1989 - The destruction of the Berlin Wall signals the end of the Soviet empire.

1991 - Operation Desert Storm cripples Saddam Hussein's regime in Iraq.

The Soviet Union disbands.

1995 - Mass hunger and starvation strike North Korea.

1997 - Voters in Iran replace the country's radical regime with a new, moderate government.

1998 - The Pentagon declares that Cuba is no longer capable of posing a military threat.

Over the past ten years the enemies of the United States have grown poorer, weaker, and more isolated. America spends $280 billion per year on its military--that's nine times as much as all of our potential enemies combined. But the Pentagon, Congress, and the President all say that's still not enough. In this episode of America's Defense Monitor, we'll take a look at America's plans to fatten its military in the face of a thinning threat.

TITLE SEQUENCE

America's Defense Monitor: television for changing times....

INTRO:

NARRATOR:Since the end of the Cold War, a new world order has emerged under America's leadership, one where the main concerns are not military alliances or political ideologies, but access to markets and the free flow of capital. America's leaders expect our military to protect this order, whenever and wherever it is threatened.

General Patrick Hughes, Director of the Pentagon's Defense Intelligence Agency, testifies before a Senate Panel on threats to America's security.

HUGHES: No global military challenger on the scale of the former Soviet Union is likely to emerge, but the US will continue to be confronted with a host of 'lesser' dangers....

NARRATOR: According to General Hughes, nuclear, chemical, and biological weapons could be used by hostile governments, terrorist groups, or criminal organizations. Nations in decline could lash out in desperation or, as was the case in Somalia, degenerate into chaos.

HUGHES: Collectively, these lesser dangers represent a formidable barrier to the emergence of a stable, secure, and prosperous international order, and will continue to absorb a great deal of the US military's time, energy, and resources.

NARRATOR: It's difficult to tell where America's next enemy will emerge. But the Pentagon keeps a watchful eye on a set of countries described as either "military competitors" or "potential adversaries."

Today, the US military sees Russia and China as its chief competitors. Both possess nuclear missiles capable of reaching American soil. And both Russia and China are powerful enough to challenge America's influence in their own regions. Neither country is officially hostile to the United States, but future relations with the US are uncertain.

The list of America's potential adversaries includes North Korea, Cuba, Iran, Iraq, Syria, Libya, and the Sudan. These nations are smaller, poorer, and have less capable militaries than Russia or China. But they are all seen as hostile to the United States, and the Pentagon remains concerned that armed conflict involving these countries could erupt at any time.

HUGHES: ...the governments and leaders of Iraq, Iran, North Korea, Libya, and others - do not share our view of the future. They typically resent the dominant global role played by the US, and feel threatened by the rapid expansion of 'western' (and particularly American) values, ideals, culture, and institutions.

NARRATOR: Despite their hostile attitudes toward the United States, all of America's potential enemies clearly understand that provoking a war with the United States would be suicidal. Several are actively seeking improved relations with the United States and its allies.

But as long as the military remains at the center of America's foreign policy, it is not the hand of friendship that America extends to the rest of the world. It is the threat of overwhelming destructive power.

RUSSIA

NARRATOR: Russia inherited the bulk of the Soviet Union's military power, including its large stockpiles of nuclear and chemical weapons. American leaders worry that an unstable Russia could once again turn against the United States.

But Moscow has cut its military budget by 96% over the last ten years, and Russia's once-feared armed forces are in a state of decay.

ARBATOV: The military budget, according to the draft law on the budget that was introduced into the Duma for 1999 amounts to 92 billion rubles...

NARRATOR: Alexei Arbatov is Chairman of the Russian Duma's Defense Committee. According to Arbatov, Russia now spends the equivalent of $5 billion dollars per year on its military. That's less than one-fiftieth of America's military budget.

ARBATOV: ...you may understand very easily that it's very difficult to maintain a 1.2 million (man) army, with 10,000 nuclear weapons and 40,000 tons of chemical weapons, and space systems, and infrastructure, and military bases and everything.... for a budget of $5 billion dollars...

NARRATOR: Russia lacks the funds to train, equip, and sometimes even feed or pay the salaries of its military forces. Russian army morale is at an all time low. As a result, the military's decline has been dramatic.

PIKE: The Russian military today simply is not in a position to pose a military threat to its neighbors.

