LnRiLWltYWdle3Bvc2l0aW9uOnJlbGF0aXZlO3RyYW5zaXRpb246dHJhbnNmb3JtIDAuMjVzIGVhc2V9LndwLWJsb2NrLWltYWdlIC50Yi1pbWFnZS5hbGlnbmNlbnRlcnttYXJnaW4tbGVmdDphdXRvO21hcmdpbi1yaWdodDphdXRvfS50Yi1pbWFnZSBpbWd7bWF4LXdpZHRoOjEwMCU7aGVpZ2h0OmF1dG87d2lkdGg6YXV0bzt0cmFuc2l0aW9uOnRyYW5zZm9ybSAwLjI1cyBlYXNlfS50Yi1pbWFnZSAudGItaW1hZ2UtY2FwdGlvbi1maXQtdG8taW1hZ2V7ZGlzcGxheTp0YWJsZX0udGItaW1hZ2UgLnRiLWltYWdlLWNhcHRpb24tZml0LXRvLWltYWdlIC50Yi1pbWFnZS1jYXB0aW9ue2Rpc3BsYXk6dGFibGUtY2FwdGlvbjtjYXB0aW9uLXNpZGU6Ym90dG9tfSAudGItaW1hZ2VbZGF0YS10b29sc2V0LWJsb2Nrcy1pbWFnZT0iNzFhYThmYmZlMzQ2N2Q2MWZhNjk5MTdjYjVhODY2M2QiXSB7IG1heC13aWR0aDogMTAwJTsgfSBAbWVkaWEgb25seSBzY3JlZW4gYW5kIChtYXgtd2lkdGg6IDc4MXB4KSB7IC50Yi1pbWFnZXtwb3NpdGlvbjpyZWxhdGl2ZTt0cmFuc2l0aW9uOnRyYW5zZm9ybSAwLjI1cyBlYXNlfS53cC1ibG9jay1pbWFnZSAudGItaW1hZ2UuYWxpZ25jZW50ZXJ7bWFyZ2luLWxlZnQ6YXV0bzttYXJnaW4tcmlnaHQ6YXV0b30udGItaW1hZ2UgaW1ne21heC13aWR0aDoxMDAlO2hlaWdodDphdXRvO3dpZHRoOmF1dG87dHJhbnNpdGlvbjp0cmFuc2Zvcm0gMC4yNXMgZWFzZX0udGItaW1hZ2UgLnRiLWltYWdlLWNhcHRpb24tZml0LXRvLWltYWdle2Rpc3BsYXk6dGFibGV9LnRiLWltYWdlIC50Yi1pbWFnZS1jYXB0aW9uLWZpdC10by1pbWFnZSAudGItaW1hZ2UtY2FwdGlvbntkaXNwbGF5OnRhYmxlLWNhcHRpb247Y2FwdGlvbi1zaWRlOmJvdHRvbX0gfSBAbWVkaWEgb25seSBzY3JlZW4gYW5kIChtYXgtd2lkdGg6IDU5OXB4KSB7IC50Yi1pbWFnZXtwb3NpdGlvbjpyZWxhdGl2ZTt0cmFuc2l0aW9uOnRyYW5zZm9ybSAwLjI1cyBlYXNlfS53cC1ibG9jay1pbWFnZSAudGItaW1hZ2UuYWxpZ25jZW50ZXJ7bWFyZ2luLWxlZnQ6YXV0bzttYXJnaW4tcmlnaHQ6YXV0b30udGItaW1hZ2UgaW1ne21heC13aWR0aDoxMDAlO2hlaWdodDphdXRvO3dpZHRoOmF1dG87dHJhbnNpdGlvbjp0cmFuc2Zvcm0gMC4yNXMgZWFzZX0udGItaW1hZ2UgLnRiLWltYWdlLWNhcHRpb24tZml0LXRvLWltYWdle2Rpc3BsYXk6dGFibGV9LnRiLWltYWdlIC50Yi1pbWFnZS1jYXB0aW9uLWZpdC10by1pbWFnZSAudGItaW1hZ2UtY2FwdGlvbntkaXNwbGF5OnRhYmxlLWNhcHRpb247Y2FwdGlvbi1zaWRlOmJvdHRvbX0gfSA=
The Stimson Center and many others lost a dear friend when Richard Clarke died last month to multiple ailments after a life well lived. There were many facets to Dick’s life beyond his love of family and his successful business career. He was also keenly interested in non-profits and brought a strong sense of commitment to those he supported, especially on governance issues. The Stimson Center celebrates his life and grieves his loss.
