McConnell: Time To Get ‘Real’ On National Security Challenges
‘Being realistic and rejecting fanciful idealism means recognizing that we’re facing the greatest, most coordinated security challenges since the Cold War. … [I]t would be utterly un-realistic to pretend that America can afford to delay an urgent, comprehensive investment in the hard power required to meet these threats.’
WASHINGTON, D.C. – U.S. Senate Republican Leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY) delivered the following remarks today on the Senate floor regarding national security priorities:
“I’d like to begin by addressing the urgent national security supplemental that’s still pending before the House of Representatives.
“Opponents of this urgent investment in American strength have taken to clothing their objections in a false mantle of ‘realism’. And at first glance, this would appear to be a rhetorically savvy move.
“After all, who would admit to being unrealistic? Who would willingly say that their policies and their worldview don’t reflect the world as it is?
“But as our nation faces the most dangerous moment in a generation, it’s worth examining this claim in a bit more detail.
“The concept of ‘realism’ has an academic meaning that refers to a specific set of assumptions about how states interact.
“The ‘realist’ school of thought, at its core, contends that states act alone in a perpetual competition – constantly assessing the balance of power with their adversaries, and seeking to maximize their own security and relative influence.
“As the ancient Athenians put it, ‘The strong do what they can and the weak suffer what they must’.
“In this sense, as some of the most vocal opponents of the supplemental like to point out, realists don’t have time for morality tales or sappy appeals to universal values.
“The world is an uncaring place and so-called realists are concerned with cold, hard, national interests.
“Well, as luck would have it, so am I!
“None of the tenets of academic realism actually preclude our colleagues from vigorously supporting the supplemental. Quite the opposite. Consider the investments we’re talking about making:
“Rebuilding American hard power, and growing our domestic industrial capacity to sustain it…
“In the process, helping to decimate the hard power of a major adversary at almost no risk to U.S. forces…
“Deterring further challenges to a balance of power favorable to American interests…
“Preserving and expanding our relative influence with other states, helping our friends and hurting our enemies…
“And successfully rallying these friends and allies to share the burden of balancing against competitors who seek to undermine the United States and the West.
“Academic realism doesn’t conflict with our efforts in the supplemental. And neither does simple reality. Being realistic and rejecting fanciful idealism means recognizing that we’re facing the greatest, most coordinated security challenges since the Cold War.
“In Europe a neo-Soviet imperialist is threatening the stability of some of America’s closest allies. Europe is the largest consumer of American products and the largest foreign direct investor in America. Instability in Europe is bad for business!
“In the Middle East, backwards theocrats are orchestrating terrorist attacks on Americans as well as our friends … and racing to produce a nuclear weapon. Their vassals are disrupting the freedom of navigation – the lifeblood of our economy – with near impunity.
“And in the Pacific, the People’s Republic of China is pulling every lever to undermine America’s power and dominate its hemisphere and beyond. From massive military expansion and predatory economic coercion to psychological manipulation, intellectual property theft, and a supply chain that pumps lethal poison across our borders.
“So Madam President, it would be utterly un-realistic to pretend that America can afford to delay an urgent, comprehensive investment in the hard power required to meet these threats.
“The mushy moralism here is pretending to care more about brave Ukrainian war dead than the Ukrainian people do themselves.
“The naïve ideology is thinking that Russian revanchism is somehow connected to Christian values, in spite of clear evidence that Putin has corrupted the Russian Orthodox Church and is actively repressing Christians both at home and in conquered territories.
“The plain fantasy is saying that the challenges we face abroad will wait patiently while we tend to our own domestic affairs.
“Here’s the diplomatic reality: Putin has said publicly there’s no sense negotiating with an opponent who’s running out of ammunition.
“Anyone who wants a negotiated end to this conflict should also want Ukraine to have as much negotiating leverage as possible!
“And here’s the political reality: If you think the fall of Afghanistan was bad, the fall of a European capital like Kyiv to Russian troops will be unimaginably worse.
“And if stalled American assistance makes that outcome possible, there’s no question where the blame will land.
“Neglecting threats doesn’t make them go away. It just guarantees unpreparedness when they strike.
“I’m reminded of the late Republican from Michigan, Senator Arthur Vandenberg – a staunch anti-interventionist in the years leading up to the Second World War.
“As Senator Vandenberg wrote in his diary after the attack on Pearl Harbor, ‘that day ended isolationism for any realist.’
“Needless to say, it shouldn’t take an attack on the homeland for America’s leaders to uphold their responsibilities and provide for the common defense.
“The clear and present danger is just that.
“It is clear. It is present. And it will grow if we do not act.
“For those of us who see the world clearly, this isn’t a question of realism vs. idealism. Right now, what America should do also happens to be what we can do.
“We can grow a defense industrial base capable of sustaining both U.S. forces and our allies and partners.
“We can help degrade one adversary while strengthening deterrence against others.
“We can start investing seriously in rebuilding the hard power that a secure and prosperous nation requires.
“Not only can we. We must.”
###
Related Issues: National Security, Ukraine, Russia, China, Iran, America's Military
Next Previous
