Download PDF of this full issue: v39n1.pdf (18.1 MB)

Fraggin'

By Bill Shunas

To the best of my recollection this past November is the first time I ever voted for the winner in a presidential election. I've voted for losing Democrats and third party candidates, and sometimes I've left that spot blank and voted only for local candidates. Once when I did that, an astonished poll watcher chased me to the door to tell me that I forgot to vote for president. So much for the privacy of the election booth.

So, I voted for Obama in spite of his professed interest in escalating the Afghan/Pakistan War. Past presidents have taken office during a war and remained heavily involved in that war just because we were already in the situation.The only way Obama will have success in his foreign policy would be to deviate from the practices of some of these predecessors. In Afghanistan that would mean de-escalating. That would mean acknowledging that the price of that war is not worth the prize of winning. That would mean suppressing the macho. That would mean walking away. We got involved there because the 9-11 planners found refuge there. Maybe an incoming president would think that this is enough reason to fight there, but Obama should think outside the box. US involvement did not work early on when it should have at Tora Bora. Now the price is too high.

Obama's big problem is, of course, the economy. In past recessions you always knew the recession would end and things would return to normal. Lots of people had good jobs, and once inventories were depleted, they could go back to work at a good wage producing the goods they used to produce before the hard times. Now it seems that there are relatively fewer of those good jobs for people to go back to. Many of those jobs are now in some other country. Others won't pay as well as they used to because the companies and corporations can get away with paying lower wages. Much is still manufactured in the US, but globalization has also siphoned off much.

I wonder if this recession is going to change the US outlook towards war and foreign policy. If you listen to the sounds of the economy you hear a giant sucking sound. That sound is dollar bills in the whirlpool of these great sewers called Iraq and Afghanistan. It used to be that you could fight a war, and the cost could be absorbed by a strong economy. Today's economy can't absorb a medium sized war. One day the strain will become too much and we will have to give up fighting these kind of wars.

Throughout history empires have risen and fallen. We may be talking about the end of empire here. This is not to say that there will be some kind of moral retribution for meddling in the affairs of most countries in the world. It is not to say that Americans will descend en masse into poverty. As long as we are surrounded by two oceans and two friendly countries, and as long as we have lots of capital and resources and manufacturing we have the capability to get along just fine. We just won't be able to handle this empire thing. What happens then could take any number of different forms.

There was the Roman Empire, which fell apart. It didn't fall that far, however. Like, would you rather live in Italy, or say, the Dominican Republic? Greece or Somalia? The British settled down nicely after their empire ended. Under Margaret Thatcher its working class got slapped down hard, but still its two centuries of empire turned it into a country that has some wealth and services for its people. The Soviet Union on the other hand has degenerated into a country of some very rich people in the midst of some very poor people. These things can go both ways.

Ah, the Soviet Union. Many Americans like to brag about bringing down that empire. To over simplify matters, what happened there was that it tried to keep up militarily with the US, and that broke the bank. Is this similar to the current US situation in which we are approaching the point where the US economy will not be able to handle endless major wars? Visions of empire are the last thing we need now. If Obama or future presidents want to keep this empire going, something's got to give. There's a limit to how much we go into debt to finance our operations. The American people have known better times, and there's a limit to how much we will draw down. We won't become Indonesia.

Our economy is not going to bounce all the way back, and every major war we fight will hold back recovery and economic advancement. At some point foreign policy will have to change, either brought about by demand from the citizenry, or, however unlikely, wisdom from the ivory tower. Empires fall, and I expect ours to follow the pattern. This recession is serious and should cause this government to seriously re-evaluate basic foreign policy premises. I know there's no accounting for stupidity, but one can always hope.

***

One additional thought about the Surge in Iraq where by the sending of 30,000 additional troops allegedly turned the tide and greatly reduced the casualties. The additional 30,000 troops did no such thing. Other factors were involved, such as involving the Sunnis in the economical and political sphere and compromising (temporarily) the Al-Sadr Shiites.

All this is beside the point. The success or failure of the Surge should be judged in terms of its real purpose which is in the world of propaganda. Over the years Americans have been proud to send troops in harm's way to supposedly help the less fortunate find freedom and democracy like we have. The only requirement is that we be successful in our mission. If not there is disillusionment. So, when LBJ said there was a light at the end of the tunnel and only a few more troops were needed, he got his troops. It blew up in his face. In Iraq, at the beginning it was said just a few more troops were needed. And the war dragged on after a couple of Surges.

The American people now question the wisdom of a few more troops in these wars. And that presents a problem for American leaders who want a few more troops to be sent into dubious battle. Now that there has been alleged success with the Surge, they can have an easier time convincing the next generation that it is good to send a few more troops. Thirty thousand more are headed for Afghanistan this Spring. In the Fall maybe we can send a brigade or two. The talk of the Surge and its success has nothing to do with reality. It has to do with greasing the skids to send more troops to wherever.

Bill Shunas is a Vietnam veteran, author and VVAW member in the Chicago chapter.