Secret Governance |
James L. Hirsen, J.D., Ph.D. |
November 17, 1999 |
NEWSMAX.COM-In
the early 1950s, due to certain highly publicized Communist espionage cases, national
security was foremost in the minds of American citizens. In 1953 President Dwight
Eisenhower signed an executive order dealing with the subject of classification of
information. Eisenhower, similar to his predecessor, President Truman, failed to cite any
kind of statutory authority for this executive order but instead justified it from a
general claim of presidential autonomy. The executive order itself provided no effective
control over what would be designated as classified material. It also had no practical way
of declassifying documents.
In
a 1968 hearing on the Tonkin Gulf incident, the Senate Foreign Relations Committee was
astonished at testimony given by Secretary of Defense Robert S. McNamara, indicating that
government classifications now existed that were "above top secret." These
classifications were outside of President Eisenhower's executive order and were themselves
classified.
In
1971 President Nixon issued an executive order that created new power for the executive
branch to investigate individual American citizens, ostensibly to discover whether such
persons constituted a threat to the security of the nation. The investigative activities
that were authorized included secret wiretapping, forcible entry into offices, and use of
undercover informants to infiltrate suspicious groups.
Richard
Nixon also issued an executive order in 1972 regarding the security classification of
documents and information. The order included provisions that allowed the executive branch
to more easily prevent Congress from inquiring into certain foreign policy areas. These
same security classifications continued through executive orders issued by Presidents
Carter and Reagan, and most recently through a new version issued by President Clinton.
Executive
orders have also been used over the years to keep certain information secret from the
public, press, and even Congress. These types of orders originated from documents called
National Security Council Policy Papers. The instruments go by various titles, including
action memoranda, decision memoranda, and presidential decision directives (PDDs). Because
of their classified status, though, we do not know the details or even the exact number of
instruments presently on the books. However, what little information we do know about two
PDDs in particular is most troubling because of the profound implications for our military
policy and readiness.
An
executive order called Presidential Decision Directive 25 was signed by President Clinton
in 1994. The fine points of this order remain a secret. However, a summary of the
directive, along with a variety of reports leaked to the press, give a fairly clear
indication of the content. This executive order apparently gives the president the power
to place U.S. Armed Forces under foreign command. U.S. troops are now routinely ordered by
the president to serve under UN command in UN operations, without any authorization from
Congress.
During
the Clinton administration, U.S. military forces have joined in a number of United Nations
interventionist efforts, including actions in Somalia, Macedonia, and Haiti. Most
recently, the war in Yugoslavia, which violated NATO's own charter as well as the War
Powers Resolution of 1973, also comes under the jurisdiction of this executive order. To
this day, the U.S. military continues to serve under foreign command in a
"peacekeeping" capacity.
In
yet another affront to constitutional procedure, a single presidential signature on a lone
instrument changed four decades of military policy in an instant. The executive order that
transformed our international demeanor and altered the global balance of power was
Presidential Decision Directive 60. The massive shift in policy again required no
involvement from Congress.
Prior
to the issuance of this executive order, our nation had a policy of launching a nuclear
missile upon warning. In the event a missile was heading toward an American target and
this fact was verified, our policy was to launch on receipt of verification. This
approach, of course, was part of a calculated deterrent that came to be known as a policy
of mutually assured destruction. It is precisely because of this firm approach that we
have enjoyed a lengthy peace and have not actually had to use such weaponry.
The
new policy established by PDD 60 literally forces our nation to absorb a nuclear first
strike before retaliating. This action dramatically reduces the deterrent factor and
increases the chances that an enemy might launch a preemptory strike. When electromagnetic
pulse warheads with the capacity to disable computers are added to the mix, it quickly
becomes evident that this policy serves to encourage military aggression from our
adversaries and undermines the geopolitical stability of the world. Not only does this
course run counter to common sense, it diminishes our military advantage and fails to
serve our country's best interests.
In
our next segment, we will examine ways in which executive orders are being used
surreptitiously to advance a comprehensive global agenda.
Reproduced with the permission of NewsMax.com. All rights reserved