Right Web

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

National Strategy Information Center

Please note: IPS Right Web neither represents nor endorses any of the individuals or groups profiled on this site.

The National Strategy Information Center (NSIC), founded in 1962, claims to be the first think tank to have advocated on national security strategy, low-intensity conflict, intelligence agency operations, and political warfare.[1] Over the past four decades, NSIC has worked with U.S. intelligence agencies to assess political and psychological warfare efforts and to collaborate with conservative labor union operations in Europe and Latin America. 

Among NSIC's founding directors are several trail-blazing neoconservative and right-wing figures, including  Richard Pipes, Joseph Coors, William Casey, Frank Shakespeare, Prescott Bush, Jr., and Frank Barnett.[2]

Along with NSIC contributors Abram Shulsky and Gary Schmitt, Barnett has been a leading advocate of Leo Strauss-inspired foreign policy notions entailing political warfare, psychological operations, and low-intensity conflict in the 1980s. A member of the Committee on the Present Danger, Barnett co-edited a 1989 National Defense University report on political warfare with fellow Straussian acolyte Carnes Lord entitled Political Warfare and Psychological Operations: Rethinking the U.S. Approach. The report advocates the dissemination of U.S. “propaganda” and the curtailment of foreign ideas and values.[3] Lord also served as a national security aide in the office of Vice President Dan Quayle, where he worked alongside William Kristol, founder of the Weekly Standard and the Project for the New American Century.

NSIC president Roy Godson served as a consultant to the President's Foreign Intelligence Advisory Board (PFIAB) during the Ronald Reagan administration, when Schmitt was PFIAB's executive director. At the same time, Godson served as one of the main intermediaries between the private Nicaraguan contra support network and the National Security Council.[4] During the Cold War, he was closely connected with neoconservative organizations such as the Coalition for the Democratic Majority and the League for Industrial Democracy. Godson also served as the longtime director of the International Labor program at Georgetown University, where NSIC's Consortium for the Study of Intelligence is housed.[5] Godson’s father and brother, Joseph and Dean, served as key advocates of neoconservative ideas and organizations in the United Kingdom during the Cold War.[6]

NSIC has endeavored to keep up with changing strategic and tactical priorities since the the onset of the “war on terror.” In 2010, Roy Godson and Richard Shultz of the Fletcher School coedited the NSIC volume Adapting America’s Security Paradigm and Security Agenda. Contributing authors to the volume include former U.S. ambassador to Iraq, Afghansitan, and the United Nations Zalmay Khalilzad, former deputy NATO commander Rupert Smith, and Marin Strmekci, vice president of the right-wing Smith Richardson Foundation.

Hyping the notion that the world is on the verge of chaos—with more than half the states on the globe purportedly failed or near failure—and that shadowy forces are engaged in an existential battle “against the West,” Godson and Shultz argue that a “paradigm shift” is needed to confront array of security challenges confronting the United States.[7] The volume claims “the highest priorities” are:

a.Reoriented and restructured military units whose primary mission is to prevail in these nontraditional irregular conflicts that the U.S. most likely will face.

b.Intelligence dominance through collection, analysis, and exploitation derived from local knowledge and operations in conflict zones.

c.Civilian and military stability units, trained, dedicated, and resourced to assist  indigenous leaders by bringing security, development, and rule of law principles to local areas.

d.Strategic communication principles becoming a major component of top down driven policy, implemented by career specialists educated for this purpose.

e.Political capabilities performed by small corps of trained professionals—military and civilian—with authorities, skills, and resources to forge coalitions among foreign state and nonstate actors.

Funding

In addition to the support it has received directly or indirectly from the U.S. government, NSIC has received funding from several right-wing foundations, including the Carthage Foundation, the Earhart Foundation, the John M. Olin Foundation, the Lynde and Harry Bradley Foundation, the Sarah Scaife Foundation, and the Smith Richardson Foundation.[8]


Share RightWeb

Please note: IPS Right Web neither represents nor endorses any of the individuals or groups profiled on this site.

Sources

[1]National Strategy Information Center, “About Us”, http://www.strategycenter.org/about/nsic.

[2]National Strategy Information Center, “Consortium for the Study of Intelligence: Founding Members, 1979,” http://www.strategycenter.org/about/csi.

[3]Carnes Lord and Frank Barnett, Political Warfare and Psychological Operations: Rethinking the U.S. Approach (National Defense University and National Strategy Information Center, 1989).

[4]Pat O’Brien, “House Probes Link Between Contras and Youth Commission,” March 23, 1987, United Press International.

[5]Georgetown University, “Roy S Godson”, http://explore.georgetown.edu/people/godsonr/.

[6]David Miller, “Reactionary Censorship in the UK: The Case of SpinProfiles,” Right Web, August 18, 2010, http://www.rightweb.irc-online.org/articles/display/reactionary_censorship_in_the_uk_the_case_of_spinprofiles.

