Wednesday, March 10, 2010

The Economics of War: Our National Security Policy

Tags: National Security Council NSC 68, Scalia Supreme Court Gave Us Bush, Gore Internet, Chomsky's "Deterring Democracy", Korten’s “When Corporations Rule the World”, USA Imperialism,

The above is one of many links to the 1950 document by our National Security Council NSC 68 which would guide our foreign policy to the current days with the possible exception during the Bush Years of 2001-2008 where no pretense was made as to what we wanted to do which was fully visible for the world to see. That is why Bush and his cohorts were so unpopular world-wide.

I first became aware of this history after the Republicans and the Scalia Supreme Court violated the Tenth Amendment and stop the recount in Florida which would have given Gore the win without even excluding the 600 fraudulent “overseas votes” by any permutation of the recount according to the jump pages of the New York Times, but not the front page.

I read the only circulating copy of Noam Chomsky’s “Deterring Democracy” (1991) in the Los Angeles main library after Bush stole the election in 2001. It was really hard to read because I had to absorb so much new information with Chomsky’s tendency provide detail on detail to prove his point with an incredible array of declassified documents.

I already was primed to leave the Republican and Democratic Party after reading Korten’s “When Corporations Rule the World” in 1995 and voted for Nader in the 1996 election. I worked and voted for Gore and the Democrats because I knew from widely available facts not given to us by the media, but still available in books that were condemned by the New York Times and absent from television. Yes, the media and other corporations pushed strongly to elect Bush because they knew who he really represented. They were rewarded with a two trillion dollar tax break which kicked in fully in 2005.

In the 1990s our Internet was quite new and more difficult to search for useful information. Gore’s 1995 Internet Bill to provide connection of the internet and computers in many schools by putting a stiff tax on our telephone bills, changed the world.

Yes, in the real sense Gore Invented the Internet! There were only three commercial websites in 1995! Now there are millions and millions of websites. Recently the Internet passed ads provided by print newspapers and magazines.

The following excerpt of 1500 words of a 20,000 page essay by Noam Chomsky will give you enough information to provide you with an understanding of our current policies by Obama, no real peace President as many thought. The War Industry takes up at least half our economy and supports a minimum of 350 Universities including MIT where he taught and provided groundbreaking research on the origin of language in humans which still obtains today.

The following excerpt provides how our current foreign policy formed and further reading in the link provided will allow you to understand that our policy towards the world has not changed one bit after Obama became President.

Jim Kawakami, Mar 10, 2010,

Modern-Day American Imperialism: The Middle East and Beyond

Noam Chomsky Dec 23, 2009 … There’s a current version of that, a crude version by Thomas Friedman, who says that “McDonald’s cannot flourish without McDonnell Douglas” (meaning the US Air Force) in his book The Lexus or the Olive Tree. Well, that’s a crude version of (President) Wilson’s point. You’ve got to batter down the doors by force and threat, and no corner of the world must be left unused—no useful corner.

There was a watershed in this process at the time of the Second World War. At the time of the Second World War, the US already had by far the largest economy in the world and had for a long time, but it wasn’t a major player in world affairs. Britain was the leading player, France second, the United States lagging. It controlled the hemisphere and had made forays into the Pacific, but it was not the leading player.

However, during the war, the US planners understood that the war was going to end with the US the world dominant power. However it turned out, other competitors were going to destroy themselves and each other, and the US would be left alone with incomparable security.

In fact, the US gained enormously from the war. Industrial production virtually quadrupled. The war ended the Depression—the New Deal measures hadn’t done so. (After the war, it looked like we would have a serious recession or worse because so much of our economy was directed at war. So naturally, Wall Street executives ran our newly established CIA and much of government as the case now.

At the end of the war, the US had literally half of the world’s wealth (and competitors were either damaged or destroyed) and incomparable security. It controlled the western hemisphere; it controlled both oceans; it controlled the opposite side of both oceans. There’s nothing remotely like it in history. And during the war, planners understood that something like that was going to turn out. It was obvious from the nature of the war.

From 1939 to 1945, there were high level meetings, regular meetings, of the State Department (the State Department planners) and the Council on Foreign Relations (the sort-of main external nongovernmental input into foreign policy), and they laid careful plans for the world that they expected to emerge.

It was a world, they said, in which the United States will “hold unquestioned power” and will ensure “the limitation of any exercise of sovereignty” by states that might interfere with US global designs.” Incidentally, I’m not quoting NeoCons. I’m quoting the Roosevelt administration, the peak of American Liberalism.

They called for what they called “an integrated policy to achieve military and economic supremacy” for the United States and bar any exercise of sovereignty by anyone who would interfere with it. And they would do this in a region that they called the “grand area.” Well, in the early part of the war, 1939 to 1943, the grand area was defined as the western hemisphere routinely, the former British Empire (which the US would take over), and the Far East. That would be the grand area.

They assumed at the time that there would be a German-led world—the rest. So there would be a non-German world (that’s us) and a German world. As the Russians gradually ground down the Nazi armies after 1942, it became pretty clear that there wouldn’t be a German world. So the grand area was expanded to be as much of the world as could be controlled— limitless. That’s simply pursuing the old position that expansion is the path to security for the infant empire of 1736.

These policies were laid down during the war, but then they were implemented right after the war. In fact, now that we have available in the declassified record the planning documents of the late 1940s, it turns out they’re (not very surprisingly) very similar to the wartime planning. One of the leading figures was George Kennan, who was head of the State Department policy planning staff. He wrote one of his many important papers in 1948 (PPS23 if you want to look it up), in which he noted that the United States has half the world’s wealth but only 6% of its population, and our primary goal in foreign policy must be, as he put it, to “maintain this disparity.” He was referring specifically to Asia, but the principle was general.

And in order to do so, we must put aside all “vague and idealistic slogans” about democracy and human rights. Those are for public propaganda, colleges, and so on. But we must put those aside and keep to “straight power concepts. “ There’s no other way to maintain the disparity. Then, in the same paper and elsewhere, he and his staff went through the world and assigned to each part of the world what would be what they called its function in the global system in which the US would have unchallenged power—unquestioned power.

So, Latin America and the Middle East: The Middle East obviously would provide the energy resources that we would control, gradually pushing out Britain—throwing out France immediately and pushing out Britain slowly over the years and turning it into a “junior partner,” as the British Foreign Office ruefully described their role at that time. Latin America we simply control. It’s “our little region over here, which has never bothered anyone,” as Secretary of War Stimson said while the US was violating the principles it was establishing by setting up a regional organization in violation of the UN Charter, and so on. So, Latin America we keep, or at least we control.

Southeast Asia would be—its function was to provide resources and raw materials to the former colonial powers. Meanwhile, we would purchase them, too. That would send dollars there, which the colonial powers would take, not the population. And they could use those. Britain, France, the Netherlands could use the dollars to purchase US manufactures. (It’s called a triangular trading arrangement), which would allow… The US had the only really functioning industrial system in the world and had a huge excess of manufacturing products, and there was what was called a “dollar gap.” The countries we wanted to sell it to didn’t have dollars—that’s Europe, basically. So we had to provide them with dollars, and the function of Southeast Asia was to play a role in that. Hence the support for French colonialism in recapturing its Indochinese colony, and so on. There were various variations, but that’s the basic story. …

No comments:

Post a Comment