U.S. special operations personnel prepare to board a UH-60 Black Hawk helicopter during a mission in Kunar province, Afghanistan, February 25, 2012. (photo: U.S. Department of Defense)
The US
Military Suffers From Affluenza
By William J. Astore,
TomDispatch
13 February 16
The
word “affluenza” is much in
vogue. Lately, it’s been linked to a Texas teenager, Ethan Couch, who in 2013 killed four people in a
car accident while driving drunk. During the trial, a defense witness argued
that Couch should not be held responsible for his destructive acts. His parents
had showered him with so much money and praise that he was completely
self-centered; he was, in other words, a victim of affluenza, overwhelmed by a
sense of entitlement that rendered him incapable of distinguishing right from
wrong. Indeed, the judge at his trial sentenced him only to probation, not
jail, despite the deaths of those four innocents.
Experts
quickly dismissed “affluenza” as a false diagnosis, a form of quackery, and
indeed the condition is not recognized by the
American Psychiatric Association. Yet the word caught on big time, perhaps
because it speaks to something in the human condition, and it got me to
thinking. During Ethan Couch’s destructive lifetime, has there been an American
institution similarly showered with money and praise that has been responsible
for the deaths of innocents and inadequately called to account? Is there one
that suffers from the institutional version of affluenza (however fuzzy or
imprecise that word may be) so much that it has had immense difficulty
shouldering the blame for its failures and wrongdoing?
The
answer is hidden in plain sight: the U.S. military. Unlike Couch, however, that
military has never faced trial or probation; it hasn’t felt the need to abscond to Mexico or
been forcibly returned to
the homeland to face the music.
Spoiling
the Pentagon
First,
a caveat. When I talk about spoiling the Pentagon, I’m not talking about your
brother or daughter or best friend who serves honorably. Anyone who’s braving
enemy fire while humping mountains in Afghanistan or choking on sand in Iraq is
not spoiled.
I’m
talking about the U.S. military as an institution. Think of the Pentagon and
the top brass; think of Dwight Eisenhower’s military-industrial complex; think
of the national security state with
all its tentacles of power. Focus on those and maybe you’ll come to agree with
my affluenza diagnosis.
Let’s
begin with one aspect of that affliction: unbridled praise. In last
month’s State of the Union address,
President Obama repeated a phrase that’s become standard in American political
discourse, as common as asking God to bless America. The U.S. military, he
said, is the “finest fighting force in the history of the world.”
Such
hyperbole is nothing new. Five years ago, in response to similar presidential
statements, I argued that many
war-like peoples, including the imperial Roman legions and Genghis Khan’s
Mongol horsemen, held far better claims to the “best ever” Warrior Bowl trophy.
Nonetheless, the over-the-top claims never cease. Upon being introduced by
President Obama as his next nominee for secretary of defense in December 2014,
for instance, Ash Carter promptly praised the military
he was going to oversee as “the greatest fighting force the world has ever
known.” His words echoed those of the president, who had claimed the previous
August that it was “the best-led, best-trained, best-equipped military in human
history.” Similar hosannas (“the greatest force for human liberation the world
has ever known”) had once been sprinkled liberally through George W. Bush’s
speeches and comments, as well as those of other politicians since 9/11.
In
fact, from the president to all those citizens who feel obliged in a way
Americans never have before to “thank” the troops endlessly
for their efforts, no other institution has been so universally applauded since
9/11. No one should be shocked then that, in polls, Americans regularly claim
to trust the military
leadership above any other crew around, including scientists, doctors,
ministers, priests, and -- no surprise -- Congress.
Imagine
parents endlessly praising their son as “the smartest, handsomest, most
athletically gifted boy since God created Adam.” We’d conclude that they were
thoroughly obnoxious, if not a bit unhinged. Yet the military remains just this
sort of favored son, the country’s golden child. And to the golden child go the
spoils.
Along
with unbridled praise, consider the “allowance” the American people regularly
offer the Pentagon. If this were an “affluenza” family unit, while mom and dad
might be happily driving late-model his and her Audis, the favored son would be
driving a spanking new Ferrari. Add up what the federal government spends on “defense,”
“homeland security,” “overseas contingency operations” (wars), nuclear weapons,
and intelligence and surveillance operations, and the Ferraris that belong to
the Pentagon and its national security state pals are vrooming along at more
than $750 billion dollars annually,
or two-thirds of the government’s discretionary spending.
That’s quite an allowance for “our boy”!
To
cite a point of comparison, in 2015, federal funding for the departments of
education, interior, and transportation maxed out at $95 billion -- combined!
Not only is the military our favored son by a country mile: it’s our Prodigal
Son, and nothing satisfies “him.” He’s still asking for more (and his
Republican uncles are clearly ready to turn over to him
whatever’s left of the family savings, lock, stock, and barrel).
On the
other hand, like any spoiled kid, the Defense Department sees even the most
modest suggested cuts in its allowance as a form of betrayal. Witness the
whining of both those Pentagon officials and military officers testifying before
Congressional committees and of empathetic committee members themselves. Minimalist cuts
to the soaring Pentagon budget are, it seems, defanging the military
and recklessly endangering American
security vis-a-vis the exaggerated threats of the day: ISIS, China, and Russia. In
fact, the real “threat” is clearly that the Pentagon’s congressional “parents”
might someday cut down on its privileges and toys, as well as its free rein to
do more or less as it pleases.
With
respect to those privileges, enormous budgets drive an unimaginably top-heavy bureaucracy at
the Pentagon. Since 9/11, Congressional authorizations of three- and four-star
generals and admirals have multiplied twice as fast as their
one- and two-star colleagues. Too many generals are chasing too few combat
billets, contributing to backstabbing and butt-kissing. Indeed, despite
indifferent records in combat, generals wear uniforms bursting with badges and ribbons, resembling the
ostentatious displays of former Soviet premiers -- or field marshals in the
fictional Ruritarian guards.
