Summary: Like fish in water, we cannot easily see the trends shaping our world. Such as the militarization of America, both foreign and domestic. We’re becoming in some ways like Prussia, sad since Prussia/Germany proved that the time for such behavior has passed. It’s not too late for us to take the reins of the nation and change course. This is a sequel to Why are we militarizing American society? {2nd of 2 posts today.}
“Know thyself.” — Carved into Apollo’s Oracle of Delphi.
After so many years of US wars in so many nations — mostly against purely local insurgencies — a question arises that requires an answer. It’s frequently asked by our most perceptive geopolitical analysts.
- “Is America Addicted to War?” by Stephen M. Walt (Prof International Relations, Harvard), Foreign Policy, 4 April 2011 — “The top 5 reasons why we keep getting into foolish fights.”
- “Is America Addicted to War?” by Paul Solman (journalist), PBS, 28 November 2011
- “America: Addicted to War, Afraid of Peace” by Gregory A. Daddis (Colonel, US Army; Professor History at West Point), The National Interest, 11 June 2015 — “After decades of being at war, the United States has come to the point where it can’t live without it.”
- ““Hi, I’m Uncle Sam and I’m a War-oholic” by William Astore (Lt. Colonel, USAF, retired) at TomDispatch, 15 June 2015.
It’s not just our fighting overseas — more frequent than by anyone else since WWII — or our massive military/intel spending (a multiple of the spending by all our potential enemies combined), but the way America conducts its affairs. Looking at this Franz-Stefan Gady (foreign policy analyst, East West Institute) asks “Is the United States the new Prussia?” at the Small Wars Journal.
In few other democratic countries in the world have more generals found places in administrations or indeed have become heads of states (one notable exception is Israel). Almost every four-star general in the United States sooner or later is presumed to have presidential aspirations. Interestingly, it is the presidents who were former generals who usually display the least confidence in the performance of the armed service, such as George Washington, Grant, and Dwight D. Eisenhower. The military influence can be seen acutely in foreign policy. A report by the Advisory Committee on Transformational Diplomacy states…
“DoD’s regional combatant commanders have come to be perceived by states and other actors as the most influential US government regional representative. It is argued that the resources that combatant commanders control, their presence and frequent travel throughout the region, and even the symbolic impact of their aircraft and accompanying service members, all combine to place them in perceived position of preeminence.”
This assertion is supported by a study of The Project on National Security Reform, the most comprehensive effort to date to analyze the US national security system and propose recommendations to alleviate many of its bureaucratic problems. Its conclusion emphasizes that an inequality of resources leads to an inequality in policy — i.e., the militarization of US foreign policy.
It’s a metaphor
“He who knows when he can fight and when he cannot will be victorious.”
— Sun Tzu in The Art of War.
Countless articles have warned about the obvious ill effects of this, both domestic and foreign. Such as “Manufacturing Insecurity: How Militarism Endangers America” by William Pfaff, Foreign Affairs, Nov/Dec 2010. Others have looked “under the hood” at the mechanics of our militarization, such as Andrew Bacevich in Washington Rules: America’s Path to Permanent War
This is a metaphor, as the mechanisms and goals of Prussian militarism have little similarity to those of modern America. But the effects are similar. Germany’s aggressiveness (with enablers among the other Great Powers) resulted in two world wars leaving it a burning wreck. Our interventions since 9/11 have helped set the Middle East aflame.
While I doubt we’ll crash so spectacularly, our belligerent attitude towards our fellow crew on Planet Earth seems likely to have a bad ending.
But no matter what the ending, we are the citizens of America and bear responsibility for its deeds.
“To prepare {to defend} everywhere is to prepare nowhere.”
— Sun Tzu in The Art of War.
For More Information
If you liked this post, like us on Facebook and follow us on Twitter. See all posts about grand strategy, especially these…
- The Obama Doctrine: we will attack and destroy all non-nuclear rivals.
- Look at America’s grand strategy. Why do we believe this nonsense?
- Americans begin to learn, and change our views about our mad empire.
- The “global commons” belongs to the world. Should America control it?
