tinual increase in the capital invested in its plants, minesrnand farms, it is one of the foremost tasks of good governmentrnto remove all obstacles that hinder the accumulationrnand investment of new capital.rnStrategic IndependencernAt the end of World War II, the United States had a nearly autarkicrnindustrial base; we produced everything needed for ourrnnahonal defense. That day is gone. In 1982, we began to runrnmanufacturing trade deficits; by 1986, deficits in the trade ofrnhigh-technology goods. American dependence on foreignrnsources for items critical to our advanced weapons systems hasrncreated a vulnerability unknown since doughboys had to usernFrench artillery and tanks, British machine guns, and Alliedrnplanes—even though our own Wright brothers had inventedrnthe airplane. A decade ago. Admiral James Lyons, commanderrnof the U.S. Pacific forces, warned, “All of the critical componentsrnof our modern weapons systems, which involve our F-I6srnand F/A 18s, our M-1 tanks, our military computers —and Irncould go on and on —come from East Asian industries. . . .rnSome day, we might view that with concern and rightly so.”rnLyons was echoed five years later by a former chairman of thernJoint Chiefs of Staff, Admiral William Crowe, Jr.:rnThe Gulf War was unique because America enjoyed thernunanimous support of all its allies. Even so, cooperahonrnVv’as difficult. . .. The U.S. defense industrial base is alreadyrnin danger of becoming too dependent upon foreignrnsources for strategic supplies. What if the next timernwe are called upon to respond, our allies decide it is inrntheir best interest to sit it out?rnFormer Commerce ofiBcial Erik R. Pages writes of the difficultiesrnto which Crowe alluded:rnThe Bush Administration was forced to intervene withrnforeign governments on over thirty occasions to guaranteerndelivery of critical military parts. As one high-levelrnadministration official commented, “If the foreign governmentsrnwere neutral or were not disposed to help usrnout, we could have run into some real problems. Wernwere sweating bullets over it and the military was sweatingrnbullets too.”rnPeacetime America may ignore such concerns; but it is arndangerous vulnerability when technology is vital to nationalrnpower, crucial to military victory, and essential to saving thernlives of Americans sent into combat. (We got a glimpse of whatrnmight happen during Vietnam, when Japan withheld the transferrnof Sony TV cameras for missile guidance.) Foreigners todayrncontrol the American companies responsible for the heat shieldrnof the D-5 Trident missile and the flight controls of the B-2rnbomber, the F-117 Stealth, and the F-22—the backbone of thern21st-century Air Force.rnOverseas factories are far more vulnerable to espionage, laborrnproblems, sabotage, political dictation, and attack by enemyrnor terrorist forces. There is no guarantee that American secretsrnare safe abroad. A clear and present danger exists whenrncorporations with allegiance to no country gain virtual monopoliesrnover items critical to American securit)-. During WorldrnWar II, Stalin’s spies and our own homegrown traitors looted vitalrndefense secrets, including those related to the atom bomb.rnCiven this experience, for us to allow technology indispensablernto our security to be kept outside the United States, vulnerablernto theft or denial, is foolhardy. The time to end foreign military’rndependence is when new weapons systems are in the designrnstage. America should guarantee that no foreign dependency isrnbuilt into any future generations of weapons. Wlien it comes torntechnology vital to national defense, “Buy American” andrn”Made in the USA” are the rules that should apply.rnThe world is a dynamic place. No nation can ground its securit)’rnin existing technological superiority’. Superpowers thatrnrest on their laurels invite the fate of the first global powers ofrnthe modern era: Holland and Spain. When former Treasury-rnSecretary Richard Darman blurted, “Why do we want a semiconductorrnindustry? We don’t want some kind of industrialrnpolicy in this country. If our guys can’t hack it, let ’em go,” hisrnwas the smug voice of the elites of numerous nations that are nornlonger counted as great.rnUnfortunately, President Clinton subscribes to the Darmanrnview. His administration is outsourcing to foreign producersrnmore components of American weapons systems than ever before.rnThis penny-wise, pound-foolish policy stiikes at the heartrnof American security and independence and ignores a truthrntaught by Adam Smith: “The great object of the political economyrnof every country is to increase the wealth and the power ofrnthat country.” • crnaMBJBlBIBJBMBIBIgMaBIBJgiaBIBiaaBlglBigiBlBMBfBIlrnA video of the famous debate betweenrnThomas Fleming and Glen ThiirowrnLincoln: Tyrant or Liberator?rnThe Bradford Debate SeriesrnSend S19.95 + $3.00 S/H to:rnThe Confederate Shoppern928 Delcris DrivernBirmingham, AL 35226rnTel: (205) 942-8978rnFax: (205) 942-7881rnwww.pointsouth.com/c-shoppe.htmrnBIIBlBiBMBigjBlMBMBIBIBiBlBlBiBfBMBIBiBlBlBlBMBMBMllrn)ULY 1998/19rnrnrn