, even right after the September 11, 2001 attacks against the US (see Harris Poll, December 26, 2001).

Given the continuing decline of the US reputation in South Korea, even when balanced against the constant antics and provocations of North Korea, the future of the relationship is a growing concern.  How should the US military plan for defending South Korea?  Should it continue to do so?  What effect will a declining alliance with South Korea have on US-Sino relations and US-Japanese relations? 

The next parts of this series will seek to address these questions.  Your comments and views are welcomed.

Recommended websites for additional reading:
1) The Korean Liberator - a top quality blog on freedom and democracy on the Korean peninsula.
2) Wikipedia - Korean War
3) Winds of Change - GEO Korea

* Thanks to Marvin Hutchens for catching a scribner's error.  The original post stated the final force would be 12,000 instead of 25,000, drawn down by 12,000.

Remembering Pearl Harbor Day

December 7th cannot and should not go unremarked upon.  To my step-father Jim, who served in the US Navy in the Pacific theater in World War II, I write a personal thanks to you and your generation who served our nation in the wake of Pearl Harbor.  My thanks go to your friends Don, Grant and Bob, Dick and Charlie who all took part on both sides of the war in the cause of freedom. It is because of your sacrifice and the millions of others who did their duty that on a day such as today, I can celebrate my freedom. 

Marvin Hutchens of ThreatsWatch has written a touching tribute to those men and women of one of the "Greatest Generations" that America has produced and is a fitting read to honor those who served and those who serve today. 

In reflecting back on such a fateful day for America, it is with hindsight that we now know that Japan is a great American friend and ally; that through the horror of war, both peoples, and many more in Europe and Asia, have experienced a new birth of freedom.  Sometimes evil can work for the greater good. 

Blessings to those of the Greatest Generation, and thank you for your service in preserving mine and others'.

Iran Protests American UAVs

Iran is protesting US UAV (unmanned aerial vehicle) flights over their country at the United Nations, according to this Washington Post article.  Considering Iran's flagrant nuclear weapons program violations and activities against the Iraqi government and coalition forces, having UAVs over their country should not be their top concern.

However, the UAVs from the US over Iran sure explains this story from January of this year in Pravda, "Russia and Iran join efforts to struggle against invasion of UFOs".

"Unidentified flying objects continue terrorizing the Eastern hemisphere of planet Earth. No one knows what to do with them, although it is obvious that something has to be done with the problem. Russia and Iran agreed to join efforts to study the mysterious phenomenon. The news may seem to be ridiculous at first sight, but it is actually a rather serious matter: UFOs pose a big threat to Iran in connection with its growing nuclear potential.

The UFO mania has gripped Iran. The Air Force command of Teheran has recently been given an order to down any unknown or suspicious object seen in the air space of Iran. If a UFO appears in the sky above Iran, anti-aircraft systems will most likely down it.

Iranian mass media, meanwhile, are distributing more and more information about extraterrestrial threats to the nation's nuclear objects. The flights of unknown objects in the air space of the country have become much more frequent lately, the Resalat Daily wrote. According to the newspaper, unusual luminous objects were spotted above Busher and Natanza, where nuclear facilities are located. One of the objects exploded in the sky, eyewitnesses said. The Iranian defense department is trying to pacify the anxious population. "We have developed plans to protect nuclear objects from any danger. The Iranian Air Force is on alert and ready to fulfill the duty," General Qarim Gavani stated."

I hope the Iranians didn't pay too much to the Russians for the expertise.  It appears from the WaPo story that the UFOs may be US Shadow and Hermes UAVs.

"The latest Iranian protests identified one "alien" unmanned aircraft as a Shadow 200 (RQ-7), which it said crashed 37 miles inside Iran in Ilam Province at sunset on July 4. A second letter said that on Aug. 25 a U.S. Hermes aircraft crashed near Khoram Abad, about 125 miles inside Iran."

It is likely the UAVs may be serving two functions over Iran:

• taking air samples for nuclear particles and photos over Iran's numerous suspected weapon sites
• gathering information on Iranian border crossings into Iraq to assist the terrorist forces to destabilize the country

US Military Focused on Horn of Africa

The Horn of Africa is a very unstable region and one of great focused concern to US foreign policy and, more specifically, to CENTCOM.

