The 2008 election brought a strong mandate for change in the direction of American national security policy.  2009 demonstrated that the Obama administration was capable of meeting this task as it deftly handled a multitude of both old and new national security challenges.  The administration’s record, while not without disappointments and occasional setbacks, contains a remarkable set of achievements, especially for a first year president.  

As has been often noted, the president inherited multiple challenges that resulted from the previous administration’s failed national security policies, including both a domestic and a global economic crisis; two stalled and unpopular wars; a military whose own leadership admitted that it was overstretched, even as the defense budget experienced unprecedented and uncontrolled growth; atrophied institutions of American civilian power; deeply degraded global respect for the United States; and a host of challenges flowing from failing states, extremist groups, long simmering conflicts, rising regional powers, nuclear proliferation, and climate change.

The administration therefore enters 2010 having successfully demonstrated its ability to handle its initial key challenges while also laying the groundwork for an ambitious second year.  This is primarily because the president has proven to be a decisive and engaged Commander-in-Chief, a style that Americans voted for, and one that contrasts sharply with his predecessor.  The president’s ability to meet his Commander-in-Chief obligations while also advancing a progressive national security agenda has led to the remaking of the fight against extremism; a restoration of the strength of American diplomacy; renewed global respect for the United States; and an ambitious attempt to restructure the American national security apparatus to address 21st century challenges.  

Importantly, the challenges and disappointments of 2009 also point the way to what must be the core goals for 2010: staying focused on both the struggle on the ground and the timeline to move away from military involvement in Afghanistan; strengthening and supporting American diplomacy on Iran, the Middle East peace process, and other protracted issues; maintaining the power of America’s values as the choices on the closure of the Guantanamo Bay detention center, human rights, and democracy get tougher; rebuilding America’s capacity to support international treaties  that are in our interest, whether it is the banning of nuclear testing or the halting of climate change; continuing to make progress on the global economy; and giving real momentum to the effort to remake America’s national security policy institutions.

The seeds planted in 2009 have reinvigorated American diplomacy and our country’s national security institutions.  These efforts will help guide the administration as it moves forward in changing the direction of American national security policy for the 21st century.

MEETING THE OBLIGATIONS OF COMMANDER-IN-CHIEF

The President inherited wars in strategic drift in Iraq and Afghanistan and a military whose leadership said it was overstretched, understaffed, and inappropriately resourced.  In 2009, through personal leadership, a strong bipartisan national security team, and constructive pressure from his core supporters, the president met his obligations as Commander-in-Chief.  

Iraq:

After years of work led by progressives, national security experts, and Iraqis seeking a true policy shift, in February the administration announced the beginning of the American withdrawal from Iraq.  Though he expressed America’s enduring support to the Iraqi people, President Obama was clear that Iraqis must bear the responsibility for their country’s future.  This advice has proven its mettle, as political turmoil and tragic violence during both the summer and fall have neither brought down the Iraqi government nor altered the Iraqi determination that American troops depart on schedule while Iraqis devise their own path to durable stability.  

Afghanistan:

In Afghanistan, the deterioration caused by years of neglect provoked tough questions about the future direction that U.S. policy should take there.  Recognizing Americans’ deep ambivalence over further U.S. involvement, the president’s policy review attended to all relevant voices.  During his review, the president listened to civilians and the military, both skeptical and enthusiastic.  He asserted the Commander-in-Chief’s role as final arbiter of all views, not merely rubber-stamp for the military.  Wisely, he rejected calls for a limitless commitment and narrowly focused military solutions.  With the policy decision now made, the Obama administration can move to implement this decision with the confidence that the strategy has clear, achievable objectives, and that is disciplined by strong oversight and an identifiable end-game.

REMAKING THE FIGHT AGAINST EXTREMISM

Over the course of the year, the Obama administration has made smart, pragmatic moves to combat extremism and protect America at home.  Depriving Al-Qaeda of the grandiosity that it desires, President Obama rejected the Bush administration’s failed concept of a “Global War on Terror,” seeing terrorism instead as a challenge that required a multifaceted response.  Abroad, the United States has executed key military successes that have either disabled or disrupted extremist organizations in Pakistan, Somalia, and Yemen.  It has addressed a vital tactical imbalance by mounting efforts to combat extremism through political, economic, and social campaigns – instead of solely through military operations – recognizing that increasing foreign assistance and partnering with allies to increase law enforcement capacity can do as much or even more to prevent terrorism than boots on the ground alone. At home, our law enforcement agencies uncovered significant networks of homegrown extremism, including one Al-Qaeda plot called the “most serious terrorism case in years.”  The administration has deftly handled both the immediate threats that these networks posed and the longer term potential for domestic anxiety and ethnic tensions, by stressing throughout that Muslim–American communities are among the nation’s first responders and first line of defense.  Key to this has been how the administration has emphasized preparedness, rather than the “wolf at the door” state of fear mentality promulgated by the Bush administration.  

