Another Daily Dose of Clark

I neglected to post the 5th Goal in Clark's Turnaround Plan for America on Friday. Bad me! Bad!

In any case, Friday was dedicated to Health Care. Specifically his goal to extend health insurance to 30 million people currently uninsured by 2008. The plan, which I've spoken of before, consists of:

1. Increasing health care value. Focus on more bang for the health care buck.
2. Increasing affordability. Provide tax credits for families making up to $90,000 to defray rising health insurance premiums
3. Expanding coverage. Extend health insurance through tax credits and cheap government coverage while ensuring workers keep their health insurance between jobs.

Today, Salon has The General telling Dean to forget a Clark vice-presidency.

But just 48 hours before before the capture of Saddam Hussein outside of Tikrit, Clark made his strongest statement to date about why a Dean-Clark ticket is a bad idea. Clark, who says that he's uniquely qualified to go "toe-to-toe" with President Bush on security issues in 2004, said that whether he's on the ticket or not, the Democrats can't win with Dean as their presidential candidate.

"I don't think the Democratic Party can win without carrying a heavy experience in national security affairs into the campaign," he told Salon in a phone interview last week. "And that experience can't be in a vice president."

Asked if he was referring specifically to the much-discussed possibility of a Dean-Clark ticket, he said: "It's no substitute. It won't work, and it won't carry the election for this party."

Today, Clark is in The Hague, Netherlands testifying at Slobodon Milosevic's war crimes trial. The Bush administration took the unusual request of asking for closed tesimony until they can screen it for "national security" reasons.

After today's testimony, Clark spoke to the Netherlands Institute for International Relations on his vision for a new Atlantic Charter.

I believe that, even in this age, we can fight and win wars through collective action.

I believe alliances are indispensable, not inconvenient.

And I prefer coalitions of the committed rather than coalitions of convenience.

I would rather have capable European forces with a say in making decisions, than to have Tonga and the Marshall Islands with no strings attached.

But even more importantly, I believe that if America works with its allies, it can engage in diplomacy, developmental assistance, and a full array of legal actions to deal with crises before they erupt into war, and to ameliorate the conditions that might lead to those crises in the first place.

And that's also what I'm here to talk to you about today: the importance for the United States of strengthening the partnerships and alliances that have served us so well over the past five decades.

We should begin with a common understanding of the world in which we live and the threats and challenges we face.

We must recognize:

The need to be tough on al-qaeda and just as tough on the reasons why terrorism draws so much support from the Arab and Islamic world.

We must recognize that globalization brings the benefits of the free flow of communication, information, ideas and capital.

But that it also has a dark side that allows the spread of terror, weapons of mass destruction, crime and drugs to grow with or without state sponsors.

We must recognize that the deficit of democracy in the Middle East has not only deprived hundreds of millions of people their universal rights -- but it also helps create the resentments on which al-Qaeda and others have fed.

We must recognize that the ongoing violence in Israel and the Palestinian territories has not only made Israelis insecure, and increased the suffering of Palestinians, but it has also been a source of anti-Americanism in the region and beyond;

And finally, we must recognize that the threat of environmental catastrophe is nearing and must be addressed.

With a common threat perception along these lines, I believe we can restore the tradition of collective action that the world wants and people deserve.

He also had some thoughts on Saddam's capture and what it does and doesn't mean for Iraq.

Regardless of your views or my views about the war in Iraq, I am pleased that so many agree that the capture of a brutal dictator like Saddam Hussein is good news. After all, this is a dictator who was responsible for starting two wars in the Gulf, whose regime brutalized the Iraqi people, who committed massive human rights abuses, and who used chemical weapons against the Kurds and against Iran.

It has been a long time since there has been good news coming from Iraq. We were long overdue.

The capture of this dictator is good news not only for the Iraqi people - but for people around the world. And I wish to congratulate the American forces and the intelligence units involved in this mission.

But a day of good news in Iraq doesn't change the challenge we face there. The war is not over. There were insurgent attacks all this week against American forces.

There was an attack yesterday and there was even an attack this morning.

The entire resistance in Iraq was not run by a pathetic ex-dictator hiding in a hole.

We still do not know how many outsiders have come to Iraq for suicide missions against American forces and the international community.

We still not know how many insurgents are driven by a misguided nationalism.

And we still do not know how many of the guerrilla fighters from Saddam's militias and intelligence service will fight harder or will give up now that he has been captured.

Our purpose of going to Iraq was not to capture Saddam Hussein. But in the chaotic aftermath of war, his capture was necessary to eliminate the fear that he inspired in so many Iraqis.

But it is not sufficient. Iraq is still in danger of becoming a failed state.

A failed state would be a stunning success for Al Qaeda.

[...]

So what does success in Iraq mean? To me, it means that we have brought the insurgency under control.

It means that Iraq is strong enough to sustain itself without substantial outside forces, but not so strong as to threaten its neighbors.

It means that representative government has taken root, so that Iraq is not just free of a dictator but can become a model for democratic change throughout the Middle East.

And finally, success means that Iraq will not become a breeding ground for radical Islamic terrorist organizations.

Capturing Saddam Hussein was important; but it was only one step towards those goals for Iraq. Meeting these goals will take years; it will take tens of billions of dollars; and it will take enormous stamina. And that's why I believe it will take Europe and America coming together again.