NEW PEARL HARBOR NEEDED

It should hardly need a full explanation at this point to remind most readers of the much-discussed Cheney/Rumsfeld/Wolfowitz-led Project for the New American Century and their report of September 2000 that went out of its way to essentially admit it was a post-9-11 military strategy written in pre-9-11 world. On page 51 appear the now-famous words “the process of transformation, even if it brings revolutionary change, is likely to be a long one, absent some catastrophic and catalyzing event – like a new Pearl Harbor.” The report was ignored until well after 9/11 made it relevant, outlining as it did the “War on Terror” unleashed a year later.

But the PNAC were not the first or the last to make such statements. In fact, this passage is nearly a paraphrase from of Andrew Krepinevich, executive director of Center for Strategic and Budgetary Assessments (“an independent, nonprofit public policy research institute established to promote innovative thinking about defense planning and investment strategies for the 21st century.”) [1] Krepinevich testified to Congress in March 1999 “in the absence of a strong external shock to the United States – a latter-day “Pearl Harbor” of sorts – surmounting the barriers to transformation will likely prove a long, arduous process.” [2] This was (presumably?) a different transformation, but the idea is clearly the same.

PNAC fellow thinker Zbigniew Brzezinski (the Polish-born National Security Advisor to President Carter, intelligence adviser to Reagan and Bush 41, Council on Foreign Relations director, Tri-Lateral Commission co-founder, etc) also noted in 1997 (to praise from admirer Wolfowitz): “The pursuit of power and especially the economic costs and human sacrifice that the exercise of such power often requires are not generally congenial to democratic instincts. Democratization is inimical to imperial mobilization. […] America [...] may find it more difficult to fashion a consensus on foreign policy issues, except in the circumstance of a truly massive and widely perceived direct external threat.” [3]

What all of these people are saying is that in a Democratic country, imperialist war and endless defense spending are difficult to achieve unless something horrible happens. As long as it is perceived as an attack by an external enemy that poses a serious threat, the people will support said policies - blood has to be shed to achieve transformation. The importance of this unfortunately correct observation in the years before September 11 cannot be underestimated.

As 2001 dawned and that ominous date drew near, the nation’s leadership turned over and the Project were set to take charge in Washington. They’d have to wait another eight months for their “new Pearl Harbor,” but that didn’t keep them from reiterating their point. Rumsfeld (nicknamed by some “General Star Wars”) had chaired a commission to assess America’s “National Security Space Management and Organization,” and the "Rumsfeld Commission’s" final report was released on January 11, just before he entered the Pentagon’s big chair. The report promoted a space-based national “missile defense shield” and creation of the “Space Force” on par with the Army or Navy, but the weirdest spot is where it noted:

“History is replete with instances in which warnings were ignored and changes resisted until an external, “improbable” event forced resistant bureaucracies to take action. The question is whether [...] as in the past, a debilitating attack against the country and its people – a “Space Pearl Harbor” – will be the only event able to galvanize the nation and cause the US Government to act.” [4] This report actually harped on the concept, pointing out that “the U.S. is an attractive candidate for a ‘Space Pearl Harbor.’” A word search of the PDF file reveals nine instances of the phrase “Pearl Harbor,” all in the more critical first half. [5]

Thomas Donnelly, PNAC Deputy Executive Director and principal author of Rebuilding America’s Defenses reiterated the report’s core assertions in numerous articles and interviews during late-2000 and throughout the first eight months of 2001. “I think Americans have become used to running the world,” Donnelly told the Washington Post on August 21, “ and would be very reluctant to give it up if they realized there were a serious challenge to it.” [6] Three weeks later Americans realized just that, the “War on Terror” opened, and in 2002 defense contractor Lockheed-Martin turned a portion of their increased profits to hiring Donnelly as their communications director. [7]

One Project memebr got to go on the record that 9/11 was in fact the fulfillment of their prophecy. Nightline, March 5 2003: When asked if 9/11 was their Pearl Harbor, he responded "I think it was the country's Pearl Harbor. I think it was the President's Pearl Harbor." [8] I have the audio clip - it sounds a lot like PNAC Chairman William Kristol to me, and I couldv'esworn it was him. I found the video at The Dossier/Iraq War but it's not there anymore. I lost my video of it and most referenes to the episode and interview have since been pulled. I managed track down a transcript here. According the this site the line is attributed to the Project's Gary Schmitt. Not sure hy they'd back off Kristol from this admission. A normal person would let it go and attribute the line to Schmitt, but I'll check the audio against voices of Kristol and Schmitt and post my findings here. Someday.

Update 1-1-07: After listening to several audio clips of their voices, it seems I was wrong and just being weird. It was Schmitt, my bad. Anyway, the basic point still stands - as many others have noted, 9/11 was - conveniently - just the Pearl Harbor they needed.

Sources:
[1] Center for Strategic and Budgetary Assessment. Official Website.
[2] Thompson, Paul and the Center for Cooperative Research. The Terror Timeline: Year by Year, Day by Day, Minute by Minute. New York. Regan Books. 2004. Page 334.
[3] Brzezinski, Zbigniew. The Grand Chessboard: American Primacy and its Geostrategic Imperatives. New York. Basic Books. 1997. Pages 210-211
[4] “Final Report of the Commission to Assess United States National Security Space Management and Organization.” January 11, 2001. PDF file - click here to donload - military site. Page vii.
Report -
[5] See 20. Thompson. Page 336
[6] Wikipedia. "Thomas Donnelly."
[7] lost source...
[8] "Story Slug: The Plan." http://www.whatreallyhappened.com/ThePlan.htm