• Feith and Shulsky on the 2010 Nuclear Posture Review
• Feith on the START Follow-on Treaty
• Feith at CSIS Nuclear Posture Review Debate
• "Organizing the U.S. Government to Counter Hostile Ideologies"

                ____________________________________

            Feith/Shulsky Op-ed in the Wall Street Journal

On May 21, 2010, the Wall Street Journal published "The Dangerous Illusion of Nuclear Zero," in which Abram N. Shulsky and I discuss the Obama administration's Nuclear Posture Review Report.

                ____________________________________

         Feith Article in National Security Policy Proceedings

The Spring 2010 issue of National Security Policy Proceedings, a Center for Security Policy journal, contains "START the Debate," in which I discuss follow-on START treaty negotiated by the Obama administration and Russia.

                ____________________________________

      Feith Debates the 2010 Nuclear Posture Review at CSIS

On April 22, 2010, I participated in a CSIS Project on Nuclear Issues debate on the 2010 Nuclear Posture Review. The other panelists were Clark Murdock of CSIS and Ivan Oelrich of the Federation of American Scientists.

                ____________________________________

                              Hudson Insitute Report
 Organizing the U.S. Government to Counter Hostile Ideologies

Abram N. Shulsky and I authored, "Organizing the U.S. Government to Counter Hostile Ideologies," a March 2010 report that details themes and possible government reorganization for improved strategic ideas campaigns.

                ____________________________________

                Feith Book Review in the Weekly Standard

On January 25, 2010, the Weekly Standard published "Israel's Secret," in which I review Startup Nation: The Story of Israel's Economic Miracle by Dan Senor and Saul Singer.

                   ____________________________________

               Feith Speaks at Duke University Law School

On October 27, 2009, I spoke at Duke University Law School. The talk was titled, "Setting the Record Straight: Legal and Strategic Thoughts on the War on Terrorism."

                ____________________________________

                              Hudson Insitute Conference
  U.S. Strategic Posture in an Increasingly Proliferated World

On October 21, 2009, I moderated a panel at the Hudson Institute's conference on the U.S. strategic posture. The panel was titled, "U.S. Nuclear Weapons, From 32,000 to Zero?" The conference's other panel was titled, "Enlisting Other States and International Legal Regimes to Strengthen Nuclear Security" Representative Michael Turner of Ohio gave the conference's keynote address.

                ____________________________________

            Feith/Shulsky Op-ed in the Wall Street Journal

On August 18, 2009, the Wall Street Journal published "Why Revive the Cold War?" in which Abram N. Shulsky and I maintain that a new arms control treaty is not necessary for continued nuclear reductions.

                ____________________________________

                              Hudson Insitute Report
    START Treaty Renewal and America's Strategic Posture

Jack David, Abram N. Shulsky and I authored, "START Treaty Renewal and America's Strategic Posture," a July 2009 report that summarizes the Final Report of the Congressional Commission on the Strategic Posture of the United States (the Perry-Schlesinger Commission) and highlights key considerations as the Obama administration negotiates a START follow-on treaty.

                ____________________________________

              Feith Book Review in the Washington Times

On June 23, 2009, the Washington Times published "It Ain't Necessarily Unnecessary," my review of Richard Haass's War of Necessity, War of Choice.

                ____________________________________

                    Feith Op-ed in the Washington Times

On June 11, 2009, the Washington Times published "Must-y Cairo Rhetoric," an op-ed in which I discuss the analytical shortcomings of President Obama's June 4 speech in Cairo.

                ____________________________________

                    Feith Op-ed in the Wall Street Journal

On May 21, 2009, the Wall Street Journal published "How to Win the 'Long, Hard Slog'," my op-ed about the need to improve civilian capacity for national security operations.

                ____________________________________

        Spanish Prosecutor Rejects Guantánamo Charges -
       Complaint Described as Fraudulent ("fraudulenta")

On April 17, 2009, the chief prosecutor of Spain's national trial court, Javier Zaragosa, advised that the Guantánamo complaint against me and five other Bush administration officials should not proceed.

Spanish attorney general Cándido Conde-Pumpido made the following remarks about the complaint on April 16:

                                                                     Cándido Conde-Pumpido

1) "I sincerely believe it's a fraudulent complaint."
Original Spanish: "Sinceramente creo que es una querella fraudulenta."

