This article is from the source 'nytimes' and was first published or seen on . It last changed over 40 days ago and won't be checked again for changes.

You can find the current article at its original source at http://www.nytimes.com/2016/12/06/us/politics/obama-in-major-national-security-speech-to-defend-counterterrorism-legacy.html

The article has changed 3 times. There is an RSS feed of changes available.

Version 0 Version 1
Obama, in Major National Security Speech, to Defend Counterterrorism Legacy Obama, in Major National Security Speech, Defends Counterterrorism Legacy
(about 13 hours later)
WASHINGTON — In his last planned address on national security, President Obama will assert on Tuesday that for eight years his administration protected the United States against a major terrorist attack while abiding by cherished ideals and bringing most troops home. TAMPA, Fla. — In his final planned address on national security as commander in chief, President Obama said on Tuesday that for eight years, his administration protected the nation against major terrorist attacks from abroad while adhering to American values and the rule of law.
The speech is intended as a final answer to years of criticism by Republicans that Mr. Obama’s sharp break from many of President George W. Bush’s policies, including contentious ones such as “enhanced interrogation,” would leave the country vulnerable. “No foreign terrorist organization has successfully planned and executed an attack on our homeland,” Mr. Obama said to loud applause in a large military hangar here. “And it’s not because they didn’t try. Plots have been disrupted. Terrorists have been taken off the battlefield. And we’ve done this even as we’ve drawn down nearly 180,000 troops in Iraq and Afghanistan.”
“He will be summing up his view of the record of the last eight years,” said Benjamin J. Rhodes, a deputy national security adviser to the president. “What we have accomplished, how we have tried to address the threat of terrorism.” The speech was intended as a valedictory answer to years of criticism from conservatives that Mr. Obama’s break with many of President George W. Bush’s policies — ending the torture of terrorism suspects and withdrawing most American ground forces from Afghanistan and Iraq — had left the country vulnerable. And many liberals have complained that Mr. Obama had betrayed his 2008 campaign supporters by acting too much like Mr. Bush in continuing and even expanding some policies, such as targeted killings using drones.
The speech will be delivered at MacDill Air Force Base in Tampa, Fla., home to the United States Central Command and the Special Operations Command, which have been crucial to Mr. Obama’s fight against terrorism and to efforts to wind down the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. Mr. Obama gave the speech at MacDill Air Force Base in Tampa, Fla., home to the military’s Central Command and Special Operations Command, both of which have been crucial to his fight against terrorism and efforts to wind down the wars fought since Sept. 11, 2001.
Mr. Obama will argue that, with terrorist groups a continuing threat years after the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks, the United States needed an approach that was less costly in lives and money than the enormous deployments and constitutionally questionable efforts of his predecessor. He stood before a crowd of about 2,500 men and women mostly in uniform and presented himself as the most battle-tested president in the country’s history. “On January 20th, I will become the first president of the United States to serve two full terms during a time of war,” he said.
While Mr. Obama has been planning the speech for months, President-elect Donald J. Trump’s victory last month made the address all the more vital, as Mr. Obama sought to provide a road map for a successor with no experience in national security. He defended an approach to fighting wars that did not bankrupt the Treasury or cause thousands of deaths. He noted, for instance, that he has spent $10 billion over the last two years fighting the Islamic State — the same amount of money President George W. Bush spent in just one month fighting the Iraq War.
“He will be reiterating that our greatest strength as a country is our values,” Mr. Rhodes said, and the international system of alliances built over 70 years. And he laid out a series of principles: keep the terrorist threat in perspective, avoid military overreach, adhere to the rule of law, use restraint when carrying out strikes to minimize repercussions, be open with the public, use diplomacy and protect civil liberties.
Mr. Trump has, on occasion, advocated the use of torture and he has questioned the value of NATO and other alliances, although he has since modulated those positions. While Mr. Obama had been planning the speech for months, Donald J. Trump’s election victory made the address all the more vital for him. The president sought to defend his legacy and provide a road map for a successor with no experience in national security — and warn Mr. Trump away from some of his more controversial positions and advisers.
Mr. Obama’s speech is bound to attract criticism from Republicans, who will note that while the United States has not had a terrorist attack on the scale of Sept. 11 during his tenure, extremist networks have proliferated around the world and the world is less secure — no place more so than Syria, which is in the sixth year of a horrific civil war and is a base of operations for the Islamic State. Mr. Trump has, on occasion, advocated the use of torture and questioned the value of NATO and other alliances, although he has since modulated those positions.
Mr. Obama will acknowledge that Syria is a disaster and that Iraq is bleeding, but he will argue that his refusal to send thousands of troops to try to pacify the region was the correct call, and one that spared needless American deaths, Mr. Rhodes said. “First of all, a sustainable counterterrorism strategy depends on keeping the threat in perspective,” Mr. Obama said. The fighters of the Islamic State or Al Qaeda are not the worry some claim they are, he said.