[7]Roy Godson and Richard Shulz, “Adapting America’s Security Paradigm and Security Agenda,” National Strategy Information Center, http://www.strategycenter.org/files/adapting_the_paradigm.pdf.

[8]Media Matters Action Network, “Conservative Transparency: National Strategy Information, Inc.,” Media Matters, http://mediamattersaction.org/transparency/organization/National_Strategy_Information_Center_Inc_/funders.

Share RightWeb

National Strategy Information Center Résumé

Contact Information

National Strategy Information Center
1730 Rhode Island Avenue NW, Suite 500
Washington, DC 20036-3117
Phone: 202-429-0129
Email: info@strategycenter.org
Website: http://www.strategycenter.org/

 

Founded

1962

 

About (as of 2010)

”The National Strategy Information Center (NSIC) identifies, researches, pilots, and promotes innovative strategies to enhance security and the quality of life in democratic societies. Founded as a nonpartisan, nonprofit, nongovernmental organization, NSIC has been at the forefront of education about challenges to democratic institutions for nearly 50 years.”

 

Selected Principals (as of 2010)

Related:

National Strategy Information Center News Feed

White House hints at Federal Data Strategy, OPEN Govt Data Act, in open-government strategy - Federal News NetworkWEST: SPAWAR Systems Centers Rebranded as Naval Information Warfare Centers - USNI NewsUnderstanding the United States' national AI strategy - DatacenterDynamicsAs 2020 Candidates Turn Left, Some Democrats Worry About the Center - U.S. News & World ReportDHS Unveils Enterprise Multi-Vendor, Multi-Cloud Strategy - Bloomberg GovernmentThe Pentagon's National Military Strategy is done, and it's unclear if the public will ever see it - DefenseNews.comMattapoisett native David J. Helfand named national physics board chair - Wicked LocalFact-Checking the Fact-Checker on Migration from Islamic Countries - Immigration BlogInside Donald Trump's army of super PACs and MAGA nonprofits - Center for Public IntegrityAxios China - February 22, 2019 - AxiosLindsey Graham prevails, as Trump is persuaded to leave 200 US troops in Syria - Washington ExaminerAnalysis | The Technology 202: Sen. Amy Klobuchar, announcing 2020 bid, comes out swinging on Big Tech - The Washington PostCarnegie Mellon University Announces Two Leadership Positions - Carnegie Mellon UniversityWhy the U.K. Condemned Facebook for Fuelling Fake News - The New YorkerLaparoscopic Instruments - Medical Devices Pipeline Assessment, 2019 - ResearchAndMarkets.com - Business WireAssessing Trump’s artificial intelligence executive order - Brookings InstitutionOrchestrate TechSolutions, LLC to Participate in MBA's National Mortgage Servicing Conference and Expo, 2019 - PR WebSenator: Trump's 'emergency' wall funding might jeopardize submarine 'propeller' project - NavyTimes.comWayfair Stock Soars Into Buy Zone As Fourth-Quarter Earnings Top Views - Investor's Business DailyTransitions: New Chancellor at CUNY, Monmouth College Names Provost - The Chronicle of Higher Education

Right Web is not responsible for the content of external internet sites.

The Right Web Mission

Right Web tracks militarists’ efforts to influence U.S. foreign policy.

For media inquiries,
email rightwebproject@gmail.com

From the Wires

François Nicoullaud, the former French ambassador to Iran, discusses the ups and downs of Iran-France relations and the new US sanctions.


Effective alliances require that powerful states shoulder a far larger share of the alliance maintenance costs than other states, a premise that Donald Trump rejects.


The new imbroglio over the INF treaty does not mean a revival of the old Cold War practice of nuclear deterrence. However, it does reveal the inability of the West and Russia to find a way to deal with the latter’s inevitable return to the ranks of major powers, a need that was obvious even at the time the USSR collapsed.


As a presidential candidate, Donald Trump appeared to recognize the obvious problem of the revolving door. But as the appointment of Patrick Shanahan, who spent 30 years at Boeing, as the Trump administration’s acting secretary of defense reveals, little has changed. America is indeed great again, if you happen to be one of those lucky enough to be moving back and forth between plum jobs in the Pentagon and the weapons industry.


Domestic troubles, declining popularity, and a decidedly hawkish anti-Iran foreign policy team may combine to make the perfect storm that pushes Donald Trump to pull the United States into a new war in the Middle East.


The same calculus that brought Iran and world powers to make a deal and has led remaining JCPOA signatories to preserve it without the U.S. still holds: the alternatives to this agreement – a race between sanctions and centrifuges that could culminate in Iran obtaining the bomb or being bombed – would be much worse.


With Bolton and Pompeo by his side and Mattis departed, Trump may well go with his gut and attack Iran militarily. He’ll be encouraged in this delusion by Israel and Saudi Arabia. He’ll of course be looking for some way to distract the media and the American public. And he won’t care about the consequences.


RightWeb
share