William Perry

The title of this article is ambiguous. Further meanings are listed under William Perry (disambiguation) .

William Perry (1993)

William James Perry (* 11. October 1927 in Vandergrift , Westmoreland County , Pennsylvania ) is a former American politician ( Democratic Party ), of the Cabinet of President Bill Clinton until January 23, 1997 of 3 February 1994 as defense minister belonged . He was previously Deputy Minister of Defense from 1993 to 1994.

Life

Perry graduated from Butler High School in 1945 , graduated from Carnegie Mellon University with a bachelor's degree in 1949 and a master's degree from Stanford University in 1950 , received his PhD in mathematics from Pennsylvania State University in 1957 and was director of the from 1954 to 1964 Defense Laboratories of Sylvania / GTE in California . From 1964 to 1977 he was President of ESL Inc., an electronics company that was founded with his help. During Jimmy Carter's presidency from 1977 to 1981, Perry served as Under Secretary of Defense Research and Engineering , responsible for weapon systems procurement, research, and development. Among other things, he was instrumental in the development of stealth aircraft and ship technology . During his time the Lockheed F-117 and the Sea Shadow (IX-529) were planned by the Skunk Works .

After the Ministry of Defense of the United States had left in 1981, Perry was until 1985 Managing Director of Hambrecht & Quist , an investment bank in San Francisco that specializes in the financing of high-tech companies. In 1989 he was elected to the American Academy of Arts and Sciences . In the late 1980s to 1993, before returning to the Pentagon as Assistant Secretary of Defense , he was Chairman of the Technology Strategies Alliances , Professor in the Engineering School at Stanford University, and Co -Director of the Center for International Security and Cooperation at Stanford.

Defense Minister

Portrait photo of William Perry while serving as Secretary of Defense

Choice and goals

Perry's election was well received in the Pentagon, Congress, and the defense industry , and the US Senate was quick to confirm his nomination. Perry was sworn in on February 3, 1994. At the hearing on his confirmation, he identified six key responsibilities of the Defense Minister:

• Overview of the management of military operations,
• ensuring the combat readiness of the armed forces,
• to be a key member of the President's National Security Team
• preparing the annual defense budget,
• to be responsible for the military strategy,
• manage defense resources.

Shortly after taking office, Perry gave specific reasons why he made his commitment to become Secretary of Defense:

• work to end the US nuclear threat and prevent a return to the Cold War,
• advise the president on how and when to use or reject military force,
• manage the reduction of the armed forces in the post-Cold War era.

Perry came into office with a wealth of national security experience, both in industry and government, and an understanding of the challenges he faced. As a practical manager, he paid attention to internal processes in the Pentagon as well as to questions of international security. He worked closely with his two deputies ( John M. Deutch 1994-1995 and John P. White 1995-1997) and met regularly with the intelligence offices to keep them informed and seek advice on questions. He described his management style as "management by walking around".

Perry adopted “Preventive Defense” as his guideline in national security policy in the post- Cold War world. During the Cold War, the United States relied on deterrence rather than prevention as the central principle of its security policy. Perry identified three basic principles of a preventive strategy:

• Prevent growing threat;
• hinder those who are currently growing and if prevention and deterrence fail;
• fight the threat with military force.

In practice, this strategy relied on threat reduction programs (reduction of nuclear complexes of the former Soviet Union ), anti-proliferation efforts , the NATO - Partnership for Peace and the expansion of the alliance as well as maintaining military might and combat readiness of weapons systems, if necessary. In order to carry out this strategy, Perry felt it was absolutely necessary to create a modern combat-ready force capable of waging two major regional wars at the same time.

Defense budget

As with all defense ministers, one of his primary duties was drawing up the defense budget and bringing it through Congress. The problem of how to deal with a planned large reduction in the defense budget for the period 1995-2000, an issue that weakened his predecessor, Les Aspin , and contributed to his resignation, persisted when Perry took office. Immediately after presenting his 1995 budget request, which he referred to as the "post-Cold War budget," Perry stated that the defense budget would need a few more years of shrinkage and that its infrastructure would also need to be rationalized. His plan would keep a combat-ready force, reshape the modernization program (including a strong research and development program), initiate a business improvement program (reform of procurement) and reinvest defense dollars in the economy, he said.

