What Is The Heritage
Foundation?
And What Does It Have To Do With
The Bush Administration's Policy
Towards Afghanistan And Iraq?
"Your
frequent publications, timely research, policy papers, seminars and conferences account
for your enormous influence on Capitol Hill and - believe me, I know - at the White
House."
Ronald Reagan, on Heritage Foundation
"In early April, the Heritage
Foundation announced its most ambitious expansion plans in its 28-year history..... With
the Bush administration in office.... Heritage has risen to unprecedented political
prominence.... in early January, [Bush political adviser Carl] Rove told a group of
right-wing leaders 'that Bush had asked the Heritage Foundation...to review all the
executive orders put in place by President Clinton during his eight years in office and
recommend which ones should be overturned.' Donald Lambro of the Washington Times reported
that Heritage had passed its recommendations on to the White House. During the transition
period when issue-specific teams were being formed, Heritage staffers were involved in key
decision-making positions. [The New York Times's Robin] Toner says, 'officials at the
foundation passed on 1,200 to 1,300 names and resumes to the Bush administration.....'...
In the early 1980s, Heritage acknowledged that '87 top corporations' were supporters.
Heritage is the largest conservative think tank and the one most frequently quoted by the
mainstream media.... In March, the Washington Post reported, 'President Bush is quietly
building the most conservative administration in modern times, surpassing even Ronald
Reagan in the ideological commitment of his appointments.' Bush may be leading the band,
but the Heritage Foundation is the playing many of the instruments."
The Heritage Foundation Soars
Z Magazine,
June 2001
Heritage Foundation On Iraq
"To make it clear that a
post-war U.S. military operation in Iraq is not a nation-building exercise, the Bush
Administration should state that the U.S. military will be deployed to Iraq to secure the
vital U.S. security interests for which the campaign is undertaken in the first place.
Specifically, these war aims should be [amongst other goals] to .... Protect Iraq's energy
infrastructure against internal sabotage or foreign attack to return Iraq to global energy
markets and ensure that U.S. and world energy markets have access to its resources....
Removing that regime from power and contributing a post-war military presence in Iraq to
assure stability in the region and in energy markets is justified."
In Post-War Iraq, Use Military Forces to Secure Vital U.S. Interests,
Not for Nation-Building
Heritage
Foundation Report, 25 September 2002
Heritage Foundation On Afghanistan And Central Asia
"Of the many foreign policy challenges the United States faces during this
post-Cold War era, one in particular is gaining importance with the passage of time: how
best to secure adequate access to oil and natural gas reserves in the first half of the
21st century. The oil and gas reserves of Eurasia's Caspian Sea region could provide the
United States with a solution to this challenge......Congress and the executive branch
need to formulate a well-defined Silk Road strategy that integrates their energy, trade,
geopolitical, and security concerns for the region..... Russia, Iran, Turkey, and the
United States compete over exploration, drilling rights, and the directions of pipelines
in Central Asian and the Caucasus. These states understand the importance of controlling
both the development and the transport of the region's resources..... Currently, existing
pipelines run to the north, to Russia, and give Moscow exclusive and strategic control
over related exports and a vast amount of revenue that it fails to share with the host
countries that own the oil.... Another emerging market, Pakistan, is trying to gain access
to Central Asia's energy resources. Through its support of the Taliban radical Islamic
movement, Pakistan hoped to gain control of Afghanistan. Even before the war's end, plans
were laid to build an oil and gas pipeline [through Afghanistan] to Pakistan, and possibly
further to India. A consortium led by Unocal (U.S.) and the Delta Oil Corporation (Saudi
Arabia) was granted a license by Turkmenistan's government in October 1996 to explore the
possibility of constructing this pipeline. The recent defeat of the ethnically Pushtu
Taliban in the Afghani northern provinces populated by Uzbeks and Tajiks, however, may
render this less likely."
U.S. Policy in the Caucasus and Central Asia: Building
A New 'Silk Road' to Economic Prosperity
Heritage Foundation, 24 June
1997
"But the issue of access to the oil
and natural gas of the Caspian Sea region is not an isolated one; it is linked to other
important U.S. geostrategic interests in Eurasia. For example, U.S. policymakers are
becoming increasingly concerned about the possible re-emergence of a new Russian empire,
and they realize that ready access to the rich oil and gas resources of this region could
fuel such an expansion. A new Russian empire conceivably might seek to gain exclusive
control over the region's pipelines and limit U.S. access. Furthermore, the radical
Islamic regime in Iran could move to turn Central Asia into its strategic rear, viewing
the Islamic states of Central Asia as a potential sphere of influence. Even China has the
potential to become involved. ...... Preventing the resurgence of aggressive Russian
imperialism, especially in what used to be Russia's backyard in the 19th and 20th
centuries, is strategically important to the United States. Russia may remain reasonably
friendly and cooperative as a democracy, but this is unlikely to be the case if Russia
chooses to reoccupy the southern Caucasus and Central Asia and coerce their peoples.
