Clear and Present Danger
51 pages • 1-hour read
Tom ClancyClear and Present Danger
A modern alternative to SparkNotes and CliffsNotes, SuperSummary offers high-quality Study Guides with detailed chapter summaries and analysis of major themes, characters, and more.
Themes
Content Warning: This section of the guide includes discussion of graphic violence, death, and death by suicide.
The Moral Ambiguity of Covert Operations
The covert operations at the center of Clear and Present Danger result in extended debate about the definition of seemingly simple ideas like crime and murder. The novel suggests that military and intelligence communities sometimes enable individuals to justify amoral behavior in the service of a supposed greater good, revealing the moral ambiguity of covert operations.
In two instances, members of the military torture suspects to coerce a confession. First, the Coast Guard crew of the Panache stages a mock execution of foreign citizens captured at sea; later, Marines in Florida threaten to kill cartel pilots captured by operation EAGLE EYE and feed them to their pet alligator. In both cases, the responsible parties acknowledge that they are breaking the law. However, they justify their behavior by pointing to the strategic benefits that can come from the coerced confessions: The Panache confessions lead to the discovery of laundered money, while the Florida confessions help to identify more cartel assets. Even as he attempts to expose their methods, Edward Stuart argues that the crew of the Panache acted “for some greater good, some higher moral cause” (324). Ultimately, no one on the Panache or in Florida faces consequences, reflecting the acceptance of amoral behavior in the military community in the novel.
The novel’s exploration of ambiguous morality extends to murder, as characters debate whether every death holds the same weight. The first death of the Colombian operations comes when an American fighter pilot shoots down a cartel plane transporting drugs. The pilot “reflected briefly that he had just killed one man, maybe two” before concluding that “that was alright. They wouldn’t be missed” (155). Later, Domingo Chavez is thrilled to be told that he will be pulled out of combat after a mission involving killing two cartel soldiers: “that two people would have to die to make that possible was, once it was decided, a matter of small consequence” to Domingo (286). In both of these instances, members of the American military are dismissive of the deaths of enemy combatants, dehumanizing them instead of regarding them as fellow human beings.
This perspective is made explicit by Jack Ryan, who argues that “if the government decides that killing people is the correct course of action in the pursuit of our national interests, then such killing falls outside the legal definition of murder” (453). Ryan is the moral center of the novel, and his argument reflects the ambiguous morality that permeates Clancy’s depiction of military and intelligence communities.
The Abuse of Power in the American Government
Clear and Present Danger depicts an American government in which abuse of power is widespread, from the President to local justice department. In the novel’s Prologue, the President explicitly identifies the upcoming election as a motivator for the covert operations in Colombia. The novel suggests that he and his advisors repeatedly abuse their power to promote their own interests. The President’s behavior sets the tone, with the novel suggesting that abuses of power often go unchecked, revealing that the American side in the story are not as innately morally superior as they often present themselves as.
Clancy is clear that the President’s concern in the Colombian operations is the appearance of progress, rather than progress itself. Cutter promises the President that “the results will look good in the papers” even though they might not actually impact drug sales in America (120). After the death of FBI Director Emil Jacobs in Bogota, the President urges Cutter to take action that he can publicize, insisting, “I have to show that we’re doing something” (395). The President’s preference for overt operations over covert reflects the fact that his true goal is to improve his press and approval ratings in advance of the election.
The novel attributes the President’s cynical behavior to the equally cynical behavior of his opponent, Governor Fowler, who, “like every candidate since Nixon and the first war on drugs, was saying that the President hadn’t made good on his promise to restrict drug traffic” (394). The reference to the decades-old war on drugs suggests that Fowler’s view on the drug trade, like the President’s, is based on a desire to promote his own interests. That the presidential hopeful behaves in a similar way to the sitting president suggests a lack of meaningful alternatives to political corruption, as neither candidate seeks to truly serve the greater good.
Just as the novel begins with the President abusing his power to secure an election, it ends with his advisor James Cutter destroying evidence of that abuse to protect himself. When Felix Cortez threatens Cutter to leak evidence of his involvement in the Colombian operations, Cutter has a sudden, visceral fear of “courts and television reporters and congressional committees” (538). When Ritter and Cutter are unable to find any way out of the extortion “that would not damage themselves, the Agency, and their President” (565), they decide to abandon the SHOWBOAT soldiers in Colombia and destroy all evidence of their operations. The emphasis in these passages on public shame suggest that Cutter and Ritter are seeking to protect their power and status. Cutter’s death by suicide in the novel’s final chapters reflects the deadly consequences of abuse of power.
The Destructive Power of Drugs and the Drug Trade
The destructive power of drugs and the drug trade is a central concern of Clear and Present Danger. The novel depicts a world in which drugs and drug-related violence impact the lives of citizens daily, both in America and abroad.
A wide variety of characters condemn the “scourge of drugs” (402) in America, from the crew of the Panache, who spend their days seizing “goddamned drugs” (32) rather than saving lives, to John Clark’s wife, who “had too often seen the results of substance abuse” (283) in her career as a nurse. In one extreme example, a journalist reporting on drug-related violence claims, “I look at the body count every morning and wonder if I’m in D.C. or Beirut” (411). The novel suggests that drug use and drug-related violence have touched every corner of America, and that drugs present a material threat to the safety of Americans.
The novel suggests that the situation is even worse in Colombia. The novel’s introduction to Ernesto Escobedo highlights the cartel’s power: As Escobedo looks into the valley, he notes with pride that “not one person who lived within his view could continue to live were he to decide otherwise” (92). The novel explicitly attributes the violence in Colombia to the destructive power of drugs. Clancy writes that “drugs corrupted institutions at every level and in every way possible” (340), allowing for the cartel to enrich itself at the expense of civilians. The result of this poverty is desperation, which led to more violence as “poor people seized at whatever opportunity presented itself” (207). The novel’s exploration of the Colombian cartel reflects a belief in the destructive and compounding power of drugs and the drug trade.
The fact that nearly all of the troops involved in the Colombian operation have a personal connection to drugs suggests that drug violence results in more violence. Operation SHOWBOAT is explicitly pitched to troops as “a chance to get even” (150) with the drug dealers that have wreaked violence in their communities: “[T]here was not a man [there] who had not once in his life contemplated taking down a drug dealer” (152).
Later, this argument is expanded to the entire US military, as Robert Jackson reflects that “there was not a man in the service who wouldn’t mind taking a few druggies out” (392). This claim is seemingly confirmed by the fact that the first kill of the Colombian operations comes from an American fighter pilot who has no problem with the mission because “a druggie killed his mother [and] he wants to get even” (120). The fact that so many of the troops are inspired by a desire for revenge suggests that drug violence only results in more violence.
Unlock every key theme and why it matters
Get in-depth breakdowns of the book’s main ideas and how they connect and evolve.
- Explore how themes develop throughout the text
- Connect themes to characters, events, and symbols
- Support essays and discussions with thematic evidence