Meanwhile,
the proliferation of brass in turn drives budgets higher. Even with recent
modest declines (due to the official end of major combat operations in Iraq and
Afghanistan), the U.S. defense budget exceeds the combined military budgets of
at least the next seven highest
spenders. (President Obama proudly claims that it’s the next eight.) Four of those
countries -- France, Germany, Great Britain, and Saudi Arabia -- are U.S.
allies; China and Russia, the only rivals on the list, spend far less than the
United States.
With
respect to its toys, the military and its enablers in Congress can never get
enough or at a high enough price. The most popular of these, at present, is the
under-performing new F-35 jet fighter, projected
to cost $1.5 trillion (yes, you read that right) over its lifetime, making it
the most expensive weapons system in history. Another trillion dollars is
projected over the next 30 years for “modernizing” the U.S.
nuclear arsenal (this from a president who, as a candidate, spoke of eliminating
nuclear weapons). The projected acquisition cost for a new advanced Air Force bomber is already $100
billion (before the cost overruns even begin). The list goes on, but you
catch the drift.
A
Spoiled Pentagon Means Never Having to Say You’re Sorry
To
complete our affluenza diagnosis, let’s add one more factor to boundless praise
and a bountiful allowance: a total inability to take responsibility for one’s
actions. This is, of course, the most repellent part of the Ethan Couch
affluenza defense: the idea that he shouldn’t be held responsible precisely
because he was so favored.
Think,
then, of the Pentagon and the military as Couch writ large. No matter their
mistakes, profligate expenditures, even crimes, neither institution is held
accountable for anything.
Consider
these facts: Iraq, Afghanistan, and Libya are
quagmires. The Islamic State is
spreading. Foreign armies, trained and equipped at enormous
expense by the U.S. military, continue to evaporate.
A hospital, clearly
identifiable as such, is destroyed “by accident. ”Wedding parties are wiped out “by
mistake.” Torture (a war crime) is committed in the
field. Detainees are abused.
And which senior leaders have been held accountable for any of this in any way?
With the notable exception of Brigadier General Janis Karpinski of Abu Ghraib infamy, not a
one.
After
lengthy investigations, the Pentagon will occasionally hold accountable a few
individuals who pulled the triggers or dropped the bombs or abused the prisoners.
Meanwhile, the generals and the top civilians in the Pentagon who made it all
possible are immunized from either responsibility or penalty of any sort. This
is precisely why Lieutenant Colonel Paul Yingling memorably wrote in
2007 that, in the U.S. military, “a private who loses a rifle suffers far
greater consequences than a general who loses a war.” In fact, no matter what
that military doesn’t accomplish, no matter how lacking its ultimate
performance in the field, it keeps getting more money, resources, praise.
When
it comes to such subjects, consider the Republican presidential debate in Iowa
on January 28th. Jeb Bush led
the rhetorical charge by claiming that President Obama was “gutting” the
military. Ted Cruz and Marco Rubio eagerly agreed, insisting that a “dramatically
degraded” military had to be rebuilt. All the Republican candidates (Rand Paul
excepted) piled on, calling for major increases in defense spending as well as
looser “rules of engagement” in the field to empower local commanders to take
the fight to the enemy. America’s “warfighters,” more than one candidate
claimed, are fighting with one arm tied behind their backs, thanks to knots
tightened by government lawyers. The final twist that supposedly tied the
military up in a giant knot was, so they claim, applied by that
lawyer-in-chief, Barack Obama himself.
Interestingly,
there has been no talk of our burgeoning national debt, which former chairman
of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Admiral Mike Mullen once identified as the biggest threat facing
America. When asked during the debate which specific federal programs he would
cut to reduce the deficit, Chris Christie came up with only one, Planned
Parenthood, which at $500 million a year is the equivalent of two
F-35 jet fighters. (The military wants to buy more than 2,000 of them.)
Throwing
yet more money at a spoiled military is precisely the worst thing we as
“parents” can do. In this, we should resort to the fiscal wisdom of Army Major
General Gerald Sajer, the son of a
Pennsylvania coal miner killed in the mines, a Korean War veteran and former
Adjutant General of Pennsylvania. When his senior commanders pleaded for more
money (during the leaner budget years before 9/11) to accomplish the tasks he
had assigned them, General Sajer’s retort was simple: “We’re out of money; now
we have to think.”
Accountability
Is Everything
It’s
high time to force the Pentagon to think. Yet when it comes to our relationship
with the military, too many of us have acted like Ethan Couch’s mother. Out
of a twisted sense of love or loyalty, she sought to shelter her son from his
day of reckoning. But we know better. We know her son has to face the music.
Something
similar is true of our relationship to the U.S. military. An institutional
report card with so many deficits and failures, a record of deportment that has
led to death and mayhem, should not be ignored. The military must be called to
account.
How?
By cutting its allowance. (That should make the brass sit up and take notice,
perhaps even think.) By holding senior leaders accountable for
mistakes. And by cutting the easy praise. Our military commanders know that
they are not leading the finest fighting force since the dawn of history and
it’s time our political leaders and the rest of us acknowledged that as well.
C 2015 Reader Supported News
Donations can be sent
to the Baltimore Nonviolence Center, 325 E. 25th St., Baltimore, MD
21218. Ph: 410-323-1607; Email: mobuszewski [at] verizon.net. Go to http://baltimorenonviolencecenter.blogspot.com/
"The master class
has always declared the wars; the subject class has always fought the battles.
The master class has had all to gain and nothing to lose, while the subject
class has had nothing to gain and everything to lose--especially their lives."
Eugene Victor Debs
No comments:
Post a Comment