March i April 1979

On the Cover-

:arter & Foreign Policy

Volume xv, Number 3 Price 5 1.50 Commentary

Reviving the Military Draft

Book Review

Political Potpourri

GOP Primary Winner Tim Petri Faces Goyke in Wisconsin , Congressional Special Election

rower Seeks to Engineer Upset or Fulton Machine in Nashville

Washington, UncolD . f DR and Connally?

~la nton Finale Propels \.\Iexander to Strong Slarl

Reagan Lead Dwindling

and more ... RIPON fOR~M COMMENTARY

COMMENTARY Repealing the Repealing the 13th Amendment 2 13th Amendment POLITICAL POTPOURRI 3 ith surprising rapidity a push fo r the return of the mil itary draft has gained momentum in the last few BOOK REVIEW 7 W months. Generally the proposals for the return of conscription have been coupled with plans for some fonn of universal compulsory national service. Under these various FOREIGN POLICY sc hemes alt young men or all youth would be required to serve six months to two years in either the military or some Changing the Rules alternative civilian service. of the G::l.lne(s) 9 Several justifications have been advanced for the civilian service alternative_ Politicians scared about the political RIPON SOCIETY repercussions of proposing a return of the draft hope to ANNUAL MEETING 16 soften the resistance by providing some fonn of alternative youth service in hospitals, day care centers, VISTA projects, civilian conservation camps, Indian reservations, eiC. Other proponents such as Kingman Brewster view an army of seve r­ al million subsistence wage youth laboring on social service projecls as the onl y way 10 achieve liberal goals now Iha t 3 tax conscious public is not willing to pay the market cost of such services. 17le Washington MomMy , a normally sensible publica tion. has advanced an even more ingenious argument RIPON fOR~M for compulsory national se rvice in in recent " Platform for Editor: Arthur M. llill II the Eight ies". Afler bemoaning the decline of voluntarism in Executive Editor: Steven O. Livengood modern society. this foun tain of liberal chic proposes to beat Aft Director: Elizabeth Lee (The Graphic Tuna) this altruism back into o ur wayward youth. Quoth the Plal­ TIlE RI PON FORUM (ISSN 0035·5526) is published month­ form for 1984: ly (ex«pt for the Match/ April and July/August combined issues) by the Ripon Society, Inc. In the pubJi c~ lion , the Society hopes \0 pro"ide a forum for "Because the idea of volunteering is so foreign to young Amer­ fresh ideas, well researched proposals, and a spirit of creative ica ns today, we believe a universal service would have 10 be criticism and innovation in the Republican Party. Manu· compulsory at first. lis chances of succeeding would other· scrip ts and photographs are solicited, but do not represent the views of the Society unless so Slated. wise be slim ; for too many kids, the fear of being left behind Contents areoopyrighted C 1979 by the Ripon Society, lnc., by their peers in the race for credentials would prevent Ihem 800 181h Sireet. N.W. , Washington, D.C. 20006. from jOining. But as our allitudes toward altruistic service Second dau postaAe and fU$ paid at Washington, D.C. and changed, we believe thai kind of paranoia would subside. If additional mailing offices. il were seen as a way or fulfilling a responsibility to the Subscription rates: S I 5 per year. 57.50 for students. service· men, Peace Corps, Vista and other volunteers. Overseas, community, rather than as a mandatory mot of shorl-term add 56. Pl ease allow five wuks for address c han~ s. drudgery, and if Ihose beyond the age of service nevertheless The Ripon Society, Inc" 10hn C. Topping, Jr., President , is a set an example by volunteering their own time, it might not Republican rescarch and policy organi-tation whose members arc business. academic, and professional men and women. have to be compulsory for long. By instilling the spirit of It is headquartered in Washington. D.C. , with fifteen chap· altruism at a young age , universal service could also sustain in ten, seve ral affiliated subchapters, and National Associate us a lifelong commitment 10 helping each other." members throughout the United States. The Society is sup­ ported by chapter dues, individual contributions, and reve­ nues from its publica tions and contract work. Whether the aims of uni versal youth service proponents are

2 Ripon Forum to sugarcoat a return of the draft, to eliminate black youth some critics see m to be insi nuating. Would such troops unemployment , to realize the Great Society on the cheap or mutin y, it is asked, if the U.s. intervened in favor of South to inoculate our youth against an epidemic of selfishness, Africa or against Uganda? Yet this question of the loyalty of their nostrum is far more monstrous than the military draft. black troops has already been put to the test. Du ri ng the More over, these un iversal service proposals, in the view of urban riots of the late six ties significantly black units such as most learned constitutional experts, expressly violate the the 82nd Airborne exhibited su perb discipline when patrol· 111irteenth Amendment. While the military draft can argu· ling black neigllborh oods. Moreover, the somewhat dispro· ably be sustained against a claim of involuntary servitude portionate percentage of blacks in the military is less a func­ because of the breadth of the war power, no competing con· tion of recruitment than of the rela ti vely greater tendency of stitutional value exists to sustain a sys tem of compulsory of blacks in the military to reenlist. This is largely the civilian service. Proponents are in effect seeking to piggy . result of a disparity in opportunities open to younger se mi · back on the war powcr to usher in a system of compulsory skilled blacks and whites in the priva te sec tor. civilian service that could not stand constitutional scru tiny on its own merits. The weaknesses of today's military manpower system are generally concentrated in specific skill areas and are far Aside from its dubious constitutional base , a system of uni· beller addressed by a rifle shot approach than by a shotgun versal compulsory national se rvice would prove profoundly method such as the draft or universal youth service. The detrimental both in ilS philosophy and in its economic military is ex periencing difficulty recruiting and retaining impact. Aside from its coe rcive effect on American youth, doctors and it is having trouble re tai ningjullior officers with universal service would enormously swell the powers of the training in such higllly technical areas as nuclear engineering. cen lral government. Wh oever controlled the executive There is no inherent reason why most of the doctors servic· branch could determine which organizations coul d be right. ing the military, particularly those based in the U.S., must be fu l beneficiaries of a free labor supply paid subsistence wages in the uniformed service. At only a marginal increase in cost by the state. The potential fo r partisan abuse and political the military could staff its facili ties with civilian doctors paid corruption in such unbridled executive branch discretion at competitive salaries. Stateside military dependents and could make the abuses of Watergate seem like small potatoes. retirees could obtain health ca re on the private market with Uke the chain gangs of the Deep South these youth in· government pay ing the full cost of health insurance. The ductees could be placed at the service of local political military could increase its retention of essential technical bosses. Certainl y the conditions of work would be far better specialists by adopting gene rous and more selectively tar· than in earl ier forms of peonage. !eve rtheless, involunta ry geted retention bonuses. Finally the troublesome future servitude with due process is still slavery. A system of problem posed by the demographics of a sh rinking supply of universal service could reduce the seemingly intractable young adolescen t males can be addressed by increaSing op· problem of youth unemployment to the levels of such portunity for women in the military. nations as the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics or the People's Republic of China. There is nothing inconsistent between a posture of milit ary strength and the main tenance of a volunteer military. The Ironically proponents of compulsory nat ional service have failure of will of the Carter Admin istration is hardly reo gained impetus from arguments that the volunteer military is dressed by stumbling into a system of universal youth too expensive. Yet , even if youth inductees into the com· service. As a nation built in large part by refugees from con· pulsory service system are paid onl y subsistence wages, the scription and peonage in Europe and split apart by the issue added cost of such a system would range in the tens of bil· of black slavery, we can hardly ignore the lessons of our lions of dollars. The ba ll ooning of military personnel costs as history. With the death of Bill Steiger there is no one in a portion of the Pentagon budgct has caused some hardware· Congress leading opposition to the increasingly well COil· conscious conse rvatives to focus on the volunteer military as certed figlll to institute universal youth service. We can only a scapegoat. Yet, on closer scrutiny we find that onl y a tiny hope that such leadership will come forward and that Con· percentage of the increase in military personnel costs is due gress will look before it leaps in to an unknown chasm. • to increased salaries for recruits. Nearly all of the increased sala ry expenses have gonc to noncommissioned officers or to lhe offi cer corps. If the draft is brought back is ar'lonc to suppose that these careerists will welcome a slash .n their sala rics to late nineteen six ti es levels? GOP Prim ary Wi nner Tim Pelri Faces Goyke in Wisconsin Cri ti cs of the volunteer military have seized with glee upon Congressional Special Eleclio ll reports indicating our difficulty in mobilizing to fight a pro· tracted conventional war on the European Continent. Wh ile cOnlingcncy planning is useful for military war garners and like·minded hobbyists on Capitol Hil1 this possibili ty seems tate Senator Thomas E. (Tim) Petri won a de cisive to defy reality. The likelihood of a protracted conventional victory February 20 in a seven way Republican war across the European Continent seems only marginally Sprimary for the Sixth District Congressional vacancy more probable than a snowball fight across thc Sahara Desert. crea ted by the death of Bill Steige r. Petri , a forme r Ripon Society executive director, carried half the counties in his Another hobgoblin that has been raised to discredit the dist ri ct and ran well district-wide. His four se ri ous opponents. volunteer military is the specter of a predominan tl y black two conservatives and two moderates, ge nerally did well in army. Such an army would be somewhat less than reliable , their home areas but failed to mount strong campaigns else·

March/April 1979 3 where. Garnering 35.3 per cent of the total GOP vote Petri " Power for the People" campaign for the past year on shoe· nearly doubled the vote of his closest competilOr. string financing.

