Chat Details

Gen. Wesley K. Clark 08-21-08

This chat will begin at 1 p.m. on Thursday, August 21, 2008.

Retired Gen. Wesley K. Clark joins The Washington Times for a live chat to discuss the Russia-Georgia conflict, the effects of Pakistani President Pervez Musharraf's resignation on the region, other national security issues, the 2008 elections and his future plans. The site is now open for questions. You must be registered with www.WashingtonTimes.com to ask questions. To register, click the gray word "REGISTER" on the top right-hand corner of this page, then follow the instructions. Once you're registered, come back to this chat page and then click the orange "Ask a Question" link.

Transcript

1. • The Washington Times is pleased to welcome Gen. Wesley K. Clark for a live chat. Good afternoon, Gen. Clark. Thank you for being with us. by
   • Answer: Good afternoon, everyone. Glad to be with you. by
2. • Hi there. Can the Democrats win in November if neither person on the ticket has experience serving in uniform? Thanks. by
   • Answer: I don't believe that experience in uniform is a prerequisite for winning in November. But I do believe the Democrats have to convince the American people that they can do a better job on national security than the Republicans, and that means protecting America at home and American interests abroad. It means being tough-minded where necessary, as well as having a larger vision for security. by
3. • Gen. Clark, are you really not participating in the Democratic convention, and why not? Thanks. by
   • Answer: I will be at the convention as soon as I finish some business requirements in Europe that I simply couldn't reschedule. I should be there on Thursday as things now stand. by
4. • The Caucusus sounds very much like the Balkans in that there are multitudes of conflicting ethnic groups and cultures vying for "ownership" of these nearby territories. Mikhail Gorbachev yesterday made the case that Russia has fallen victim to propaganda of the West and that the recent conflict is Saakashvili's responsibility. Of course, the truth lies somewhere in between, but I wonder how Russia, the West, and rest of the international community can ever find its way toward a sustainable relationship that isn't constantly shadowed with suspicion. Gorbachev laid out some basics, and for the most part it's undeniable that the United States has a bad habit of condescension toward the rest of the world. I wonder, do you think that new understanding will require new international institutions, or reinforcement of existing institutions such as the work within NATO to develop relations with Russia? Are we still looking at remnants of Cold War personalities that will inhibit relationships for the foreseeable future? What prescriptions for the long term cross your mind that could see Russian satisfaction beyond a return to superpower/Soviet resurgence? by
   • Answer: A very interesting set of questions. But the first step to answering any of these is that Georgia must be "unoccupied" by the Russians, including Abkhazia and South Ossetia. I believe the Russians should make restitution, also. Then we can have the longer discussion about new institutions, ending centuries of mistrust, and other issues that will need to be addressed, but cannot be addressed now. Russia's leadership seems to view the world as a chessboard, and sees the game of geostrategy as its primary duty. You know, how many countries do you control. It is an archaic and dangerous way to look at the world, but until they change their mindset, the smaller countries in Easter Europe have every reason to be concerned. They need a strong NATO to prevent a Russian resurgence - and of course, it's just that strong NATO that the Russians say they object to. So, these are important issues, but not at this point appropriate for discussion. First, the Russians have to leave, completely, and with restitution. by
5. • Gen. Clark, there is not one Democrat who has as much and as broad a range of experience as you. Can you name one person in the Democratic Party who has better qualifications than you to be Sen. Obama's running mate? I, and others, feel very strongly that we want you to be on the Democratic ticket. Thank you. -- Lori Mueller, Eland, Wis. by
   • Answer: Lori, I'm flattered by your question, but seriously, the Democrats have a wealth of talented people, many, many with a lot more political experience than I have, and many who could be great running mates for Barrack. by
6. • Assuming Putin wants to rebuild the Soviet Empire by reclaiming former states -- which I think he does -- what does this do to the status of the various nuclear weaponry and materials that could become misplaced, accidentally on purpose, in the ensuing chaos? How much more difficult will it become to verify the whereabouts of such materials and weapons? How high do you feel the risk is of this happening, and those items ending up being sold to the highest bidder? Thanks, Wes. by
   • Answer: The U.S. has worked very hard to denuclearize the newly independent states, and has succeeded, with the exception, of course, of Russia. So, however much chaos might ensue, there are no nuclear weapons at risk there. However, it's not clear that all the Russian nuclear weapons and materials are adequately safeguarded. We've invested several billion dollars over the years trying to help the Russians secure nuclear materials, but success has been problematic. by
7. • Gen. Clark, sir, do you think Russia will strike Poland if they go through with allowing our missile defense system in their country? Do you think either of the presidential candidates ios equipped to deal with Russia? Thank you for your lifetime of serving our country and doing what you can to make the world a better place. by