Perry applied for US $ 252.2 billion for the 1995 budget year , including funding for numerous weapon systems, such as a new aircraft carrier , three new cruisers and six C-17 transport aircraft . The budget planned a further cut of 85,500 in active military personnel, equivalent to a force of 1.52 million. Ultimately, Congress approved commitment authorizations (Parliament's approval of the executive branch to enter into budget commitments for approved projects up to a maximum of the limit set by Parliament over several years) in a total amount of US $ 253.9 billion, US $ 2 billion more than in the 1994 budget year, but a 1.2 percent reduction from real size. Because of the inflation rate , the budget grew more rapidly than the defense budget, so that its relative share in the overall budget fell.

In February 1995, Perry applied for $ 246 billion for the Department of Defense for the 1996 budget year. This proposal became part of the 1995 Republican controversy over their "Treaty with America," their efforts to spend more on defense than the government asked for, and continued Need for deficit reduction implicated. Perry warned Congress in September of the possibility that President Clinton could veto the 1996 Defense Budget because Congress had added $ 7 billion in overhead costs, mostly for weapons systems the Department of Defense did not want and because of restrictions on it Contingency operations that Congress built into the bill. Three months later, he recommended that the president veto the budget. When Congress and the government finally reached their budget compromise in mid-1996, the Department of Defense received commitment appropriations totaling $ 254.4 billion, slightly more than in 1995, but a two percent cut in terms of real growth.

As expected, the question of a national anti-missile defense system turned out to be a crucial point in the budget discussions. Les Aspin had closed the Strategic Defense Initiative (SDI) program, but longtime supporters both inside and outside of Congress called for a resurrection, especially when the defense budget came up. Perry dismissed calls for SDI to return, arguing that the money would be better spent on battlefield anti-missile defense and troop modernization, that the United States was not currently facing any real threat and that if the system were built and put in place, it would have the strategic arms control treaties with the Russians. The Secretary of Defense agreed to fund development work on a national system so that, if necessary, the US could build and deploy it in three years. President Clinton signed the 1996 defense budget in early 1996 only after Congress agreed to stop funding the national missile defense system.

Just before presenting the 1997 budget in March 1996, Perry warned that the US could abandon its strategy of preparing for two major regional conflicts if the armed forces suffered further reductions. His five-year modernization plan, which Perry presented in March 1996, reflected these basic premises that the defense budget would not be reduced in the 1997 budget and grow thereafter, that the Department of Defense would realize significant savings by cutting infrastructure mainly through closings, and that the savings would be made by outsourcing many Activities and procurement reform would be achieved.

For the 1997 budget year, the Clinton administration requested the Department of Defense to allocate US $ 242.6 billion, 6% less than the inflation-adjusted 1996 budget. The draft budget delayed modernization for another year, although the administration earlier increased funding for new weapons and equipment in the 1997 budget year. The draft budget included increasing funds for contingent military operations that had been funded through supplementary budgets in the past few years . Moderate real growth in the defense budget would not begin before fiscal year 2000 in the six-year defense budget projection. The procurement budget would increase from US $ 38.9 billion in 1997 to US $ 60.1 billion in the 2001 financial year during this period. For 1997, Congress approved total commitment appropriations of up to US $ 244 billion, which included budget titles for weapons systems that the Clinton administration did not want.

Although he had not thought that it could succeed so early, at the end of his tenure in early 1997, Perry believed that he could modernize the US armed forces with a balanced budget. Perry argued that the current level of the armed forces, just under 1.5 million, is the minimum necessary for the US to maintain its global role. Further budget cuts after 1997 would require cuts in the structure of the armed forces and make it impossible for the US to maintain its global power.

Rationalization of the military infrastructure

Perry spent much of his time restructuring military procurement policies and procedures, following up on procurement reform measures he began as Assistant Secretary of Defense. In June 1994, the Secretary of Defense signed a directive ordering the armed forces to purchase products and components as commercial off-the-shelf whenever possible, a radical departure from the traditional “ Milspec ” - over 30,000 military specifications and standards that cut costs inflate - meant.

In March 1996, Perry endorsed a new, comprehensive Department of Defense procurement policy that emphasized commercial practices and products. Program managers and other procurement officers would have the power to use their professional judgment in purchasing. The plan deleted more than 30 separate procurement policy memoranda and report formats, and replaced existing documents with new ones that are 90% shorter. Perry viewed these reforms as one of his most important accomplishments, and saw the savings generated by the new practices as part of the key to adequately funding the military in the era of continuously tight budgets. In another effort to save money, Perry resorted to closing and rearranging locations . In May 1994, he and General John Shalikashvili , Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff , announced that the defense, as required by law, would proceed with a round of site closures in 1995. The defense would take into account the economic impact and capacity in the affected communities to manage the closed facilities.