Moscow, not Tbilisi or Baku, would gain from control of the area's impressive energy
resources..... Russia would like to prevent the NIS [Newly Indpendent States] from
exporting energy resources and deny these countries the ensuing cash flow the local people
so desperately need. In the event Russia cannot prevent these exports, Russian politicians
and oil companies will try to direct all the routes and pipelines north to establish
control over the lifelines of Western economies. Russian oil and gas companies certainly
can play a role in developing the hydrocarbon resources and economies of the Caucasus and
Central Asia, but the governments of both the West and the NIS share an interest in
warding off any Russian attempts to impose hegemony..... Due to its proximity, size, and
strength, China is likely to loom increasingly large in Central Asia. For now, it has
chosen to treat the region as its strategic rear while focusing on the Pacific Ocean,
absorbing Hong Kong, and challenging Taiwan.... [But] China's economy already has inspired
tentative plans to build the longest gas pipeline in the world, from western Kazakstan to
the Xinjiang province in China. The Chinese National Gas company has acquired gas fields
in western Kazakstan. If constructed, this pipeline could well prove attractive for
consumers further east, in South Korea and Japan."
U.S. Policy in the Caucasus and Central Asia: Building
A New 'Silk Road' to Economic Prosperity
Heritage Foundation
Background Paper, 24 July 1997
"Historically, the Silk Road was a
network of caravan routes running from China and India through Central Asia to Western
Europe. Commerce along the Silk Road brought economic prosperity and a resulting cultural
renaissance to Central Asian cities like Samarkand and Bukhara. When Islamic fanatics
finally blocked the Silk Road in the 16th century, the entire region fell into decline.
The valuable oil and natural gas reserves of the Caucasus and Central Asia are likely to
make the new Silk Road a trade and investment engine to power unprecedented economic
growth. The Silk Road would connect China, Russia, Eurasia, and Western Europe, providing
business opportunities for American companies and, ultimately, jobs for American workers.
The future of the Silk Road is, therefore, an important national interest. To ensure the
economic and strategic interests of the United States in Eurasia, U.S. policymakers
should..... [i] ncrease coordination between governments and American companies involved
in the oil and natural gas industry and pipeline routes in the region....The United States
has important geopolitical and economic interests in the southern Caucasus and Central
Asia. Both to ensure Western access to the rich oil and natural gas resources of this
region and to lessen the dependence of the U.S. economy on the Middle East, U.S.
policymakers must design a coherent and consistent policy for Central Asia and the
Caucasus. The tremendous wealth of oil and natural gas, worth between $2 trillion and $4
trillion, presents an opportunity for the United States to facilitate economic and
political reform in this region. Many in Washington recognize the overlap between the
energy requirements of the United States and the need for the New Independent States to
ensure that revenues from their energy resources are used to develop their own economies
and societies--and not to enrich the regimes of power-hungry elites in Russia or
Iran...."
U.S. Policy in the Caucasus and Central Asia: Building
A New 'Silk Road' to Economic Prosperity
Heritage Foundation
Background Paper, 24 July 1997
"The United States has the opportunity
to ensure the flow of oil and gas to Western markets..... As the world's only current
superpower, the United States should focus on countering both Iranian and Russian attempts
to dominate the area. The United States is capable of projecting important economic and
diplomatic power and promoting peaceful solutions without committing U.S. troops on the
ground. It should focus on developing strong economic ties, diplomatic cooperation, and
military and security training for these countries, especially pro-Western countries like
Azerbaijan and Georgia. U.S. diplomacy should function in cooperation with Turkey, an
important regional ally; with Israel, which has unique agriculture and security
capabilities.....U.S. policy should integrate geopolitical, security, trade, and energy
concerns. The best way to ensure that this happens would be for the President to nominate
a high-ranking coordinator at the National Security Council to focus on security and
energy policy for this region. Such an official should have a strong background in
international energy and security issues, as well as in multinational investment, and
should not be a career diplomat or academic who--having been focused solely on
Russia--would be likely to articulate the current 'Russia-first' policy pervasive at the
Department of State."
U.S. Policy in the Caucasus and Central Asia: Building
A New 'Silk Road' to Economic Prosperity
Heritage Foundation
Background Paper, 24 July 1997
"Central Asia,
geopolitically and economically, is an important region of the Eastern Hemisphere,
occupying areas adjacent to several nuclear powers, such as Russia, China, India and
Pakistan. It is located in proximity to a potential nuclear power, Iran, and is a major
repository of oil, natural gas, gold, uranium and other minerals.... In the future, the
competition for influence in Central Asia is likely to increase.... These two regional
giants are positioning themselves to define the rules under which the United States, the
European Union, Iran, and Turkey will be allowed to participate in the strategically
important Central Asian region. The U.S. has several important state interests in Central
Asia. [Amongst other matters] It should strive to....[e]nsure access for U.S. companies to
energy and other natural resources and markets in the region.... Opposition to the United
States as the sole superpower is akey component of the developing strategic partnership
between Moscow and Beijing."
U.S. Foreign Policy Interests and Human Rights in Central Asia
Heritage
Foundation Testimony, 18 July 2001
More on Heritage - click here