On only his second day in office, President Obama rejected the false choice the Bush administration had created between combating extremism and respecting the rule of law and our constitutional norms.  Addressing the legal, diplomatic, and ethical mess left behind by the Bush policies – compounded by Vice President Cheney’s aggressive attacks on the president’s efforts – has proven harder to clean up than expected.  Still, the administration has instituted clear, universal policies banning torture; created a system with guidelines for interrogation and evidence-gathering; improved transparency and Red Cross access to U.S.-run detention facilities; resettled 20 Guantanamo detainees; brought the first detainees to face trial for their crimes – something the Bush administration failed to do; begun more court procedures for Guantanamo detainees in one year than the Bush administration completed in eight using military commissions; and committed to close the Guantanamo Bay detention center.  These policies have made our fight more effective, eased partnerships with other countries, and most importantly deprived extremists of their self-described number one recruiting tool.  

RESTORING THE STRENGTH OF AMERICAN DIPLOMACY

Heading into 2009, American diplomacy was an atrophied instrument.  This last year has witnessed its resurgence, with the Obama administration returning to the best traditions of American leadership for advancing U.S. interests in the world.  

On longstanding problems like Iran and North Korea, a new American appetite to exchange bluster for sustained diplomatic action produced modest but real results.  On North Korea, an unwillingness to be deterred by provocations yielded tough, internationally backed sanctions aimed at pressuring the Hermit Kingdom, while later providing the possibility of the resumption of talks.  And though initial hopes for cooperative negotiations with Iran appear to have been blocked by the regime’s intransigence, thanks to President Obama’s pursuit of engagement, the world is now closer than ever to being united behind the American position.

2009 also saw diplomacy advance with the 21st century’s rising powers: China, India and Russia.  These key relationships were notable in 2009 for the paucity of headlines they generated – a success that has eluded many first term presidents.  The administration avoided the first year jitters that plagued its last three predecessors, as it made advances in U.S. – China relations that paid off in North Korea and Iran policy, global economic stimulus, and climate change and other issues.  The United States also strengthened its relationship with India, establishing a “strategic dialogue” in acknowledgement of India’s rising influence and heightening the partnership in Afghanistan.  The administration also successfully moved away from the emotional rhetoric of its predecessor and returned its relationship with Russia to a foundation of mutual interests and respect – with encouraging results in Iran policy, arms control, and elsewhere.

Lastly, gone are the days when American representatives would arrive home from international summits with nothing to show for their participation.  After the G-20 meetings in London and Pittsburgh, as well as at the U.N. Security Council Session in New York, the Obama administration won concrete achievements for the United States and the global economy, as well as on Iran.  In addition, during climate change negotiations at Copenhagen, the president’s tenacity eliminated the gloom that had settled on the talks, resulting in an agreement that established a foundation for future progress. These efforts demonstrated that American interests could be effectively advanced through strong diplomacy, rooted in respect for other nations, and pursued both directly and through multilateral forums and institutions.  

RENEWING GLOBAL RESPECT FOR THE UNITED STATES

In January 2009 President Obama inherited an America that was withdrawn from the international community, seen by many around the world as a pariah.  The Bush administration had managed to build worldwide ire over its conduct of the “Global War on Terror,” its mismanagement of the economy, and its unilateral national security policy.  

This past year, the Obama administration made serious efforts to heal the divide that has arisen between the United States and the rest of the world and to foster respect for the United States.  At the United Nations General Assembly in September, the president positioned America as a global leader, calling for action from those who have used anti-Americanism as “as an excuse for our collective inaction.”  The president demonstrated America’s commitment by paying past arrears and re-starting long-stalled American contributions to family planning. He established that America would play a leading role on two global priorities -- combating climate change, as demonstrated by his leadership in Copenhagen, and reversing the spread of nuclear weapons, as highlighted by the START follow-on treaty talks with Russia and his highly commended speech in Prague.  