Meanwhile Oshkosh State Senator Gary Goyke handily won Meanwhile Fulton's image of invincibility has begun to the Democratic primary. Petri's surprisingly strong showing erode. The mayor finished a poor third in the August 1978 and the heavy GOP primary turnout (nearly three times the Democ ratic gubernatorial primary and barely carri ed Nash­ Democratic turnout) seem to augur well for the GOP in the ville. Moreover , Fulton has su ffe red by obvious similarities April 3 special election. Democra t Goyke, however, is a between his modus operandi and that of the re cen t Demo­ strong campaigner and has run very well in normally Repub· cratic Governor, Ra y Blanton. "Fulton's a Blan ton without li can Oshkosh. The Petri campa ign is gearing up fo r a tiglllly the pardon power" remarked one veteran observer of Ten­ contested election in this district which President Ford nar· nessee politics. rowly carried in 1976. Citizens for Petri has headquarten at 43 South Main Street, Fond du Lac, Wi sconsin 54935. Area Given virtually no chance at the outset, Power has developed Code (414) 9234050. considerable momentum in the last few months. He has attracted the strong support of former Mayor Beverly Briley, still probably the most well respected political leader in Nashville and Davidson County. In this officially nonparti­ san ra ce Power has gained the lion's share of support of Nashville activists in both the Bob Clement and Lamar Alex­ ander gubernatorial campaigns. Clement lost the Democ ratic gubernatorial primary by an eyelash and several million Power Seeks to Engineer Upset dollars to East Tennessee banker Jake Butcher. Clement, the of Fulton Machine son of a popular Democratic governor, nearly edged Fulton in Nashville in Nashville. Exploiting resentments by both Fulton and Clement partisans against the free spending campaign of erhaps the most fascinating mayoralty campaign this Butcher, Republican nominee Lamar Alexander carried year is centered in Nashville, Tennessee, a thriving me· heavily Democratic Nashville by a landslide. Although Ale x­ P tropolis that can claim to be "the music capital of the ander is staying out of the mayoralty race, many of his world." A classic confrontation is shaping up between a campaigners seem to be fl ocking to Power's banner. powerful old-s tyle political machi ne headed by incumbent Mayor Richard Fulton and a young iss ue-oriented reformer Already 1979 has witnessed the defeat of mayoral incum· in the person of35 year old Daniel E. Power III . bents in Chicago and Kansas City. Nashville may see a similar result in its August 2 election. Power's victory would fulton is a long-time Nashville political fixture. A veteran be virtually unique in one respect. Despite the extensive Democratic Congressman from Nashville, Fulton won the body of knowledge that has grown up in this country in the mayoralty in a landslide in 1975 when Mayor Be verly Briley. fields of city planning and public administration, rarely do the highly regarded father of consolidated city-county mayoral candidates have extensive backgrounds in these government , retired. Fulton apparently saw the mayoralty as areas. Instead they seem clubhouse politicians, skilled in the the stepping stone to the 1978 Democratic gubernatorial art of compromise but often ignorant of the essentials of nomi nation. Soon after Fulton took the reigns of power, efficient municipal government, or lawyer/reformers in the Nashville's once textbook model of municipal government mold of Richardson Dilworth or 10hn Lindsay. High .minded began to give way to a style of politics reminiscent of in their objectives but often unfamiliar with the problems of Dashiell Hammett's novel , TI,e Glass Key . A local liquor everyday folk , the patrician reformers have tended to give dealer and political crony of Fulton soon gained de facto reform a bad name. patronage control over the Nashville Police Department. As Fulton geared up for his gubernatorial campaign city con· A Power victory could spark candidacies in other big cities of Iracton found themselves strong-armed to bankroll the a new sort of mayoral or ci ty council aspirant - individ uals mayor's campaign for higher office. trained in the disciplines of economic and responsive muni­ cipal government. The Power for Mayor campaign can be At this point Power, hitherto a political unknown, stepped contacted at P.O . Box 1979, Nashville . Tennessee, 37202. forward. The same day in January, 1978 that Fulton de­ clared for the governorship, Power announced for Fulton's job. Typically the young urban reformer who has tackled the old·line city machine has been a lawyer from a well-to·do family. In marked contrast Power is a civil engineer and Wash ing ton , Uncoln , FDR and Connally? city planner from a moderate income Nashville family. A civil engineering graduate of Nashville's highly regarded Van­ n the last two months the star of the Republican presi­ derbilt University, Power has a Masters in City Planning from dential stage has been Texan John Connally. His crowd the University of Tennessee. Although Power ha s extensive I appeal is a spicy blend of constitutional radicalism, macho experience in the administrations of both the late Demo­ politics and chutzpah. The former Texas Governor and cratic governor Frank Clement and the popular, moderate Secretary of the Treasury has embraced a staggering array of Republican former governor Winfield Dunn, he has never constitutional amendments and other radical departures. He before run for public office. The tall engi neer/planner has favors electing Pre sidents to one six year term, distributing become an effective public speaker as he has pressed his the proceeds of the corporate income tax equally to all

4 Ripon Forum Americans who voted in the preceding election , subjecting Barnes, a protege of the late Presiden t. Connally's Demo­ American youth to a system of compulsory national service cratic allies in Texas are meanwhile seeking to change the and adopting a constitutional requirement for a balanced Texas presidential primary da te . Tory Democrats suffered in budget. 1976 when many normally Democratic conservative voters deserted their party's primary to vote in the Reagan-Ford There seem some inherent contradictions in Connally's posi­ contest that same day. Liberal Democrats unexpectedly won tions that might prove troublesome to an ordi nary mortal many primaries fo r state and local offices. To head off a but hardly to someone with Connally's personality. Connal­ repetition of this event in 1980, conserva ti ve Democrats are ly's late January campaign kickoff at the National Press Club seeking to move the presidential primary to March while focused on the Carter Administration's foreign policy weak­ leaving the state and local primary in May. Under Texas' ness and alleged stinginess on defense spending_ The dust open registration system , voters could first vo te in the Re­ had barely settled from his announcement when Connally publican presidential primary and then a few weeks later was calling for an across-the-board five percent cut in all vote in the Dem ocratic primary fo r state offices. By most cal­ Federal spending including defense. Seemingly vulnerable to culations this stagge red election would benefit Connally who attack from conserva tives favoring Reagan or Crane, John would be expected to reap a double bonus- the bulk of the Connally managed to weathe( this flap with no appa rent additional crossove r votes and the psychological boost of a damage. strong Texas primary showing on latcr state primaries. Re­ gardless of whether the attempt to stagger the primaries is The appeal of the Connally campaign is , however. hardly a successfuL Connally confidently predicts that he will win. function of issues but ra ther of the Texan's success in pro­ jecting his person as synonymous with strength and lea der­ Since his declaration of candidacy Connally has reportedly ship. In launching his campaign John Connally stated that at been showered by contributions from senior executives of three times of ea rl ier national crisis, great leaders had come major co rporations. Although he lacks a strong base among forward in the persons of Presidents George Washington, elected Republicans, Connally seems the favorite of the For­ Abraham Uncoln and Franklin D. Roosevelt_ No w in its tune 500 and the oil industry. TIlis fact alone shoul d ensure fourth great national cri sis the country might, he suggested, Connally financial staying power through the early primaries_ be re ady for another great leader. It is unclear how well Connally will parlay this financial clout, but it seems certain that LBJ's and Nixon's favorite Such modest humility would prove the undoing of many poli tician will moun t a serious bid for the nation's highest politicians but the silver-tongued Ho uston lawyer has served office. himself up to many Republican audiences as the prescription for the nation's ills. His most successful response so far oc­ curred at an early March gathering of Midwest Republican officials. Connall y impressed the assemblage so much that he Blanton Finale Propels Alexander to Strong Start edged his closest competitors, Ronald Reagan and George Bush, in a straw poll of participants. Despite Connally's uring his four years as Governor of Tennessee- and remarkable early progress, some observers believe that he particularly during the last few weeks of hi s terlll­ should not soon anticipate seeing his face carved on Mount D Dem ocrat Ray Blanton accompli shed for Tennessee Rushmore. Stumbling blocks they cite to a Connally Presi­ Republicans approximately what General Sherman did for dency include: Georgia Democrats more than a cen tury before. A widely shared view of Blanton's tenure was advanced by nre Mem­ Concern among many issue-oriented Republicans and phis Commercial Appeal in an editorial two days after other limited government voters o\'er Connally's strong Blanton had been ousted from office: statist philosophy. Not only is Connally a former Demo­ cratic officeholder, he remains, these critics suggest , a Blanton has brought more shame to Tennessee than other wholehearted believer in FOR and LBJ style big gove rn ­ governor in the state's history. From the very beginning, ment approaches. his administration has been steeped in controversy and charges of wrongdoing. Some of his record has been ludi­ The belief among many Republican politicos that Con­ crous - like the telephone calls at state expense 10 a nally is vul nerable to more damaging disclosures concern ­ secretary in Washington or his leiter to President Carter ing his past activity in Texas or national politics. urging a ban on "negative" news_ Some of it has been maddening - like the continuous interference of patron­ The feeling tllat Connally's close professional and finan­ age and politics in the operation of state government or cial ties to the domestic oil industry and to Arab petro­ the jet trips to sunny climes when the tem perature turned dollar in vestors may not sit well in 1980 with American cold. Some of it has been friglltening - like the clemency voters upset over a doll ar per gallon gasoline _ scandal.