NARRATOR: John Pike is Director of the Space Policy Project at the Federation of American Scientists and an expert on military technology. He argues that Russia's ability to threaten the countries of Central and Eastern Europe, which are now shielded by the NATO alliance, is a thing of the past.

PIKE: If you look at all the difficulties that the Russians had in the domestic Chechnya crisis, where their military didn't do very well at all, it's very clear that the Russian military today does not pose a significant threat to any of its neighbors, even if it wanted to.

NARRATOR: But according to Pike, Russia's weakness is as great a threat as its strength used to be.

Russia is in the process of dismantling most of its strategic nuclear arsenal. But the country's economic decline has raised fears that components of Russian nuclear weapons could be stolen and sold for profit on the black market.

PIKE: When you think about missile troops that may not have been paid recently, or guards out foraging for food rather than protecting nuclear materials, you got a lot to worry about with the weakness of Russia.

NARRATOR: Senator Jeff Bingaman of New Mexico serves on a new Senate Subcommittee which tracks military threats to the United States.

BINGAMAN: Well, of course, the Russian military is a threat as long as they have nuclear weapons, a fairly large arsenal of nuclear weapons, and we need to continue to work with them to build down the level of nuclear weaponry on their side, on our side, on all sides. I think that that's very important for us.

NARRATOR: Senator Bingaman supports programs which assist Russia in safely reducing its nuclear arsenal, and disposing of nuclear weapons materials to prevent their misuse or spread to other countries. The programs are commonly known as Nunn-Lugar funds.

BINGAMAN: ... with the Nunn-Lugar funding, we now spend something close to $800 million a year on non-proliferation activities focused on Russia.

NARRATOR: In just a few years and at relatively little cost, these cooperative programs have done more to reduce the Russian nuclear danger than all of America's military might. Using Nunn-Lugar funds, Russia has dismantled hundreds of warheads, provided assistance to its unemployed nuclear scientists, and has thus far kept its nuclear materials off the black market.

But America's investment in keeping Russia's nuclear arsenal safe is tiny compared to the cost of keeping its own nuclear forces as deadly as ever.

PIKE: The problem with today is that we're spending $30 billion a year maintaining our nuclear arsenal. We're only spending a few percent of that amount reducing directly the danger from the Russian nuclear arsenal.

NARRATOR: America's growing nuclear advantage, and the flight of Russia's former allies to the American-led NATO alliance, are putting a strain on US-Russian relations.

ARBATOV: Russia feels very vulnerable, humiliated, not treated in a fair way...

The most important imaginable decisions--like NATO extension, like bombing of Serbs in Kosovo... are taken not only without an attempt to reach consensus with Russia, but very often even against Russia's clear objections....

NARRATOR: NATO's war against Serbia has Russian politicians calling to cut all ties with the United States, and to rebuild Russia's nuclear arsenal.

In its current state of economic and military decline, and with NATO pressing closer to its borders, today it is Russia that feels threatened.

CHINA

NARRATOR: America's next military competitor, China, is also a nuclear power.

BINGAMAN: Now I think in the case of China, China is, has much less capability militarily. They have some nuclear weapons, but much less than the Russians.

NARRATOR: China's nuclear arsenal is small compared to the United States', and lags decades behind in sophistication.

PIKE: The Chinese nuclear threat today is about the same as it's been over the last 10 or 20 years. They have a small number of missiles that can reach the United States.

NARRATOR: With just 20 long-range nuclear missiles and a few dozen nuclear bombers and submarines, China's nuclear forces are just large enough to deter an attack on Chinese soil.

Although China's military is not seen as a major threat today, political leaders worry that a military buildup in China could lead to an Asian arms race.

BINGAMAN: You'd have a competition going in the Far East for military dominance which would be destabilizing. I think that's the danger they represent. It's not a direct danger to the United States, but it certainly is contrary to our interests to allow that kind of arms race to develop.

NARRATOR: Chinese military spending has risen by about 10% over the last ten years--but this is hardly enough to support a major military buildup.

PIKE: I think the concern has to be, though, that if we start building an anti-missile system, the Chinese are gonna want to retain the ability to deter us, which means they're going to have a lot more missiles in response to our anti-missile system....

NARRATOR: Chinese nuclear missiles are often cited as a reason for America to build a national missile defense.

But according to the Chinese government's top arms control official, American deployment of a national missile defense, or NMD, would simply force China to build more nuclear missiles.

