{"id":22155,"date":"2012-10-15T12:00:29","date_gmt":"2012-10-15T11:00:29","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/www.transcend.org\/tms\/?p=22155"},"modified":"2012-10-14T16:53:04","modified_gmt":"2012-10-14T15:53:04","slug":"overwrought-empire-the-discrediting-of-u-s-military-power","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.transcend.org\/tms\/2012\/10\/overwrought-empire-the-discrediting-of-u-s-military-power\/","title":{"rendered":"Overwrought Empire: The Discrediting of U.S. Military Power"},"content":{"rendered":"

Americans lived in a \u201cvictory culture<\/a>\u201d for much of the twentieth century.\u00a0 You could say that we experienced an almost 75-year stretch of triumphalism — think of it as the real \u201cAmerican Century\u201d — from World War I to the end of the Cold War, with time off for a destructive stalemate in Korea and a defeat in Vietnam too shocking to absorb or shake off.<\/p>\n

When the Soviet Union disintegrated in 1991, it all seemed so obvious.\u00a0 Fate had clearly dealt Washington a royal flush.\u00a0 It was victory with a capital V.\u00a0 The United States was, after all, the last standing superpower, after centuries of unceasing great power rivalries on the planet.\u00a0 It had a military beyond compare and no enemy, hardly a \u201crogue state,\u201d on the horizon.\u00a0 It was almost unnerving, such clear sailing into a dominant future, but a moment for the ages nonetheless.\u00a0 Within a decade, pundits in Washington were hailing us<\/a> as \u201cthe dominant power in the world, more dominant than any since Rome.\u201d<\/p>\n

And here\u2019s the odd thing: in a sense, little has changed since then and yet everything seems different.\u00a0 Think of it as the American imperial paradox: everywhere there are now \u201cthreats\u201d against our well-being which seem to demand action and yet nowhere are there commensurate enemies to go with them.\u00a0 Everywhere the U.S. military still reigns supreme by almost any measure you might care to apply; and yet — in case the paradox has escaped you — nowhere can it achieve its goals, however modest.<\/p>\n

At one level, the American situation should simply take your breath away.\u00a0 Never before in modern history had there been an arms race of only one or a great power confrontation of only one.\u00a0 And at least in military terms, just as the neoconservatives imagined<\/a> in those early years of the twenty-first century, the United States remains the \u201csole superpower\u201d or even \u201chyperpower\u201d of planet Earth.<\/p>\n

The Planet\u2019s Top Gun<\/strong><\/p>\n

And yet the more dominant the U.S. military becomes in its ability to destroy and the more its forces are spread across the globe, the more the defeats and semi-defeats pile up, the more the missteps and mistakes grow, the more the strains show, the more the suicides rise<\/a>, the more the nation\u2019s treasure disappears<\/a> down a black hole — and in response to all of this, the more moves the Pentagon makes.<\/p>\n

A great power without a significant enemy?\u00a0 You might have to go back to the Roman Empire at its height or some Chinese dynasty in full flower to find anything like it.\u00a0 And yet Osama bin Laden is dead.\u00a0 Al-Qaeda is reportedly a shadow of its former self.\u00a0 The great regional threats of the moment, North Korea and Iran, are regimes held together by baling wire and the suffering of their populaces.\u00a0 The only incipient great power rival on the planet, China, has just launched<\/a> its first aircraft carrier, a refurbished Ukrainian throwaway from the 1990s on whose deck the country has no planes capable of landing.<\/p>\n

The U.S. has 1,000<\/a> or more bases around the world; other countries, a handful<\/a>.\u00a0 The U.S. spends as much on its military as the next 14 powers<\/a> (mostly allies) combined.\u00a0 In fact, it\u2019s investing an estimated $1.45 trillion<\/a> to produce and operate a single future aircraft, the F-35 — more than any country, the U.S. included, now spends on its national defense annually.<\/p>\n

The U.S. military is singular in other ways, too.\u00a0 It alone has divided the globe — the complete world — into six \u201ccommands.\u201d<\/a>\u00a0 With (lest anything be left out) an added command, Stratcom<\/a>, for the heavens and another, recently established, for the only space not previously occupied, cyberspace<\/a>, where we\u2019re already unofficially \u201cat war<\/a>.\u201d\u00a0 No other country on the planet thinks of itself in faintly comparable military terms.<\/p>\n