Dick enjoyed life. He had a lively intelligence and a strong sense of responsibility to his family, his work, and his causes. He was, first and foremost, a family man. He was also a businessman. He cared for his employees and knew them by name. He was a doer. His only concession to flash, at least that I recall being told about, was to a pair of blue suede shoes that he wore in the flush of youth. He loved to vacation lakeside in Canada, where he was born.
The origin story of Dick’s connection to Stimson is rooted in the Center’s efforts to support the negotiation and ratification of a treaty banning the development, production and use of chemical weapons during the Reagan, Bush, and Clinton administrations.
The historical context matters here and speaks volumes.
After the terrible carnage of World War I, marked by trench warfare and the massive use of chemical weapons, diplomats gathered in Geneva to prohibit the use of “poisonous and asphyxiating” gases in warfare. The U.S. Chemical Manufacturers Association opposed the 1925 Geneva Protocol, as it was bad for business. Due, in part, to this opposition, the U.S. Senate did not ratify it until fifty years later, after widespread U.S. use of deadly herbicides and napalm in Southeast Asia.
The Geneva Protocol was, in effect, a prohibition on first use. Stockpiles were allowed, and states that ratified the Convention clarified that retaliatory use could be expected. This was the state of play until President Ronald Reagan decided to seek prohibition. His point person was Vice President George H. W. Bush. As President, Bush completed the Chemical Weapons Convention just before leaving office. Clinton’s challenge was to secure the Senate’s consent. To do this, he needed help from U.S. chemical industry.
I asked a Stimson colleague who was working on this issue, Amy Smithson, to nose around for prospects in the chemical industry who might support the Convention. Amy found Dick Clarke, who met with us at one of his favored haunts, The Metropolitan Club in Manhattan. I explained the historical context and the problem of Senate ratification. Dick said that he’d help any way he could.
That was Dick Clarke: a man with an open and caring mind, intellectual curiosity, and the willingness to help. With Dick’s help and with the support of the Chemical Manufacturers Association, the Senate ratified the Chemical Weapons Convention in 1997.
One conversation with Dick led to another, and he agreed to join the Stimson Center’s Board in that same year. He served with distinction until 2009. When he agreed to join Stimson’s Board, it still reflected its origins. We needed to transition from a group of the co-founders’ wonkish friends to an engine for institution building. Dick prompted us to make changes on many fronts, including recruitment, rotational Board membership, and other initiatives that helped Stimson grow stronger. If this sounds pedantic or prosaic, then you’ve never tried to grow a non-profit organization.
In addition, Dick helped Stimson in two very crucial ways. It is essential that a new nonprofit – especially one without an endowment — get the “baton pass” from founders to their successors right. This is harder that it seems. Dick was instrumental in this regard. Dick was also indispensable in clarifying the separation between Stimson and Defense Forecasts, Inc., the for-profit business that Barry Blechman had founded before Stimson was created.
Stimson couldn’t have happened without DFI as a partner. We shared the rent and occasionally each other’s personnel to work on projects. But after establishing itself, Stimson couldn’t thrive without separation from DFI. This was necessary to avoid potential conflicts of interest between a not-for-profit NGO and the thriving business that Barry was building at DFI. Dick was the most instrumental Board member in establishing guidelines as both institutions grew and required separate space.
Stimson’s strength as a nurturing think tank, our ability to provide entry-level talent with room to grow, our ability to provide creative space for policy entrepreneurship, and our capacity for growth all reflect Dick Clarke’s contributions. The Stimson Center owes a great deal to Dick. We shall miss him deeply.