Unfazed by such considerations, " Di g John " Connally is I.n December 1978 two of Blan ton's top aides we re indicted pressing ahead full-steam. The former Texas governor is on federal charges of selling pardons 10 prison inmates. For cashing in his chits with the LBJ wing of the De mocratic the past year foll owing Blanton's declara tion that he in­ Part y, cu rrently bereft of any other representative on the tende d to free a political crony's son who had been convicted presidential scene. His triumphant campaign tour through of double murder the state's clemency process has been the Texas seemed like a reunion of the LBJ faithful. Among the focus of sharp controversy _ No matter how much they had sponsors of the events was former Ueutenant Governor Ben come to expect the unexpected from Ray Blan ton, few Ten-

Ma rch/April 1979 5 nessee voters were prepared for the performance of his fi ­ sworn in , Lee Sherman Drey'fus, a former college chance ll or nal week in office_ The governor began his last week in office and political ma ve ri ck, pushed a tax cut of more than nine by pardoning or paroling 52 inmates including 23 murderers. hundred million dollars through the heavily Democratic Wi s· These included the son of a political crony as well as others consin legislature. Perhaps the fines t extemporaneous polit i. believed to ha ve bought their way to freedom. Citing as cal speaker in America today. the Wi sconsi n governor com­ justification for his actions the overcrowding of Tennessee bines an unorthodox political style with a remarkable facility prisons, Blanton indicated his intention to sign more pardons for communicating to the pUblic. In his uphill primary cam· and commutations. paign against Congressman Robert Kasten, Dreyfus ran his opponen t's spots in which Kasten kept referring to himself in At this point, amidst an incredible public furor, bipartisan­ the third person. Stating " Real people don't talk that way", ship prevailed to frustrate Blanton's plans. Traditionally Dreyfus demolished his heavily favored opponent. Tennessee governors are inaugurated on January 20 and Republican Governor Elect Lamar Alexander was scheduled While making a few apparent campaign gaffes such as ex­ to take office on that date. The Tennessee Constitution, pressing sympathy for right to work laws in strongly union­ however, permits the new governor to be inaugurated as ized Wi sconsin, Dreyfus swept the gene ral election and ran early as Janu ary 15 if the legislature concurs. Once Blant on well in Democratic and labor districts. His openness and had made known his in ten ti on to launch anothe r spate of clever quips have made him a fo lk he ro of sorts, much like pardons. the Democratic controlled legis13ture moved with his long-time friend , California Senator S. l. Hayakawa. lightning speed to dislodge Blanton. Three days before his Dreyfus has reinforced his pOSition by an aggressive talen t sc heduled ina ugura tion Lamar Al exander was ushered over to search. Uis administra tion is already heavily staffed by the state legislature to be sworn in as governor. This early members of the Ne w RepUblican Conference of Wisconsin , inauguration was precipitated by U.S. Attorney Hal Hardin an organization of young moderate RepUblicans intent on who told Ale xander and the legislative leaders thai he had rev italizing the once nearly moribund Wi sconsin GOP. "substantial reason to believe" Bl anton would free prisoners who were suspects in n ardin's probe of suspected pardon Buoyed by Dreyfus' vi ctory, Republican strategists now sales. see a reasonable chance of cap turing control of the Assembly in the 1980 legislative elec ti ons. Gaylord Nelson, long con­ Alexander's calm and down·to-earth approach to his office sidered invulne rable , is now believed to be susceptible to a has proved welcome to Tennesseeans of all political persua· strong Republi can challenge to his U.S. Senate seat in 1980. sions, who had during Blanton's regime come to expect buf­ foonery from thei T chief executive . The governor's unpre· Long a key primary state, Wisconsin is becoming a favorite tentious manner - he freque ntly places his own phone call s speaking site for many Republican presidential contenders. to sta te offices - contrasts with the imperial style of his Some observers have begun to wonde r whether Wisconsin's predecessor. Al exander has attracted IOp·night staff and feist y governor might himself emerge as a dark horse. The some highly regarded department heads. He has indicated an non·politician an ti-establishment style that all owed him to intention to curb the patronage abuses th at have traditionally romp to victory in Wisconsin might , they suggest, register plagued state hiring. While this change may trigger resent­ well with a GOP electorate eager for an outs poken but com· ment among some Republicans who were licking their chops manding pe rsona li ty. at evening scores, it seems quite popular.

As a result of a re cent change in the state consti tution Alex­ ander may fun to succeed himself as governor. If he can re tai n most of his re markable current popularity, Alexander Reagan lead Dwindling should be a strong favorite fo r reelection in 1982. Already Alexander has emerged as a standout among the ne wly rmed with Decem ber, 1978 Gallup Poll figures show­ elected govern ors and is foreseen as a leading national figure ing him with a commanding lead among Republican in the early nineteen eighties. At the same time that the A vo ters, Ronald Reagan launched an intense blitz this most promine nt Ten nessee Democrat other than lightly January to sew up the GOP Presidential nomination. Meet­ rega rded Senator William Sasser is former GSA Admini­ ing with scores of Senators and Representatives the former strator Jay Solomon, Republicans can boast a popular Californ ia gove rn or sought to persuade them of his electabil ­ governor, a Senate minority leade r and likely Presidential ity and his reasonableness. Mean while his skilled poliHcal candidate, and a national party chairman who has already operatives ci rculated at the Republi can National Committee produced:l turnaround in his party's psychology. Suffering meeting in Washington's Sheraton Park Hotel. The much from a Blanton-induced hangover. Volunteer State Demo· vaunted blitz failed to live up to its advance billing; on all crats seem likely to remain on the defensive for a long time fronts there was evidence of Reagan's slippage. to come. A number of Southern party officials who had sup· ported Reagan in 1976 expressed misgivings that Rea· gan "had been around the track too often". Staying Dreyfu s Powers GOP Upsurge in Wisconsin uncommitted, many of these Re aga ni tes were looking at John Connally, and some at Phil Crane, Jack Kemp isconsin's new RepU blican governor, perhaps the or George Bush. most fa sci nating officeholder in America today, has Wjumped off to a spectacular starl. Barely after being Reagan has already lost the support of many move-

6 Ripon Forum ,------

men I conservatives to Illinois Congressman Philip one day after the Reagan committee announcement Crane. The Viguerie organization and its various ap­ played into Crane's hands. The Illin ois Congressman pendages have moved en masse to Crane together with immediately secured reams of publicity and a unani­ many 1976 Reagan delegates and leaders in New mous resolution of the New Hampshire 1·louse deplor­ England. ing the Loeb attack. Before the attack Reagan enjoyed a 37 to 21 percent lead among New Hampshire voters Nelson Rockefeller's death was viewed by many party ove r second-place finisher Tennessee Senator Howard professionals as a blow to Reagan's candidacy. They Baker with Crane several miles back. The apparent reasoned that the untimely death of the seemingly hale movement of Reagan supporters to Crane in the last and hearty Rockefeller could only underscore Reagan's few days has undoubtedly eroded the former California mortality. governor's lead further.

