“I think in many ways it matters much more what Secretary Mattis and Secretary Tillerson think it [Trump’s statements] means than what the president had in mind when he said it,” he said.ANNOUNCER: Over two decades, they had served three presidents and argued for one big idea: that the United States must project its power and influence throughout the world.His recent military adventurism in the Middle East and elsewhere has led other notorious neo-conservatives like Senator Lindsey Graham – who was also strongly opposed to Trump during his campaign – to exclaim “we have got a president and a national security team that I’ve been dreaming of for eight years.” The Trump administration’s moves targeting North Korea and Syria, as well as the resurgence of anti-Russian rhetoric, are in line with the policy laid out in “Defense Strategy for the 1990s: The Regional Defense Strategy,” better known as the “Wolfowitz doctrine.” This notorious document, as the New York Times noted in March 1992, laid out a policy meant to “ensure that no rival superpower is allowed to emerge. Furthermore, the Trump administration’s most aggressive rhetoric has been directed at Russia and China, the U. In one recent instance, Trump was not even informed of the use of a Massive Ordnance Air Bomb (MOAB) against Daesh (ISIS) forces until after it was detonated.With its focus on this concept of benevolent domination by one power, the Pentagon document articulates the clearest rejection to date of collective internationalism.” The Wolfowitz doctrine gives particular attention to preventing the resurgence of Russia as a potential economic challenger to U. hegemony and to “remain the predominant outside power in the [Middle East] region and preserve U. and Western access to the region’s oil.” The most aggressive military action seen under Trump thus far has focused on the Middle East – namely in Syria and Yemen, whose conflicts are both based on securing fossil fuel interests for the U. Wolfowitz, in the interview, made it clear that he knows Mattis is calling the shots, stating that Trump’s statements and positions take a backseat to the decisions Mattis ultimately makes.
C.– This week, in an interview with Politico, the so-called “godfather” of the Iraq War Paul Wolfowitz stated his glowing optimism regarding the future policies of President Donald Trump, a sharp departure from Wolfowitz’s pre-election statement that a Trump presidency would be “unacceptable.” Wolfowitz told Politico’s Susan Glasser that Trump may offer more than he had anticipated, calling Trump’s recent strike against the Syrian government a “fantastic opportunity,” yet cautioning that it was “only a first step” and must be followed by more military action.
The anti-corruption specialist said: "Hank Paulson is disgusted by all this.
He is a straight arrow and he thinks that under US legislation Wolfowitz would have been forced out already if he were running an investment bank.
In the interview Wolfowitz summarized his ties to the two high-ranking officials, stating “ I know Mc Master quite well from before.
And Mattis actually was my senior military assistant when I first came to the Pentagon in 2001, and I worked with him quite a bit later on in his various later capacities, including in Iraq.
ANNOUNCER: Tonight on FRONTLINE, the inside story of why the president of the United States seems so determined to go to war with Iraq. They will vie for the command-in-chief's attention and his approval.