In Memoriam: Dick Clarke
By Michael Krepon
In
The Stimson Center and many others lost a dear friend when Richard Clarke died last month to multiple ailments after a life well lived. There were many facets to Dick’s life beyond his love of family and his successful business career. He was also keenly interested in non-profits and brought a strong sense of commitment to those he supported, especially on governance issues. The Stimson Center celebrates his life and grieves his loss.
Dick enjoyed life. He had a lively intelligence and a strong sense of responsibility to his family, his work, and his causes. He was, first and foremost, a family man. He was also a businessman. He cared for his employees and knew them by name. He was a doer. His only concession to flash, at least that I recall being told about, was to a pair of blue suede shoes that he wore in the flush of youth. He loved to vacation lakeside in Canada, where he was born.
The origin story of Dick’s connection to Stimson is rooted in the Center’s efforts to support the negotiation and ratification of a treaty banning the development, production and use of chemical weapons during the Reagan, Bush, and Clinton administrations.
The historical context matters here and speaks volumes.
After the terrible carnage of World War I, marked by trench warfare and the massive use of chemical weapons, diplomats gathered in Geneva to prohibit the use of “poisonous and asphyxiating” gases in warfare. The U.S. Chemical Manufacturers Association opposed the 1925 Geneva Protocol, as it was bad for business. Due, in part, to this opposition, the U.S. Senate did not ratify it until fifty years later, after widespread U.S. use of deadly herbicides and napalm in Southeast Asia.
The Geneva Protocol was, in effect, a prohibition on first use. Stockpiles were allowed, and states that ratified the Convention clarified that retaliatory use could be expected. This was the state of play until President Ronald Reagan decided to seek prohibition. His point person was Vice President George H. W. Bush. As President, Bush completed the Chemical Weapons Convention just before leaving office. Clinton’s challenge was to secure the Senate’s consent. To do this, he needed help from U.S. chemical industry.
I asked a Stimson colleague who was working on this issue, Amy Smithson, to nose around for prospects in the chemical industry who might support the Convention. Amy found Dick Clarke, who met with us at one of his favored haunts, The Metropolitan Club in Manhattan. I explained the historical context and the problem of Senate ratification. Dick said that he’d help any way he could.
That was Dick Clarke: a man with an open and caring mind, intellectual curiosity, and the willingness to help. With Dick’s help and with the support of the Chemical Manufacturers Association, the Senate ratified the Chemical Weapons Convention in 1997.
One conversation with Dick led to another, and he agreed to join the Stimson Center’s Board in that same year. He served with distinction until 2009. When he agreed to join Stimson’s Board, it still reflected its origins. We needed to transition from a group of the co-founders’ wonkish friends to an engine for institution building. Dick prompted us to make changes on many fronts, including recruitment, rotational Board membership, and other initiatives that helped Stimson grow stronger. If this sounds pedantic or prosaic, then you’ve never tried to grow a non-profit organization.
In addition, Dick helped Stimson in two very crucial ways. It is essential that a new nonprofit – especially one without an endowment — get the “baton pass” from founders to their successors right. This is harder that it seems. Dick was instrumental in this regard. Dick was also indispensable in clarifying the separation between Stimson and Defense Forecasts, Inc., the for-profit business that Barry Blechman had founded before Stimson was created.
Stimson couldn’t have happened without DFI as a partner. We shared the rent and occasionally each other’s personnel to work on projects. But after establishing itself, Stimson couldn’t thrive without separation from DFI. This was necessary to avoid potential conflicts of interest between a not-for-profit NGO and the thriving business that Barry was building at DFI. Dick was the most instrumental Board member in establishing guidelines as both institutions grew and required separate space.
Stimson’s strength as a nurturing think tank, our ability to provide entry-level talent with room to grow, our ability to provide creative space for policy entrepreneurship, and our capacity for growth all reflect Dick Clarke’s contributions. The Stimson Center owes a great deal to Dick. We shall miss him deeply.
Recent & Related