In light of the recent attack by pirates off the coast of Somali against a cruise liner, the importance of the Horn of Africa as a key objective in the Global War on Terror is increasingly apparent.

The Horn of Africa is the northeast portion of Africa. CENTCOM's Combined Joint Task Force - Horn of Africa (CJTF-HOA) defines its area of responsibility as Kenya, Somalia, Ethiopia, Sudan, Eritrea, Djibouti, Yemen and Seychelles and was fielded in 2002. 

A Humanitarian Focus

CJTF, led by Marine Maj. Gen. Timothy Ghormley, is not your typical Joint Task Force.  With over 1,500 soldiers in the task force, its job is more diplomatic than war-fighting.

"Task force commander Marine Maj. Gen. Timothy Ghormley very proudly tells one and all that no one in his command has 'fired a shot in anger,' but the command may have prevented hundreds of young men and women in the region from embracing the terrorist philosophy. 'My combat forces are doctors, veterinarians, engineers and dentists,' Ghormley said during an interview at his headquarters today."

To "win the hearts and minds" of the people in the Horn of Africa, his soldiers perform:

• Humanitarian assistance
• Medical care for those who have no access to it (up to 40 visits)
• Veterinary care of the livestock of regional animals (up to 40 visits)
• Digging wells to provide clean water for villages (11 wells)
• Building and renovating of schools (33 schools)

The structure of CJTF is novel indeed and maybe the future of more such operations.

"Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld has called the command a model for the future of DoD. But the task force may become a model for the entire government. Planners are working on a reorganization that would include all agencies that can help."

Other agencies that may be brought in to assist CJTF could include the Department of Justice, Treasury and Agriculture along with the efforts already underway by the US State Department.

Working Multilaterally rather than Unilaterally

Rather than a unilateral approach, the US has stressed the "coalition of the willing" approach. The British, Dutch, French, Romanians and Koreans are among countries taking part.  However, even with a multilateral approach, there are several challenges. This excellent Asia Times Online by Michael A. Weinstein lays out the challenges.

"The danger of the new strategy is that Washington will be drawn into choosing sides in regional and domestic conflicts, and will face backlashes if it supports the losing side...

In a frank appraisal of his mission, Ghormley said that the major requirement for its success and his major difficulty was gaining access to the region's countries, except for Djibouti. Among the four core states of the Horn, the CJTF is barred from Somalia because Washington has ceded responsibility there to the African Union; it is unwelcome in Eritrea, which accuses Washington of backing Ethiopia in the border dispute between the two countries, and it has achieved solid footholds in Ethiopia and Djibouti."

Therefore, the efforts of the task force to build goodwill among the nations it is active in is critical to its long-term success.  Their efforts build goodwill and promote long-term stability in relations between the US and the African nations.

A Generational Mission

The US efforts in the Horn of Africa are visionary, for the mission is not one of days or even years, but is a generational commitment. In a recent press conference with Gen Ghormley, he spoke of the generational component of the mission.

"'What you have is an area that is at the crossroads,' he said. 'You have nations that want to go forward, that want to join the greater population. They wish to become a part of a functioning society. We want to give a regional approach. We want them to be able to enjoy this fidelity and security.'

...The work the military is doing in the Horn of Africa is generational, meaning it will leave a lasting impact, Ghormley said, and it proves that U.S. forces can be used for something other than conflict."

The Horn of Africa is a critical piece in the Global War on Terror, for it is part of an "arc of instability" with a large Muslim population that can and is being radicalized by al-Qaeda.  It is more than a mission to attack terrorists but to reduce the ability for terrorists to recruit new fighters for Iraq, Afghanistan and beyond for suicide bombings and direct attacks on innocent people.

However, Gen. Ghormley's leadership, along with his Marines, are leaving the mission as the US Navy will be taking over the CJTF with an unnamed admiral as its head, allowing the Marines to tackle responsibilities elsewhere (Source Winds of Change).

Additional Source Documents

Rumsfeld and UK Defense Secretary Comments

The US-UK special relationship is the cornerstone of American foreign policy in Europe and arguably the Middle East as well.  This past November 7th, US Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld and UK Secretary of State for Defense John Reid gave a joint news briefing (the full text can be found here).

