FacebookTwitterGoogle+RedditEmail

The Merchant of Weapons

Photo by manhhai | CC BY 2.0

President Trump has turned into a merchant of weapons, coaxing nations to buy American weapons and warfare systems. Inevitably, modern U.S. presidents are obligated to support the manufacturers of warfare systems. The Republican presidents do it openly whereas the Democratic presidents do it through deceptive quietude. Trump has been most assertive in his rambunctious ways to push the sale of lethal weapons. (Recall how Trump the realtor boasts fooling Libya’s Gadhafi by overcharging him for pitching a tent on Trump’s New York City estate.) The U.S. warfare establishment sees war as a necessary evil that must always remain the prime factor in foreign policy.

Warfare Establishment

The U.S. warfare establishment comprised of the Pentagon, CIA, White House, warfare industry and their lobbyists, imperial think-tanks (Heritage Foundation), warmongering theoreticians, and “hawkish” congressmen in the House and the Senate, all stimulate a culture of domestic and global fear to promote the making and vending of deadly weapons.  Now for years, the war on terror has been used as a grand ploy less to fight the poorly-armed Muslim militants and more to hype the need for the nations’ “self-defense“ translated into the purchase of military aircrafts, missiles, bombs, tanks, and cyber warfare equipment.

The U.S. “defense” industry, an aggregation of hundreds of large and small companies, is a formidable juggernaut and part of the warfare establishment. It benefits when the establishment germinates, exasperates, and maintains potential and real wars across the globe.

The first victims of the warfare establishment are the American taxpayers, forced to disburse their hard-earned money to the Pentagon, a military hegemon that fritters away over $600 billion every year. The U.S. spends at least 20% of federal revenues on the military (whereas the education budget is less than 2%). On huge profits and soaring stocks, the top five companies in the warfare industry have multiplied their market capitalization by over 200%.

The U.S. warfare establishment adores Trump as a grandfatherly salesman to sell arms to a legion of countries, including Saudi Arabia, Iraq, Japan, South Korea, and India. In his first foreign visit, President Trump extracted from Saudi Arabia contracts for military equipment worth $100 billion.  In his recent Asian trip to Japan and South Korea, Trump offered to sell “sophisticated military gear” so that these nations can defend themselves against North Korea, a country that has been carefully cultivated as a threat in the region. Consequently, Thaad missile defense launchers, missiles with payloads of up to 2,200 pounds, bunker-busting bombs, JAASM (long-range missiles), Spy-6 radar systems, and much more are for sale amounting to billions of dollars.

Congress first criticizes the arms deals that the president makes and then, after much sound and fury signifying nothing, approves them, leaving the impression among the simple-minded domestic and global audiences that the sale of military equipment is a favor that the U.S. does to its allies. Nothing is farther from the truth.

The warfare establishment is desperate to sell weapons, and worse, it has no moral qualms in fomenting international wars and civil insurrections in many parts of the planet. Wars sell weapons just as addictions sell drugs.  A booming warfare industry creates jobs, wealth for shareholders, and supports the U.S. hegemonic policies. It also proves how the warfare establishment dupes the nations of the world.

Global Grand Plan

The grand plan to sell warfare systems openly to allies and secretly to adversaries consists of a shrewd strategy.  For years, the warfare establishment studies potential conflicts involving nations that can afford to buy weapons. For example, Saudi Arabia has been identified as a perfect candidate to engage in warfare with its neighbors. Saudi Arabia has a vulnerable monarchy. It is rich. In addition to domestic vulnerabilities, the war in Yemen, the Shia-Sunni discord, the disagreements with Qatar and Lebanon, and many other trigger points force Saudi Arabia to buy expensive weapons.

Creating the dread of Iran as the most dangerous, terror-sponsoring nation in the world fits into the establishment narrative that Saudi Arabia and the other Gulf States need to arm themselves against domestic revolutions and external aggression, all of it allegedly Iran-sponsored. Ironically, the dread of Iran also forces Israel to buy the U.S. warfare systems. The dread of Iran is also beneficial for the European states willing to sell arms to Iran, after a “wink-wink” opposition from the U.S. warfare establishment. If Iran is militarily strong, the U.S. can sell more arms to its allies. This logic is so simple that the simple-minded finds it incredible.

Likewise, North Korea as a bully state in the region is conducive to selling arms to Japan and South Korea. The warfare establishment has every reason to showcase North Korea as a crazy country that can attack neighboring states without reason or warning. A cornered and demonized North Korea displays craziness of its own making (which country wouldn’t under starvation pressures) but the warfare establishment blows it out of all proportion because the higher the dread, the higher the need for “defense” weapons that the U.S. warfare industry can sell for billions of dollars.  To reinforce the dread of North Korea, the bogus conflict over the South China Sea is exaggerated to sell weapons to vulnerable states, including Taiwan.

As India emerges from poverty imposed by the British colonists and joins the top economies, the U.S. warfare establishment is drawing India into costly conflicts with China and Pakistan. The simmering territorial disputes with neighbors have been employed to persuade India to stand up to China and fight a cold war with Pakistan over Kashmir and Afghanistan.  India has surged to the second biggest buyer of U.S. weapons.