   • Answer: The Russians aren't going to strike Poland, and if they were, they would do it regardless of whether we had an anti-missile facility there. This is Russian rhetoric aimed at intimidating Eastern Europe and weakening NATO. It is designed to weaken our resolve to see Russia leave Georgia and provide new fears with which to distract us. by
8. • Many of your supporters are angry that the Obama campaign seems to have "thrown you under the bus." Do you feel this is what's happened, and what would you say to your supporters about the matter? by
   • Answer: Thanks to all of you who came online with me today, and all of you who are supporting me. No one has ever had more loyal friends, and I am very grateful to you all. Now, let's do our duty to helping put a new administration in place. by
9. • Regarding your future plans: I always get a clearer picture of what's happening in the world after hearing or reading your explanations. Will you (please) continue commenting, taking interviews, writing editorials and books, etc., whatever happens in the election? by
   • Answer: Thanks for your nice comment. I do hope to continue to be able to present my views, regardless of the election outcome. by
10. • Gen. Clark, I have read that Europe is quite dependent on Russia as a source of energy, particularly natural gas. I have also read that the development of unreliable, intermittent sources of renewable energy, particularly industrial wind turbines, has not lessened this dependence since Russia's gas is needed to provide backup to wind. How can energy independence really be achieved by any country that develops unreliable sources of energy, such as grid-connected wind power, which needs consistent backup from reliable sources that require fuels that cannot be obtained within their own borders? Also, can any country really claim energy independence if foreign corporations own their energy facilities? Thank you. -- Jan, Altoona, Pa. by
    • Answer: Jan, Russia is providing Europe much of its natural gas, and as British and Norwegian gas depletes, that percentage is expected to rise. What Europe must do is diversify its supply. LNG is one alternative, and that is being developed. Nuclear is another. Solar and wind do help ameliorate demand, but without suitable energy storage mechanisms, they cannot provide the necessary power to meet "base load." But adding the storage is just a matter of threat perception and economics. It could and probably will be done. Of course, for us in America, the situation is much different. We have a lot of oil and gas, abundant coal, and the opportunities for wind and solar that the market is just beginning to recognize. We can certainly become energy independent if we choose to do so. By the way, I should also mention energy conservation; this is a critically important aspect of energy independence. by
11. • Do you accept that the United States and its allies basically crushed the Soviet Union by outspending it on military might via the resources provided by our economic engine? And if so, what are the chances that the same fate may await the United States sometime in the future (30 years?) as the economic might of China grows. by
    • Answer: The truth is that the Soviet Union fell because people could no longer accept the premises that provided its foundation. Marxism-Leninism lost legitimacy; human nature wasn't perfectible; public ownership of the means of production didn't eliminate avarice, corruption and lethargy. So, as the Soviet Union fell behind the West economically, and still tried to spend 25% or more of its GDP on military goods, it simply lost its economic competitiveness. That is not going to happen to us. by
12. • Gen. Clark, many of your supporters have been very disappointed in the response of the Obama campaign and other Democratic leaders to the ruckus over your "Face the Nation" appearance, where you attempted to help Obama win the presidency. We are hesitant to support someone who did not have your back. We know that you continue to support him, but some of us are angry over his response, and others are still angry over the way Obama won the primaries. Do you have anything to say that can help unify us or help us feel better in supporting Obama for president? Do you believe that he is really qualified to be an effective president? by
    • Answer: Thanks for your support. I wish it had worked out differently, that I hadn't been taken out of context, etc., but it is what it is, and we must still put our people back into positions where our beliefs and values can be worked for. So, I'm supporting Barrack and the ticket wholeheartedly and ask you to do the same. by
13. • You've been recently working in the wind-energy field. What do you think of New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg's idea to build windmills in New York? For now, he just means offshore, but do you think it's possible to design compact windmills that would fit into an urban setting or that could be integrated into existing structures? by
    • Answer: I was glad to see the mayor's statement. No one is doing a very good job with offshore wind. It's a big technology lead right now, even though everyone talks about it. The combination of vibration and salt is really tough on big machinery. But city-scale wind - absolutely possible. We'll be trying to step up and do this, I'm sure. by
14. • The Wall Street Journal is reporting that Iraq and the United States have agreed to a complete withdrawal of U.S. troops by 2011. If this is true, does this effectively neuter Obama's 16-month withdrawal plan (which would be complete by mid-2010) as a political issue? Do you believe that the upcoming political conventions have anything to do with the timing of a possible official announcement of such an agreement? by