When its high command plans for its future \u201cneeds,\u201d thanks to Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff General Martin Dempsey, they repair (don\u2019t say \u201cretreat\u201d) to a military base south of the capital where they argue out their future and war-game various possible crises while striding across<\/a> a map of the world larger than a basketball court.\u00a0 What other military would come up with such a method?<\/p>\n

The president now has at his command not one, but two private armies.\u00a0 The first is the CIA, which in recent years<\/a> has been heavily militarized<\/a>, is overseen by a former four-star general (who calls the job \u201cliving the dream<\/a>\u201d), and is running its own private assassination campaigns and drone air wars throughout the Greater Middle East.\u00a0 The second is an expanding elite<\/a>, the Joint Special Operations Command, cocooned<\/a> inside the U.S. military, members of whom are now deployed to hot spots around the globe.<\/p>\n

The U.S. Navy, with its 11 nuclear-powered aircraft carrier<\/a> task forces, is dominant on the global waves in a way that only the British Navy might once have been; and the U.S. Air Force controls the global skies in much of the world in a totally uncontested fashion.\u00a0 (Despite numerous wars and conflicts, the last<\/a> American plane possibly downed in aerial combat was in the first Gulf War in 1991.)\u00a0 Across much of the global south, there is no sovereign space Washington\u2019s drones can\u2019t penetrate to kill those judged<\/a> by the White House to be threats.<\/p>\n

In sum, the U.S. is now the sole planetary Top Gun<\/a> in a way that empire-builders once undoubtedly fantasized about, but that none from Genghis Khan on have ever achieved: alone and essentially uncontested on the planet.\u00a0 In fact, by every measure (except success), the likes of it has never been seen.<\/p>\n

Blindsided by Predictably Unintended Consequences <\/strong><\/p>\n

By all the usual measuring sticks, the U.S. should be supreme in a historically unprecedented way.\u00a0 And yet it couldn\u2019t be more obvious that it\u2019s not, that despite all the bases, elite forces, private armies, drones, aircraft carriers, wars, conflicts, strikes, interventions, and clandestine operations, despite a labyrinthine intelligence bureaucracy<\/a> that never seems to stop growing and into which we pour a minimum of $80 billion a year<\/a>, nothing seems to work out in an imperially satisfying way.\u00a0 It couldn\u2019t be more obvious that this is not a glorious dream, but some kind of ever-expanding imperial nightmare.<\/p>\n

This should, of course, have been self-evident since at least early 2004, less than a year after the Bush administration invaded and occupied Iraq, when the roadside bombs started to explode and the suicide bombings to mount, while the comparisons of the United States to Rome and of a prospective Pax Americana<\/em> in the Greater Middle East to the Pax Romana<\/em> vanished like a morning mist on a blazing day.\u00a0 Still, the wars against relatively small, ill-armed sets of insurgents dragged toward their dismally predictable ends.\u00a0 (It says the world that, after almost 11 years of war, the 2,000th U.S. military death in Afghanistan occurred<\/a> at the hands of an Afghan \u201cally\u201d in an \u201cinsider attack.\u201d)\u00a0 In those years, Washington continued to be regularly blindsided by the unintended consequences of its military moves. Surprises — none pleasant — became the order of the day and victories proved vanishingly rare.<\/p>\n

One thing seems obvious: a superpower military with unparalleled capabilities for one-way destruction no longer has the more basic ability to impose its will anywhere on the planet.\u00a0 Quite the opposite, U.S. military power has been remarkably discredited globally by the most pitiful of forces.\u00a0 From Pakistan to Honduras, just about anywhere it goes in the old colonial or neocolonial world, in those regions known in the contested Cold War era as the Third World, resistance of one unexpected sort or another arises and failure ensues in some often long-drawn-out and spectacular fashion.<\/p>\n

Given the lack of enemies — a few thousand jihadis<\/em>, a small set of minority insurgencies, a couple of feeble regional powers — why this is so, what exactly the force is that prevents Washington\u2019s success, remains mysterious.\u00a0 Certainly, it\u2019s in some way related to the more than half-century of decolonization movements, rebellions, and insurgencies that were a feature of the previous century.<\/p>\n

