Sections
Home » Peace & Justice » An End to Constant War

YES! I want to try YES!
Magazine.
YES! by Email
Join over 62,000 others already signed up for FREE YES! news.
[SAMPLE]  [ARCHIVE]
YES! This Week email logo
Sign up for our weekly highlights email. 

David Korten's Agenda for a New Economy: 3 Ways to Get the Book

Posters ad (generic)

Hot or Cold: the YES! Klean Kanteen

 

An End to Constant War

Seven reasons we’re always at war … and seven ways to quit.

Peace_war Photo by Jayel Aheram

"Most Americans are not only convinced we have the best troops, the best training, and the most advanced weapons, but also the purest motives."

Photo by Jayel Aheram.

If one quality characterizes our wars today, it’s their endurance. They never seem to end. Though war itself may not be an American inevitability, these days many factors combine to make constant war an American near certainty. Put metaphorically, our nation’s pursuit of war taps so many wellsprings of our behavior that a concerted effort to cap it would dwarf BP’s efforts in the Gulf of Mexico.

Our political leaders, the media, and the military interpret enduring war as a measure of our national fitness, our global power, our grit in the face of eternal danger, and our seriousness. A desire to de-escalate and withdraw, on the other hand, is invariably seen as cut-and-run appeasement and discounted as weakness. Withdrawal options are, in a pet phrase of Washington elites, invariably “off the table” when global policy is at stake, as was true during the Obama administration’s full-scale reconsideration of the Afghan war in the fall of 2009. Viewed in this light, the president’s ultimate decision to surge in Afghanistan was not only predictable, but the only course considered suitable for an American war leader. Rather than the tough choice, it was the path of least resistance.

Why do our elites so readily and regularly give war, not peace, a chance? What exactly are the wellsprings of Washington’s (and America’s) behavior when it comes to war and preparations for more of the same?

Consider these seven:

  1. We wage war because we think we’re good at it—and because, at a gut level, we’ve come to believe that American wars can bring good to others (hence our feel-good names for them, like Operations Enduring Freedom and Iraqi Freedom). Most Americans are not only convinced we have the best troops, the best training, and the most advanced weapons, but also the purest motives. Unlike the bad guys and the barbarians out there in the global marketplace of death, our warriors and warfighters are seen as gift-givers and freedom-bringers, not as death-dealers and resource-exploiters. Our illusions about the military we “support” serve as catalyst for, and apology for, the persistent war-making we condone.

  2. We wage war because we’ve already devoted so many of our resources to it. It’s what we’re most prepared to do. More than half of discretionary federal spending goes to fund our military and its war making or war preparations. The military-industrial complex is a well-oiled, extremely profitable machine and the armed forces, our favorite child, the one we’ve lavished the most resources and praise upon. It’s natural to give your favorite child free rein.

  3. We’ve managed to isolate war’s physical and emotional costs, leaving them on the shoulders of a tiny minority of Americans. By eliminating the draft and relying ever more on for-profit private military contractors, we’ve made war a distant abstraction for most Americans, who can choose to consume it as spectacle or simply tune it out as so much background noise.

  4. While war and its costs have, to date, been kept at arm’s length, American society has been militarizing fast. Our media outlets, intelligence agencies, politicians, foreign policy establishment, and “homeland security” bureaucracy are so intertwined with military priorities and agendas as to be inseparable from them. In militarized America, griping about soft-hearted tactics or the outspokenness of a certain general may be tolerated, but forceful criticism of our military or our wars is still treated as deviant and “un-American.”

  5. Drone Image

    High-tech drones, such as this Reaper drone are examples of machinery that drive up the cost of war.

    Photo by US Air Force.

    Our profligate, high-tech approach to war, including those Predator and Reaper drones armed with Hellfire missiles, has served to limit American casualties—and so has limited the anger over, and harsh questioning of, our wars that might go with them. While the U.S. has had more than 1,000 troops killed in Afghanistan, over a similar period in Vietnam we lost more than 58,000 troops. Improved medical evacuation and trauma care, greater reliance on standoff precision weaponry and similar “force multipliers,” stronger emphasis on “force protection” within American military units: All these and more have helped tamp down concern about the immeasurable and soaring costs of our wars.