Conclusion

President Trump, a guy seasoned in mischief, is a sharp merchant representing the warfare establishment for selling arms to nations of the world. Trump himself has no interest in minimizing international conflicts; and, moreover, the warfare establishment will not allow him to even think of a peaceful world where companies like Lockheed Martin, Northrop Grumman, Raytheon, General Dynamics, and L3 Technologies have no buyers.

An ungodly dog-eat-dog categorical imperative constructs an idyllic world for the U.S. warfare establishment to pursue hegemony, fake conciliations, and superpower duplicities. Some U.S. officials will play the role of peacemakers citing the Bible of love while the warfare establishment cooks and enflames deadly conflicts. “If you prick us, do we not bleed? If you tickle us, do we not laugh? If you poison us, do we not die,” complains Shylock in The Merchant of Venice.

More articles by:

Liaquat Ali Khan is the founder of Legal Scholar Academy, a firm dedicated to the protection of civil rights and human liberties. Send your comments and question to legal. scholar. academy[at] gmail.com

September 24, 2018
Jonathan Cook
Hiding in Plain Sight: Why We Cannot See the System Destroying Us
Gary Leupp
All the Good News (Ignored by the Trump-Obsessed Media)
Robert Fisk
I Don’t See How a Palestinian State Can Ever Happen
Barry Brown
Pot as Political Speech
Lara Merling
Puerto Rico’s Colonial Legacy and Its Continuing Economic Troubles
Patrick Cockburn
Iraq’s Prime Ministers Come and Go, But the Stalemate Remains
William Blum
The New Iraq WMD: Russian Interference in US Elections
Julian Vigo
The UK’s Snoopers’ Charter Has Been Dealt a Serious Blow
Joseph Matten
Why Did Global Economic Performance Deteriorate in the 1970s?
Zhivko Illeieff
The Millennial Label: Distinguishing Facts from Fiction
Thomas Hon Wing Polin – Gerry Brown
Xinjiang : The New Great Game
Binoy Kampmark
Casting Kavanaugh: The Trump Supreme Court Drama
Max Wilbert
Blue Angels: the Naked Face of Empire
Weekend Edition
September 21, 2018
Friday - Sunday
Alexandra Isfahani-Hammond
Hurricane Florence and 9.7 Million Pigs
Andrew Levine
Israel’s Anti-Semitism Smear Campaign
Paul Street
Laquan McDonald is Being Tried for His Own Racist Murder
Brad Evans
What Does It Mean to Celebrate International Peace Day?
Nick Pemberton
With or Without Kavanaugh, The United States Is Anti-Choice
Jim Kavanagh
“Taxpayer Money” Threatens Medicare-for-All (And Every Other Social Program)
Jonathan Cook
Palestine: The Testbed for Trump’s Plan to Tear up the Rules-Based International Order
Jeffrey St. Clair
Roaming Charges: the Chickenhawks Have Finally Come Back Home to Roost!
David Rosen
As the Capitalist World Turns: From Empire to Imperialism to Globalization?
Jonah Raskin
Green Capitalism Rears Its Head at Global Climate Action Summit
James Munson
On Climate, the Centrists are the Deplorables
Robert Hunziker
Is Paris 2015 Already Underwater?
Arshad Khan
Will Their Ever be Justice for Rohingya Muslims?
Jill Richardson
Why Women Don’t Report Sexual Assault
Dave Clennon
A Victory for Historical Accuracy and the Peace Movement: Not One Emmy for Ken Burns and “The Vietnam War”
W. T. Whitney
US Harasses Cuba Amid Mysterious Circumstances
Nathan Kalman-Lamb
Things That Make Sports Fans Uncomfortable
George Capaccio
Iran: “Snapping Back” Sanctions and the Threat of War
Kenneth Surin
Brexit is Coming, But Which Will It Be?
Louis Proyect
Moore’s “Fahrenheit 11/9”: Entertaining Film, Crappy Politics
Ramzy Baroud
Why Israel Demolishes: Khan Al-Ahmar as Representation of Greater Genocide
Ben Dangl
The Zapatistas’ Dignified Rage: Revolutionary Theories and Anticapitalist Dreams of Subcommandante Marcos
Ron Jacobs
Faith, Madness, or Death
Bill Glahn
Crime Comes Knocking
Terry Heaton
Pat Robertson’s Hurricane “Miracle”
Dave Lindorff
In Montgomery County PA, It’s Often a Jury of White People
Louis Yako
From Citizens to Customers: the Corporate Customer Service Culture in America 
William Boardman
The Shame of Dianne Feinstein, the Courage of Christine Blasey Ford 
Ernie Niemi
Logging and Climate Change: Oregon is Appalachia and Timber is Our Coal
Jessicah Pierre
Nike Says “Believe in Something,” But Can It Sacrifice Something, Too?
Paul Fitzgerald - Elizabeth Gould
Weaponized Dreams? The Curious Case of Robert Moss
Olivia Alperstein
An Environmental 9/11: the EPA’s Gutting of Methane Regulations
FacebookTwitterGoogle+RedditEmail