Right Web

Tracking militarists’ efforts to influence U.S. foreign policy

The Hawks’ Hawk

In putting together his long-awaited new strategy on Iraq, President George W. Bush relied heavily on the counsel of J.D. Crouch II, perhaps the most...

In putting together his long-awaited new strategy on Iraq, President George W. Bush relied heavily on the counsel of J.D. Crouch II, perhaps the most hardline-and most obscure-of his hawkish advisers.

Over the past 15 years, the generally low-profile Crouch has taken a number of controversial positions, from advocating military action against Cuba and North Korea to blaming the 1999 Columbine High School student massacre in Colorado on “30 years of liberal social policy.”

As deputy national security adviser, Crouch, who has held three posts in the Bush administration, chaired the interagency group charged with mapping out Bush’s new Iraq strategy. The main feature of the so-called surge strategy will add some 20,000 new U.S. troops to the 140,000 already there in hopes of stabilizing Baghdad and the rebellious Al Anbar province.

Crouch, whose substantive expertise is in arms control-or, more precisely, how the United States can evade or undermine international efforts to promote arms control-has long been a favorite of Vice President Dick Cheney, whose own national security adviser, neoconservative John Hannah, has reportedly played a key role in the deliberations over Iraq.

Crouch first worked under Cheney at the Pentagon during the administration of President George H.W. Bush when, as a deputy assistant secretary for international security, he contributed to the controversial 1992 draft Defense Planning Guidance (DPG) that, among other things, called on Washington to pursue unquestioned military dominance in and around Eurasia.

He returned to the Pentagon as assistant secretary for international security after the younger Bush took office as president in 2001. In that capacity, Crouch focused mostly on the administration’s withdrawal from the 1972 Anti-Ballistic Missile (ABM) Treaty, plans to develop new kinds of nuclear weapons, and the preparation of the 2002 National Security Strategy, which codified many of the ideas first proposed in the 1992 draft DPG.

He left the administration in late 2003 to return as a professor to Southwest Missouri State University (SMSU, now renamed Missouri State University), long a stronghold of missile defense, nuclear arms, and space weapons advocates, only to be appointed the following year as U.S. ambassador to Romania, a post he held for just eight months before being recalled to Washington in early 2005 as deputy national security adviser under Stephen Hadley.

His return was described by Washington Post columnist Jim Hoagland as evidence that Cheney was “charging ahead with undiminished influence and unshakable self-confidence.”

Now 48, Crouch first entered government after earning a doctorate in international relations at the University of Southern California in the mid-1980s. With the help of his longtime mentor and one of then-President Ronald Reagan’s most hawkish advisers, William Van Cleave, Crouch was assigned to the State Department’s Arms Control and Disarmament Agency before joining the staff of the far-right senator from Cheney’s home state of Wyoming, Malcolm Wallop, in 1986.

In 1990 Crouch moved to the Pentagon, where he worked under then-Undersecretary of Defense for Policy Paul Wolfowitz. After the first Gulf War Crouch was part of a team that prepared the draft DPG, including Wolfowitz, I. Lewis Libby (Cheney’s future vice presidential chief of staff until 2005), and Zalmay Khalilzad (Washington’s current ambassador to Iraq). The draft DPG’s leak to the New York Times sparked a major controversy that eventually prompted the George H.W. Bush administration to repudiate its more unilateralist proposals.

Crouch spent most of the 1990s teaching at SMSU, where the Department of Defense and Strategic Studies was headed by Van Cleave, and speaking out against what he and his associates charged was the “appeasement” policies of the Clinton administration.

He strongly denounced U.S.-North Korean negotiations in 1995, calling for Washington to send more U.S. troops and deploy tactical nuclear weapons to South Korea to carry out air strikes against nuclear targets in the North if Pyongyang refused to give up its nuclear program. The following year, he criticized President Bill Clinton for imposing travel restrictions and economic sanctions against Cuba after its air force shot down two civilian planes flown by anti-Castro activists from south Florida. “We ought to have considered military options,” Crouch said at the time. “As long as we allow a totalitarian Communist regime to exist 90 miles from our borders, we can expect these kinds of problems to recur.”

He also joined the Board of Advisers of the ultra-hawkish Center for Security Policy (CSP), a lobby group funded by defense contractors and far-right Zionists associated with Israel’s Likud Party and headed by hardline neoconservative Frank Gaffney.

Other members of that board have included senior members of the Bush administration, including Elliott Abrams, the senior Middle East director on the National Security Council; Richard Perle, the former Defense Policy Board chairman; Douglas Feith, the former undersecretary of defense for policy; and a number of former and current SMSU faculty members, including Van Cleave, Charles Kupperman, Keith Payne, and Henry Cooper, the former head of Reagan’s Star Wars program.