It also has something to do with the way economic heft has spread beyond the U.S., Europe, and Japan — with the rise of the \u201ctigers\u201d in Asia, the explosion of the Chinese and Indian economies, the advances of Brazil and Turkey, and the movement of the planet toward some kind of genuine economic multipolarity.\u00a0 It may also have something to do with the end of the Cold War, which put an end as well to several centuries of imperial or great power competition and left the sole \u201cvictor,\u201d it now seems clear, heading toward the exits wreathed in self-congratulation.<\/p>\n

Explain it as you will, it\u2019s as if the planet itself, or humanity, had somehow been inoculated<\/a> against the imposition of imperial power, as if it now rejected it whenever and wherever applied.\u00a0 In the previous century, it took a half-nation, North Korea, backed by Russian supplies and Chinese troops to fight the U.S. to a draw, or a popular insurgent movement backed by a local power, North Vietnam, backed in turn by the Soviet Union and<\/em> China to defeat American power. \u00a0Now, small-scale minority insurgencies, largely using roadside bombs and suicide bombers, are fighting American power to a draw (or worse) with no great power behind them at all.<\/p>\n

Think of the growing force that resists such military might as the equivalent of the \u201cdark matter\u201d in the universe.\u00a0 The evidence is in.\u00a0 We now know (or should know) that it\u2019s there, even if we can\u2019t see it.<\/p>\n

Washington’s Wars on Autopilot<\/strong><\/p>\n

After the last decade of military failures, stand-offs, and frustrations, you might think that this would be apparent in Washington.\u00a0 After all, the U.S. is now visibly an overextended empire, its sway waning from the Greater Middle East to Latin America, the limits of its power<\/a> increasingly evident.\u00a0 And yet, here\u2019s the curious thing: two administrations in Washington have drawn none of the obvious conclusions, and no matter how the presidential election turns out, it\u2019s already clear that, in this regard, nothing will change.<\/p>\n

Even as military power has proven itself a bust again and again, our policymakers have come to rely ever more completely on a military-first response to global problems.\u00a0 In other words, we are not just a classically overextended empire, but also an overwrought one operating on some kind of militarized autopilot.\u00a0 Lacking is a learning curve.\u00a0 By all evidence, it\u2019s not just that there isn\u2019t one, but that there can\u2019t be one.<\/p>\n

Washington, it seems, now has only one mode of thought and action, no matter who is at the helm or what the problem may be, and it always involves, directly or indirectly, openly or clandestinely, the application of militarized force.\u00a0 Nor does it matter that each further application only destabilizes some region yet more or undermines further what once were known as \u201cAmerican interests.\u201d<\/p>\n

Take Libya, as an example.\u00a0 It briefly seemed to count as a rare American military success story: a decisive intervention in support of a rebellion against a brutal dictator — so brutal, in fact, that the CIA previously shipped<\/a> \u201cterrorist suspects,\u201d Islamic rebels fighting against the Gaddafi regime, there for torture.\u00a0 No U.S. casualties resulted, while American and NATO air strikes were decisive in bringing a set of ill-armed, ill-organized rebels to power.<\/p>\n

In the world of unintended consequences, however, the fall of Gaddafi sent Tuareg mercenaries from his militias, armed with high-end weaponry, across the border<\/a> into Mali.\u00a0 There, when the dust settled, the whole northern part of the country had come unhinged and fallen under the sway of Islamic extremists and al-Qaeda wannabes as other parts of North Africa threatened to destabilize.\u00a0 At the same time, of course, the first American casualties of the intervention occurred when Ambassador Christopher Stevens and three other Americans died in an attack on the Benghazi consulate and a local \u201csafe house.\u201d<\/p>\n

With matters worsening regionally, the response couldn\u2019t have been more predictable.\u00a0 As Greg Miller and Craig Whitlock of the Washington Post<\/em> recently reported<\/a>, in ongoing secret meetings, the White House is planning for military operations against al-Qaeda-in-the-Magreb (North Africa), now armed with weaponry pillaged from Gaddafi\u2019s stockpiles.\u00a0 These plans evidently include the approach used in Yemen (U.S. special forces on the ground and CIA drone strikes), or a Somalia \u201cformula\u201d (drone strikes, special forces operations, CIA operations, and the support of African proxy armies), or even at some point \u201cthe possibility of direct U.S. intervention.\u201d<\/p>\n

