Cato Daily Dispatch for October 22, 2003
Subscribe to the Daily Dispatch via email
Subscribe to the Daily Dispatch via PDA (AvantGo)
(Links to outside sources were active as of the date of this dispatch; however, not all news sources maintain links to current stories indefinitely. Some links also may require registration.)
Rumsfeld's Grim Memo on War Against TerrorismReport: Pakistan, Saudi Arabia in Nukes-for-Oil Deal
Senators Call Criticism of Patriot Act Unfair
Rumsfeld's Grim Memo on War Against Terrorism
"The United States has no yardstick for measuring progress in the war on terrorism, has not 'yet made truly bold moves' in fighting al-Qaeda and other terror groups, and is in for a 'long, hard slog' in Iraq and Afghanistan, according to a memo that Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld sent to top-ranking Defense officials last week," USA Today reports.
"Despite upbeat statements by the Bush administration, the memo to Rumsfeld's top staff reveals significant doubts about progress in the struggle against terrorists. Rumsfeld says that 'it is not possible' to transform the Pentagon quickly enough to effectively fight the anti-terror war and that a 'new institution' might be necessary to do that."
In "The War on Terror: Two Years Hence," Subodh Atal, an independent foreign affairs analyst, writes: "The past year has thus been marked by a series of tactical and symbolic victories, while strategic goals such as isolation and destruction of al Qaeda and its allies, and maintaining international consensus on the terror war, have been de-emphasized. Unless the Bush administration practices greater discipline in avoiding further distractions from the war on terror, Americans one year hence will find themselves no more secure than in the dark days immediately after 9/11."
Report: Pakistan, Saudi Arabia in Nukes-for-Oil Deal
"Pakistan and Saudi Arabia have concluded a secret agreement on 'nuclear cooperation' that will provide the Saudis with nuclear-weapons technology in exchange for cheap oil, according to a ranking Pakistani insider," reports The Washington Times.
"The disclosure came at the end of a 26-hour state visit to Islamabad last weekend by Crown Prince Abdullah bin Abdulaziz, Saudi Arabia's de facto ruler, who flew across the Arabian Sea with an entourage of 200, including Foreign Minister Prince Saud Al Faisal and several Cabinet ministers."
In "Pakistan in America's War against Terrorism: Strategic Ally or Unreliable Client?", Leon T. Hadar, Cato research fellow in foreign policy studies, writes: "Following the Sept. 11 attacks, "Islamabad still regarded Afghanistan as a strategic ally and ideological associate. Afghan training camps and Afghan recruits helped to prepare the next Pakistani-instigated insurgency against the Indians in Kashmir and to spread radical Islamic ideas and institutions around the world through 'jihad-international' brigades, some of which were tied to the al-Qaeda network."
Cato Senior Fellow Doug Bandow says that it's time for the United States to rethink its relationship with the Saudis. In "Befriending Saudi Princes: A High Price for a Dubious Alliance," he writes: "The United States must not retreat from the world. But it should stop intervening militarily and supporting illegitimate and unpopular regimes where its vital interests are not involved, as in Saudi Arabia."
Senators Call Criticism of Patriot Act Unfair
"Democratic and Republican lawmakers said yesterday that the USA Patriot Act has drawn unmerited criticism from civil libertarians at both ends of the political spectrum who have targeted it with complaints over unrelated issues," The Washington Post reports.
"Even as some members of the Senate Judiciary Committee said they want to see elements of the Patriot Act modified, others contended that some of the attacks on the anti-terrorism legislation have been unfair. The act, they said, has been inaccurately cited for harsh treatment of detainees in the months after the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks and President Bush's designation of some terrorism suspects as enemy combatants."
In "Breaking the Vicious Cycle: Preserving Our Liberties While Fighting Terrorism," Timothy Lynch, director of Cato's Project on Criminal Justice, writes: "To assuage the widespread anxiety of the populace, policymakers make the dubious claim that they can prevent terrorism by curtailing the privacy and civil liberties of the people. Because everyone wants to be safe and secure, such legislation is usually very popular and passes the legislative chambers of Congress with lopsided majorities. Too many people indulge in the assumption that they are now safe, since the police, with their newly acquired powers, will somehow be able to foil the terrorists before they can kill again. The plain truth, however, is that it is only a matter of time before the next attack."
Jonathan Block, editor, jblock@cato.org