The Politics Of National Security: Congress And U.S. Defense Policy
Neither Blechman's conclusions nor his recommendations are unfamiliar: for instance, that many members of Congress serve longer and so are more experienced than their executive branch colleagues; that the nation's interests are best served when the two branches conspire, as they did over the Intermediate-range Nuclear Forces Treaty; and thus that the executive should seek comity more often than it does. But Blechman is both seasoned in the executive and sympathetic to Congress, and the recent war in the Persian Gulf makes his exhortation all the more welcome.
Related
US public expectations of a 'peace dividend' from the collapse of the socialist bloc are unrealistic. Structural properties of US defence policy-making, and the non-existence of any strategic vision not predicated on the monolithic Soviet threat, mean that "for the next several years the 'peace dividend' will be much smaller than enthusiasts hope, and earning it will require departures from customary congressional habits". Offers advice on a strategy for reducing US defence expenditure (1) avoid a return to the 'hollow army' by shifting towards reserve or 'round-out' units (2) cut US forces in Europe in the light of CFE results, not in advance of them (3) defer various high-price equipment programmes, while preserving R&D budgets (4) using arms control to cut what the USA "can safely do without".
U.S. spending on foreign policy--defense, aid, and diplomacy--has been halved since 1962, while entitlements grab evermore tax dollars. Congress should now be investing more in national security, not beggaring it for a peace dividend.
The recent troubles of the CIA date back to its early years, when dashing young men toyed with foreign governments. Evan Thomas evokes the time. Jeffrey T. Richelson catalogs the consequences.

Sign-up for free weekly updates from ForeignAffairs.com.