Sec. Rumsfeld thanked the British:

"Throughout much of modern history, the special relationship between the United States and Great Britain has dealt repeated blows to totalitarianism of various stripes.  The world is safer and our countries are safer because of the uncommon steel of the British people.  We're grateful for our partnership and for your friendship, Mr. Secretary."

Considering PM Tony Blair's extreme costly political efforts on behalf of the special relationship, it was the least the Secretary could say, and his words are well true.

Sec. Reid begins his address touching on the same subject while expanding on the threat faced to Western Civilization:

"I'm delighted to be here, and I hope the fact that we are standing together on so many issues -- which we've discussed today, from Iraq through Afghanistan and the many other theatres where we are working together; more importantly, our service men and women continue to work together -- is a symbol of our enduring relationship.

I think the thing which lies at the heart of that is shared values, and the struggle which is going on on the global sphere at present is indeed a battle of our values.  It is at heart an ideological struggle between those of us who adhere to 21st century values and those who are trying to impose seventh century values in large sections of the world.  Though it is ideological at heart, it manifests itself in the worst forms of terrorism -- innocent civilians targeted indiscriminately by people who have no constraints of morality, conventions or legality.  It therefore makes it a very, very difficult battle for the young service men and women who serve both our countries with such distinction, courage and fortitude."

It is important that the discussion of radical Islam be framed as a battle against the West on a "battle of our values".  From an American perspective, this distinction seems often lost on the European press, not to mention a few US publications as well. Sec. Reid goes on to attack those in the Main Stream Media (MSM) and elsewhere who argue that change in Iraq is going too slow, by putting it in a historical context.

"I've had some people say that the failure to achieve absolute unanimity within 18 months was indeed a failure.  Well, coming from a country, the United Kingdom, which has a similar continual discussion about the nationalities within a nation-state, and now in the 837th year of trying to resolve the Irish settlement in Northern Ireland and the 300 years just having settled the Scottish one, I think the Iraqis have done damn well to get where they have in 18 months quite frankly, Secretary Rumsfeld.  And to see 64 percent of the Iraqi population coming out in the elections, a greater turnout, despite the threats to themselves, than there was in our general election and probably your presidential election, is a sign of encouragement."

While the conference was a good opportunity for the two Secretaries to give their continued view and rationale for the direction of the campaign in Iraq, the question-and-answer session hit upon some interesting topics.

Joint Strike Fighter

Regarding the JSF program, which will be the largest ever US military purchase, spanning the AirForce, Navy and Marines with different versions of the JSF along with orders from the British and Japanese governments, the US commitment was called into question.

"[W]e're pretty confident that the United States, in their own interests, not just in ours, will make the sensible decisions on the Joint Strike Fighter.  It is true, it is a huge part of our future planning.  We don't have forces, or for that matter the budget the size of the United States.  But we do, I believe, have forces that are equipped, capable and active in terms of meeting the modern threats.  And part of that is the ability to reach out, to have sustainable reach.  And that is why we've ordered a final perusal of our plans to build two carriers which are three times the size of anything that we've got at present.  And if we have such carriers to sustain a presence a long distance from the United Kingdom over a long period, we need a good airplane to operate off them.  And the airplane we want to get is the Joint Strike Fighter, and I see no reason at the moment to be worried about that."

Iranian and Syrian Involvement in Iraq

On the issue of Iranian and Syrian involvement against coalition forces in Iraq:

"Q: Mr. Minister, the top British general down in Basra last week said that he was concerned and had solid evidence that Iran was moving technology and materials over into Iraq.  Can you elaborate on that and your concerns, especially in southern Iraq, with these explosives coming across the border?

SEC. REID:  Do you mean General Dutton?

Q:     Dutton.  Yeah.

SEC. REID:  Yeah.  Yeah, well, for obvious reasons I don't want to go into the technicalities of it, but it is our belief that the nature of the devices being used against British troops and possibly elsewhere in Iraq in recent months bear the hallmark of groups like Hezbollah and may well be connected with elements within Iran.  We don't have the evidence that says this is being backed by the Iranian government, but it is nevertheless worrying, and we've made representations to Iran, because it would obviously not be right for a country to be publicly supporting democratic self-determination in Iraq at the same time as it was allowing or in any way encouraging the use of terrorism or violence.