In March 1995, Perry published the Department of Defense Relocation and Closure Plan (BRAC), which included 146 individual actions. He estimated that implementing BRAC 95 would result in one-time costs of $ 3.8 billion and net savings of $ 4 billion over a six-year period.

External relations

At the time of his appointment, Perry was not expected to be aggressively involved in foreign policy. He belied that impression. A few days after his inauguration, he left Washington, DC for his first trip abroad to meet with European defense ministers. In April 1994, the Economist stated in an article entitled “ Perrypatetic ”: “ The man who's starting to sound like a Secretary of State is actually Defense Secretary William Perry… Suddenly he's popping up in public and mingling with strategy business strong way one. “In fact, Perry traveled more than any previous minister in his three-year tenure. Unlike most of his predecessors, Perry paid attention to the other nations in the Americas, hosted the first Conference of Defense Ministers of the Americas in Williamsburg , Virginia in 1995, and attended the second conference in Argentina in 1996 . His extensive travels met his straightforward style. During his travels he emphasized personal contact with upper and lower ranks of the armed forces. His frequent travels reflected the demands of a large number of foreign crises that surfaced during this period, including several that required the deployment of US forces.

NATO

Perry strongly supported NATO . He made significant efforts to advance his Partnership for Peace program, in which the Clinton administration saw a way to link NATO with the new Eastern European democracies, including Russia, and as a compromise between the wishes of many in the Eastern European countries To become NATO members and Russia's determined resistance to it. Each nation could join the Partnership for Peace program under its own agreements with NATO, and many did exactly what enabled them to participate in NATO's joint training and military exercises without formally being a member of the Alliance. Perry held several conferences with Russia's Defense Minister Pavel Grachev to allay Russia's concerns and secure its membership in the Partnership for Peace. The subject remained prominent when Perry left office in early 1997 and NATO developed provisional plans to admit a few former Warsaw Pact members in the summer of 1997.

Russia

Although he realized that the reform movement in Russia might not be successful, Perry did everything possible to improve relations with Moscow . He emphasized the need for continuous military cooperation with and assistance to the states of the former Soviet Union ( Commonwealth of Independent States , CIS) in order to promote the destruction of nuclear weapons . He set up the Cooperative Threat Reduction Act of 1992 (the Nunn- Lugar program), which provided budget funds for the dismantling of nuclear weapons in Russia, Ukraine , Belarus and Kazakhstan in order to reduce the nuclear threat. He urged Congress to continue the threat reduction program, defending it against claims that it was in fact foreign aid to Russia's military . When Perry traveled to Ukraine in June 1996 to witness the full delivery of nuclear warheads to Russia, the only previous Soviet missiles outside of Russia were in Belarus. Perry testified for the USA the ratification of the START II treaty, which was completed on the American side in 1996. In October 1996, he spoke at a meeting of the Russian Duma in Moscow, urging members to ratify the treaty.

Asia

In Asia, Perry, like Defense Minister Caspar Weinberger a decade earlier, tried to improve relations with both the People's Republic of China and Japan . He was the first US Secretary of Defense to visit China after the 1989 Tiananmen Square massacre , when the People's Republic authorities forcibly ended the democracy movement. Although he did not ignore longstanding problems such as the People's Republic's arms sales and human rights policies, he still believed that the US and the People's Republic of China should cooperate militarily. It made some progress even though the US sent two aircraft carrier formations to the East China Sea when the Chinese threatened Taiwan with an extensive naval maneuver shortly before the presidential election in March 1996.

When three US soldiers stationed on Okinawa raped a young Japanese girl in 1995 , this led to calls in Japan to reduce the presence of American troops on the island. In late 1996, the US agreed to give up 20% of the used area on Okinawa and give up some military facilities including Futenma Marine Corps Air Station. The Japanese agreed that 28,000 US troops would remain stationed on Okinawa.

Bosnian War

The most dangerous international crisis was in Bosnia . When Perry took office in February 1994, the Bosnian Serbs besieged the capital, Sarajevo , but were forced to withdraw in the face of the UN ultimatum and the warning of air strikes. Shortly afterwards, they threatened to overrun the Muslim city of Goražde in eastern Bosnia. Initially, Perry ruled out US military operations, but in April 1994 US fighter jets took part in the UN airstrikes at Goražde, which caused the Bosnian Serbs to retreat.

