FacebookTwitterGoogle+RedditEmail

The Bureaucracy of War

Bureaucracies repeat patterns until they learn new ones. The bigger and more entrenched the bureaucracy the less likely it is to learn anything. The US military is a bureaucracy. It tortured humans in Vietnam, Afghanistan and Iraq. It used the excuse of WMD to destroy Iraq and it intends to use the threat of a future WMD to attack Iran.  It has used the pretense of human rights to invade nations that refuse the terms of their submission. Most importantly, and more generally, the Pentagon and its political enablers continually plan for war as if the next one will have a different outcome than the wars that came before.  In other words, they repeat not only the same idea, but even the same strategies and tactics, despite the fact that those strategies and tactics have essentially failed no matter what the geography of the battlefield looks like or the political nature of the latest enemy.  Shock and awe or counterinsurgency, every single US war of the last sixty years has had its share of both and every single US war of the last sixty years has not produced the results the voters were promised.  Yet, the wars drag on.

Unlike US voters, Washington’s enemies have figured out the patterns implicit in US war making.  Consequently, what is at best a stalemate to the military machine directed by the Pentagon becomes a victory for its foes.  The military’s experience in Vietnam, Iraq and Afghanistan all prove that no matter what the US military throws at the respective resistance forces, it cannot win without eradicating most of the population.  Since not even the popular will of the United States seems likely to stomach such an obviously genocidal move, the best the US military can do is turn the countryside into wasteland.  Naturally, this does not endear Washington or its cohorts to the resisting population.  In Iraq and Afghanistan, this strategy has also ensured continued conflict among the nation’s citizens and between the US and the locals.

While military members, politicians and the rest of the concerned populace watch the reaction of the Afghans to the recent massacre of civilians by what we are told is a deranged soldier, the clamor for a NATO withdrawal will surely grow louder.  This is as it should be.  It has been a long time since there was any military or political reason for foreign troops to be killing and dying in that land.  Indeed, the continued presence of those troops and their mercenary cohorts proves the argument that it is the war itself that is the reason for more war.  In other words, there is plenty of money to be made in the process of destruction, death, and “rebuilding” the Afghan people have been made to endure in the name of freedom.  As a recent cartoon made clear: “We are in Afghanistan to protect the soldiers that are in Afghanistan.”  In other words, the US military presence in Afghanistan exists because of the US military presence in Afghanistan.  As for that deranged soldier:  while his actions may be a slight aberration from the normal actions of soldiers in that nation, it is no more of an aberration than the massacre at My Lai was in Vietnam.  Obama’s statements to the contrary, US soldiers are not trained to respect the Afghan people.  It’s not the soldier that is deranged.  It’s the imperial policy of Washington that is.

In Iran, a scenario somewhat similar to that which preceded the war on Iraq continues to play out.  Washington, Tel Aviv and their co-conspirators insist that Iran has no right to possess the same type of WMD (nuclear weapons) that Tel Aviv and Washington have in excess.  Furthermore, Washington and its allies insist on their right to attack Iran if and when they deem it necessary.  No matter what Iran says and no matter what they do in terms of acquiescing to Washington and Tel Aviv’s demands, that nation will be attacked should Washington deem it necessary.  The media in the west decry Iran’s supposed refusal to cooperate with IAEA inspectors, claiming that such a refusal is equivalent to possessing forbidden WMDs.  In reality, Iran is doing what any nation in its position would do.  It is demanding that it set the terms of the inspections and not Washington Tel Aviv or London.  If the UN inspections of pre- invasion Iraq are any indication then Tehran is absolutely right in denying IAEA teams access to the military bases where nuclear activity is taking place. It was admitted after the fact that the some members of the inspection teams in Iraq actually served as spies for the Pentagon as it made plans to invade and occupy that country.  If I recall correctly, a leader of one such team actually resigned in protest when he realized his team had been used in such a manner.  There is no reason to think that the IAEA teams might not be asked to serve a similar purpose in Iran. Even if the teams themselves are not engaged in espionage as a group, there could be individuals only too willing to provide Washington with military information that would help the US and Israeli militaries in any attack.  While espionage is part of war and diplomacy, no nation in its right mind invites spies onto its military bases, especially when those spies are working for a nation discussing the best way to make you do its will.  As for the sanctions against Iran, Washington hopes they serve the same purpose as they did in Iraq.  That is, they will soften up the country for an attack by bleeding it dry.

In addition (or perhaps instead of) all this, there is an obvious approach to the unfolding crisis between Iran and the United States.  That solution would be this: accept Iran’s suggestion to begin work on creating a nuclear-free zone in that part of the world.  Such an agreement would diminish further the likelihood of nuclear war and also improve the chances of a just peace.  After all, if Tel Aviv were required to give up its nuclear weapons, then perhaps it might start dealing with its neighbors more equitably.  Instead, it pretends that it is somehow judged by a different standard that allows it to violate whatever international laws and human rights it deems necessary.