2) He explained that he wanted to avoid having the Spanish national trial court "turned into a toy" and he said that the cited complaint is "a fraudulent penal action" that attempts a "judicial artifice."
Original Spanish: Según explicó, pretende evitar que este órgano judicial español "se convierta en un juguete" y aseguró que la citada querella es "una acción penal fraudulenta" que pretende un "artificio jurídico"."

3) Baltasar Garzón, the investigative Spanish magistrate who became famous for championing the prosecution of Augusto Pinochet, is promoting the Guantánamo case. In an obvious reference to Garzón, Conde-Pumpido said:

"It's obvious that we cannot support this action, and it's also obvious that the policy of the Prosecutor is to defend to the death the exercise of universal jurisdiction by the Audencia Nacional, but keep it from being turned into a toy in the hands of people looking for a certain celebrity or attempting political action."
Original Spanish: "Es indudable que no podemos apoyar esa acción y es indudable también que el criterio de la Fiscalía es el de defender a muerte el ejercicio de la jurisdicción universal por parte de la Audiencia Nacional, pero evitar que se convierta en un juguete en manos de personas que buscan un determinado protagonismo o intentan una acción política."

                ____________________________________

                      Background on the Spanish Affair

A complaint brought before the Spanish courts sought the indictment of six Bush administration officials, including me. The author of the complaint who gave interviews to the New York Times is a lawyer and convicted terrorist named Gonzalo Boyé.

This threat of prosecution challenges the integrity of the U.S. government. The legal theory makes no distinction between former and current officials. It claims that U.S. officials can be criminally punished by a foreign court for official work they do for the American people, as if the U.S. political and judicial systems don’t deserve any more respect than did the Nazi government of Germany.

Moreover, what the complaint says against me is false, as I pointed out in a April 3 Wall Street Journal piece and my appearances on the O'Reilly Factor, the Glenn Beck Program, and the Hugh Hewitt Show. As Under Secretary of Defense, I took a strongly pro-Geneva-Convention position and the written record proves this. The complaint inaccurately claims that I aimed to undermine the Geneva Convention.

As highlighted in a recent article in the New Yorker, the complaint was inspired by the work of Philippe Sands. As Gonzalo Boyé stated, "Let me just say that he [Sands] played a very big role in my thinking. His book showed me who the targets were."

Sands’s book, Torture Team, is a dishonest work full of inaccuracies, misrepresentations, and distortions. I detailed Sands's errors in my July 15, 2008 testimony before a House Judiciary subcommittee and in subsequent letters to subcommittee Chairman Jerrold Nadler.

All the material from the hearing is available, as is the audio file and written transcript of the interview I gave Sands as he was writing his book. The interview transcript shows that Sands, in his book, grossly misreported our interview.

                ____________________________________

                   Feith Published in the New York Times

On March 30, 2009, the New York Times published "Radio-Free Swat," an op-ed that I co-authored with Hudson Institute Research Associate Justin Polin.

The piece discusses the bombing of the Rahman Baba shrine in Peshawar, Pakistan, and it explains the opportunity it presents to communicate with Pashtuns who reject the extremist ideology of the Taliban and al Qaeda.

                 ____________________________________

           Behind the Scenes: The Executive Response to 9/11

On February 28, 2009, I participated in a Peter Jennings Project panel discussion at the National Constitution Center in Philadelphia, PA.

The panel was titled, "Behind the Scenes: The Executive Response to 9/11" and also featured former White House Chief of Staff Andrew Card, former Secretary of Homeland Security Michael Chertoff, former White House Press Secretary Ari Fleischer, and former Deputy White House Counsel Timothy E. Flanagan.

In a discussion moderated by Ann Compton, the only reporter on Air Force One during the September 11 attacks, we recounted our experiences on September 11 and spoke about the Bush administration's use of constitutional powers.

                 ____________________________________

              War and Decision Paperback Edition Released

From the HarperCollins press release:

"War and Decision, Douglas Feith's highly praised and revealing New York Times and Washington Post bestseller, is now being published in paperback. The only insider account of the Bush Administration's controversial decisions in the post-9/11 era, it offers valuable lessons on foreign policy and decision-making as a new administration takes office..."