Press reports of squabbling in the Reagan organization Underscoring the Reagan slippage, Gallup Poll figures pub­ have evaporated the mystique of invincibility that was lished in early March indicated that Reagan 's support had central to Reagan's locking the nomination up well dropped 9 points among RepUblican voters in less than three before the primaries. The friction in the Reagan camp months. Reagan fell from 40 percent to 31 percent, while reportedly contributed to the decision of David Keene, Gerald Ford rose slightly fr om 24 percent to 26 percent. a skilled 1976 Reagan lieutenant , to become political Howard Baker, third place finisher in December at 9 percent , director of George Bush's presidential campaign . fell slightly to 8 percent. The big gainer was John Connally who was apparently buoyed by the publicity from his declar­ Although the announcement of a Reagan campaign ation of candidacy. Connally jumped from 6 percent to 13 committee contained many well known names, the list percent in significant measure by peeling away Reagan was fairly thin in several key areas Reagan secured the supporters. support of only one governor, Charles Thone of Ne­ braska (5 electoral votes). Other than retiring Pennsyl­ Despite increasing signs of vulnerability , Reagan's greatest vania Senator Ri cha rd Schweiker Reagan's U.S. Senate strength seems to be the failure of any of his rivals to stand supporters were largely from small Western states. out. Should this si tuation change, the Reagan candidacy could decelerate rapidly . Already Reagan and Ford are hurt The savage editorial attack March 8 on Congressman by national opinion polls showing both of them being Philip Crane and his wife Artene by pro· Reagan pub­ trounced in match ups with an unpopular Jimmy Carter. lisher William Loeb of the Manchester Union Leader Both may be caught up in the politics of deja vu in which the has hardly strengthened Reagan's already vulnerable public is turning away from old standbys in search of new position in New Hampshire. The timing of this allack leaders. •

BOOK REVIEW

Emerging Coalitions in American Politics truth , voter apathy, the breakdown of the New Deal coali­ Edited by Seymour Martin Upset tion, the possibility that the electorate has "shifted" to the (Institute for Contemporary Studies, 5 19 pages, S6.95) right , the dominance of the policy-making process by a tech­ nocratic elite, the transformation of elected legislators from rhe New American Political System representatives to ombudsmen, the intensification of "special Edited by Anthony King interest" politics - the list of changes and trends seems end­ (American Enterprise Institute, 407 pages , $6.75) less - these are just a few of the subjects that are making it easier for political scientists to publish rather than perish and for a legion of pundits to identify more problems for the Dem oc ra cy than Monday Night Football has criti cal third by L. SCOff Miller down plays. Tltis situation is a far cry from the early 1970s when all political scientists had to write about was the 1m· perial Presidency. (Happily for those still gripped by the nostalgia fad , that old favorite remains a subject of lively Much is being written these days about the state of the inquiry.) Inevitably , most new books on these matters are nation's political processes. The decline of the political destined to achieve little more than a higher profit for parties and associated rise of independent campaigns by can­ Weyerhaeuser and International Paper. Howeve r, a few do didates, the emergence of media gurus to create the candi­ stand out as genuine contributions to the field. Two of date as IMAGE , the metamorphosis of polling from applied these, which are particularly valuable for a layman, are social science to a quasi·religious process of revealing secular Emerging Coalitions in American Politics and 111 e New

Ma rch!April1 979 7 American Political System. abortion. On some social iss ues they have much more in common wi th most RepUblicans. Nonetheless, as long as Emerging Coalitioll s is the work of 23 prominent political economic iss ues re main salient and Republicans are in some scientists, poli tical commentators, and practicing poli ticians. measure guided by the Ne w Right 's economic philosophy, a Al though the quality of the articles va ries - wItich is almost shift in party allegiance by Catholics does not see m to inevitable in such a work - man y are packed with insights. Greeley to be in the cards. This is especially true of three pieces on the history of the major parties. Richard Jense n of the University of Illinois Although The New American Political System also has milch has written an analysis of the impact of "modern" economic to say about parties, its best articles concern the process of and social val ues on party coali tions fro m Jackson to Carler governing and policy-making. For example , Fred Greenstein wItich provides an excell ent overview of how economic of Prince ton has wri tten a fine history of the development of growth/industrialization issues have entered partisan debate the development of the mode m presidency. In this chronicle, durin g the last 150 yea rs. Jerome Clubb of the Unive rsity of Truman and Eisenhower are !lIe presidents who ins titution­ Mi chigan has done a thoughtful analysis of how Republicans ali zed the policy evaluation capability within the Executive came to dominance with the election of 1896: The combina­ Office of the President. (It was under Truman that the tion of the Democrats (under Cleveland) being tagged as the Bureau of the Budget - now the Office of Management and party of depression in 1894 and of Bry an laking the party Budget - began to systematically review proposals from the towa rd the populist extreme during the campaign in 1896 departments to ensure their consistency wi th the Admin istra­ allowed Mc Kinley, with his calls for a protective tariff and tion's age nda and ove rall policies.) Yet despite this new pro-industrial growth policies, to lead the Republicans to managerial and technical capability, presidents have generall y victory. Everett ladd has prepared a companion piece dis· neither been able to control the Executive Branch nor main­ cussing the wresting of power by the Democrats from the tain the upper hand with the Congress. A consensus foreign Republicans in 1932, and the subsequent evolution of the policy arising from the "cold war" masked this situation New Deal coal ition over the next 45 years. Taken together, un til the Vietnam War. But the Wa r and Watergate merely these last two articles offer a useful reminder that a major underlined the fundamental reality: A president's power rests party's power derives from an ability to recognize and solve on the abil ity to persuade. In an era of interrelated issues people's problems - us ually those starting with the pocket­ and special interest politics, such power is difficult to come book - rathe r than to exhort the electorate to embrace a by and inevitably flee ting. particular ideology. Once having been perceived as a better problem·solver than the opposition, the pany may set the With his extensive analysis of " issue networks" and "policy agenda fo r yea rs to come. profeSSionals," Hugh Heclo of Ha rvard has provided a useful companion piece to that of Greenstein . He cogently discusses Having discussed two major political turn ing points in the emergence of po licy professionals in the Executive our history, it is fi tting that considera tion is also given in Bra nch departments, the Congress, state government, think the book to the question of whether another may be close at tanks, consulting firms , universities, interest groups and hand. In this regard , Gary Orren and William Schneider, corporations: A rela tively small group of experts in a given both of Harvard, have wri Hen two relevant articles on voter field now dominate policy option development and decision· behavior. Orren analyzes the 1976 presidential election in making. Because the experts possess knowledge that is not terms of the impact of candidates' styles. He provides a fas­ easily obtained, understood or challenged, they are to a sig­ cinating account of how candidate Carter was able to man ip­ nificant degree beyond the contre! of elected officials and ulate symbols in a fashion which appealed to many of the isolated frolll the pUblic. The impact of tItis si tuation is pro­ disparate groups which now make up the Democratic family , found , and it is to Heclo's credit that he is able to go beyond but in the process failed to build a genuine coalition. This is traditional Galbraithian discussion of technocrats. For a subject often written about , but rarely with such scholar­ example , he notes the benefit to the system that a group of ship. Schneider follows this piece with one on "liberalism" individuals concerned with a particular problem "speak the an d "conservatism." lie has examined these terms on two salTle language". Interinstitutional communication is facili­ dimensions: economic views and social va lues. Schneider tated; problems are addressed using similar ass umptions , marshals much statistical evidence to demonstrate something analytical techniques and option ranges and , as non·politi­ that most of us recognize intuitively - in a ti me of serious cians, they call make "independent" recommendations. At economic problems, vote rs make their decisions more on the same time the costs are high. Because such experts are these questions than those relating to social and cultural independe nt, their recommendations often are difficult to matters. But Schneider does not stop here. He goes on to " legitima tize" politically; such persons are not generally in provide a profile of each state on both dimensions, essen­ regular touch with the general public - most of the time tially indicating whether it is liberal or conservative on each. they mix among themselves; and, if a change is required, a leader such as a president must tum to the same pool for a Discussion of divisions within the Democratic party these replacement. (Regarding this latter pOint, remember that days often focuses on the New Left's more permissive values President-elect Carter promised to bring new blood to the and the more traditional ones of the ethnic groups of the cabinet. A quick review of who heads key departments such New Deal coali tion. Schneider's and Orren's art icles address as State , Defense , the Treasury and HEW, HUD and DOE this question in broad temlS, but Andrew Greeley of the makes Heclo's point only too well.) University of Chicago has written wha t is in essence a case st udy on Catholics. Catholics remain committed to the This revie w has been able to hit only a fe w of the highlights economic policies and programs of the New Deal but are in­ of these two books. For those wh o take the time , an invalu· creaSingly estranged from the Ne w Le ft on issues such as able short-course in American govern ment awaits them. _

8 Ripon Forum FOREIGN POLICY Changing the Rules of the Game (s)

by Dr. Clifford W. BrowlI, Jr. enterprise (or its logical equivalent) to win one serve only to make us lose which pits one side or team against another. In this situation we are re­ ven with the advent of an another. quired to view some aspects of inter­ Ameri can broke red Israeli-Egyp­ Recent in ternational events, how­ national relations not only as a multi­ Etian peace treaty, this country ever, have placed us in a situation person game,. but also as a multi· hardly appears in the dri ver's seat on where we are required to play games dimensional game an d we find this a the international stage. that do not fit this pattern . For the new and quite dislUrbing experience America's current international dif· first time since John Adams' admini· indeed. ficulties stem from many sources, but stration (with the possible exception We are in a situation where our con­ the principal reason for our problems of a few events during the secretary­ ceptual tools do not match our strate­ may momentarily lie beyond President ship of John Hay) we are engaged in gic requirements and the result is ex· Carter's control: the changing nature a genuine 3-person in ternational game traordinary confusion. of the international system has created where the players (USA, USS R, China) It is remarkable the extent to which a situation where we can no longer de­ have sets o f interests that are so at American contests are structured fine with precision the requi rements of odds with each other tha t no two around the 2·person model. Games the in te rn ational game in which we 3TC countries can become fu tl y aligned (or like baseball , football, chess, an d playing. even realistically trustful of each bridge are obviously of this variety, Americans are inveterate game play­ other), yet also where none of these but even games like poker and horse­ ers. We probably play more games three counlries can so disassociate its racing ge nerall y reduce themselves than any Olher nation and we prob­ interests from the inlerests of the either in to a series of separate bilateral ably think of life in the metaphor of other two that it can pull out of the contests o r into games in which the a game morc than any other people. triangular game altogether. Simul­ field . so to speak. is all in opposition Our concept of what constitutes a taneously, for the first time since be­ to the player in the number one posit game, however, is relatively narrow. fore World War II, we arc in a situa· tion. America's national pastimes do To most of us a game is uni·dimcnsion­ tion whe re the four great in ternational not tend to be tri angular games where al (one contest, one set of fules, one ga mes (the military, diplomatic, econ· the players interact dynamically with clearly defined measure of win ning omic, and ideological) afe so out of each other in such a way that coopera · and losing), and usually a two person phase with each other that our efforts tion becomes the child of competi·

Dr . Clifford W. Brown , J r., author of Jaws oj VicfOry, co-editor of Struggles ill tlte State and currently co­ director of a large research project o n campaign contributors, is a member of the Na tional Executive Com­ mitlee of the Rip'ln Society and teaches poli tical science at Uni on College in Schenectady, New York.