Ron Jacobs is the author of The Way the Wind Blew: a History of the Weather Underground and Short Order Frame Up. Jacobs’ essay on Big Bill Broonzy is featured in CounterPunch’s collection on music, art and sex, Serpents in the Garden. His collection of essays and other musings titled Tripping Through the American Night is now available and his new novel is The Co-Conspirator’s Tale. He is a contributor to Hopeless: Barack Obama and the Politics of Illusion, forthcoming from AK Press.  He can be reached at: ronj1955@gmail.com.

 

More articles by:

Ron Jacobs is the author of Daydream Sunset: Sixties Counterculture in the Seventies published by CounterPunch Books. His latest offering is a pamphlet titled Capitalism: Is the Problem.  He lives in Vermont. He can be reached at: ronj1955@gmail.com.

Weekend Edition
December 07, 2018
Friday - Sunday
Steve Hendricks
What If We Just Buy Off Big Fossil Fuel? A Novel Plan to Mitigate the Climate Calamity
Jeffrey St. Clair
Cancer as Weapon: Poppy Bush’s Radioactive War on Iraq
Paul Street
The McCain and Bush Death Tours: Establishment Rituals in How to be a Proper Ruler
Jason Hirthler
Laws of the Jungle: The Free Market and the Continuity of Change
Ajamu Baraka
The Universal Declaration of Human Rights at 70: Time to De-Colonize Human Rights!
Andrew Levine
Thoughts on Strategy for a Left Opposition
Jennifer Matsui
Dead of Night Redux: A Zombie Rises, A Spook Falls
Rob Urie
Degrowth: Toward a Green Revolution
Binoy Kampmark
The Bomb that Did Not Detonate: Julian Assange, Manafort and The Guardian
Robert Hunziker
The Deathly Insect Dilemma
Robert Fisk
Spare Me the American Tears for the Murder of Jamal Khashoggi
Joseph Natoli
Tribal Justice
Ron Jacobs
Getting Pushed Off the Capitalist Cliff
Macdonald Stainsby
Unist’ot’en Camp is Under Threat in Northern Canada
Senator Tom Harkin
Questions for Vice-President Bush on Posada Carriles
W. T. Whitney
Two Years and Colombia’s Peace Agreement is in Shreds
Ron Jacobs
Getting Pushed Off the Capitalist Cliff
Ramzy Baroud
The Conspiracy Against Refugees
David Rosen
The Swamp Stinks: Trump & Washington’s Rot
Raouf Halaby
Wall-to-Wall Whitewashing
Daniel Falcone
Noam Chomsky Turns 90
Dean Baker
An Inverted Bond Yield Curve: Is a Recession Coming?
Nick Pemberton
The Case For Chuck Mertz (Not Noam Chomsky) as America’s Leading Intellectual
Ralph Nader
New Book about Ethics and Whistleblowing for Engineers Affects Us All!
Dan Kovalik
The Return of the Nicaraguan Contras, and the Rise of the Pro-Contra Left
Jeremy Kuzmarov
Exposing the Crimes of the CIAs Fair-Haired Boy, Paul Kagame, and the Rwandan Patriotic Front
Jasmine Aguilera
Lessons From South of the Border
Manuel García, Jr.
A Formula for U.S. Election Outcomes
Sam Pizzigati
Drug Company Execs Make Millions Misleading Cancer Patients. Here’s One Way to Stop Them
Kollibri terre Sonnenblume
Agriculture as Wrong Turn
James McEnteer
And That’s The Way It Is: Essential Journalism Books of 2018
Chris Gilbert
Biplav’s Communist Party of Nepal on the Move: Dispatch by a Far-Flung Bolivarian
Judith Deutsch
Siloed Thinking, Climate, and Disposable People: COP 24 and Our Discontent
Jill Richardson
Republicans Don’t Want Your Vote to Count
John Feffer
‘Get Me Outta Here’: Trump Turns the G20 into the G19
Domenica Ghanem
Is Bush’s Legacy Really Much Different Than Trump’s?
Peter Certo
Let Us Argue Over Dead Presidents
Christopher Brauchli
Concentration Camps From Here to China
ANIS SHIVANI
The Progress of Fascism Over the Last Twenty Years
Steve Klinger
A Requiem for Donald Trump
Al Ronzoni
New Deals, From FDR’s to the Greens’
Gerald Scorse
America’s Rigged Tax Collection System
Louis Proyect
Praying the Gay Away
Rev. Theodore H. Lockhart
A Homily: the Lord Has a Controversy With His People?
David Yearsley
Bush Obsequies
FacebookTwitterGoogle+RedditEmail