I've written about Andrew Bacevich a few times before, mostly about his 2008 book The Limits of Power: The End of American Exceptionalism. His work and contributions are prominently featured by The American Empire Project, along with others like Chalmers Johnson (inventor of the term "blowback") and Noam Chomsky (Manufacturing Consent). The general gist behind "The Project" is to help Americans understand that we have, in fact, become an empire and it is way past time we recognize this reality, and start to act accordingly. The Washington Rules is now out in paperback, and Professor Bacevich has posted a new essay on Libya that coincides with and promotes its' release.
In a new article posted at the American Empire Project, Professor Bacevich poses a different question regarding the United States' decades long propensity to dabble in Middle Eastern affairs. The essay entitled "Not Why, But How:To the Shores of (and Skies Above) Tripoli" redirects attention from the stated motives of US politicians for their actions, to instead focus the light on what form these actions invariably take. Bacevich argues that it is "a mugs game" to try to tease out the myriad motivations for various courses of action taken by a straight line of US Presidents from Carter to Reagan and on down to Obama. Endless arguments ensue in trying to define the difference between Obama and Bush II--something not unknown around here lately. Instead, the question is, despite the stated motive for whatever pushed the decision to intervene, what form does intervention take, and what should that be telling us about ourselves? If the only thing you can apply is force--what does this tell you about your nature, policy, goals or motives?
When it comes to the Islamic world, for more than three decades now Washington’s answer to how has been remarkably consistent: through the determined application of hard power wielded by the United States. Simply put, Washington’s how implies a concerted emphasis on girding for and engaging in war. Bacevich, 4-12-11.
The follow up question should be--"So how is that force thing workin' out for ya?" Judging by the last 30+ years of US "Policy" in the Middle East and the level of our military expenditures; (as so recently and effectively described by Meteor Blades' front pager of today) the inevitable answer is "Not very well." With four times more billionaires than any other country on the globe, despite population, the answer for an overwhelming number of Americans should be an emphatic "Piss poor, in fact, and while you're at it why do our young people continually appear to be sacrificing life and limb for this pointless set of policies that don't benefit anyone I know?" When are we going to put a stop to this. Roads or bombs? Guns or health care? Education or destruction? Progress for many or unimaginable wealth for a few? The class war and the real wars out there are linked and it is past time we opened up a second front on the very idea of a Military Industrial Complex and the power structure that purports its' alleged necessity.
The question demands to be asked: Are we winning yet? And if not, why persist in an effort for which great pain is repaid with such little gain? Bacevich, 4-12-11.
Go check out Bacevich's article if you missed it in the first paragraph: Bacevich--Not Why, But How... Join The American Empire Project's newsletter here: Sign Up