Ma rch/ April 1979 9 tion and the ability to create and man­ for the sa ke of the marriage game, related. Even those people who recog· ipulate instability becomes the central taking ca re, of course, to lose in such ni7.e the existence of seve ral games source of success_ Although some di­ a wa y that it would seem to partner that are re le vant to America's overall mensions of our economic culture are B that the loss was genuine (other· security position tend to treat them studied in terms of a three-person wise the effect on lhe marriage game separately: they view the large r model, most American ins titutions are might be even more devastating). picture li ke a decathalon where the ob­ structured as two-person games: the A chess expert observing this game ject is to do the best in each and pil e debate, the adversary process al law, and familiar with the skills of players up as many points as possible overall. and the two-party system are only a A and 11 , but unaware of the marriage They often do not realize that success few examples. We are so commilled to game , would find it very hard to ex­ in one game can sometimes lead to this image of reality that when three­ plain the moves on the chess board failu re in another, or that failure in party circumstances arise our tendency other than to suggest, perhaps, that one can be translated into success in is immediately to simplify them as player A had had a bad nigh t and was anothe r. Wh en all games appear to quickly as possible ei ther by combin­ not playing up to par. (The observer, be going well , such relationships are ing two legs of the triangle to form a of course , would not be offerin g a not considered important. Wh en games temporary coalition of alliance , or by valid explanation since player A to begin to go badly, however, awareness eliminating one of the parties to the throw the game convinci ngl y would of these relationships is absolu tely triangle from the game alt oge ther. So probably have to play more than up to necessary for an intelligent diagnosis ingrained is this percep tion that when par.) The couple's non-c hen-playing of the problem. President Carter announced his recog­ next door neigllbor, on the other America is now playing four im­ nition of China, some of the most so­ hand, might be aware of the marriage portant games of relevance to its phistica ted television commentators in game, but could not explain what was security: game *I is the weaponry the co untry began immedia tely \0 talk happening on the chess board either. game and because only the United in terms of the ant i-Soviet American­ The neighbor might be able to inter­ Sta te s and the Soviet Union possess Chinese allian ce . pret the significance of the outcome , a wide ra nge of state-of-the-art weap· If Ameri cans have trouble thinking but could not explain how the out­ ons systems toge ther with the econom­ about and playing a multi-person come was reached. Thus "experts" ic and technolOgical bases to sustain game , we have even more trouble play­ in each game played se parately could these systems. game # I is a 2-person ing multi-dimensional games where not well interpret the totality of game . Game#2 is a "high diplomacy" several different kinds of games (some events of these games played jointly game and the recent emergence of perhaps two-person , some perhaps on a multi-dimensional level. Chin a as a major player on t.he chess multi-person) are being played simul­ If a gambler, unbeknownst to the board has meant that most people who taneously and in such a relationship 10 two players, wished to place a bet on focus on Ihis game today regard it as each other that they not onl y have the outcome of the game on the chess­ a 3·person game involving primarily winners and losers within themselves board itself, he would presumably con­ the two super powers and the People's but also ha ve a di rect bearing on each sult wi th the che ss expert, receive an Republic though a Russian opening to other in such a way that losers in one accurate assessment of the proficiency Europe could make it still more com­ game , by virtue of their loss, can be­ of the two pla ye rs, and confiden tly plicated. Game #3 is the economic come winners in another and vice· place his money on the wrong person. game played globally. This is a multi­ ve rsa (or that a player's standing in If he consulted the next door neigll­ person game in which Ru ssia and one game can be brought to bear posi· bor as well , he might have a better China are less important players and tively or ne ga ti ve ly upon a player's perspective on the situation, but he Europe , the oil sta tes, and Japan have standing in another ga me). would still have some difficulty as­ a Significance far greater than their Here is an example of a very simple sessing whether or not the ga me was Sign ificance in games I and 2. Game multi-dimensional game. Suppose a being played on a multi·dimensional *4, the ideological "game," in many husband an d wife are playing chess level and, if it should be , how the in­ res pects is not a game at all , but for an d one parlner is a better player than teraction of the two games would af­ our purposes we shall regard it as a the other. This partne r (A) would fect the outcome of the board game . multi-person game in volving the Third be expected to win the ga me si nce a This is an example of a simple 2· World no less than the developed proficiency edge is nearly always de· player two dimensional game in which world . It is the realm of international cisive in a game of chess. Suppose, it was possible for one player to morality. purpose, and commi tment. however, that the other marriage " win" a game on one level and fo r Many rightly regard it as the most partner (11) let it be known in ways. the other player to translate a "loss" fundamental , as it is the most long perhaps too subtle to suggest, that a on one level into a "win " on the range game of all. loss in th is chess game would be so in ­ other. When one looks al these games in· furiating that it would seriously en­ Today the United States finds it· dividually , it appears that America danger the marriage relationship. (As­ self engaged in a number of games is not doing well. We are still ahead in sume that partner 11 is a relatively in· which can best be understood as if game I I, but not as far as we are secure person, and also realizes that a they were sub·games of a much lar· accustomed to being. We are at the loss in chess, as everyone knows, is ger multi·dimensional game. Unfortun­ moment doing poorly in game '11'-2 , a sure demonstration of a person's ately those who are responsible for while the Chinese. having seized t.he inhe ren t inferiority .) Under the se playing the se games tend to look ini tiati ve in ASi a, it seems are doing circums tances il is quite possible that upon them as if they were sepa rate quit.e well . Game 'lF3 is a disaster area partner A might play to lose the game from each other and not dynamically from t.he standpoint of America; we

