Subscribe to Off Message on Apple Podcasts here. | Subscribe via Stitcher right here.
Stop relying on Secretary of Security James Mattis or perhaps Secretary of Condition Rex Tillerson to avoid a nuclear war if Donald Trump would like one, says Costs Perry. They couldn’t.
Story Continued Below
Perry, who served while secretary of defense for President Costs Clinton, is a 90-year-old arm-waving apostle of doom-“the opportunity of a great apocalypse thrust itself after me,” he told me in an interview for POLITICO’s Off Message podcast. He says nuclear war has “become more probable in the last season, partly due to President Trump,” and partly because of situations beyond the president’s control. He thinks Trump doesn’t figure out the North Koreans, and doesn’t understand what his rhetoric is doing.
That the president and his Cabinet secretaries are frequently putting out conflicting messages makes the problem worse. And though Perry subscribes to the idea that Mattis and Tillerson certainly are a “stabilizing affect,” he explained that with this president, “I’m not really more comfortable with anybody.”
While expenses by Rep. Ted Lieu (D-Calif.) and Sen. Ed Markey (D-Mass.) to restrict first of all usage of nuclear weapons possess stalled in Congress, Senate Foreign Relations Committee Chairman Bob Corker (R-Tenn.) is defined to put some muscle behind his very public nervousness about Trump’s leadership. On Tuesday, Corker will carry a committee hearing on nuclear authorization-the first on this issue since Gerald Ford was president-prompted by worries he’s heard from members both on and off the committee over letting one individual, and this person in particular, have the unfettered ability to launch a nuclear war.
Perry knows Mattis well-while Perry was first defense secretary in the 1990s, Mattis worked for him directly, plus they both ended up in Stanford University recently. The two still chat, and Perry thinks Mattis understands the nuclear threat well-he merely doesn’t believe Mattis would necessarily have the ability to carry out anything if Trump decided to go forward with a strike.
Perry’s heard the storyline of Richard Nixon’s final days in the Light House, when Security Secretary James Schlesinger supposedly told generals that any nuclear strike order from the plainly distressed president be go by him first.
But that’s not really the way it works, Perry said.
“The order can go directly from the president to the Strategic Air Command. The defense secretary is not necessarily for the reason that loop. Consequently, in a five- or six- or seven-minute sort of decision, the secretary of defense probably under no circumstances hears about any of it until it’s also late. If there is period, and if he does check with the secretary, it’s advisory, just that,” Perry explained. “Whether [the president] complements it or doesn’t choose with it-[the secretary] doesn’t possess the authority to avoid it.”
Perry lived through several nuclear apocalypse scares. The first of all lasted for times, when as a consultant, he was brought by the CIA to help sort through cleverness during the Cuban missile crisis. The next lasted for a moment, when as a lower-ranking Pentagon established during Jimmy Carter’s term, he was woken by a phone call warning him that it appeared as if 200 nuclear missiles were previously in the air-but it had been immediately told him that this was a computer error. The experience were searing, and kept him convinced that just good luck and a small amount of good management saved the universe from closing under John F. Kennedy, and that the context of lower tensions throughout that 1979 computer error stopped the problem from spiraling out of hand.
Sign up to the Podcast Just click here to subscribe fully podcast and hear the one thing Perry thinks Barack Obama got best suited seeing that president on nuclear affairs, and his applying for grants recreating the Cold War: “We just allow it happen. And it’s supreme stupidity.”
Today, Perry sees worse management and larger tensions. He worries that America’s good fortune may have go out.
It’s not hard for him to assume what would happen if a terrorist group acquired fissile material and then set it off in NY, Washington or another major city: The country wouldn’t rally together or perhaps easily recover, just like in a disaster movie.
“If you look at 9/11, besides the 3,000 casualties, there have been very significant economical and political and public consequences. There have been new laws and regulations passed. There have been new restrictions placed on our freedoms due to that. All of those effects would probably be magnified tenfold or a hundredfold if a nuclear bomb will go off in Washington,” Perry said. “If you imagine that some kind of a legislation passed-10 occasions the Patriot Action, for example-that’s the type of thing we’d see. You may see attacks on citizens who were thought to be somehow related to or associated with the terror attack. It would be ugly.”
America is vulnerable, he said, and America would be wounded, perhaps mortally, if terrorists took advantage of that vulnerability. Once the consequences are considered, Perry explained, “the terrorists would have succeeded in some good sense in changing our country, in changing it with techniques that are extremely negative.”
Perry’s been on the highway, entering his 10th 10 years of life while performing the component of a reluctant Cassandra, but is channeling much of his energy right into a no cost online Stanford course about nuclear terrorism-one designed to sound the alarms he can’t believe aren’t ringing. Already, 6,000 people own accessed it, and 3,000 have registered, seeking for his answers to the concern, “Is the threat of nuclear terrorism real?”
I just asked him whether anyone in the Trump Light House has registered.
“I don’t hear from the Trump White House,” he said.
Trump and many of his allies blame 20 years of poor negotiations for the current predicament with North Korea, stretching back again to the Clinton years-when, in 1999, Perry went to Pyongyang and returned with a handshake agreement for a nuclear nonproliferation framework he believes his boss would have signed had Al Gore won the presidency.
“I think we are able to learn some lessons from negotiating with North Korea, but I believe the Trump administration has learned a wrong lesson. They’re hard negotiators. They’ve demonstrated an inclination and a ability to evade and cheat on treaties. So I believe what we’ve learned from that is that when we negotiate with them, we must have strong verification. Actually the Agreed Framework-which I believe they cheated on toward the finish of the century-delayed their nuclear system by perhaps six, or seven or eight years,” Perry explained. “So that it was something.”
Perry acknowledges his own negotiations had complications, but says that President George W. Bush’s decision to pull away from them pressured the current situation after the world: The theory that North Korea won’t be a nuclear power is out the home window, and the most that can be hoped for is to persuade the regime to scale back its missile checks. Where it seemed like Kim Jong Il required international respect, Kim Jong Un appears to instead prioritize the protection and continuity of the regime.
“We missed our major likelihood to negotiate with them again at the move of the century, but that doesn’t imply that diplomacy has no part today,” Perry said. “So when you consider the alternatives to diplomacy, it’s pretty obvious we must be trying it.”