So it's as simple as that; we have put that.  And putting it in a wider context, of course, if we have those worries -- along with the duplicity which Iran has been using in the development of its nuclear capability -- as witnessed not by me or Secretary Rumsfeld, but by the International Atomic Energy Authority, and then the sort of statements that we've seen from the Iranian president about wiping off the face of the map another member state of the United Nations, then all of these items come together and they are worrying."

Bill Roggio's Interview with Col. Davis (Part II)

Bill Roggio again has another excellent must-read interview with Col. Stephen Davis, Commander of Marine Regimental Combat Team - 2, on Operating Steel Curtain.  The interview is good not only from the comments and analysis provided by Col. Davis but also the probing and knowledgable questions asked by Mr. Roggio.  An earlier interview with Col. Davis can be found here.

Here is just one nugget from the exchange on the Iraqi army:

"Bill: Last time we spoke, we discussed the morale of the Americans serving under your command. Can you give us a feel for the morale of the Iraqi troops?

Col Davis: The morale of the Iraqi troops is high. We are very fortunate to work with these soldiers and to watch them grow. The 2nd Brigade, 7th Division of the Iraqi Army is operating in the Hit/Haditha region, and the 1st Brigade, 1st Division is operating out west on the Syrian border. One of the battalions was engaged in Fallujah and Ramadi. There are some tough and battle hardened soldiers in these units. I am fortunate to have these two brigades directly under my command.

I dine nightly with [Iraqi Army] Colonel Razak, and we discuss the progress of the Iraqi troops and their ability to conduct combat operations. These units operating out here have good morale and show a high degree of proficiency in combat. They are in need of logistics assistance from us. These guys fight hard; I’ve lost six Iraqi soldiers since they have been operating out here.

The Iraqi troops are extremely helpful when it comes to identifying insurgents and al Qaeda. For example, outside of the displaced persons camp set up for citizens of Husaybah, Iraqi troops of the 1/1 picked two Saudis and a Qatari out of the crowd who were dressed as women, then engaged and killed all three. This is but one example of their proficiency."

I highly recommend the post to you.  While you are there, consider donating to Mr. Roggio's December trip "in country" to Iraq as he will be with the Marines of RCT-2.

Bill Roggio's Interview with Col. Davis

Bill Roggio, who is planning on going to Iraq to report firsthand on the Marines' efforts in the Anbar Province in Western Iraq, conducted an insightful interview with Colonel Stephen W. Davis, Commander of Marine Regimental Combat Team - 2.

There are many excellent nuggets in the interview, but Col. Davis' focus on seeing the big picture in waging the fight against the insurgents is clear.

"Saddam never controlled this region of Iraq. It is very tribal and fiercely independent. He sent in the army to kill and intimidate the population. He established two tribes in the region: the Salmanis and the Karabilah tribes, to further his goals and counterbalance existing dominating tribes. The Iraqis out west, particularly in Haditha, are well educated and are able to provide for their own needs. They have operated this way for centuries and can do so again with the proper security environment. We have a simple equation we use out here:

Presence = Security = Stability = the environment for self governance.

Our goal is to enfranchise the Iraqi security forces and allow them to provide for the security in the region and improve the lives of the Iraqi people. We will continue to conduct civil/military affairs operations to improve the lives of the Iraqi people. In Haditha, we are rebuilding the hospital the jihadis attacked with a car bomb and then used as a base of operation. We are working to enhance schools and other services vital to the people. We will continue to maintain a presence until the Iraqi Army is capable of standing on its own."

I highly recommend the article.

Please help Bill Roggio raise the $25,000 he needs to travel to Iraq and expand on his first-rate coverage of the men and women fighting the war and the global perspective of how the war for Iraq is progressing against the backdrop on the Global War on Terror.  Follow the link in the upper right.  For an updated list of Bill's needs for the trip, click here.  The list includes:

• Bullet proof vest with Level 4 API plates
• Tactical backpack
• Cold weather sleeping bag
• Rough weather/terrain computer
• Video camera
• Digital camera
• Extra batteries
• Audio recording device

It is a worthy cause supporting a man I know personally, who is a first-rate gentleman and brilliant thinker.  If you are inclined to and able to help (even just $15 will make a difference) please contribute.