  6. As we incessantly develop those force-multiplying weapons to give us our “edge” (though never an edge that leads to victory), it’s hardly surprising that the United States has come to dominate, if not quite monopolize, the global arms trade. In these years, as American jobs were outsourced or simply disappeared in the Great Recession, armaments have been one of our few growth industries. Endless war has proven endlessly profitable—not perhaps for all of us, but certainly for those in the business of war.

  7. And don’t forget the seductive power of beyond-worse-case, doomsday scenarios, of the prophecies of pundits and so-called experts, who regularly tell us that, bad as our wars may be, doing anything to end them would be far worse. A typical scenario goes like this: If we withdraw from Afghanistan, the government of Hamid Karzai will collapse, the Taliban will surge to victory, al-Qaeda will pour into Afghan safe havens, and Pakistan will be further destabilized, its atomic bombs falling into the hands of terrorists out to destroy Peoria and Orlando.

Such fevered nightmares, impossible to disprove, may be conjured at any moment to scare critics into silence. They are a convenient bogeyman, leaving us cowering as we send our superman military out to save us (and the world as well), while preserving our right to visit the mall and travel to Disney World without being nuked.

The truth is that no one really knows what would happen if the United States disengaged from Afghanistan. But we do know what’s happening now, with us fully engaged: We’re pursuing a war that’s costing us nearly $7 billion a month that we’re not winning (and that’s arguably unwinnable), a war that may be increasing the chances of another 9/11, rather than decreasing them.

Capping the Wellsprings of War

Each one of these seven wellsprings feeding our enduring wars must be capped. So here are seven suggestions for the sort of “caps”—hopefully more effective than BP’s flailing improvisations —we need to install:

  1. Let’s reject the idea that war is either admirable or good—and in the process, remind ourselves that others often see us as “the foreign fighters” and profligate war consumers who kill innocents (despite our efforts to apply deadly force in surgically precise ways reflecting “courageous restraint”).
  2. Let’s cut defense spending now, and reduce the global “mission” that goes with it. Set a reasonable goal—a 6-8 percent reduction annually for the next 10 years, until levels of defense spending are at least back to where they were before 9/11—and then stick to it.
  3. Let’s stop privatizing war. Creating ever more profitable incentives for war was always a ludicrous idea. It’s time to make war a non-profit, last-resort activity. And let’s revive national service (including elective military service) for all young adults. What we need is a revived civilian conservation corps, not a new civilian “expeditionary” force.
  4. Let’s reverse the militarization of so many dimensions of our society. To cite one example, it’s time to empower truly independent (non-embedded) journalists to cover our wars, and stop relying on retired generals and admirals who led our previous wars to be our media guides. Men who are beholden to their former service branch or the current defense contractor who employs them can hardly be trusted to be critical and unbiased guides to future conflicts.
  5. Let’s recognize that expensive high-tech weapons systems are not war-winners. They’ve kept us in the game without yielding decisive results—unless you measure “results” in terms of cost overruns and burgeoning federal budget deficits.
  6. Let’s retool our economy and reinvest our money, moving it out of the military-industrial complex and into strengthening our anemic system of mass transit, our crumbling infrastructure, and alternative energy technology. We need high-speed rail, safer roads and bridges, and more wind turbines, not more overpriced jet fighters.

  7. Finally, let’s banish nightmare scenarios from our minds. The world is scary enough without forever imagining smoking guns morphing into mushroom clouds.

There you have it: my seven “caps” to contain our gushing support for permanent war. No one said it would be easy. Just ask BP how easy it is to cap one out-of-control gusher.

Nonetheless, if we as a society aren’t willing to work hard for actual change—indeed, to demand it—we’ll be on that military escalatory curve until we implode. And that way madness lies.


William-J.-Astore.jpgWilliam J. Astore is a retired lieutenant colonel (USAF) and regular contributor to TomDispatch.com—where this article first appeared. He has taught at the Air Force Academy and the Naval Postgraduate School and currently teaches history at the Pennsylvania College of Technology.

Interested?