    • Answer: First, the 16-month withdrawal wasn't the complete removal of troops. It left room for training forces, going after Al Qaeda, and security, so it's a little different than the 2011 agreement, whatever that says (I haven't read it yet), but you can be sure that Iraq, Iran, Afghanistan and Al Qaeda will be prominent in this election no matter what. by
15. • Gen. Clark: Yesterday it was reported that John McCain implied, in response to a questioner at a rally, that he agreed with a return of the draft. What is your position on a draft and on national service requirements in general? by
    • Answer: I can't see us returning to a draft at this point. I do like national service and hope we can do more of it. I doubt McCain really meant to call for the reinstitution of the draft; if he did, he'd be reversing about 40 years of Republican Party philosophy. by
16. • Hello, General. What are your thoughts on what is going on between Russia and Georgia, and how do you think their conflict will end? by
    • Answer: Briefly, this is a conflict that was a long time in coming, that the West should have worked harder to prevent, and that can only end with a complete Russian withdrawal and restitution. The conflict reflects Russia's desires to retake control of its "near abroad" and maintain a security perimeter far from its own borders. It also reflects Russia's fundamental misunderstanding of major global challenges and forces. by
17. • I am a retired U.S. Army person of Active, Reserve and Guard duties to frame my history and interest in this question. As a RVN returnee, I agreed with the content in Gen. Powell's book about military planning and operations. The operations planning must include the logic for the entry and exit from the situation. I believe that the early Iraq operation failed to establish this function; hence, Gen. Powell leaving the State Department. What should be the plan for Iraq, and don't answer with the BHO cut-and-run tactic. You and I both know that is not truly the option. by
    • Answer: Thanks for coming online. I think we have to do our best to succeed in Iraq. I am not sure what that success will be - certainly not what President Bush called for, some kind of Western-looking democracy. But maybe we can get out with a peaceful, nonthreatening, stable country that is moving toward democracy. I do want to say, though, that I don't find Barrack's position cut and run. We have so many competing requirements, and our pressing military challenge is Afghanistan, and we are in grave danger there of failing. So some redeployment is mandated for military reasons. Barrack doesn't want us to lose, he wants us to win, win the right war in the right way. by
18. • Dear Gen. Clark: I have a tremendous amount of respect for your wisdom and sound judgment. I doubt that President Bush would ever listen to your advice, so I have very little hope about our foreign policy while he is still in office. If elected president, would either Barack Obama or John McCain take your phone call and seriously consider what you had to say if you had some specific advice that you wanted to share with them if there was ever a major foreign policy crisis or if a very complex foreign policy decision had to be made? Thank you. --Mitch Dworkin by
    • Answer: Mitch, thanks for your support. I'll do whatever I can to help, but you have to really be in the cockpit to help steer the boat. by
19. • What are the top three actions the incoming administration should take with regard to the Guantanamo Bay detainees? Is it correct to call them detainees at this point, or are they prisoners? by
    • Answer: Ask NATO to take charge of GTN+MO, then close it, and have the prisoners examined and tried in international courts. by
20. • I think a reality check is in order. Was Bill Clinton an effective and knowledgable commander in chief? by
    • Answer: Nobody does everything right. Everyone makes mistakes. Starting with George Washington. But Clinton did well; he took his responsibilities seriously, learned the issues, and was personally engaged. He kept us out of most conflicts and won one -- Kosovo -- decisively, and without American casualties. by
21. • How can Obama overcome some of the assertions that he is not patriotic? by
    • Answer: He has to demonstrate toughness and a propensity to stand up for America. He has and will do that. by
22. • Gen. Clark, as you may know, Canadians lost three more soldiers in Afghanistan yesterday, and with our comparatively small military, each one of these losses is personal. If a withdrawal from Iraq allows the U.S .to refocus on the "first front" again, what would you advise a new administration to change about its strategies there? Many suggest that a combative mission in the tribal border regions will always be fruitless and that a more humanitarian, peace-keeping strategy would be better. However, NGOs and other humanitarian work (now also under attack there) depend on military security to keep going. by
    • Answer: We need a new success strategy for Afghanistan. It has to start with recognizing the essentially tribal nature of the country. You can't expect a strong central government. Then you have to work to provide an economic rationale for the country; there are several, including food production, energy, and transit. All should be worked. Then regional forces would be responsible for security. But the key is the economy, for without that, there are no jobs, and no hope for the future. We may need to reinforce the border with Pakistan until the Pakistanis sort all that out. by