FacebookTwitterRedditEmail

An “Inconvenient Truth” that Al Gore Missed

In a recent interview with The Real News, actor and activist John Cusack made a simple but profoundly important point: “[Y]ou can’t separate climate justice and militarism’, he said,”… because the drones are going to follow the fresh water, and the soldiers are going to protect the oil, and then if things go on as they are, game over for the planet.”

There is ‘an inconvenient truth’ that didn’t make it into the 2006 documentaryby that name featuring Al Gore. It is something rarely mentioned by most environmental and social justice activists and their organizations. Most labor leaders who seek a just transition to a sustainable energy system that does not make workers with fossil fuel-dependent jobs bare the social cost also remain silent.

The truth is that preventing climate change from inflicting cataclysmic damage to our ecosystem and threatening much of life on earth and civilization as we know it cannot be accomplished unless we also demilitarize our foreign policy, end interventionist wars and break the grip that both Big Carbon and the military-industrial complex have on our federal budget, foreign policy, economy and government.

Peace is a climate goal because it is a climate necessity

War is an environmental nightmare that pollutes and contaminates every place it is fought, while contributing substantially to the carbon load of the planet. The US military is the single largest consumer of fossil fuels on the planet and its single largest greenhouse gas polluter. War and climate change-caused disasters are the principal drivers of global migration and the refugee crisis.

The physical, social and financial impacts of war are felt for generations. War, preparation for war and its aftermath drain resources from investment in renewable energy. It limits our ability to protect our most vulnerable frontline communities and mitigate the worst effects of climate change. Military spending consumes funds needed to meet other critical economic and social needs — healthcare, education, infrastructure, energy efficiency and more. The costs of war continue long after the fighting ends in the ongoing care required by veterans, the social costs of addiction, depression and other manifestations of PTSD, and interest paid to service the debt that accrues when wars are fought on the government’s credit card.

Our military’s primary function is to defend whatever the president as commander-in-chief determines is in America’s ‘national security’ or ‘vital US interests’. George Bush sent tens of thousands of troops to invade Iraq in 2003 without provocation and in contravention of international law, in the name of ‘national security’. But in reality, the concepts of ‘national security’ and ‘vital interests’ are more often than not euphemisms for protecting and defending corporate and investor interests, preeminent among which are the interests of fossil fuel energy conglomerates and the military-industrial complex — or more simply to make the world safe for the exploitation of and trade in fossil fuel and other natural resources while boosting profits of military contractors. To do that it has to assert military superiority and global hegemony to discourage, and discourage or defeat, any competitor or adversary, whether real, potential, contrived or imagined. The US military serves as global enforcer for fossil fuel interests. It’s collaborator in that effort is the military-industrial complex, which maintains a codependent and inextricably interwoven relationship with Big Carbon. Neither can survive without the other.

The US military has been continuously at war for more than 17 years at a cost of over five trillion dollars, and has been engaged in some form of armed conflict or military intervention on average every six months since World War II. Its global reach is provided by more than 1.3 million men and women under arms stationed on 800 foreign bases in 80 nations, reinforced by 20 aircraft carriers; 66 submarines; 329 other naval craft; 3,700 fighter jets, bombers and attack aircraft; 44,700 tanks and armored fighting vehicles; 6,550 nuclear warheads, and 800 inter-continental ballistic missiles — a military might unmatched by any other country in the world . The US has deployed Special Forces to 150 countries — more than three-quarters of all the nations in the world* — in service to what the AFL-CIO General Executive Council in 2011 aptly described as a “militarized foreign policy.” The US fits the classic definition of a ‘garrison state’.

In order to fulfill this role, the US military and military contractors consume nearly two-thirds of the entire US discretionary budget, costing taxpayers $1.25 trillion a year when the Pentagon base budget, war spending, nuclear arms, veterans benefits and future care, interest paid on funds borrowed to finance past wars, and other national security-related expenses of government are added up. The US military budget is greater than the next seven nations combined — roughly double what China, Russia, Iran and North Korea together spend — far more than is required to defend our country’s borders and its people.

As we abandon fossil fuels, a just transition to a sustainable energy society requires that we defend immigrant families, protect and meet the needs of frontline communities, assure the welfare of displaced workers in both fossil fuel-dependent and military-industrial jobs, and support military personnel impacted by an end to our aggressive foreign policy.

Just as fossil fuel and military-industrial interests are interwoven and interdependent, so too are environmental, social justice and labor causes, The labor, environmental justice and peace movements must abandon issue and organizational silos to begin operating as a single multi-faceted progressive movement that understands their interdependence and consciously develops collaboration, mutual support and solidarity between them. What compels these different strands of progressive struggle to weave a new progressive tapestry is recognition that none of these movements can achieve their objectives without achieving the objectives of the others. We will not be able to successfully decarbonize our economy if we do not also demilitarize US foreign policy.

Rev. Martin Luther King, Jr. understood this when he declared one year prior to his death: “We as a nation must undergo a radical revolution of values. . . . When machines and computers, profit motives and property rights are considered more important than people, the giant triplets of racism, extreme materialism and militarism are incapable of being conquered.” His admonition has been echoed more recently by the Poor People’s Campaign.

