Threats are real but the US has to stop the narrative of perpetual war

How different would American be if it heeded the stark warnings of its 34th President and one of its most celebrated general, Dwight D. Eisenhower? As the most powerful country with a military budget that dwarfs every other nation, one assumes Eisenhower’s remarks about the dangers of the military-industrial complex, if heeded, would not only have changed the course of US history but also the fate of this world.

In his last address to the American people two days before leaving office in 1961, Eisenhower spoke of the danger posed by the military-industrial complex to the country’s democracy. He warned that “an immense military establishment and a large arms industry” had emerged as a hidden force in US politics and that Americans “must not fail to comprehend its grave implications”. Eisenhower appealed to his nation to “guard against the acquisition of unwarranted influence” by the military-industrial complex and see “the potential for the disastrous rise of misplaced power.”

Despite his warning, America developed an insatiable appetite for power. It wasn’t good enough for military strategists in Washington for the US to be ten times more powerful than the second most powerful country in the world. In their eyes, the US had to be 20 times more powerful. Maintaining this level of military superiority has not only been wasteful, it also fuelled a global arms race and, as Eisenhower warned, undermined US democracy.

With big money, big business and profit to be made from war, it’s no surprise to see America descend into a cycle of perpetual war and conflict. To leaders under the spell of the military industrial complex, their best means of survival is to maintain the perpetual supply of enemy; America doesn’t just endure wars, as some have said, it seems to need them. It’s no wonder then to find another report by the priests of war in Washington warning of the loss of American supremacy and the need to plough more money into its over bloated defence industry.

Read: ‘The world is (not) flat’: ‘Trumpism’ is a symptom of decades-long imperial arrogance

The latest Pentagon Department of Defence DoD study: At Our Own Peril: DoD Risk Assessment in a Post-Primacy World, claims that America needs to prepare for a world in which it is no longer a pre-eminent force. The group of defence experts paint a stark picture of US demise, and claim that international system founded by the America after World War II is “fraying” and “collapsing”.

While some of their conclusion is hard to flaw, their prescription seems extremely misguided. They say that the US is entering a “post-Primacy” global environment where it ceases to be the only superpower. The rise of China, Russia as well as the ascendancy of countries like Iran and North Korea will remove the US from its position of global “pre-eminence”, claim the strategists. Risk to US supremacy, claim the authors, will not be limited to unfriendly nations and states. Citing Daesh and other “leaderless” groups that have emerged out of the Arab Spring, they claim that America will be “buffeted” by hostile groups all across the globe.

The study which the authors say “represents the best collective judgment” of individuals in the field of strategy development and risk identification, points out that the “status quo that was hatched and nurtured by US strategists after World War II and has for decades been the principal beat is not merely fraying but may, in fact, be collapsing”. Consequently, the role of the US and the approach it adopts to the world is “fundamentally changing”. They state that the loss of US “pre-eminence” will fundamentally change America’s role; Washington will inhabit a world of extreme unpredictability, created in part by the disruptive “strategic shock” following 9/11.

Their assessment echoes previous studies that made ominous predictions about the US. The Global Trends review, produced by the National Intelligence Council (NIC), predicted that US dominance will end by 2025, commenting that Washington was entering an increasingly unstable and unpredictable period. The loss of American primacy had also been described as the emerging consensus within the foreign policy community that American primacy is eroding due to the shift in global power that’s taking place from the West to the “rising rest”.

While some dispute the coming loss of American primacy, contending that the US will remain atop of the global pecking order militarily and economically, the DoD believes that the global system is undergoing a “volatile restructuring” that will lead to “seismic changes in the international system”. While describing this change as the “third transformational era”, the authors see the US being ill-equipped to face the challenges of the future.

#UnitedStatesOfArabia

It’s revealing that the study does not cite American interventions following 9/11 as well as its profligate support of Israel as two of the main – if not the main – reasons for why the US is heading towards a “post-primacy” world. Modest estimates put the cost of the Iraq war at $3 trillion which is nearly the annual budget of the US. The vast majority of US foreign aid, which is roughly the GDP of Somalia, goes to Israel, which receives $3 billion annually from the US. According to a report by the US Congress, Israel is the largest cumulative recipient of US foreign assistance since World War II. To date the US has provided Israel $127.4 billion in bilateral assistance.

The authors’ caution against the current US “fixation” with the greater Middle East, suggesting that “the same forces at work [in the Middle East] are similarly eroding the reach and authority of governments worldwide”. This observation seems at first to be a paradox. But it’s clear from their depressing vision of the future that their main interest is to overstate the global threat to the US, which is best achieved by not focusing in only one region of the world. It is unsurprising then to see the report suggesting an increase in military expenditure. Expanding the US military is the only option, they claim, for the US to regain its stature in the world sphere. It further calls for the military to remain powerful enough to preserve “maximum freedom of action”, which seems to be a euphemism to do as they please, and allow Washington to “dictate or hold significant sway over outcomes in international disputes,” which I presume means blocking any UN resolution that is not in its interest.

Read: The US has set the stage for a new Gulf War

The report’s glaring flaw is in its failure to acknowledge that unrestricted military spending is one of the main reasons for why challengers to US dominance are multiplying. Expecting a different outcome by doing the same thing over and over again is a clear sign of madness. War costs the world $13.6 trillion annually. Believe it or not that’s enough to give $1,876 to every person on the planet; enough to build peace and avoid the conditions that fuel war. The question as to why governments spend so little on peace and so much on war and expect a different reality will continue to baffle minds. A different international mind-set, however, will not be possible unless the world’s biggest contributor to war starts to become the biggest contributor to peace and that seems a long way away when it continually paints a future of endless enemies and diminishing US power.

The views expressed in this article belong to the author and do not necessarily reflect the editorial policy of Middle East Monitor.