[Congressional Record Volume 154, Number 113 (Thursday, July 10, 2008)]
[House]
[Pages H6386-H6387]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                      AMERICA'S STRATEGIC CONTEXT

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Under a previous order of the House, the 
gentleman from Missouri (Mr. Skelton) is recognized for 5 minutes.
  Mr. SKELTON. Madam Speaker, yesterday I rose to speak about the need 
for America to embark upon a process to develop a comprehensive 
strategy to advance U.S. interests in the world. Today I rise to 
continue that theme; I want to take the conversation a bit further.
  A strategy, as I said last night, describes the way we employ all 
elements of national power to advance our critical interests. 
Ultimately, determining these critical interests depends upon the place 
America occupies in the world. What do we see as our role? Who do we 
want to be, and how do we want to interact with the rest of the globe's 
inhabitants to get there? That's the fundamental question, of course, 
but we are not ready to answer it yet.
  Instead, we must first consider the domestic and global contexts 
within which we must act. As our vision of where we want to go evolves, 
we must have an ongoing dialogue about the effort and the sacrifices we 
are willing to make. We must also look at the world as it is, not as 
we'd like it to be, and we must acknowledge that much of the world does 
not necessarily see us as we would see ourselves. We must look clear-
eyed beyond Iraq and Afghanistan. Only with that understanding can we 
determine where we want to go and how we want to get there. But as this 
vision develops, we must keep in mind that it is no good if we cannot 
provide the means to achieve it, nor is it useful if it is not a 
realistic fit with the rest of the world.
  The global environment is ever changing. While we cannot control the 
sea swell of change, we must prepare ourselves to navigate those 
waters. Regional power is shifting; some large nation states, such as 
China, India, Brazil, to name a few, are ascending and verge on global 
power status. Russia may already be there, again. Do their interests 
conflict or coincide with ours? Is their rise a challenge to oppose or 
an opportunity to engage? Some of our traditional security arrangements 
may fade in importance as others take on new meaning. But nation states 
are not our only concern. It's clear that a number of transnational 
issues will challenge us while others may provide positive potential. 
Fundamentalist terrorism and the proliferation of dangerous weapons are 
obvious examples of serious challenges, of course, but what about 
climate change, the fragility of increasingly connected world financial 
markets, or the outbreak of pandemic diseases? These are challenges 
that present themselves without any malicious intentional human action.
  The point here is that the world around us bears significant scrutiny 
because it represents the context that binds whatever strategy we 
choose. This is not to say we cannot strive for an ideal. We can and we 
should. It's how this Nation was formed. The ability to conceive a 
vision that is breathtaking in scope and heartbreaking in its beauty is 
America's gift to the world. But while the goal may be the ideal, our 
understanding of our environment and our selection of the means to 
reach it must be firmly rooted in realism.
  With that thought I close, Madam Speaker. In my next speech 
addressing these issues, I will talk about the need to return to the 
fundamentals of strategic understanding, a return to Sun

[[Page H6387]]

Tzu, to Clausewitz, to strategic thought rooted not in slogans but in 
enduring principles.

                          ____________________