We need a new definition of national security

We need a new definition of national security based on what the American people, not multinational corporations and the investor class need to be secure — not based on the size of our military, the number of our foreign military bases, the power of our weapons or the advanced state of our military technology but on the strength of our shared values and the needs and aspirations of the American people. Real national security should protect our people, not the profits of multinational corporations.

· Real national security exists when people have jobs with incomes sufficient to provide a decent standard of living, affordable housing and healthcare, education without a lifetime of student debt, and safe, affordable child and elder care.

· Real national security provides efficient affordable mass transit, modern safe public infrastructure, a proper social safety net, sustainable carbon-free energy, protection of our environment, and wholesome food.

· Real national security can only be achieved if all countries dramatically reduce their consumption of fossil fuels, lower the threat posed by runaway global warming, and eliminate all nuclear weapons.

· Real national security requires our country operate in the world as a member of a global community of nations so as to earn respect rather than to instill fear.

· Real national security requires respect for international law, human rights, the rights of refugees, the Bill of Rights of the US Constitution, and work to end xenophobia, nativism, racism, misogyny, homophobia and transphobia.

· Real national security can be achieved only if the conditions of poverty, unemployment, alienation and despair which provide the fertile field in which terrorism grows are alleviated throughout the world — when the fate of the least of us is tied to the fate of the rest of us as members of a single global human community.

That is why we must rise together for climate, jobs, justice and peace.

More articles by:

Michael Eisenscher is National Coordinator Emeritus of US Labor Against the War.

July 14, 2020
Anthony DiMaggio
Canceling the Cancel Culture: Enriching Discourse or Dumbing it Down?
Patrick Cockburn
Boris Johnson Should not be Making New Global Enemies When His Country is in a Shambles
Frank Joyce
Lift From the Bottom? Yes.
Richard C. Gross
The Crackdown on Foreign Students
Steven Salaita
Should We Cancel “Cancel Culture”?
Paul Street
Sorry, the Chicago Blackhawks Need to Change Their Name and Logo
Jonathan Cook
‘Cancel Culture’ Letter is About Stifling Free Speech, Not Protecting It
John Feffer
The Global Rushmore of Autocrats
C. Douglas Lummis
Pillar of Sand in Okinawa
B. Nimri Aziz
Soft Power: Americans in Its Grip at Home Must Face the Mischief It Wields by BNimri Aziz July 11/2020
Cesar Chelala
What was lost when Ringling Bros. Left the Circus
Dan Bacher
California Regulators Approve 12 New Permits for Chevron to Frack in Kern County
George Wuerthner
Shrinking Wilderness in the Gallatin Range
Lawrence Davidson
Woodrow Wilson’s Racism: the Basis For His Support of Zionism
Binoy Kampmark
Mosques, Museums and Politics: the Fate of Hagia Sophia
Dean Baker
Propaganda on Government Action and Inequality from David Leonhardt
July 13, 2020
Gerald Sussman
The Russiagate Spectacle: Season 2?
Ishmael Reed
Lin-Manuel Miranda’s Perry Mason Moment
Jack Rasmus
Why the 3rd Quarter US Economic ‘Rebound’ Will Falter
W. T. Whitney
Oil Comes First in Peru, Not Coronavirus Danger, Not Indigenous Rights
Ralph Nader
The Enduring Case for Demanding Trump’s Resignation
Raghav Kaushik – Arun Gupta
On Coronavirus and the Anti-Police-Brutality Uprising
Deborah James
Digital Trade Rules: a Disastrous New Constitution for the Global Economy Written by and for Big Tech
Howard Lisnoff
Remembering the Nuclear Freeze Movement and Its Futility
Sam Pizzigati
Will the Biden-Sanders Economic Task Force Rattle the Rich?
Allen Baker
Trump’s Stance on Foreign College Students Digs US Economic Hole Even Deeper
Binoy Kampmark
The Coronavirus Seal: Victoria’s Borders Close
Evaggelos Vallianatos
Power, Knowledge and Virtue
Weekend Edition
July 10, 2020
Friday - Sunday
Lynnette Grey Bull
Trump’s Postcard to America From the Shrine of Hypocrisy
Anthony DiMaggio
Free Speech Fantasies: the Harper’s Letter and the Myth of American Liberalism
David Yearsley
Morricone: Maestro of Music and Image
Jeffrey St. Clair
“I Could Live With That”: How the CIA Made Afghanistan Safe for the Opium Trade
Rob Urie
Democracy and the Illusion of Choice
Paul Street
Imperial Blind Spots and a Question for Obama
Vijay Prashad
The U.S. and UK are a Wrecking Ball Crew Against the Pillars of Internationalism
Melvin Goodman
The Washington Post and Its Cold War Drums
Richard C. Gross
Trump: Reopen Schools (or Else)
Chris Krupp
Public Lands Under Widespread Attack During Pandemic 
Alda Facio
What Coronavirus Teaches Us About Inequality, Discrimination and the Importance of Caring
Eve Ottenberg
Bounty Tales
Andrew Levine
Silver Linings Ahead?
John Kendall Hawkins
FrankenBob: The Self-Made Dylan
Pam Martens - Russ Martens
Deutsche Bank Fined $150 Million for Enabling Jeffrey Epstein; Where’s the Fine Against JPMorgan Chase?
David Rosen
Inequality and the End of the American Dream
Louis Proyect
Harper’s and the Great Cancel Culture Panic
FacebookTwitterRedditEmail