  • Afghanistan: Should We Stay or Should We Go?
    David Wildman, Sunita Viswanath, and Lorelei Kelly discuss how can we best support Afghan national stability.
  • I Teach Peace
    What if we taught our children that nonviolence, peace, and justice are not utopian dreams but real and practical ways in which humans can affect the world around them?
YES! Magazine encourages you to make free use of this article by taking these easy steps. Astore, W. J. (2010, July 08). An End to Constant War. Retrieved February 12, 2012, from YES! Magazine Web site: http://www.yesmagazine.org/peace-justice/an-end-to-constant-war. This work is licensed under a Creative Commons License Creative Commons License


You won’t see any commercial ads in YES!, in print or on this website.
That means, we rely on support from our readers.

||   SUBSCRIBE    ||   GIVE A GIFT   ||   DONATE   ||
Independent. Nonprofit. Subscriber-supported.




Reader Comments

ending war

Posted by Valerie at Jul 09, 2010 07:08 PM
Wonderful list. How?

Seven reasons we’re always at war … and seven ways to quit.

Posted by Andy at Jul 09, 2010 07:51 PM
Regardless of what Mr. Astore's opinion why the US is continually in war with a third world country, this policy is to the detriment of the US citizens and will expedite losing the abundance they are used to. This is shown in the stagnation of the individual income in the USA in the past 20 years. If the US continues this policy, it is predicted that within 20-25 years, the USA will be asking China for financial assistance in Yuan.

 The USA is wasting its resources in meaningless wars in Iraq, Afghanistan and other parts of the world. However, regardless of whether it is to fight terrorism or to control the strategic resources of the world, the USA has to learn that the old colonization policies are OVER. The winners in the current USA wars are China and the arms dealers and manufacturers. The losers are the citizens of the USA and those of the invaded countries.

It seems that neither the USA government nor its citizens are aware to the reality of the world today. There is an ongoing competition against the USA and the developed countries to control the world economy. It is more serious than its war on terror. China has been pursuing it diligently in the past 25 year. The result of this battle is too serious for the USA to ignore. It will determine the quality of life of the US citizens for generations to come. The first stage that China has won is the ability to harness a manufacturing power that beat any manufacturer in the developed world. China has won this battle. The second stage is to control non-renewable resources (oil and minerals) globally. China is playing this war the smart way while the USA is pursuing old policies that prove to be unsuccessful. China learned from what happened to the UK in the 19th and 20th centuries. The UK left their colonies in the middle of the 20th century because it was too costly to maintain their occupation. China knows that the era of physically occupying other countries is behind us. Today, you can occupy a country by controlling its strategic resources and economy. That is what China is doing as it buys resources in any country in the world at market price.

Constant War

Posted by Alexi at Jul 09, 2010 08:43 PM
Since there is no draft, we don't see mass protests like we did in the 60s against involvement in Viet Nam. I would gladly join in a mass demonstration against the war and if there were enough of them, it would put the Obama administration in an awkward position of defending the war when it was clear that he campaigned for peace. The sheeple are easily distracted and frightened and until we wake up to what the war is costing us, it will go on forever. Good article, please keep them coming and let's get momentum behind this movement and end these pointless wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. I like the bumper sticker that says "I'm already against the next war".

In reply to o your comment

Posted by d,m. at Jul 10, 2010 11:08 PM
Consider the idead of a Marxist-Green deocratic party for U.S.A. or Marxist-Green revolutonary United Nations. Perhaps this fits to much into what the other is against but it fits more with what Thomas Paine said about riduculous animostities and expense of separate armed forces.
In addition democratiztion of Islam.Christianity,and Judaism and open election for religious figures based on Pai.es Rights of man could help end war. Paine also say principles based not on revenge work best and I figure combination of religious democratization and U.N. Chater stategies might work.

Reframing the War Metaphor

Posted by Chuck Watts at Jul 10, 2010 05:38 AM
Neuroscience tells us words matter. Words/metaphors frame conversation that either light up brain neurons that "best fit" to values of one world view or another.

The "war" metaphor reinforces the values of authoritarianism, obedience to that authority and discipline by that authority. These are the core values of the current power structure. By naming the article "constant war" it makes me not even want to read it.

My core values are empathy, personal and community responsibility and strength. Here's a short video of Senator Wayne Morse resisting the "war" metaphor.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JiLV-Xeh8bA

A metaphor that would be more helpful to me is "occupation." Wars will be won or lost. Occupations will be begun and ended. There's a difference and its huge.

