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

Weekend Edition
December 14, 2018
Friday - Sunday
Andrew Levine
A Tale of Two Cities
Peter Linebaugh
The Significance of The Common Wind
Bruce E. Levine
The Ketamine Chorus: NYT Trumpets New Anti-Suicide Drug
Jeffrey St. Clair
Roaming Charges: Fathers and Sons, Bushes and Bin Ladens
Kathy Deacon
Coffee, Social Stratification and the Retail Sector in a Small Maritime Village
Nick Pemberton
Praise For America’s Second Leading Intellectual
Robert Hunziker
The Yellow Vest Insurgency – What’s Next?
Patrick Cockburn
The Yemeni Dead: Six Times Higher Than Previously Reported
Nick Alexandrov
George H. W. Bush: Another Eulogy
Brian Cloughley
Principles and Morality Versus Cash and Profit? No Contest
Michael Duggin
Climate Change and the Limits of Reason
Victor Grossman
Sighs of Relief in Germany
Ron Jacobs
A Propagandist of Privatization
Robert Fantina
What Does Beto Have Against the Palestinians?
Richard Falk – Daniel Falcone
Sartre, Said, Chomsky and the Meaning of the Public Intellectual
Andrew Glikson
Crimes Against the Earth
Robert Fisk
The Parasitic Relationship Between Power and the American Media
Stephen Cooper
When Will Journalism Grapple With the Ethics of Interviewing Mentally Ill Arrestees?
Jill Richardson
A War on Science, Morals and Law
Ron Jacobs
A Propagandist of Privatization
Evaggelos Vallianatos
It’s Not Easy Being Greek
Nomi Prins 
The Inequality Gap on a Planet Growing More Extreme
John W. Whitehead
Know Your Rights or You Will Lose Them
David Swanson
The Abolition of War Requires New Thoughts, Words, and Actions
J.P. Linstroth
Primates Are Us
Bill Willers
The War Against Cash
Jonah Raskin
Doris Lessing: What’s There to Celebrate?
Ralph Nader
Are the New Congressional Progressives Real? Use These Yardsticks to Find Out
Binoy Kampmark
William Blum: Anti-Imperial Advocate
Medea Benjamin – Alice Slater
Green New Deal Advocates Should Address Militarism
John Feffer
Review: Season 2 of Trump Presidency
Frank Clemente
The GOP Tax Bill is Creating Jobs…But Not in the United States
Rich Whitney
General Motors’ Factories Should Not Be Closed. They Should Be Turned Over to the Workers
Christopher Brauchli
Deported for Christmas
Kerri Kennedy
This Holiday Season, I’m Standing With Migrants
Mel Gurtov
Weaponizing Humanitarian Aid
Thomas Knapp
Lame Duck Shutdown Theater Time: Pride Goeth Before a Wall?
George Wuerthner
The Thrill Bike Threat to the Elkhorn Mountains
Nyla Ali Khan
A Woman’s Selfhood and Her Ability to Act in the Public Domain: Resilience of Nadia Murad
Kollibri terre Sonnenblume
On the Killing of an Ash Tree
Graham Peebles
Britain’s Homeless Crisis
Louis Proyect
America: a Breeding Ground for Maladjustment
Steve Carlson
A Hell of a Time
Dan Corjescu
America and The Last Ship
Jeffrey St. Clair
Booked Up: the 25 Best Books of 2018
FacebookTwitterGoogle+RedditEmail