In addition, in response to the worst global economic crisis since the Great Depression, the new administration rallied partners to rebuild the global governance structure – warding off a devastating recession and regaining trust and respect for American leadership around the world.   Finally, in perhaps the most groundbreaking of his efforts to restore respect for the United States, the president reached out, in unprecedented addresses, to the peoples of both the Arab and the Muslim worlds.  At year’s end, results could be seen both in terms of concrete progress and through public opinion surveys that documented dramatically-improved views of the U.S.

RESTRUCTURING THE AMERICAN NATIONAL SECURITY APPARATUS TO ADDRESS 21ST CENTURY CHALLENGES

In this new century, the United States and the world face challenges vastly different from those of the previous century.  In perhaps one of the most underrated and important moves of the year, President Obama and Secretary of Defense Robert Gates led a bipartisan effort to reform the defense budget so that the United States could better address the threats it faces. This past October, the president signed into law a defense budget that rebalances resources to meet the security challenges of the 21st century and cuts billions of dollars from unnecessary and wasteful programs that either fight the wars of the past or are pointless for the soldiers of today.

Recognizing that the United States needs to use all elements of national power to pursue its interests and that a strong State Department and U.S. Agency for International Development are as important as a strong Pentagon, the Obama administration increased funding for development and diplomacy by 25% from last year – nearly double what it was in 2005.  It also convened a series of reviews to improve and integrate all aspects of our foreign affairs:  the first Quadrennial Diplomacy and Development Review (QDDR) as well as a development review at the National Security Council through a Presidential Study Directive (PSD); the forthcoming Quadrennial Defense Review (QDR); and the Quadrennial Homeland Security Review (QHSR).  Furthermore, the importance of multilateral institutions was also recognized by the president, when he returned the position of Ambassador to the United Nations to a cabinet level position.  These reforms to the national security apparatus have made America better equipped to deal with the challenges both of today and the future.

LOOKING AHEAD BY LOOKING BACK

2009 has featured struggles, as well as successes, which point the way to key challenges awaiting the United States and the Obama administration in the year ahead.  The administration has laid out sophisticated strategies that will require discipline, focus, and political capital.  It has tough questions to answer on thorny issues such as Afghanistan, Iran, Iraq, North Korea, nonproliferation, Middle East peace, climate change, the global economy, development and human rights, Guantanamo Bay, domestic detention policies, and terror trials, just to name a few.  Merging effective policies with America’s values will remain an ongoing test on vital importance to both the country and the administration.

In specific, on Afghanistan, implementing the president’s strategy will demand that the administration remain focused on the core objectives, that it undergo constant scrutiny, and that it keep an eye trained on the eventual end of American involvement there.  In addition, while Iraq may not be the news item it once was, parliamentary elections and the re-deployment of American troops will undoubtedly command greater attention in the year to come.  

American diplomacy will also be sorely tested.  On Iran and North Korea, emerging complications may threaten to derail American strategy there.  The administration will also have to make room on its plate to accommodate areas where concrete achievements have yet to take shape.  This includes its work toward Middle East peace, a process that has taken up much of the administration’s time, yet has yielded minimal progress.  It also encompasses nonproliferation, where the administration faces an agenda that is brimming with treaties, deadlines, and international conferences.  

Addressing these imperatives will make the task of maintaining America’s leadership daunting.  The world will be watching how the administration continues its outreach to the Muslim world amidst escalating conflict in Afghanistan; how the promise of closing Guantanamo and altering detention practices is carried out; how it handles both the domestic and international politics regarding climate change; how it works to restore the global economy; and how the pledge to watch our deeds, not our words, on democracy promotion and human rights develops.  

All of this will take place while the administration continues to explore the unglamorous yet critical project of revamping the institutions at the core of American national security policy.  Achieving a better balance between the diplomatic, economic, and military instruments of national power in the short-term will require the administration to devote significant attention to the question of resources and management.  In the long-term, the administration must transform the strategic planning exercises currently underway into an action plan that leads to genuine reform.  These foundational shifts will be competing against a myriad of near-term priorities, yet must take place in order for a progressive national security policy to come to fruition.