In an important declaration on Bosnia in June 1994, Perry attempted to clarify US policy, in which he stated that the conflict disrupted national humanitarian and other US interests, but not overriding interests. In order to limit the spread of violence in Bosnia, the US decided to use the NATO air force to stop the bombing of Bosnian cities, gave UN troops air support and carried out humanitarian missions. Perry and the White House resisted pressure from Congress to lift the arms embargo previously imposed by the UN on all sides in the Bosnian conflict. In 1994/95 some senators, including Republican Bob Dole , demanded that the embargo against Bosnian Muslims be lifted to enable them to more effectively resist the Serbs. Perry thought this would provoke the Serbs to attack and perhaps force the US ground forces to make a decision. In August 1995, Clinton vetoed US legislation calling for the embargo to be lifted. (In fact, the Bosnian Muslims received weapons from Iran , Saudi Arabia, and other Islamic sources via Vienna and Croatia , not without the CIA's knowledge .) Despite regularly declaring that they would not send ground troops to Bosnia, the U.S. government pressed 1994 meanwhile their readiness to send troops to save the UN blue helmets if they were withdrawn. When the Bosnian Serbs took over 3,000 blue helmets hostage, the USA, France , Germany and Russia decided to send a larger and better-equipped UN force with a “robust mandate”.

Following massive pressure, the US pursued a plan in November 1995 to host a conference in Dayton, Ohio, with the presidents of Serbia , Bosnia and Croatia , which achieved a satisfactory peace agreement, which was signed in Paris in mid-December . This brought about the cessation of all hostilities, the withdrawal of fighters on specific fronts, the establishment of separation zones and the stationing of a Peace Implementation Force (IFOR) in Bosnia. The North Atlantic Council decided in September 1995, with Perry's participation, a NATO-led force to implement every peace agreement for Bosnia, which should consist of at least 60,000 including 20,000 men from the USA. In a statement to the US Congress in November, Perry explained why US troops should go to Bosnia: The war threatens vital political, economic and security interests of the US in Europe; this presented a real chance to end the carnage. The US was the only nation that could lead a NATO force to implement peace and the US risks of allowing the war to continue were greater than the risks of the planned military operation.

The first US troops entered Bosnia in early December 1995 and by the end of January 1996 the entire contingent of 20,000 men was stationed. Although Perry had previously said that they would leave Bosnia within a year, during a longer stay in June 1996 he let it be known that they would stay if NATO decided that without them peace would not be maintained in Bosnia. The defense minister agreed to a study proposed by the NATO defense ministers in September 1996 to establish a successor to IFOR. Finally in November 1996, after the presidential elections, Clinton announced with Perry's support that the US would provide a contingent of 8,500 NATO troops for a successor force ( SFOR ). The US force was reduced slightly in 1997 and 1998 and withdrawn completely in June 1998.

Haitian crisis

Perry also inherited the Haiti problem from Les Aspin , where a military junta continued to refuse to reinstate the elected President Jean-Bertrand Aristide , who had been deposed . In the spring of 1994, the US debate continued as to whether military intervention should take place in order to saw off the military ruler in Haiti, Raoul Cédras , and to bring Aristide back to power. President Clinton said the United States would not rule out the use of military force and suggested that military teams could be deployed to Haiti for the purpose of training local security and police forces. In the meantime, a large number of refugees from Haiti fled by boat in the hope of being able to enter the USA. Most of them were intercepted by US ships on the high seas and taken to the US naval base at Guantanamo Bay in Cuba .

Despite increased pressure and apparent preparations in the US to invade Haiti, the junta refused to surrender. On September 19, 1994, shortly after former President Jimmy Carter negotiated an agreement, the United States sent military forces with the approval of the UN . The de facto rulers of Haiti, including Cédras, agreed to resign on October 15, so that Aristide could return to power in his country. On the evening of September 19, 600 US troops were in Haiti. At the end of March 1995 a UN commander took over and the USA provided 2,400 of the 6,000-strong UN force that was to remain in Haiti until February 1996. Because of the previous resistance at the outset, the US's first concern was to do only the limited job and avoid injuries in its ranks. After the US troops withdrew, Aristides was appointed duly elected successor in February 1996. Up to this point, the US government has been able to describe Operation Haiti as a complete success.