10 Ripon Forum still have a large pile of economic country B is attacking country C and tern is conside red very damaging be· chips, but that pile seems to diminish country C is allacking country A. cause it redut."(:s the nexibility of our with e:lch spin of the wheel. Game (This is why American observe rs in response capabilities and dec reases =11=4 is also going badly despi te efforts China in the early 1940's found it dif­ "crisis stability" by increasing the in­ by the Carter administration to re­ ficult to deal wi th a situation where centive to fire these wea pons "on emph asize America's commitments to Chiang focused primarily on Mao, Mao assessment " of a Soviet attack before human rights. The only reason that we on the Japanese. and the Japanese on they were presumably destroyed on remain undisputedJ y number one in Chiang.) the ground. A second sou rce of con­ the overall picture is that we are the In this perception of conflict. pre­ cern has been the rapid build-up of only country that is a major playe r in paration for a showdown is simply ad­ the Sodet navy with its threat to our all ga mes. Chin a, Europe. and Japan di ti ve - you pile up arms, you pile up supply lines not onl y to areas li ke cannot play game =11= I , Europe and Ja­ allies, you develop better arms, you Europe and Japan whi ch we are ob­ pan :l re only minor players in game employ better generals, and you hope ligated to defend, but also from coun­ =/F2 . In game #4, the Russians ha ve to end up with more of each than your tries upon whom we are increasingly never done well, al though their use of amagonists. TIle dy namics of this dependent for our ra w materials. Cuba in recent years has enabled them ki nd of game are well known to Finall y , the Soviet build-up of land to score points. China, an active game Americans, and much intellectual ef­ forces in the last decade has been im­ 1f4 player under Mao, has become so fort over the last twe nty years has pressive . Although this may be in sin gle-minded with res pect to game been invested in working them out. response to a pe rceived threat from #2. that she is now de-emphasizing This perception embraces both China, western analys ts cannot dis­ game 1/<4 (as the Vietnam invasion ··hawks" and "doves" in the arms count the possibility that such fo rces clearly shows). community. TIle former see security could be used elsewhere. The problem for America , however, as the product of arms superiority, Because of these developments, is not simply to do better in these the latter as a product of arms con­ game =IF I "hawks" have been strenous­ various games, it is also to do a betler trol : security thus comes either from Iy arguing for increased military pre· job of coordina ting the ga mes them­ " winning" the arm s ra ce by building paredness on the part of the Uni ted selves. To do so, Ame ricans must be up the stockpile of arms and deepen­ States. Even those who support SA LT ab le to perceive why thei r managers in ing their sophistication, or from "reg­ can argue persuasively that those each ga me tend to understand the ulating" the arms race th rough SALT agreements do not cover cO llventional worl d in a harmfu ll y narrow way. agreemen ts which provide the basis fo r forces. Serious critics of this view. mutual security. In the former case , however, have argued with equal to use a cu rrent exam ple , we rescue cogency that in the zero-sum atmo­ Game #1 Minuteman ei ther by making it mobile sphere of a 2-person game, a build-up or by concealing its location; in the of arms ge nera tes a matching build­ To the people who focus their at­ latter case we rescue "assured destruc­ up by the other side and the situation tention on military hardware, the tion" and "crisis stability" by lim it ing spirals into what Henry Ki ssin ger world contains onl y two pla yers of the Soviet threat to our missiles (and styled the "security dilemma" where importance. Even though France may ours to theirs) by mutual agreements one nation's attempts to achieve se­ ha ve a ve ry sophisticated weapons in­ on force levels. curity serves only to undercut the dustry and China may have a large The last decade has seen many security position of its rival and vice army , the wo rl d of military might re­ developments in game #1: the mul­ ve rsa. Thus increased military expen­ mains the monopoly of the two super­ tiple warhead , the cruise miss il e, the Hures, by ge nerating counter measures, powers who have the advanced missile neutron bomb, the Trident submarine. may leave both countries worse off technology, the world's onl y na vies of the rapid development of lasers, and than before due to higher cos ts and account. and by far the largest and the deployment of "smart" devices, little change in the overall position . most advanced air forces . It is not but American military planners now TIl us to both the hawks and doves su rprising that mili tary planners regard fear thai America, despite these of game I , the China breakthrough the rest of the world as peripheral: American achievements, is in a weaker seemed to be a godsend. Although in the realm of hardware. Ru ssia is not pOSition now vis-II-vis the Soviet Union China was not a central player, it was simply our principal antagonist. she is than any time since the beginning of a wclcome- and seemingly costless­ our only antagonist. the Cold War. Players and observers addition. a new ally to add to the pile. This perception of the world as a of game =lFJ cite three disturbing de · Rut here the narrowness of the game 2-person game is not only a legitimate ve lopments. First, they warn that mul­ #1 perception begins to opera te and inheritance of the high cold war, it tiple warheads on Soviet missiles harmfully detracts from our ability is also a perception logically in line threaten our Minuteman land-based to play the international game in a with traditional western vie ws of war­ missiles and that by the early 1980's, Oe xible way. The fixation on Russia , fare. Western wars have always been even with SA LT or with IllOst pro­ put simply, limits our bargaining posi­ two sided. They may be fought with posed "hardenings" of our si tes , a tion with respect to other players in allies , and nations may refrain frOIll large pe rcen ta ge of these missiles will the game, and to the extenl that we joining, but the western conception of be vulne ra ble to a Soviet first strike. regard Ihe China breOi kthrough baltle (a duel, as Clausewit.t defined it) Although we will still have a sub­ th rough the prism of game #=1, we are is eminently 2-person. We have had vir­ mari ne and aircraft nuclear capability , more or less committed blindly to tually no expe ri ence of a war whe re the increased vulnerability of our most support Chinese policies as long as country A is allacking country B while sophisticated offensive weapons sys- they are executed in an anti-Soviet

March/April1979 11 con {ext. Furthermore, to the degree the outcome of tJle contest. Most is quite possible to antagonize Russia that th is occurs, we tend to deepen the Americans find this kind of game 10 be by moving in the direction of China antagonism between ourselves and the ethicall y repulsive to play themselves and to anlagonize China by not Soviets. Such a deepening, in turn, and fundamentally infuriating when moving far enough in the direction of can increase the Chinese bargaining po· played against them. China to be of use to China agains t sition vis·~·vis America. In this sense, Triangularity is, hence, a subtle Russia. tJle perceptions of game # 1 when ap· game which we tend to dislike and we An awareness of this possibility can plied to the China breaktJuough can are playing badly. Power in this game lead a central player to want to simpli­ force us into an increasingly weakened is the result of posi lioning- and the fy the game by eliminating the triangu­ position in game *2 and, if we are not key position in a triangle is the central larity altogether. Some suggest (es­ careful, actually detract from overall position. That central posilion is de· pecially those who are game "#= I security pOSition , as an analysis of fined by the level of antagonism that players) that we should align with game#,2 will show. exists between each of the players. At China against Russ ia and by "playing present the United States remains in the China card," recreate the two­ the key central pOSition because the sided configuration. The problem Game #2 level of antagonism between Russia with this suggestion is that it ignores and China is greater Ihan the level of the resultant bargaining relationships I.n game #2 weaponry may still be antagonism between Russia and wi thin what would be the emerging relevant, but politics takes precedence. America and between America and anti·Soviet Coalition. In the real This is the ga me of the balance of China: both Russia and China to world , China is not a card to be power, an old ga me to the British and some extent are bidding for our sup­ played, but a player with cards. The to the Europeans, but a relatively new port against the other. Should, how. more we commit ourselves to China, game to Americans, introduced to us ever, the level of antagonism be tween the more cards China will have . Our by Henry Kissinger when he began to America and Russia become deeper recent commitments certainly have insert China into the calcula tions of than that between Russia and China, given her some cards to play in big power diplomacy. then China would move into the cen- southern Asia . TIle basic triangularity might be eliminated by an American Although Europe and Japan playa commitment to China. but a new game more significant role in game #=2 than '"Today the United Stales would quickly emerge. Many com­ they do in game 1 (where they are mentators on the Vietnam war des­ considered primarily as prizes to be finds itselr engaged in cribed how our commitment to that defended or bases from which to oper­ a number or games which can struggle became stronger than the ate), the main focus in this game is on best be understoli'd as if they commitment to the struggle of Ihe the relationship between the United governments in South Vietnam. Un· were sub-g3 l1l es or a much States, the Soviet Union, and China. der this circumstance, we were man· Big power politics today is the politics la rger l11ulti-dime nsio nal euvered by them more than we man· of triangularity. game." euvered them. (Remember all those Security is a central concern in this anti-corruption drives we "forced" game no less than in game =#= I. but the them so successfully 10 prosecute so players in this game fi nd security first Iral position of the triangle and our resolutely?) But being maneuvered by through the arrangement of the system, pOSition would be severe ly ci rcu m· the South Vietnam government was to and only secondly through the abso­ scribed: we would be bidding for the United Slates a situation of o nl y lute or relative levels of weaponry Chinese support , rather than the local significance. Being maneuvered owned by the players. For example, Chinese bidding for our support. In by China in a game involving Russia in a triangular game, the weakest state this circumstance the fact thut China would be something else again. in terms of weaponry may become the was militarily much less powerful than Henry Kissinger was well aware of most powerful in terms of its bargain­ Russia and America would be beside the dimensions of tri angularity. What· ing pOSition if it is accurately placed the point- as would be our predictable ever else he might be crit icized for, he between two other very hostile sense of betrayal. cannot be faulted for misunderstand­ powers. each of which is bidding fo r Triangularity, however, has more ing the system he created. He under­ its support. This is not, however, a dimensions to it than this simple stood it sufficien tl y well not to Jet the game in which the object is primarily example illustrates. A strategy of relationship between Anterica and to end up on the side that possesses playing for the central position, if Russia deteriorate to the point where the larger amount of military force in misplayed, can lead to a condition China threatened to move into the an emerging two-sided configuration. where the erstwhile central player commanding central position in the The object of the game, rather, is antagonizes both of the otJter players. triangular game. Whate ver else detente either to end up on the side that Chamberlain in the 1930's brieny held may have been, it was a policy essen­ possesses the larger amount of military the central position between Russia tial to the preservation of the central, force afler ex torting the maximum and Germany. He refused to play at all ity of the American position. In this price for your support from the other with Russia (against the advice of respec t Kissinger followed Bisma rck members of the larger side , or the o b­ Churchill) and created a si tuation whose reinsurance treaty preserved the ject of the game is to be able to switch where he ended up with a hot war central ity of Germany's pOSition sides at the opport une moment in against Germany and a cold war between Russia and Austria, a pOSition order to manipulate to your advantage against Russia. In today's situation it even more vital to Bisma rck than to

