Governor Howard Dean

Education
Yale University, B.A., 1971; Albert Einstein College of Medicine, M.D., 1978

Military Service
None

Profession
Physician

Foreign Policy Advisers
Exclusive advisers: Benjamin Barber, Ivo Daalder, Morton Halperin, Elisa Harris, General Joseph Hoar (USMC, Ret.), Major General Randy Jayne (USAF, Ret.), Franklin Kramer, Anthony Lake, General Merrill McPeak (USAF, Ret.), Clyde Prestowitz, Susan Rice, Jeffrey Sachs, Danny Sebright, Admiral Stansfield Turner (USN, Ret.), William Woodward

Campaign Website
www.deanforamerica.com

As president, Howard Dean says he would use a combination of diplomacy and deterrence to combat the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction (WMD), avoiding what he calls the Bush administration’s “almost single-minded” focus on pre-emptive war. “I would not make this mistake,” the former governor of Vermont stresses on his campaign website. “All means to combat the threat of WMD, cooperative and coercive, multilateral and unilateral, would be employed.”

After months of defending against charges that he lacks sufficient defense and foreign policy experience to serve as president, the former governor acknowledged Dec. 22 that “it’s a resumé problem” and, if nominated, pledged to “plug that hole…with my running mate.” Dean tried to shore up his global reputation Dec. 15 when he rolled out a long roster of high-profile foreign policy advisers and delivered a major national security policy speech. The speech came on the day after Saddam Hussein was captured. “Let me be clear: My position on the war has not changed,” Dean, who vociferously opposes the decision to go to war in Iraq, declared.

Dean says he will focus on rebuilding alliances that have been “eroding” under the current administration. “America should never be afraid to act alone when necessary,” Dean stated Dec. 15. “But we must not choose unilateral action as our weapon of first resort….As president, I will be far more interested in allies that stand ready to act with us rather than just willing to be rounded up as part of a coalition…Our country will be safer with established alliances, adapted to control twenty-first century dangers, than with makeshift coalitions that have to start from scratch every time the alarm bell sounds.”

In particular, Dean would launch a “global alliance against terrorism” that would expand comprehensive threat reduction (CTR) efforts beyond the former Soviet Union, coordinate law enforcement and intelligence operations with U.S. allies, and enhance the capacity for joint anti-terror military operations. He says the $60 billion plan would triple CTR funding (Dean envisions half the cost being picked up by the United States and the remainder by its allies). “For too long we have been penny-wise and pound-foolish when it comes to addressing the weapons proliferation threat,” Dean said. “We urgently need to strengthen these programs in order to defend America.”

Dean is highly critical of the Bush administration’s handling of the North Korean nuclear crisis. “Contrary to this administration’s view,” the former governor notes on his website, “engagement is not appeasement.” A Dean administration would seek to negotiate a resolution with North Korea while articulating a “redline” that makes clear that the United States and its allies will not tolerate North Korea’s production of nuclear weapons. It would also offer a declaration of peaceful U.S. intentions and economic incentives in exchange for verifiable elimination of Pyongyang’s nuclear weapons; utilize a program of “intrusive inspections” to verify any agreement; and develop an economic program with South Korea, Japan, and China to help generate change in the North Korean society.

On the domestic front, one of the first things Dean would do as president is cut funding allocated by Congress—at the request of the Bush administration—to research a new generation of nuclear weapons. While the candidate believes that nuclear weapons are “a fact of life” and that strategic deterrence will remain essential to U.S. security strategy, he states on his website that: “Given our existing nuclear arsenal, the deployment of nuclear weapons of low yields or new weapons to destroy deeply buried targets is unnecessary for deterrence and would undercut diplomatic efforts to halt nuclear proliferation. Research and development would therefore be a misplaced priority.”

Effective missile defense will be an “important part” of a Dean administration’s national and homeland security strategy, the candidate stated in answers to a survey produced by the Council for a Livable World. “A sound program of tactical, theatre and long-range missile defense can enhance our security, but only if the systems work and the costs do not keep us from achieving other critical military objectives.” That said, Dean continued, the Bush program to deploy a limited national missile defense by the fall of 2004 fails on both counts. “It is rushing an untested…system, overspending, and not utilizing proven methods of weapons development.”