North Korea

North Korea posed a serious problem for Perry, who supported the government's policy of getting the communist regime to have the International Atomic Energy Agency ( IAEA ) supervise its nuclear facilities . Between February and October 1994 the US increased its pressure on North Korea. Perry warned in March that the US would not allow the development of an arsenal of nuclear weapons. War was not imminent, he said, but hinted that he had ordered military preparations for a possible conflict. Shortly thereafter, Perry stated that the US would propose economic sanctions to the UN if North Korea did not allow international inspections of its planned end to the use of nuclear reactor fuel rods, which produce enough plutonium to produce four or five nuclear weapons. North Korea began removing the fuel rods in May 1994 without guaranteeing the IAEA inspection facilities and later announced it would leave the IAEA.

On October 21, 1994, the US and North Korea signed an accord after lengthy negotiations in Geneva , Switzerland , sponsored by former President Carter. The US, Japan, South Korea and Canada promised to supply North Korea with two light water reactors estimated at US $ 4 billion to replace the existing or partially built facilities that can produce plutonium for nuclear weapons. North Korea agreed to open its facilities for international inspections and the US promised to lift trade restrictions and supply fuel to the power plants. Perry saw this deal as better than risking war in Korea or continuing North Korea's nuclear program. He promised to ask Congress for money to build US troops in South Korea if the deal failed. Another critical situation has been mitigated, but the implementation of the agreement has proven difficult. At the end of Perry's tenure, a number of issues remained unresolved and tensions between the two Korean states flared from time to time.

middle East

In the Persian Arab Gulf region, Iraq caused trouble and US military action with periodic provocative moves by Saddam Hussein . After the Second Gulf War in 1991, the USA organized a coalition in accordance with a US resolution to monitor the no-fly zones in Iraq north of the 36 ° and south of the 32 ° parallel. In a tragic accident in April 1994, two shot Air Force F-15 fighter aircraft that operated in the northern no-fly zone, two Army - helicopters from after they were mistaken for Iraqi. This incident with its high blood toll dramatically highlighted the complexity of dealing with Iraq after the second Gulf War in 1991. When various Iraqi elite divisions moved to the Kuwaiti border in October 1994 , the USA mobilized ground, air and naval forces in the region to withstand the threat. Perry warned Iraq that US forces would take steps if Iraq does not withdraw its Republican Guards north of 32 degrees latitude. The UN Security Council then passed a resolution calling on Iraq to withdraw its troops 250 km north of the Kuwaiti border.

The Iran also behaved aggressively when he landed 6,000 men in March 1995 on three islands in the mouth of the Persian-Arabian Gulf, both from Iran, as the UAE claimed. Perry stated that the Iranian operations threatened shipping on the Strait of Hormuz , a waterway on which a significant part of the world's oil production is transported. The United States strengthened the back of its allies in the Persian Arab Gulf by increasing their self-defense capacity and by using their collective strength in the Gulf Cooperation Council. In Perry's judgment, US determination to have a strong regional defense capacity with air forces and warships in the area, equipment provided, existing operational plans and access agreements with Gulf partners was of paramount importance.

Again provocative measures by Iraq forced the US to take powerful action. When Saddam Hussein intervened in September 1996 by sending 40,000 men to one of the two sides of the rival Kurdish factions in northern Iraq, he demonstrated that he was using his military power against the American warning. Perry stated that while this factional conflict did not affect significant US interests, the stability of the region as a whole was vital to US security and would therefore trigger US responses. On September 2 and 3, US warplanes attacked Iraqi air defense missile sites (SAM) and air defense control in the south because, as Perry explained, the US saw a fundamental threat from Iraq to Kuwait.

Another tragic incident on June 25, 1996 exposed mounting tensions in the Middle East and the dangers associated with the US military presence. Terrorists detonated a truck at the Khobar Towers apartment complex where US military personnel were staying in Dhahran , Saudi Arabia, killing 19 people and wounding 500. A Perry-appointed investigative body recommended in September 1996 a variety of measures to deter , prevent or mitigate the effects of future terrorist attacks on US personnel overseas and that a single Department of Defense unit should be responsible for protecting the force. The panel found that the attacked unit in Dhahran had not taken every possible precaution at the Khobar Towers. Then the Ministry of Defense moved the units from Dhahran to more remote locations in Saudi Arabia for better protection.