'2 Ripon Forum Ki ssinger beca use of the existence of a could become a substitute for Ameri· Equall y important, if we train our· hostile France.) ca n slippage in game # 1 and, contrari­ selves to be nexible players in this Ki ssinger's system, however, was wise , that ga me #2 coul d be played game tha t is based so much on a not directed primaril y towards playing with sufficient precision to prevent the player's ability to be nexible, we face the triangular game. His policy was Soviets from resorting to game 'lfl . serious consequences in game #4, the sequen ti ally to isolate every major He therefore fe lt that as long as "ideological" ga me, whose central re­ playe r in the game from every other detente remained cen tral to Ameri can quirements seem to be a deep sense of playe r- Russia was isolated from policy makers, the Soviets would not purpose and commitment- the very China , kept at arms length from Eur· be completely isolated and they would anti thesis of nexibili ty. Many obse r­ ope, shu t out of the Mi ddle East , and not perceive the arms race as their vers have cogently questioned the wis­ permitted to build relations with only road to security. dom of Carter's policy towards Tai wa n Japan ; Europe was shut out of Mid· Kissinger's successors have been less on the grounds that our nexibility in East politics, not encouraged to make aware of the relationship between the this area has seriously call ed into ques· closer ties to Japan , kept away from two games (otherwise they would no t tion- to our disadvantage in other Russia , etc.;China was maintained in a have jeopardized SA LT by the timing areas- the vali dity of American com· conditi on of isolation, as was Japan . of the China re cognition) and they mitments. With all of these countries, except for also have been play ing game #2 rather Japan (a tactical mistake), Ki ssi nge r poorly, Initiative is a key concept in Game #3 forged special relat ionships, bringing any ga me of position and China has them out of isolation, as it were , by temporarily seized the initiative , des· Game #3 is the economic game. It creating an American connection. pi te our still central position in the is the game of overseas investments This system which could be dia· triangle. Crit ics have ri ghtly asked and markets, of resources and dollar grammed as a "wheel" with spokes what America received in return for flows , of multi·national corporations and a hub, but no rim , was 50 success· the recognition of China, What China and international finance , of world ful (by its own terms) that no player received is more apparent : an end to trade and domestic productivity. could deal with any other player on an isolation and encirclement and a free Whatever the shortrun artificialities of important question without reference hand to deal with Vietnam. this game may be, it is essentially a to Washi ngton. The administration's reaction to the game whose winners have either vast recent invasion is a striking example resources or highly efficient and or· The key element, however, that both of policy paralysis in a dangerous ganized domesti c structures. In this kept this system working was the triangular situation and of initiative game Russia and China playa much nature of the American connection. surrender: we stated in one breath that smaller role than in the previous game; To maintain a player in a condi tion of we opposed the invasion of Cambodia countries in Europe, the Middle East isolation without the American con· by Vietnam and of Viet nam by China. and Far East play a much more im· nection was to court disaster. A The implication of this policy presum­ portant role. This is not a new one to country completely isolated (and ably is that Vi etnam should withdraw America , although it has been prose· hence a loser) in game #2 could reo from Cambodia and China from Viet­ cuted with much more determin ation spond only by resorting to ga me # I. nam. Chinese policy, on the other in the last thirty years than eve r Thus a Soviet Union, isolated by the hand , seems to be that Vietnam should before. United States, would have 10 resort to withdraw from Cambodia and, in the an arms race if detente were not a sa me breath, China from Vietnam. In many respects we have pattern ed meaningful altern ative. This is what Although Washington may not per· our play on the Brit ish model o f the SA LT I was a central component of ceive its policy as identical to that of first part of this ce ntury by sacrificing Ki ssinger's system- the li nkage , as it China, it would hardly be su rprising if our domestic economic position in were , bet wee n games #1 and #2. Moscow, Hanoi, and Peking perceive it order to establish and solidify our The same would be true for Ameri ca; that way. In an y even t, we are now world position . The problem at pre· if Russia and China should bury their responding to Chinese initiatives and se nt is that our domestic pOSition , differences and coordinate policies in clumsily tailoring our policies to fol· thus weakened, is now imperiling our Asia vis·a·vis Korea, Thailand, and low theirs. To those who focus on world position . Americans have even the Philippines or Japan , the ga me *2, this precedent does not established an elaborate imperial game United States, under these ci rcum· bode well for the fu ture of America's during the post-war period as a result stances a loser in game #2, would abilit y to play this game of bargaining of which we can use our centralit y in have to resort to a major arms build·up position. that game as a substitute fo r produc­ in the area. To be proficient in this game, we tive efficiency and mercantile prowess. Ki ssinge r thus bequeathed 10 his learn a new set of skills and focus This game can still be played because successors the very complica ted struc­ upon our bargaining position at least that centrality still persists; we have ture of ga me #2 and a si tuation as much as upon our force levels. But the wo rl d's largest economy and where America n successes in that game there are se ri ous dangers in focusing remai n the world's largest market. We would create st rong incentives for the exclusively on game =#=2. To the ex· are the home of a large majority of the Russians to try all the harder 10 win tent that we re gard it as a substitute major multi·national corporations, our game # 1. This dynamic relationship for game #1 , we may neglect our overseas portfolio is still impressive, between the two games was well military preparedness in the dangerous the dollar, however weakened, is st ill understood by Ki ssinger who, to some hope that dex terity can become the the world currency, and New York extent, felt that success in game #2 basis for our long range secu rity. remains the heart of the international

Ma rch /Ap ril 1979 13 financial network. which poured back into the country Yet even the most casual observer from the oil producing states. Game Game #4 knows that this game is not going well . #3 "well·played" in the international Game #4 is not really a game at all The decline of the dollar, the oil situa· context, was thus poorly played in the and to be "successful" it cannot be tion, our increasing vulnerability to domestic context , the context that th ought of as a game. It is the ideo· the pricing whims of other nations. the provides the ultimate basis for a well lOgical contest, the perception of loss of our unquestioned technological played game # I. And the Shah, on international rela tions in terms of edge , the serious crisis in domestic the other hand, to some extent dis· morality, justice, and purpose. This investment, and the universal re cogni· tracted from his own ideologic.11 prob· approach to international relations has tion of our economic decline are all lems in Iran by the exercise of buying a long and honorable history in threa tening the very structure that we our sophisticated aircraft, lost in a Anlerica stre tching back to the found· in one sense sacrificed much at home domestic context what we have called ing fathers. Ironically, it formed the to create, The British became so de· game #4. When Iran exploded in our basic perception of both the Wilsonian pendent on this sort of game that they face , partly because games *3 and and isolationist traditions. Mos t failed to maintain a viable domestic #4 were badly out of phase , we lost Americans, before we were taught to productive base and their economy heavily in our game 'lF l against the be rea list ic. believed that there was a never re covered when the guns of Sovie t Union, and our handling of the right and a wrong in the world. The August destroyed the basis of their crisis , together with our handling of Wilsonians shaped this perception into imperial system. Today we face an al· Taiwan (as a result of a game #2 a policy of peace through law and tack on OUf system. perhaps less strategy), redounded to our disadvan· in ternational organization , relying dramatic , but no less persiste nt than tage in Saudi Arabia wJu ch began seri· upon such doctrines as commitment, the one that ruined Britain. We should ously to question our ability to play rights, obli gations, and duties. TIl e ne ver fo rget that a serious setback in game #4- the game of long range isola tionists , alternatively, believed game #3 is no less threatening 10 our that such attempts were doomed to security than a setback in games I and failure and that efforts to involve 2. In many respects it is more threat· America in world politics would in· ening since success in game # I "We are in OJ situation wh ere evitably lead America into Ihe evils of depends in the long run on our ability our conceptual tools a game #2 where we could neither to maintain an efficient productive do not match our stra tegic succeed nor remain uncorrupted . The and technologica ll y advancing domes· violen ce of World War II and the rise tic economic power base. requirements and rhe result is of the cold war shattered both these extraordinary confusion." perceptions. An ac tive game #4 The current mode of play in game emerged, however , as America entered #3 has had further implica tions fo r a period of containing Ihe Communist the other games. Wh en the oil crisis Threat. The war for man's minds was hit. fo r example, and we were faced commitments- a game of great im· not neglected during the Eisenhower with a seve rely disruptive economic portance to Saudi Arabia , and also, we period and most of its America n com· situation, we were able to translate a might add, to Israel. batants believed se ri ously in their mis· seeming loss in game #3 into a partial Game #3 is also potentially at sion. The 1960's, however , brought shortrun gain in game #1. We al· variance with game #4 in the rest of about a fundamental change . We now lowed the incre ases to occur on the the Third World . Our Nicaraguan know that many of the exhuberant condition that we could retain a major policy is but one example of this cir· game players of the Kennedy and voice in the distribution of the surplus. cu mstance, The scramble fo r reo Joh nson administrations were increas· Since the price rises had more sources, of great conce rn to the ingly bored by game #4. Theirs was impact on the Europeans and Japanese Ame rican poSition in game #3, increasingly a world of winners and th an they did on us the net result was potentially puIS us into a game where losers . Game #1 became the cen tral a setback in that game for the Euro· we are opposing the legitimate aspira. focus and the fact of the cold war , not peans and the Japanese. We, however. ti ons of developing countries- to the the reasons for it became the starting encouraged the Sha h to in vest heavily extent that we insist on establishing point for thei r calculations. A striking in American arms, we thereby used the advantageous economic terms of trade iIIustr3lion of this attitude is con· inflated oil prices as a means of prop· with these countries- something that tained in John McNaUghton's defini. ping up our position in game #1, and, we should properly do from the stand· tion of American aims in Vietnam in effect forced the Europeans and point of game #3. but something that written in March, 1965, and printed in Japanese to subsidize lliis arrange· often embarrasses us from Ihe per· the Pentagon Papers: ment. Similar strategies occurred in spective of game #4. It is of little 70'% - to avoid a humiliating U.S. Saudi Arabia in effect permitting us to consolation to the players of game #4 defeat (to our reputation as "buy in" in a major way to lhe tech· that we seem to be doing poorly in guarantor) nological development of that country. game #3 when our efforts in game 20% - to keep SVN (and the adja· The American economy. instead of #3, despite our poor performance. cent) territory from Chinese responding to the challenges posed by seem still to end up undercutting our hands. Ihe price increases , (as did the econo· pOSition in game #4. We thus are 10% - to permit the people of mies of Germany and Japan), was rapidly becoming known as the nOI SVN to enjoy abetter, permitted to proceed in its sluggish very effective exploiters of the Third way ofHfe. way in pari by the ex ternal subsidies World. ALSO- Io emerge from cri sis with·

