[Congressional Record Volume 154, Number 112 (Wednesday, July 9, 2008)]
[House]
[Page H6313]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




    THE NEED FOR A COMPREHENSIVE STRATEGY TO ADVANCE U.S. INTERESTS

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Under a previous order of the House, the 
gentleman from Missouri (Mr. Skelton) is recognized for 5 minutes.
  Mr. SKELTON. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to talk about a fundamental 
problem affecting the national security of the United States which has 
not received the notice and consideration it deserves.
  The United States suffers from the complete absence of a 
comprehensive strategy for advancing U.S. interests. This strategic 
void detracts from almost every policy effort advanced by the United 
States Government. As a result, major policies are inconsistent and 
contradictory in different areas of the world and across different 
policy realms. We find ourselves unable to agree upon and set national 
priorities for addressing the major challenges of our time. We suffer 
from a splintering of national power and an inability to coherently 
address threats and reassure and cooperate with allies.
  What do I mean by a comprehensive national strategy? The word 
``strategy'' has military roots, coming from the Greek word for 
``generalship,'' but the concept of a strategy extends well beyond just 
the military context. In the context of this speech, and others that I 
intend to deliver on this topic, it means a commonly agreed-upon 
description of critical U.S. interests and how to advance them using 
all elements of national power: economic, diplomatic, and military.
  The next President will have a unique opportunity to develop a 
successful strategy for the Nation. When President Dwight D. Eisenhower 
took office, he commissioned the Solarium Project to review strategies 
for dealing with the Soviet Union. After a competitive process in which 
three teams of advisers promoted the merits of three strategies, 
President Eisenhower decided to continue the policy of containment 
developed by President Truman, and did so with a largely unified 
administration.
  Over the course of our history, the U.S. has had numerous successful 
strategies. During the Cold War, both major political parties supported 
a strategy of containment for confronting the Soviet Union. During 
World War II, the United States had a widely-supported strategy of 
focusing first on the war in Europe and deferring some effort from the 
war in the Pacific until the Nazi threat was contained. At other times 
in our Nation's history, we have pursued less successful strategies, 
such as a strategy of isolationism during the period between World Wars 
I and II.
  The next President would be well advised to engage in and personally 
lead a Solarium-type approach to determining a strategy for today's 
rapidly changing world. To ensure that a new strategy for America can 
truly develop support across the political spectrum, Congress should be 
involved in the process, and to ensure that a new strategy is one that 
the American people can support, the general outline of the debate 
should be shared with and involve the American people.
  This speech is the first in a series. In the future I will discuss 
the objectives and challenges that a new U.S. strategy will need to 
contend with; some of the means by which the U.S. will likely need to 
pursue its objectives and their ramifications for the national security 
apparatus of the United States Government; and some of the options that 
a Solarium-type review of a strategy by the next President would need 
to consider.
  I hope that my colleagues will join me in urging the next President 
to address this problem and join with me in a conversation, both in 
Congress and with the American people, about what today's strategy 
should be.

                          ____________________