Somalia conflict

William Perry in conversation with the Vice President of Rwanda, Paul Kagame (1994)

During Les Aspin's tenure, the US involvement in Somalia ended in 1994 . Under the protection of US Marines aboard warships off the coast, US forces left Somalia in late March within a deadline set by President Clinton. Later, in February 1995, more than 7,000 US soldiers helped the remaining UN peacekeepers withdraw with their weapons from Somalia in an extremely successful operation. On another mission to Africa in 1994, the United States engaged in a humanitarian effort in Rwanda . A civil war between two rival ethnic groups, the Hutu and the Tutsi , resulted in widespread death and destruction and the flight of hundreds of thousands of refugees from Rwanda to neighboring countries including Zaire . Although not part of the UN peacekeeping operation in Rwanda, the US distributed humanitarian aid in the form of purified drinking water, medicine, medical stations and other things. In July the Pentagon dispatched planes and approximately 3,000 troops, most of them to Zaire. US forces took control and repaired the airport in Kigali , capital of Rwanda, to provide assistance with the distribution of food, medicine and other supplies.

Successes and Resignation

Perry, of course, took on a heavy burden during his tenure as Secretary of Defense between 1994 and 1997. Adjusting the budget, downsizing the military and carrying out humanitarian, military and peacekeeping operations gave him a full agenda. Still, it was an intoxicating three years. In January 1996, he spoke about his experiences over the past year, which he never thought a defense minister would be involved in. At the top of this list was the peacekeeping mission of a Russian brigade in a US division, of which he was able to see for himself. The remaining:

• Dayton, Ohio, became synonymous with peace in the Balkans,
• help the Russian Defense Minister blow up a Minuteman missile silo in Missouri ,
• watch a joint exercise by American and Russian troops in Kansas ,
• Reception of former Warsaw Pact troops in Louisiana ,
• Head of a school in Garmisch-Partenkirchen , Germany, where former Soviet and Eastern European officers are taught democracy, the budget and to testify as a witness in front of a parliament,
• Day care for children,
• Dismantling of military specification systems for procurement,
• Cutting off a pig's ear in Kazakhstan and
• Eating a Manchurian toad in China. These things demonstrate "how much the world has changed, how our security has changed, how the Department of Defense has changed, and how much my office has changed," Perry said.

Shortly after President Clinton's re-election in November 1996, Perry announced his decision to step down as Secretary of Defense. He spoke of his growing frustration with working with a partisan Congress that is damaging the military establishment and that he does not believe that the results of the 1996 congressional elections will reduce congressional partisanship. He later stated that his decision to resign "was due in large part to the constant burden of sending US soldiers on life-threatening missions" .

As he left the Pentagon, Perry listed what he thought were his greatest achievements:

• Building an effective working relationship with US military chiefs,
• Introduction of major procurement reforms,
• Developing close relationships with foreign defense ministers,
• effective use of military strength and resources in Bosnia, Haiti, Korea and the Persian Arabian Gulf region,
• dramatic reduction in the cold war and nuclear legacy
• Advancing the Partnership for Peace within NATO.

His disappointments closed

• the failure to achieve the Russian ratification of the START II treaty,
• the slowness in securing budget increases for weapon system modernization and
• the misconception of Gulf War Disease Syndrome that has persisted in some media and in large parts of the public.

At a ceremony in January 1997, the four-star General Shalikashvili mentioned the outgoing defense minister's relationship with the troops. Shalikashvili said: “Certainly Bill Perry was the Secretary of Defense for the GIs . When asked about his greatest successes as Secretary of Defense, Bill Perry made no mention of an operation or a weapons system. He said his greatest achievement was his very strong bond with our men and women in uniform. "

Perry's successful career in the Department of Defense spanned eight years of profound changes - four years as Secretary of State for Research and Development from 1977 to 1981, one year as Assistant Secretary of Defense from 1993 to 1994, and three years as Secretary of Defense.

Later career

After Perry left the Pentagon, he returned to San Francisco as a senior advisor to Hambrecht & Quist's board of directors. He also returned to the faculty at Stanford University, where he became a professor at the Stanford Institute for International Studies.

Honors

On 14 January 1997 handed President Clinton Perry, the Medal of Freedom ( "The Presidential Medal of Freedom"), the highest civilian honor in the United States.

• 1998: Order of the British Empire (Knight Commander)
• 2002: Order of the Rising Sun , Grand Cross
• France: Ordre national du Mérite Grand Officer
• 1998: Grand Order of King Dmitar Zvonimir with sash and morning star
• 1996: Order of Merit of the Republic of Poland

Web links

Commons : William Perry  - Collection of Images, Videos and Audio Files

• William Perry in nndb (English)
• William Perry in the Miller Center of Public Affairs of the University of Virginia (English)

Individual evidence

1. ↑ https://narodne-novine.nn.hr/clanci/sluzbeni/1998_09_116_1535.html
2. ↑ http://prawo.sejm.gov.pl/isap.nsf/DocDetails.xsp?id=WMP19970140139