' 4 Ripon Forum out unacceptable taint from return to game #4 in terms of human just be possible that the seemingly methods used. rights. The government, however, anomolous return of Iran to tradition­ This somewhat chilling assessment is proceeded tactically , not strategicall y a! values is the result of a feeling that not untypica! of the language of that in this important area. The human the American answer to the requi re­ period and illustrates in its final point rights campaign- which could have had me nts of civilization is no longe r un­ the lethal mistake of regarding game a very wide appeal and could ha ve assailable. If this is correct and litis "#4 merely as a game. Thus through restored to America a degree of inter­ view spreads, then America's world their realism , the defense intellectuals national initiati ve- became too closely position will no longer be secure. To created the moral justification for associated with anti-Soviet policies and those who ha ve foll owed us it will not America to enter game #2, a move soon appeared to be me rely an exten· simply be a question of whether Amer­ that would have raised the eyebrows sion of game # I. China's abuses in ica's commitments are good. It will be of virtually every thoughtful American the area were ove rl ooked in pursuit of more a question of whether or not president from Washington to Eisen ­ ga me #2, and our efforts in the de­ America's exa mple is valid . hower. ve loping world often seemed subor­ Ki ssinger did not believe in game dinated to the requirements of the ilI ­ How, then should America pro­ "#4. although he was certainly aware played game #3. ceed? It is possible to devise a wide of the need for a substitute: the man Carter also neglected the impor­ range of suggestions for dealing with who wrote a book about legitimacy tance of a second major component of the problems posed by mUlti-person could not be blind to the need for game # 4: commitment. Here game and multi-dimen sional games. For justifying his policies. Ki ssinger. how­ #4 and game #2 come directly into example. one might suggest that ever, found justification for playing conflict. Commitment is the antithesis America's bes t COU T! of action would game #1 and especially game #2, of flexibility and fl exibility is the be to start with game #3, firm up our within the games themselves. Peace major requirement of game #2. This domestic economic position, while and securi ty, goals above reproach, problem goes beyond Taiwan, Is rael. consolidating our international eco­ especially in the middle of a war , how­ and Saudi Arabia , however. TIle nomic position and thereby rely upon eve r limited, legitimized his actions United States is at the center of a an improved game #3 to reinforce and anything that contributed to their World Alliance system and is the point our position in game # 1. Suggestions reali zation was hence justifiable. A of referen ce for many countries who could be made about firming up our successful game #2 to the degree that have no formal alliances with us. To a alliance structure in Europe and Asia it contri buted to our power, therefore great degree, stability in the world so that we would not need to playa to our security, and th rough both to depends on a consistent set of expect­ triangular game #2. First , especially in the peace of the wortd , was a legiti­ ations about our shortrun behavior. a mode inconsistent with our basic val­ mate enterprise. and about our long range heal th and ues and at od ds with the more funda­ The circula ri ty of this pOSi tion be­ viability. mental requirements of game # 4. came increasingly apparent as other TIle most impOT!ant component of a Many suggestions could be made about countries refused to equate American "successful" game #4 is the ability to firmin g up game '1/'4., not Sim ply in power with international legitimacy. convey to the world a se nse of purpose terms of human rights, but also in Justification for America's position in and direction that is consistent with terms of national purpose and com­ the world could not be found exclu­ the aspirations of those peoples in the mitment. sively in America's international dex­ world who look to us for leadership. It is, however, more important at terity, 1I 0r merely in its peace-keeping Here is where the current administra­ the moment to focus on improving the role. Ca rter, therefore, commendably tion has failed most dramatically. The conceptuali zation of decision making. reintroduced game #4. Unfortunate­ world is increaSingly doubtful that the The problem is not to observe that ly, howeve r, he did not play it well. future is ours. Wh atever our fai lures America is at a low ebb, nor merely to This is. of course, not an easy game during the post·war era, the rest of the make new proposals fo r "policy coor­ to pla y and it is especially'difficult if world looked on us not only as dination" , rather it is to suggest the a nation is playing the other three number one but as a safe bet to remain need for really fundamental break­ games as well. The basic question to number one: the Soviets wanted to throughs. We must become aware of be answered in this game after all the catch up; the Europeans rushed to multi-dimensionality in a much more calculations of power and imperatives copy our democra tic institutions; the sopltisticated way than we currently of economics have been stripped away Japanese copied our industrial plant; are and we must also become aware of is: what does a nation stand for? Does the Third World, while doubting our the relationship be tween these games it keep its commitments. does it sup­ good intentions, nevertheless wanted in a way that transcends the gaming port its allies, is it sensiti ve to human to imporl our managerial sk ill and the mentality. We must put the games aspirations and human rights? Does it wonders of our technology. into a perspective that will ena ble us have a vision of the future, and is this TIlese unstated attitudes became a to have a deeper sense of priorities. vision of the future responsive to its major componenl of our power and Such analyses ul timately ca n occur world constituency; In an important our ability to lead and shape our only when we are fuJly aware of where sense, it is only on th is level that a intern at ional environment. Today we stand and where we are going in country like America can deal with assu ran ce aboul America and the "game number four". It is only then questions such as Taiwan, Israel , Ira n, future has been replaced by doubt and that we can fa thom the importance of and Southern Africa. hesitance. Although one should not understanding that at stake is not a President Carter, al the staT! of his view all world events in the light of series of games but the shape and administration , defined America's world perceptions of America . it may mastery of our destiny as a nation. •

March/April1979 '5 The meeting will begin at 10:00 a.m. with a panel on " Politics, 1980 and Deyond".

The panelists include: John Deordourff, Politicol Consultant VI ctor Kamber, Special Assistant to the President AFL-CIO Tanya MeUch, Director of Civic Affairs, COS

At Q luncheon beginning at noon, pennsylvania Governor Ri chord Thornburgh will deliver a mojor address. Tickets to the luncheon ore available at S 1 5.00 each.

Ripon At 2:00 p.m. a ponel will begin on"EleCtion Finonce: Unlocking the Advantoges of Incumbency" . Society The panelists include: Prof. Herbert Alexander, Director, Citizens Research Foundation Dr. Clifford Drown, Professor, Union College Annual D. Dorton Doyle. Esq., author of Ripon study on campaign finance.

At 4:00 p.m. the Ripon SOCiety's National Governing Ooard will meet. Its agenda will Meeting inctude the election of officers for the coming year and a discussion of the Society's program On Saturday. April 28. 1979 the for the next twelve months. annual meeting of the Ripon Following the NGO Meeting the Ripon Society will hold a Reception and Annual Dinner. a Society will be held in the "Solute to Republican Leaders of the Future". Sheraton Philadelphia Hotel. Honorees will inctude outstanding Republicans at the Federal. state and local level from a 1725 JFK Boulevard. number of states. The cocktail reception will Philadelphia. Pennsylvania begin at 6:30 p.m. and the dinner at 7,30 19103. All Ripon Society p.m. Tickets are available at )25.00 each. members. Forum subscribers and At 10,00 a.m. Sunday .. April 29, 1979 the other interested individuals are Society's Notional Executive Committee will meet at the Philadelphia Sheraton Hotel. The welcome at the meeting. There agenda will include a setting of budget is no admission charge to the priorities for the coming year, a review of plans for the Ripon Forum, and a discussion of event except for the cost of issues and political srrategy. The NEC meeting tickets to the luncheon and is open to all Society members.

annual dinner. Please make checks payoble to The Ripon Society and mail them to 800 Eighteenth Street, N.W .. Washington, D.C. 20006. Include ) 15.00 for each ticket to the luncheon with Governor Thornburgh ond )25.00 for each ticket to the Annual Dinner.

Roams are available at a reduced (ate to Ripon meeting ottendees Friday and Saturday night at the Philadelphia Sheraton (phone (215) 568-3300). Please mention the Ripon event when calling.