SHA: If a country, in addition to its offensive power, seeks to develop advanced TMD or even NMD, in an attempt to attain absolute security and unilateral strategic advantage for itself, other countries will be forced to develop more advanced offensive missiles. This will give rise to a new round of arms race, and will be in nobody's interest.

NARRATOR: Few countries receive as much high-level attention as China. China and the US share full diplomatic ties and are important trading partners. The American and Chinese militaries have observed and participated in each other's military exercises.

But close ties between America and China carry an undercurrent of fear and suspicion, and today the relationship is in jeopardy. American accusations of Chinese nuclear spying may force restrictions on nuclear cooperation between the US and China.

America's accidental bombing of the Chinese Embassy in Kosovo enraged China's people, and presented China with a newly menacing image of the United States.

If tensions continue to build, and if the United States forces China's hand by building a National Missile Defense, it could result in a new Cold War.

NORTH KOREA

NARRATOR: The Communist dictatorship of North Korea tops the list of America's potential adversaries.

HUGHES: North Korea remains the country most likely to involve the United States in a large-scale regional war scenario over the near term (the next five years or so).

NARRATOR: Tens of thousands of American and South Korean troops patrol the border between North and South Korea, constantly on the alert for a North Korean invasion.

But for a number of reasons, a new Korean war is highly unlikely.

Today North Korea is in a state of collapse. The government's food distribution system no longer reaches most areas of the country. Chronic food shortages turned into famine in 1995. In a country with a population of just 22 million, as many as two million people have died of hunger.

TENET: The regime is still struggling with serious food shortages, last year's grain harvest having been more than 1 million tons short of minimum grain needs. Very few heavy industrial plants are in operation. Living conditions for most North Koreans are miserable.

NARRATOR: North Korea's economic collapse is mirrored by its military. North Korea has cut military spending by two-thirds over the past ten years; its military budget for 1999 is about $2 billion dollars. By contrast, US allies South Korea and Japan will spend a combined $50 billion this year.

A thaw in the political climate of Northeast Asia has further reduced the danger of war.

North Korea's strongest ally, China, has made peace with South Korea, and the two have become important trading partners. The United States, Japan, and South Korea are the largest donors of foreign aid to North Korea.

It's difficult to imagine how a country which can't feed its people could muster the necessary forces to invade South Korea.

But an American peacekeeping force has remained in Korea since the 1950s. Today that force numbers 37,000 personnel, and stands ready to severely punish any North Korean aggression.

CLINTON: It's pointless for them to try to develop nuclear weapons, because if they ever used one, it would be the end of their country.

NARRATOR: At the urging Japan and South Korea, the United States has recently begun to soften its stance against North Korea. In exchange for food and energy assistance from the US and its allies, North Korea has agreed not to develop nuclear weapons.

Just recently, President Clinton sent former Secretary of Defense William Perry to North Korea as his personal representative, to discuss more possibilities for cooperation between North Korea and the United States.

CUBA

NARRATOR: Cuba, like North Korea, is a Cold War adversary overtaken by events.

America has maintained an economic blockade on the island nation for nearly four decades. The trade embargo has caused more hardship over the past decade than ever before.

Last year, the Pentagon determined that Castro's military is now incapable of posing a threat. Cuba has cut its military budget by 87% over the past ten years, to a mere $300 million per year. That's less than $30 for each Cuban citizen; the US military spends more than a thousand dollars a year for each American citizen.

The American and Cuban navies have teamed up to control the flows of refugees and illegal drugs in the Caribbean, including a record 10-ton cocaine seizure in 1996. And the United States maintains a large naval base on the Cuban island.

Cuba is the only country in the entire Western Hemisphere on the Pentagon's list of potential adversaries, and the United States stands alone in its hostile policy toward Cuba. And despite the official hostility, Cuba is becoming an increasingly popular destination for American academics, tourists, and athletes. The time has come to cross our island neighbor off the enemies list.

OTHER ROGUE STATES

NARRATOR: The five remaining countries--Iraq, Iran, Libya, Syria, and the Sudan--make up the roster of America's potential enemies in the Middle East and Northern Africa.

PIKE: In practice, none of the states currently have the ability to directly threaten the United States itself with a military attack...

NARRATOR: All of these countries have dramatically reduced military spending over the past ten years. All five nations combined will spend less than $11 billion on their militaries. America's allies in the region-Israel, Egypt, Kuwait, Saudi Arabia, and Turkey-will spend about $40 billion combined. The United States and its allies together can decisively defeat the armed forces of any hostile country in the region.