From his perch at SMSU, meanwhile, Crouch also spoke out about and wrote on domestic issues, taking classically far-right positions against big government, progressive taxation, and gun control. In a letter published in the Washington Times, he blamed the 1999 Columbine shooting rampage on “30 years of liberal social policy that has put our children in day care, taken God out of the schools, taken Mom out of the house, and banished Dad as an authority figure from the family altogether.” Crouch has since then insisted that he does not oppose “women in the workplace.”

Although such positions generally do not reflect neoconservative views, neoconservatives, including Perle and Gaffney, have, like Cheney, been among Crouch’s most enthusiastic boosters over the years.

“Knowing him as I do,” Gaffney-whose list of U.S. adversaries against which Washington should be much more confrontational runs from Iran to France-told the St. Louis Post Dispatch earlier this year, “I’m almost certain that he is exercising influence, and influence that is reinforcing the most robust policies and positions of this administration.”

Jim Lobe is a contributor to Right Web (rightweb.irc-online.org) and the Washington bureau chief of the Inter Press Service.

Citations

Jim Lobe, "The Hawks' Hawk," Right Web Analysis (Somerville, MA: International Relations Center, January 11, 2007).

Share RightWeb

Featured Profiles

Update was slow, but still no lag in the editor window, and footnotes are intact.     This has been updated – Bernard Lewis, who passed away in May 2018, was a renowned British-American historian of Islam and the Middle East. A former British intelligence officer, Foreign Office staffer, and Princeton University professor, Lewis was…


Bernard Lewis was a renowned historian of Islam and the Middle East who stirred controversy with his often chauvinistic attitude towards the Muslim world and his associations with high-profile neoconservatives and foreign policy hawks.


John Bolton, the controversial former U.S. ambassador to the UN and dyed-in the-wool foreign policy hawk, is President Trump’s National Security Adviser McMaster, reflecting a sharp move to the hawkish extreme by the administration.


Michael Joyce, who passed away in 2006, was once described by neoconservative guru Irving Kristol as the “godfather of modern philanthropy.”


Mike Pompeo, the Trump administration’s second secretary of state, is a long time foreign policy hawk and has led the public charge for an aggressive policy toward Iran.


Max Boot, neoconservative military historian at the Council on Foreign Relations, on Trump and Russia: “At every turn Trump is undercutting the ‘get tough on Russia’ message because he just can’t help himself, he just loves Putin too much.”


Michael Flynn is a former Trump administration National Security Advisor who was forced to step down only weeks on the job because of his controversial contacts with Russian officials before Trump took office.


For media inquiries,
email rightwebproject@gmail.com

From the Wires

Trump is not the problem. Think of him instead as a summons to address the real problem, which in a nation ostensibly of, by, and for the people is the collective responsibility of the people themselves. For Americans to shirk that responsibility further will almost surely pave the way for more Trumps — or someone worse — to come.


The United Nations has once again turn into a battleground between the United States and Iran, which are experiencing one of the darkest moments in their bilateral relations.


In many ways, Donald Trump’s bellicosity, his militarism, his hectoring cant about American exceptionalism and national greatness, his bullying of allies—all of it makes him not an opponent of neoconservatism but its apotheosis. Trump is a logical culmination of the Bush era as consolidated by Obama.


For the past few decades the vast majority of private security companies like Blackwater and DynCorp operating internationally have come from a relatively small number of countries: the United States, Great Britain and other European countries, and Russia. But that seeming monopoly is opening up to new players, like DeWe Group, China Security and Protection Group, and Huaxin Zhongan Group. What they all have in common is that they are from China.


The Trump administration’s massive sales of tanks, helicopters, and fighter aircraft are indeed a grim wonder of the modern world and never receive the attention they truly deserve. However, a potentially deadlier aspect of the U.S. weapons trade receives even less attention than the sale of big-ticket items: the export of firearms, ammunition, and related equipment.


Soon after a Saudi-led coalition strike on a bus killed 40 children on August 9, a CENTCOM spokesperson stated to Vox, “We may never know if the munition [used] was one that the U.S. sold to them.”


The West has dominated the post-war narrative with its doctrine of liberal values, arguing that not only were they right in themselves but that economic success itself depended on their application. Two developments have challenged those claims. The first was the West’s own betrayal of its principles: on too many occasions the self interest of the powerful, and disdain for the victims of collateral damage, has showed through. The second dates from more recently: the growth of Chinese capitalism owes nothing to a democratic system of government, let alone liberal values.


RightWeb
share