Gore vs. Bush on Defense

— -- The presidential race is a battle of the hawks when it comes to defense.

Vice President Al Gore has traditionally been a pro-defense Democrat, one of only 10 senators in his party — along with running mate Joseph Lieberman — to vote in favor of the Gulf War in 1991. Gore supports a missile defense system to protect the United States from nuclear attack and promises to boost military spending by $100 billion over the next decade.

The Republican presidential candidate, Texas Gov. George W. Bush, also says he’ll make defense a top priority. He wants to decommision old nuclear weapons, increase research spending on new weapons by $20 billion, and wants an even more extensive missile defense system, one that would protect America’s allies as well.

In all, Bush proposes $47 billion in new military spending, not including the costs of a missile-defense system.

But the missile-defense issue is a central point of disagreement right now between the two candidates. The land-based system would theoretically defend against missiles from terrorists and so-called rouge states like North Korea. But Russia strongly opposes the system and building it would conflict with the 1972 Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty.

Gore has said he would seek to amend the ABM treaty to permit a domestic missile-defense system, but Bush has said he will break the treaty if he cannot convince Russia to agree. The latest test of the missile-defense hardware, on July 3, was a failure.

Readiness Disputed

Bush has also sought to make an issue out of the country’s military preparedness, saying the Clinton administration has hurt troop morale and neglected to keep the armed forces in top shape.

“It’s time for new leadership in Washington that will rebuild the morale of the United States military,” Bush said at a speech in September, flanked by former Gens. Norman Schwarzkopf and Colin Powell.

Serving under Bush’s father, former President George Bush, Schwarzkopf and Powell helped orchestrate the U.S. victory in the Gulf War, along with then-Defense Secretary Dick Cheney, who is now the Texas governor’s running mate. And Bush has strongly hinted that Powell, the former head of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, would have a position in his Cabinet.

Gore, a Vietnam veteran who often calls American armed forces the “strongest and the best in the entire world,” has vigorously disputed Bush’s claims that the military is lacking readiness and that morale has suffered.

“[It] makes me so concerned when others try to run down America’s military for political advantage in an election year,” Gore said in August. “That’s not only wrong in fact, it’s the wrong message to send to our allies and adversaries across the world.”

The Gore campaign also points to a 4.8 percent military pay increase enacted in 1999 and the vice president’s support for an additional across-the-board 3.7 percent increase in the pay budget as signs of Gore’s concern for the rank-and-file.

Belief in Technology

In a general area of agreement, both candidates think new technology is the answer to a lot of military problems. Bush wants to “skip a generation” of weapons and replace them with newer systems; Gore opposes that idea, focusing on progressive upgrades and an “Information Age force.”

Bush wants to slash the U.S. nuclear arsenal, but opposes a Comprehensive (nuclear) Test Ban Treaty which was rejected by the Senate in September 1999. Gore wants to see the test ban enacted.

Bush has suggested he would be more selective than Gore in sending U.S. troops to intervene in foreign countries. He’s suggested crises not directly related to U.S. interests, like the Rwandan genocide, might not warrant U.S. intervention.

Gore has expressed regret for U.S. inaction in Bosnia and Rwanda, although he has listed “our national interest” as his No. 1 criterion for committing U.S. forces.