Dear CCI Friends,
What’s happening today, in the shadow of our mostly disastrous 20-year Afghanistan occupation and pullout, is creating a volcano of realizations that we in America have been at war for six decades … all for less than decent motives.
Those who suspected or knew what was happening thought this current situation would be covered up again, per usual. But no … military brass, foot soldiers and ordinary Americans are opening up painful truths as we move forward. A mass catharsis looks to be underway. NATO nations normally subservient to U.S. policy are splintering off to make decisions for themselves. In this short period of a month or two, we have forever lost our #1 place in the world. Too dramatic you might say? I don’t think so.
Meanwhile, two rising giants stand by watching it all. Apparently the Presidents of China and Russia have been quietly advising Afghans for months, trying to reduce tensions and increase positive possibilities … but letting it be known that good behavior will be rewarded to help Afghans with economic development if they follow a sensible course.
As it turns out Afghanistan has a wealth of subsoil minerals needed by the rest of the world, thus allowing them to drop opium production to survive. China’s Belt and Road Initiative will provide much needed trade and economic support going forward. Too good to be true? Maybe not. While America is trillions of dollars in debt from fighting wars across the Middle East, China and Russia have been figuring out how to avoid wars and build economic alliances to benefit themselves and smaller nations across half of the world.
So where are we headed as a nation? Is a financial crisis coming? Will we have to face what other nations have suffered in the past? Fortunately China and Russia won’t go to war with us; but they are putting in motion quite different solutions for the world in which we will live. Beside these two countries, our U.S. solutions and actions of the past thirty years look quite paltry.
Articles such as the one below are just part of what we must change. There are no quick fixes. There seem to be no serious solutions in either U.S. political party unless we rethink everything in our existing lexicon. What can we do? For starters we can stop putting money where we have spent it during the past few decades.
Sharon Tennison
Center for Citizen Initiatives
Why America Goes to War
Money drives the US military machine.
September 9, 2021
By Andrew Cockburn
Innumerable wars originate, wrote Alexander Hamilton in Federalist No. 6, “entirely in private passions; in the attachments, enmities, interests, hopes, and fears of leading individuals in the communities of which they are members.” As an illustration of this truth, he cited the case of Pericles, lauded as one of the greatest statesmen of classical Athens, who “in compliance with the resentment of a prostitute, at the expense of much of the blood and treasure of his countrymen, attacked, vanquished, and destroyed the city of the Samnians” before igniting the disastrous Peloponnesian War in order to extricate himself from political problems back home.
It should come as no surprise that this version of Athenian history is not echoed by orthodox historians, despite credible sources buttressing Hamilton’s pithy account. Instead, Pericles’s attack on Samos is generally ascribed to his concern for protecting a democratic regime in the neighboring city of Miletus or the need to preserve Athenian “credibility” as a great power.
The compulsion to endow states and leaders with respectable motives for their actions is far from confined to ancient historians. It extends across the spectrum of contemporary foreign and defense policy analysis and commentary, from academic ivory towers housing international relations and national security studies departments to think tanks, research institutes, and, of course, media of every variety. Thus, in modern times, two former national security eminences for the Brookings Institution stated that the goal of expanding NATO into Eastern Europe in the 1990s was to “promote peace and stability on the European continent through the integration of the new Central and Eastern European democracies into a wider Euro-Atlantic community, in which the United States would remain deeply engaged.”
Actually, it wasn’t. The driving force behind the expansion, which ensured Russian paranoia and consequent instability in Eastern Europe, was the necessity of opening new markets for American arms companies, coupled with the prospect of political reward for President Bill Clinton among relevant voting blocs in the Midwest.