In addition, Eric Schmitt and David Kilpatrick of the New York Times<\/em> report<\/a> that the Obama administration is \u201cpreparing retaliation\u201d against those it believes killed the U.S. ambassador, possibly including \u201cdrone strikes, special operations raids like the one that killed Osama bin Laden, and joint missions with Libyan authorities.\u201d\u00a0 The near certainty that, like the previous intervention, this next set of military actions will only further destabilize the region with yet more unpleasant surprises and unintended consequences hardly seems to matter.\u00a0 Nor does the fact that, in crude form, the results of such acts are known to us ahead of time have an effect on the unstoppable urge to plan and order them.<\/p>\n

Such situations are increasingly legion<\/a> across the Greater Middle East and elsewhere.\u00a0 Take one other tiny example: Iraq, from which, after almost a decade-long military disaster, the \u201clast\u201d U.S. units essentially fled in the middle of the night<\/a> as 2011 ended.\u00a0 Even in those last moments, the Obama administration and the Pentagon were still trying<\/a> to keep significant numbers of U.S. troops there (and, in fact, did manage to leave behind<\/a> possibly several hundred as trainers of elite Iraqi units).\u00a0 Meanwhile, Iraq has been supportive of the embattled Syrian regime and drawn ever closer to Iran, even as its own sectarian strife has ratcheted upward.\u00a0 Having watched this unsettling fallout from its last round in the country, according to<\/a> the New York Times<\/em>, the U.S. is now negotiating an agreement \u201cthat could result in the return of small units of American soldiers to Iraq on training missions. At the request of the Iraqi government, according to General Caslen, a unit of Army Special Operations soldiers was recently deployed to Iraq to advise on counterterrorism and help with intelligence.\u201d<\/p>\n

Don\u2019t you just want to speak to those negotiators the way you might to a child: No, don\u2019t do that!\u00a0 The urge to return to the scene of their previous disaster, however, seems unstaunchable.\u00a0 You could offer various explanations for why our policymakers, military and civilian, continue in such a repetitive — and even from an imperial point of view — self-destructive vein in situations where unpleasant surprises are essentially guaranteed and lack of success a given.\u00a0 Yes, there is the military-industrial complex to be fed.\u00a0 Yes, we are interested in the control of crucial resources, especially energy, and so on.<\/p>\n

But it\u2019s probably more reasonable to say that a deeply militarized mindset and the global maneuvers that go with it are by now just part of the way of life of a Washington eternally \u201cat war.\u201d\u00a0 They are the tics of a great power with the equivalent of Tourette’s Syndrome.\u00a0 They happen because they can\u2019t help but happen, because they are engraved in the policy DNA of our national security complex, and can evidently no longer be altered.\u00a0 In other words, they can\u2019t help themselves.<\/p>\n

That\u2019s the only logical conclusion in a world where it has become ever less imaginable to do the obvious, which is far less or nothing at all.\u00a0 (Northern Chad?\u00a0 When did it become crucial to our well being?) Downsizing the mission?\u00a0 Inconceivable.\u00a0 Thinking the unthinkable?\u00a0 Don\u2019t even give it a thought!<\/p>\n

What remains is, of course, a self-evident formula for disaster on autopilot. But don\u2019t tell Washington. It won\u2019t matter. Its denizens can\u2019t take it in.<\/p>\n

______________________<\/p>\n

Tom Engelhardt, co-founder of the <\/em>American Empire Project<\/a> and author of <\/em>The United States of Fear<\/a> as well as <\/em>The End of Victory Culture<\/a>, his history of the Cold War, runs the Nation Institute’s <\/em>TomDispatch.com<\/a>. His latest book, co-authored with Nick Turse, is <\/em>Terminator Planet: The First History of Drone Warfare, 2001-2050<\/a>.<\/p>\n

Copyright 2012 Tom Engelhardt<\/em><\/p>\n

Go to Original \u2013 tomdispatch.com<\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

The more dominant the U.S. military becomes in its ability to destroy and the more its forces are spread across the globe, the more the defeats and semi-defeats pile up, the more the missteps and mistakes grow, the more the strains show, the more the suicides rise, the more the nation\u2019s treasure disappears down a black hole — and in response to all of this, the more moves the Pentagon makes.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":4,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[65],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-22155","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-anglo-america"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.transcend.org\/tms\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/22155","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.transcend.org\/tms\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.transcend.org\/tms\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.transcend.org\/tms\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/4"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.transcend.org\/tms\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=22155"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.transcend.org\/tms\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/22155\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.transcend.org\/tms\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=22155"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.transcend.org\/tms\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=22155"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.transcend.org\/tms\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=22155"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}