PIKE: They could put up a formidable fight for a couple of weeks, perhaps a few months. But given the strength of the American economy and the size of the American military, and its sophistication, there's no doubt that the United States would certainly win and win fairly quickly.

BINGAMAN: I think it's clear that we have the most capable military today in the world, and accordingly, it's foolhardy for someone to take us on tank-to-tank...

NARRATOR: The threat posed by the so-called "rogue states" of the Middle East comes not from their armed forces, but rather their reputation as safe havens for terrorists, and bases for terrorist attacks.

HUGHES: I am particularly concerned that the simultaneous occurrence of many 'lesser' crises will result in a 'net effect' that could diffuse our focus, dissipate our power and

resources, cause us to be reactive, and ultimately, undermine our ability to shape the future.

NARRATOR: Iraq, Iran, Libya, Syria, and the Sudan are all suspected of sponsoring acts of international terrorism, and of stockpiling chemical weapons. The international community, led by the United States, has responded by imposing stiff economic and military sanctions on each of them.

But as these countries grow poorer and more isolated, the more likely they are to commit acts of terrorism, and to blame their troubles on the United States. According to the CIA, Americans are more at risk from terrorist attacks today than ever before.

TENET: On terrorism, Mr. Chairman, I must be frank in saying that Americans increasingly are the favored targets. US citizens and facilities suffered more than 35 percent of the total number of international terrorist attacks in 1998.

PIKE: These are new threats, they require new policies, and a lot of the stuff that we're doing that's left over from the Cold War really isn't addressing these new problems.

NARRATOR: Military firepower is far from perfect as an antidote to terrorism.

Last year, the US military used cruise missiles to attack suspected terrorist sites in the Sudan and Afghanistan. The bombings may have had the unintended effect of aiding the terrorists' cause.

Prior to the cruise missile attacks, The United States had asked the Sudan to deport terrorist leader Osama bin Laden. Mindful of bin Laden's reputation for ruthless violence, and the vast wealth he had accumulated in Sudan, the Sudanese authorities refused. However, they did offer to help monitor and contain bin Laden's terrorist network.

But since America's subsequent attack on Sudan, which destroyed the country's only medicine factory, little hope remains for such cooperation.

There are still opportunities for the United States to form new relationships with the so-called rogue states. Iran, which has perhaps the strongest and most modern military among America's potential enemies, is also the best candidate for closer relations with the US.

Iran elected a new, moderate government in 1997, which itself feels threatened by the hard-line Taliban regime in Afghanistan, and by Saddam Hussein's Iraq.

So the Iranian government of Mohammed Khatami is currently looking to form closer ties with moderate Arab regimes, including US allies Saudi Arabia and Kuwait. Iran and Saudi Arabia have both invited Syria to join the discussions.

Such a broad Arab alliance would help bring Iran, and perhaps Syria, more firmly into the moderate Arab community, reducing their incentive to destabilize the region with terrorism or other attacks.

The proposed partnership could ease America's burden in containing Saddam Hussein, allowing the United States to reduce its own military presence in the Middle East.

America can either continue to punish and isolate its potential enemies in the Middle East, or support their efforts to share the benefits of regional peace and stability.

CONCLUSION:

NARRATOR: American lives may be more at risk today, but that is partly because American lives are on the line in so many places and in so many ways. America continues to rely on its military to stabilize an entire international system.

In trying to enforce a world order, the US military has consumed untold billions of dollars, strained its own resources, and has still failed to eliminate America's enemies. Is the American military trying to do too much?

BINGAMAN: That's always a danger, and I think we need to constantly reassess whether… we have shouldered more than our share of the burden. And we need to constantly reassess and find ways to reduce that level of commitment where we can.

NARRATOR: There are limits to the role destructive force can play in shaping the world order.

Confronted with America's tremendous military might, and its eagerness to demonstrate its power anywhere and anytime, today it is our potential enemies who feel threatened.

As long as that is the case, they will seek ways to defend themselves, and to disrupt any vision of a world order from which they are excluded.

SHA: It is important that a fair and just new world order be established whereby all states treat each other with equality. The big and powerful should not bully the small and the weak. And all disputes should be solved peacefully, without resort to the use or threat of force.

END OF SHOW