“We believe that U.S. military intervention — at no time has there been a clear plan where we could see how that could make the situation demonstrably better,” Mr. Rhodes said. “They are thugs and they are murderers and they should be treated that way,” Mr. Obama said. And while defending the use of wartime powers to fight terrorists — something many liberals reject — he also emphasized the importance of sometimes relying on law enforcement powers that the Bush administration explicitly rejected as a response to a threat. For example, Mr. Obama argued that it had proved more effective to prosecute terrorism suspects in civilian courts than military commissions.
There have been terrorist attacks in the United States since Mr. Obama took office, including one in San Bernardino, Calif., a year ago that killed 14. But they have resulted in far fewer deaths than the Sept. 11 attacks, and they were perpetrated by American citizens inspired by jihadist literature online. Such lone-wolf attacks are extremely difficult to prevent. For a historic comparison, Mr. Obama pointed out that fascism threatened to overrun the globe during World War II, and the Soviet Union threatened a nuclear holocaust during the Cold War.
Mr. Obama vowed early in his first term to close the detention center at Guantánamo Bay, Cuba, a promise he will almost certainly be unable to fulfill. But he will argue that his administration’s efforts to capture, convict and imprison terrorists through the civilian criminal justice system have been far more successful than were the military commissions that Mr. Bush used, Mr. Rhodes said. “Today’s terrorists can kill innocent people, but they don’t pose an existential threat to our nation and we cannot make the mistake of elevating them as if they do,” he said, because exaggerating their powers helps bring them enhanced credibility among their followers and potential followers.
Mr. Obama, a former professor of constitutional law, will also use the speech, along with a 61-page report released on Monday to portray what has sometimes appeared as an ad hoc, make-it-up-as-you-go fight against myriad terrorist groups, to show that his administration’s antiterrorism efforts were grounded in solid legal reasoning and strict limits on presidential power. “These terrorists can never directly destroy our way of life but we can do it for them if we lose track of who we are and the values that this nation was founded on,” he said.
The choice of MacDill to deliver the speech is a symbolic one because so much of Mr. Obama’s antiterrorism strategy, including the raid that killed Osama bin Laden, relied on special operations forces. Such troops can be used in small raids and training efforts in ways that do not attract the kind of opposition and attacks that large bodies of forces would. Mr. Trump has proposed banning immigration from Muslim countries, and some Republicans have proposed scrutiny of Muslim communities in the United States. Mr. Obama criticized such proposals. Michael T. Flynn, a retired general who is Mr. Trump’s choice for national security adviser, has emphasized the threat represented by Islamic extremism, which he said is spreading.
“He’s always felt a special connection to the special forces community,” Mr. Rhodes said. “Protecting liberty? That’s something we do for all Americans, not just some,” Mr. Obama said.
James N. Mattis, a retired general whom Mr. Trump has nominated as defense secretary, once led the Central Command. But his time there was cut short by the Obama administration, which viewed him as too hawkish on Iran at a time when it was trying to complete a nuclear deal with the country. And while the Islamic State and Al Qaeda claim to be fighting on behalf of Islam, he said they do not speak for Muslims everywhere, including the United States.
General Mattis is widely expected to favor sending more troops to the Middle East, a strategy Mr. Obama was planning to implicitly criticize today. “If we act like this is a war between the United States and Islam, we’re not just going to lose more Americans to terrorist attacks, but we’re also going lose the very principals we claim to defend,” he said.
Mr. Obama also expressed frustrations with Congress, reiterating his criticism that lawmakers did not act on his request to enact a new and limited war authorization to battle the Islamic State. He also complained that Congress did not lift legal restrictions that prevented him from closing the Guantánamo Bay prison, which he called “a blot on our national honor.”
Mr. Obama’s speech drew criticism from Republicans, including his 2008 presidential campaign opponent, Senator John McCain of Arizona.
“President Obama’s speech was nothing more than a feeble attempt to evade the harsh judgment of history,” Mr. McCain said. “But to the American people, our emboldened enemies, and our dispirited allies, his legacy on counterterrorism is unmistakably clear: a disastrous withdrawal from Iraq, the terrorist rampage of ISIL, an indecisive approach to the war in Afghanistan that has empowered the Taliban, and an indifferent approach to the carnage in Syria on which our terrorist enemies have thrived. No rhetorical conceit will alter history’s verdict.”
His speech was interrupted by raucous applause on several occasions, including when he said that one of his core convictions as commander in chief was “that we are and must remain the strongest fighting force the world has ever known.”
Mr. Obama acknowledged that the situation in Afghanistan is not perfect, but that the fight is now almost entirely being waged by Afghan forces, not by Americans.
He also acknowledged that there have been a series of domestic terrorist attacks during his presidency that were “carried out by homegrown and largely isolated individuals who were radicalized online.” But while such lone-wolf attacks — he cited the Boston Marathon bombing and shooting sprees at Fort Hood, Tex., San Bernardino, Calif., and Orlando, Fla.,— cause “pain,” he said, they
cannot inflict the kind of mass casualties that the 9/11 attackers managed.
Mr. Obama’s choice of MacDill Air Force Base to deliver the speech was symbolic, because much of his antiterrorism strategy, including the raid that killed Osama bin Laden, relied on Special Operations forces. Such troops can be used in small raids in ways that do not attract the opposition and attacks that large bodies of forces would.