FacebookTwitterGoogle+RedditEmail

We Won’t Be Fighting for Freedom in Iraq

The Defense Department’s “Defend America” Web site reads, “Dear member of the U.S. military: Thank you for defending our freedom.” Fill in your name and hometown and click to join the more than 2 million who have sent the message.

The sentiment seems hard to argue with. No matter what one thinks of the coming war against Iraq, can’t we all send such a message to those who serve?

Not if we want to be honest about U.S. war plans, for those troops won’t be defending our freedom but defending America’s control over the strategically crucial energy resources of the Middle East. They will be in the service of the empire, fighting a war for the power and profits of the few, not freedom for the many.

To some, that statement may seem disrespectful. But resistance to the coming war against Iraq doesn’t signal a lack of respect for those who do the fighting. I never have served in the military, but my family and friends have, and I have empathy for people on the front lines who face the risks.

If I truly am to respect them–as human beings and as fellow citizens–I should be willing to state clearly my objections to this war.

That requires distinguishing between the rhetoric and the reality of U.S. foreign and military policy. Every great power claims noble motives for its wars, but such claims usually cover an uglier reality, and we are no different.

For most of the post-World War II era, the United States’ use of force against weaker nations was justified as necessary to stop Soviet plans for world conquest. The Soviet regime was authoritarian, brutal and interventionist in its own sphere, and it eventually acquired the capacity to destroy us with nuclear weapons.

But the claim that the Soviets were a global military threat to our existence also was a political weapon to frighten Americans into endorsing wars to suppress independent development in the Third World and accepting a permanent wartime economy.

With the Soviet Union gone, American planners needed a new justification for the military machine. International terrorism may prove more durable a rationale, for organizations such as al-Qaeda are a real threat, and we have a right to expect our government to take measures to protect us.

But the question is: Which measures are most effective?

U.S. intelligence officials have acknowledged that the U.S. attack on Afghanistan did little to reduce the threat and may have complicated counterterrorism efforts. But the war was effective at justifying a continuing U.S. military presence in Central Asia. A war against Iraq, being marketed as part of the war on terrorism, is even more obviously about U.S. control of the region’s oil.

So, we have to separate what may motivate people in the armed forces from the real role of the U.S. military.

I have no doubt that many of the people who serve believe they are fighting for freedom, an honorable goal we should respect. But they are doing that for a government with a different objective–to shore up U.S. power and guarantee the profits of an elite–that we shouldn’t support.

There is no disrespect in urging fellow citizens who have joined the military to ask, “What am I really fighting for?” and, “Who really benefits from the risks I take?”

If we civilians truly care about the troops–as well as the innocent people of Iraq who will die in a war–we should make it clear to Washington that we won’t support wars for power and instead demand a sane foreign policy that seeks real freedom and justice, not dominance and control.

My message to the troops would be: “Thank you for being willing to defend freedom, but please join the resistance to this unjust war.”

That is a message of support for the troops and a plea for solidarity among ordinary people who want to build a better world, not serve the empire.

It is a reminder that, as John McCutcheon put it so eloquently in song: “The ones who call the shots won’t be among the dead and lame/And on each end of the rifle we’re the same.”

ROBERT JENSEN is the author of Writing Dissent: Taking Radical Ideas From the Margins to the Mainstream and a journalism professor at the University of Texas at Austin.

 

 

More articles by:

Robert Jensen is a professor in the School of Journalism at the University of Texas at Austin and board member of the Third Coast Activist Resource Center in Austin. He is the author of several books, including the forthcoming Plain Radical: Living, Loving, and Learning to Leave the Planet Gracefully (Counterpoint/Soft Skull, fall 2015). http://www.amazon.com/Plain-Radical-Living-Learning-Gracefully/dp/1593766181 Robert Jensen can be reached at rjensen@austin.utexas.edu and his articles can be found online at http://robertwjensen.org/. To join an email list to receive articles by Jensen, go to http://www.thirdcoastactivist.org/jensenupdates-info.html. Twitter: @jensenrobertw. Notes. [1] Wendell Berry, The Unsettling of America: Culture and Agriculture, 3rd ed. (San Francisco: Sierra Club Books, 1996), p. 106. [2] Gerda Lerner, The Creation of Patriarchy (New York: Oxford University Press, 1986). [3] Fyodor Dostoyevsky, The Brothers Karamazov, edited and with a revised translation by Susan McReynolds Oddo (New York: W.W. Norton and Company, 2011), p. 55.

April 24, 2018
Carl Boggs
Russia and the War Party
William A. Cohn
Carnage Unleashed: the Pentagon and the AUMF
Nathan Kalman-Lamb
The Racist Culture of Canadian Hockey
María Julia Bertomeu
On Angers, Disgusts and Nauseas
Nick Pemberton
How To Buy A Seat In Congress 101
Ron Jacobs
Resisting the Military-Now More Than Ever
Sonali Kolhatkar
The Left, Syria and Fake News
Manuel E. Yepe
The Confirmation of Democracy in Cuba
Peter Montgomery
Christian Nationalism: Good for Politicians, Bad for America and the World
Ted Rall
Bad Drones
Jill Richardson
The Latest Attack on Food Stamps
Andrew Stewart
What Kind of Unionism is This?
Ellen Brown
Fox in the Hen House: Why Interest Rates Are Rising
April 23, 2018
Patrick Cockburn
In Middle East Wars It Pays to be Skeptical
Thomas Knapp
Just When You Thought “Russiagate” Couldn’t Get Any Sillier …
Gregory Barrett
The Moral Mask
Robert Hunziker
Chemical Madness!
David Swanson
Senator Tim Kaine’s Brief Run-In With the Law
Dave Lindorff
Starbucks Has a Racism Problem
Uri Avnery
The Great Day
Nyla Ali Khan
Girls Reduced to Being Repositories of Communal and Religious Identities in Kashmir
Ted Rall
Stop Letting Trump Distract You From Your Wants and Needs
Steve Klinger
The Cautionary Tale of Donald J. Trump
Kevin Zeese - Margaret Flowers
Conflict Over the Future of the Planet
Cesar Chelala
Gideon Levy: A Voice of Sanity from Israel
Weekend Edition
April 20, 2018
Friday - Sunday
Paul Street
Ruling Class Operatives Say the Darndest Things: On Devils Known and Not
Conn Hallinan
The Great Game Comes to Syria
Jeffrey St. Clair
Roaming Charges: Mother of War
Andrew Levine
“How Come?” Questions
Doug Noble
A Tale of Two Atrocities: Douma and Gaza
Kenneth Surin
The Blight of Ukania
Howard Lisnoff
How James Comey Became the Strange New Hero of the Liberals
William Blum
Anti-Empire Report: Unseen Persons
Lawrence Davidson
Missiles Over Damascus
Patrick Cockburn
The Plight of the Yazidi of Afrin
Pete Dolack
Fooled Again? Trump Trade Policy Elevates Corporate Power
Stan Cox
For Climate Mobilization, Look to 1960s Vietnam Before Turning to 1940s America
William Hawes
Global Weirding
Dan Glazebrook
World War is Still in the Cards
Nick Pemberton
In Defense of Cardi B: Beyond Bourgeois PC Culture
Ishmael Reed
Hollywood’s Last Days?
Peter Certo
There Was Nothing Humanitarian About Our Strikes on Syria
Dean Baker
China’s “Currency Devaluation Game”
Ann Garrison
Why Don’t We All Vote to Commit International Crimes?
LEJ Rachell
The Baddest Black Power Artist You Never Heard Of
FacebookTwitterGoogle+RedditEmail