The US and Japan Solve Issue

The United States and Japan came to agreement on the repositioning of forces away from the island of Okinawa while preserving the overall US military capability and force structure.  The International Herald Tribune states:

"The United States and Japan agreed on a plan Wednesday to relocate a major American air base on the southern island of Okinawa, removing the biggest obstacle to talks on the redeployment of U.S. troops across the country.

According to the plan, the Futenma Marine Corps air base, located in the city of Ginowan, will move to an existing U.S. base, Camp Schwab, in a less populated area on the main island."

For background on why this has been a sensitive issue with the Japanese, one needs only to go back over the past decade and look at some horrific crimes by US servicemen against local Japanese girls and women.

Three US soldiers were convicted of raping a 12 year old girl in 1995.  Incidents of rape have surfaced in the news in 2002 and 2003 against the local Okinawans.  With up to 47,000 US soldiers in Japan and the majority on the island, the possibility for future incidents is high.

The Australian reports that the US military gave in to the Japanese in arriving at the compromise.  The US initially wanted to build the airstrip over a reclaimed coral reef, but the Japanese balked at the potential environmental impact.

"The Futenma decision appears to have been achieved by US concessions.

"The US side, taking into consideration the importance of the Japan-US alliance ... have accepted the most recent Japan Defence Agency proposal and plan for the relocation of the US Marine Corps at Futenma," lead American negotiator Richard Lawless told reporters yesterday....

About half the 50,000 US Forces in Japan personnel are deployed on Okinawa, a territory that was controlled by the US military for 27 years following the end of the Pacific war and remains a location of high strategic value because of its proximity to Taiwan and mainland China."

Why does this story interest Dawn's Early Light?  By attempting to remove a regular domestic political and social thorn in the side of US-Japanese relations, the two countries can remove a source of friction and gear up for future regional threats.  These threats are more likely to come from North Korea or China.  Additionally, it will make President Bush's trip to Japan easier on November 16. 

The US and Japan are serious about improved relations (as noted before here and here).  Given the rising importance of the Asia region, this compromise is good news for both sides.

Update: The Washington Post has a more detailed account of some of the behind-the-scenes diplomacy that is critical to DEL's point above about moving the relationship forward.

"'There was a sense of emergency that not reaching agreement on the issue, a central part of the U.S.-Japan relationship, would seriously damage relations,' Foreign Minister Nobutaka Machimura told reporters.

Despite the accord, U.S. dismay at the pace of the talks was evident. The head of the U.S. delegation, Richard Lawless, deputy assistant secretary of defense for Asian & Pacific affairs, suggested Tuesday that the difficulties over such issues as Futenma had delayed a broader reshaping of the U.S.-Japan alliance. The United States has come to view the alliance as a cornerstone of regional security as China assumes a more assertive stance and North Korea is presumed to have become a nuclear-armed threat.

'We have to realize that we no longer have the luxury of interminable dialogue over parochial issues,' said Lawless, speaking at a Tokyo conference sponsored by the Washington-based American Enterprise Institute.

'If we are to bring the alliance to where it needs to be in the 21st century,' Lawless said, 'then we need to dramatically accelerate, across the board, to make up for the time lost to indecision, indifference and procrastination.'"

The US is serious about Asia and apparently Japan is on the road to be in agreement.  US and Japan need to be of one mind to tackle the issues of national security that will affect both nations directly as time moves on with the Global War on Terror.

Send Bill Roggio to Iraq

Tired of what you read in the Main Stream Media about Iraq and want a firsthand, reliable account?

Well, now you can do something about it!  Bill Roggio of the 4th Rail is embarking on an exciting adventure.  He is taking a leave of absence and is going to go to Iraq for a month to report firsthand.  As a former US Army soldier, he will be in good company as he will be with Regimental Combat Team - 2, 2nd Marine Division.

However, Bill needs our support.  Please visit his blog or click the link to the right and give him your financial support.  Read his post here and click on the PayPal link.  It will be the best money you spend all day.  Bill's commentary on Iraq is literally second to none.  My wife and I are contributing, and I strongly encourage you to do so.

Keep him and his family in your prayers as he prepares to leave his job unpaid for the month and gather support for his trip over to Iraq.

I plan on posting more information about his trip and his new adventure with ThreatsWatch.org as information becomes available.