On ending war

Posted by d.m. at Jul 14, 2010 12:42 PM
Propaganda in form of fiction found in libraries can be critiqued as a way to end war. Examples of propaganda in the form of fiction can be found in the book The Crisis about a Charismatic Islamic Warlord and Harold Coyle's book Blue Shadow or something to that effect. The book is about a man called Nathan Dixon who is fighting Islamic terrorists in the jungles of the Phillipines. Perhaps picketting the libraries in protest over the one sided premise of the book,boycotts, and again sressing democratization and a Green-Marxist Revolutionary United Nations could counterract the streotype. I know I am not original perhaps in idead but perhaps if something different published then it could help peace. Or at least new plot elements introduced.

The real causes of war

Posted by Fry at Jul 29, 2010 07:23 PM
The cause of war is perhaps the most important question of our time (and many others). I applaud the author on understanding this. He also rightly understands that there is no single cause of war, rather there are many. He lists 7 but there are many others.

The author has the common misconception that nations wage war. They don't. Particular interest groups within nations wage war for their own benefit, each for their own separate reasons. Because of this misconception, he misses the most important causes and thus his solutions are garenteed to fail.

The primary cause of war is the powerful wishing to maintain the status quo. The Bushs both calculated that their popularity, and thus the chance for re-election would be increased if they waged war. History proved their political calculations correct. They both saw huge surges in support after causing war, though only one managed to turn that into a re-election, one that wouldn't have happened otherwise.

Imagine a president who didn't want to cause war. Some other politican would then take advantage of the politics of fear and replace him. It is not primarily the individuals in place but the system within which they reside that makes war inevitable. That system includes the voting public where irrational fear trumps all other concerns. In theory we could change this dynamic with education. But as far as I know, no public educational institution teaches the true causes of war, and certainly not the majority of them for decades, which would be necessary to stop war.

It is therefore unrealistic to stop war by having a president and having voting period. I'm aware that nearly all Americans disagree with me. But by supporting our decision-making system, they are, inadvertently or not, supporting constant war. Astore's solutions are headed in the right direction, but even taken collectively, they are bandaids insufficient for peace.

Excellent analysis except 2 points

Posted by MF at Jul 30, 2010 03:41 PM
Excellent analysis/commentary except for two points.
1) Besides the MIC economic interests, there are purely political forces, domestic and foreign, that promote American military intervention abroad, especially in the Mid-East.  These ghosts in the machine are never addressed by mainstream media--and sometimes, as we see here, not touched in the alternative media either.
2) A democratic, free society in any true sense of those words does not draft citizens for ANY sort of service.  It might and should offer fair incentives--e.g., a subsidized college education--by contractual agreements in return for such service, civilian or military.

Give peace a chance? You have got to be kidding me...

Posted by TJ at Aug 06, 2010 12:43 AM
It is easy to suggest "give peace a chance" not war, but we do not live in a utopia ladies and gents, there are evil people out there who cannot be reasoned or negotiated with. Attitudes of love and peace breed more peace, this is true. But that, in a sense, is what our soldiers do - bring peace to oppressed communities. It is EXTREMELY ignorant to say that a US Marine and a Muslim extremist are equally bad for a village to have around. Our troops don't go around dealing vigilante justice to unarmed civilians to spread fear in the people. We don't rape, pillage, and burn a path to victory. We protect, defend, and rebuild; but that includes dealing death to people who do not value lives of noncombatants.

The author addresses a lot of true factors in the war and why it isn't beneficial for the US economy or politics. There is no perfect war, but is there such thing as just war? What is right isn't always easy or convenient. All that evil people need to thrive is for the good guys to sit back and do nothing. If the Allies had laid down their weapons during WW2 in the name of peace, cruel and evil people would be in charge of the world today.

war is not peace

Posted by Kathy Barker at Sep 02, 2010 08:06 PM
   Terrific article. Now we must go forth, and remind everyone that war is not peace and that none of the US wars since WWII have been for self-defense. Yes, people are resistant to hearing any criticism of the military, but this reverence for the military is horrendous, and we must question it at every turn. And we can't wait until there are lots of people in the street protesting, or until this is a large and righteous movement: each individual needs to speak out, alone, over and over, until we are alone no more.

People Who Love YES! Find Out Why... Subscribe Today

Personal tools