                 ____________________________________

                 Conference Call with Internet Journalists

On February 2, 2009, I inaugurated the Hudson Institute-RedState New Media Forum. The New Media Forum consists of monthly conference calls between a featured national security expert and prominent Internet journalists.

In the first conference call, I discussed issues including Iraq, the War of Ideas, and detainee treatment.

                 ____________________________________

            Speech at the University of Virginia's Miller Center

On January 26, 2009, I spoke before the University of Virginia's Miller Center.

During the speech, I discussed War and Decision, the public debate surrounding national security issues, the rationale for the War in Iraq, and other subjects.

                 ____________________________________

           Op-Ed Piece on the US-India Strategic Partnership

Read my op-ed piece from the December 6, 2008 issue of The Wall Street Journal.

In the piece, I discuss the evolution of the US-India relationship during the Bush administration and outline a strategic response to the terrorist attacks in Mumbai.

                 ____________________________________

           Book Review of Dexter Filkins's The Forever War

Read my book review of Dexter Filkins's The Forever War from the November 17, 2008 issue of National Review.

                 ____________________________________

      The Torture Narrative: Rebutting Reckless Allegations

On July 15, 2008, I testified at a hearing in front of the House Judiciary Committee's Subcommittee on the Constitution, Civil Rights, and Civil Liberties.

I refuted the allegation that the Bush administration encouraged or tolerated abuse or torture of detainees. The hearing was inspired by Philippe Sands's Torture Team, a book full of inaccuracies, misrepresentations, and distortions.

           

On August 13, 2008, I supplemented my testimony with a letter to the House Judiciary Committee's Subcommittee on the Constitution, Civil Rights, and Civil Liberties.

In the letter, I refuted claims that I am hostile to the Geneva Conventions and disproved the false accusations of Philippe Sands.

On October 6, 2008, I submitted answers to the "Questions for the Record" posed by members of the House Judiciary Committee's Subcommittee on the Constitution, Civil Rights, and Civil Liberties.

Important Documents and Media Read my opening statement from the hearing. Read the complete transcript of the hearing. Watch C-SPAN's full video coverage of the hearing. Also see media coverage of the hearing at the Washington Post and the Powerline blog. Read my August 13, 2008 letter to the House Judiciary Committee's Subcommittee on the Constitution, Civil Rights, and Civil Liberties. Read my October 6, 2008 answers to the Subcommittee's "Questions for the Record." Read the transcript of Philippe Sands's interview with me. Listen to the full interview.

____________________________________ Read my book review of former CIA Director George Tenet's At The Center of the Storm from the May 4, 2007 edition of the Wall Street Journal.                                                ______________________________________           Department of Defense Inspector General Report On April 5, 2007, the Acting Defense Department Inspector General, Thomas Gimble, released the unclassified version of his report on the pre-Iraq-war activities of my former office. - See my comments on Washington Post coverage of unclassified report release here. - See my additional comments on DOD Inspector General report here. The Inspector General report found all the activities to have been lawful and authorized. And refuting Senator Carl Levin (Democrat-Michigan), the Inspector General found that we did not mislead Congress. The report also said it was "inappropriate" for my staff to criticize CIA views on the Iraq-al Qaida relationship. Gimble on this point was poorly informed and illogical, arguing that policy officials "undercut" the intelligence community by criticizing it, regardless of whether their critique is valid. If the government accepted Gimble's opinion on this matter, the quality of its intelligence and policy both would suffer. Senator Levin selectively publicized the IG report, highlighting the word "inappropriate" and failing to mention the conclusions favorable to my office. He charges falsely that President Bush lied the country into war, and then dishonestly claims that the IG report supports the charge. To make the ungrounded accusation that I "cherry picked" intelligence, Levin cherry picks the IG report. To assert incorrectly that I "manipulated" intelligence, Levin manipulates Gimble's words. Gimble's opinion on "inappropriateness" is a pathetically thin reed, but Levin has eagerly whipped the administration with it. It is good that the unclassified report is now out. Only a two-page executive summary was published before and it did not spell out the IG's main argument: that criticism of intelligence is itself an intelligence activity appropriate only for intelligence officials and not policy officials. The public can now view the whole argument in all its naked incoherence.