Update for Bloggers who support Bill Roggio.  Please feel free to use the button above.  For information on how to use it:

1) Copy image onto your server (this will save me some bandwith)

2) This is the code I used "<a href="http://billroggio.com/archives /2005/10/a_journey_to_an_1.php><img title="Billroggio_iraq" alt="Support Bill Roggio's Trip to Iraq" src="http://[INSERT YOUR FILE LOCATION OF IMAGE HERE]" border="0" /></a>"

If you would like a different file size or format, email me at the link on the upper left, and I will send it to you. 

Rumsfeld Visit Represents Progress

Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld wrapped up his visit to China today.  The visit is an important first step in catching up Sino-American defense relations to the more advanced political and economic relationship.  President Bush is set to travel to China in November, therefore Sec. Rumsfeld's visit proves timely, especially given that Secretary of the Treasury John Snow was in China this month as well as recent visits from Secretary of State Rice and her Deputy Zoellick over the summer.

Sec. Rumsfeld raised some important issues that need to be seriously addressed by the Chinese in order to build a long-term cooperative military environment with the US:

• Transparency in military spending.  The US estimates China is spending double to triple what the Chinese publicly state as their $30 billion annual defense budget (not including space).  China flatly denied this allegation.
• China's efforts to block the US from Asian organizations.  From the WaPo:

"Speaking to a small group of mid-level Communist Party officials and then in extended talks with the Chinese defense minister, Rumsfeld criticized China's 'seeming preference' for regional organizations that exclude the United States and a recent decision not to invite U.S. officials to participate in an East Asian summit organized by Beijing and planned for December."

• China's efforts to build another Great Wall around free ideas. The Secretary requested giving a policy address at the Central Party School, formerly lead by President Hu.  From the IHT:

"Rumsfeld, urged the next generation of China's Communist leadership on Wednesday to become "a major player" in the global economy by taking steps to strengthen the system and not just reap the financial rewards, and he warned against erecting 'another type of Great Wall' restricting free expression and choice." - IHT

"'While there is no one model that is perfect for every nation at every time in its development, a look across the globe suggests that societies that tend to encourage more open markets and freer systems are societies where the people are enjoying the greatest opportunities,' Rumsfeld said in a speech today at the Central Party School, the party's top training center for mid-career members and its main ideological think tank.

'Most of the nations in Asia understand that,' he added, implying that China does not." - Chicago Sun Times

• China's 'mixed signals' message to the US. From the WaPo:

"Rumsfeld also cited joint military exercises that China conducted this year with Russia; a Chinese decision to exclude the U.S. military from multilateral search-and-rescue exercises in Hong Kong for the first time in three decades; and China's participation in a regional group that urged the United States to withdraw military forces from Uzbekistan in July.

Such actions, Rumsfeld argued, contradicted China's expressed desire for closer ties with the United States and, together with what he described as a rapid and secretive military buildup, raised questions about 'whether China will make the right choices, choices that will serve the world's real interests in regional peace and stability.'

'We see mixed signals,' Rumsfeld said, on the second day of his official visit, 'and we seek clarification.'"

In a private meeting between Sec. Rumsfeld and Gen. Jing Zhiyuan, commander of the Second Artillery (nuclear command), he was given assurances that China will not initiate a nuclear strike, which contradicts an earlier statement from a Chinese general over the possible engagement of US forces in a war over Taiwan.

It is understandable, from the Chinese communist party standpoint, why they would want to alienate the United States.  The US has been pursuing a policy of containment against China, from strengthening the US-Japanese Security Agreement to include Taiwan's defense, to controlling the strategic oil waterways to China in the Malacca Straits, to forging a partnership on multiple levels with India over China.

However, it is because of the mixed Chinese signals, the confrontation over the US EP-3 spy plane early in Bush's presidency, and its communist closed system of government that the United States is taking very seriously the future direction of the the PLA.

Rumsfeld's visit will lead to a greater military sharing in exchanges that will hopefully impart to both militaries more information about what their respective nations' true goals are. 

As an example of what a lack of a free press does to how news is covered, see the China Daily's depiction of Rumsfeld's visit here.

Update: Cheat Seeking Missiles has a great analogy in his summation of the Chinese response to Sec. Rumsfeld's criticism here. (October 21, 2005)