Roanoke Times
                 Copyright (c) 1995, Landmark Communications, Inc.

DATE: SUNDAY, February 24, 1991                   TAG: 9102250270
SECTION: EDITORIAL                    PAGE: D-3   EDITION: METRO 
SOURCE: WILLIAM B. HOPKINS
DATELINE:                                 LENGTH: Long

COUNTERING THE DEFENSE ESTABLISHMENT

We have a tremendous trade deficit. Our national debt has more than tripled in 10 years. Yet with the Cold War over, our military establishment remains intact.

How does my country realize the coveted peace dividend? By structuring a military force that addresses our defense needs rather than the demands of unwarranted fears. These needs include a deterrent to nuclear war, for which we already have many times the force necessary; an internal police force, such as the National Guard, that can assist the local police in times of riots or national disasters; an affordable conventional force to police our interest in international affairs; and a means to deliver this force to trouble spots around the globe.

The United States should be able to finance an armed service that meets these requirements for a fraction of the present cost. No peace dividend can be realized, however, without a massive reduction in power of the military-industrial complex entrenched in every facet of U.S. society.

In deciding the structure of forces best suited to the U.S. role in international affairs, Congress and the president should recognize that the United States does not have the resources to act as the world's policeman. The security of the United States is at risk not because of any threat from a foreign power, but because of our inability, with our huge national debt, to finance our large military establishment.

As a captain in the U.S. Marines, I served under Maj. Gen. O. P. Smith when the 1st Marine Division moved into North Korea in October 1950. Smith recognized the importance of good relations with the civilian population. Shortly after arriving in North Korea, he ordered Marines off the streets and away from North Korean places of business by nightfall. In addition, he demanded that each Marine battalion designate a political officer for contact with local governments. Each time we moved into a new position, it was the political officer's duty to inform local officials of our presence, along with our rules and regulations, so as to eliminate friction between Marines and the North Koreans.

These moves paid big dividends. When later we were surrounded by 12 Chinese divisions at the Chosin Reservoir, North Korean civilians were our friends and best source of information. We could not have escaped without their aid.

But this good will was nullified by Gen. Douglas MacArthur, who ordered the systematic bombing of the villages, towns and cities in North Korea. Before the war was over, 2 million North Korean civilians were killed or maimed. Naturally, the survivors gave what help they could to the Chinese.

After Korea, U.S. Sen. Robert Taft - known as Mr. Republican - advocated a defense-budget cut from $69 billion to less than $16 billion. Large defense budgets, Taft argued, gave those in power ideas about things they could do with force that the Korean War had illustrated could not be done.

Taft died on July 31, 1953, four days after the announcement of peace. His astute observations seem to have been interred with his body. Two future presidents, Senate Minority Leader Lyndon Johnson and Vice President Richard Nixon, were influenced by MacArthur, who - after dismissal by President Truman - argued his hands had been tied in Korea because he could not use air power to carry the war to China.

History shows that the massive bombing and killing of Chinese advocated by MacArthur would have had the same negative effect, militarily, as the indiscriminate bombing of the civilians in North Korea. In Vietnam, our Air Force dropped more bombs than in all theaters during World War II, yet the blitz only pushed North Vietnamese soldiers and civilians closer to the government leading the fight against "the foreign aggressor."

In the Persian Gulf, we seem to have learned better how to conduct a limited war with minimal civilian casualties. Still, military victory is foolhardy if political defeat is the end result. The U.N. resolutions against Iraq did not call for the United States to supply 80 percent of the fighting forces, and I think we are foolish to do so.

The military-industrial complex knows how to sway public opinion. Military bases and munitions factories have been planned so that all states share the benefit of large defense budgets. In Virginia, 200,000 servicemen backed by 200,000 civilian employees receive paychecks each month from the Department of Defense. Numerous corporations rely solely or partially on defense spending. A 10-percent reduction in the U.S. armed services means the elimination of 40,000 incomes in Virginia alone. This is not a popular prospect for the voters of any state.

The military-industrial complex exerts great power in the nation's capital mainly because it has such a large constituency in all congressional districts in the country. To blunt its influence, a counter constituency must be built at the grass-roots level, else this misplaced power will continue to thrive and survive at our nation's peril.