Noam Chomsky on the American Policy of World Militarization

In an interview with The Afghan Youth Peace Volunteers, published Dec 16, 2011 in the online journal Waging Nonviolence and republished in  TRUTHOUT.ORG, Noam Chomsky returns to his familiar, valid and essential critique of the long-standing U.S. agenda of world imperial domination.

There is very little doubt that the U.S. government intends to maintain effective military control over Afghanistan by one means or another, either through a client state with military bases, and support for what they’ll call Afghan troops. That’s the pattern elsewhere as well. So, for example, after bombing Serbia in 1999, the United States maintains a huge military base in Kosovo, which was the goal of the bombing. In Iraq, they’re still building military bases even though there is rhetoric about leaving the country. And I presume they will do the same in Afghanistan too, which is regarded by the U.S. as of strategic significance in the long term, within the plans of maintaining control of essentially the energy resources and other resources of the region, including western and Central Asia. So this is a piece of ongoing plans which in fact go back to the Second World War.

Right now, the United States is militarily engaged in one form or another in almost a hundred countries, including bases, special forces operations, support for domestic military and security forces. This is a global program of world militarization, essentially tracing back to headquarters in Washington, and Afghanistan is a part of it. It will be up to Afghans to see if, first of all, if they want this; secondly, if they can act in ways which will exclude it. That’s pretty much what’s happening in Iraq. As late as early 2008, the United States was officially insisting that it maintain military bases and be able to carry out combat operations in Iraq, and that the Iraqi government must privilege U.S. investors for the oil and energy system. Well, Iraqi resistance has compelled the United States to withdraw somewhat from that, substantially, in fact. But the efforts will still continue. These are ongoing conflicts based on long standing principles.

A progressive and obvious alternative to domestic budget cuts

Here is the information and analysis and links from the excellent newsletter of the Just Foreign Policy people (www.justforeignpolicy.org)

To hear the mainstream media tell it, America confronts a choice: Republican plans for cutting domestic spending or President Obama’s plans for cutting domestic spending. That’s what they want us to think.

You’d never know from the mainstream media that 80 Members of Congress have put forward an alternative to cuts in spending on domestic needs: the People’s Budget, advanced by the Congressional Progressive Caucus. The People’s Budget would cut military spending and end the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan.

Here is the link for the People’s Budget:
 http://cpc.grijalva.house.gov/index.cfm?sectionid=70&sectiontree=5,70

Here is a piece by Colombia University economist Jeffrey Sachs about the People’s Budget: 
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/jeffrey-sachs/the-peoples-budget_b_846573.html

And here is a piece by JFP’s Robert Naiman on why Jeffrey Sachs’ endorsement of the People’s Budget is so important and has such potential to influence the budget debate. Embedded in the article is a video interview with Jeffrey Sachs on Democracy Now:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/robert-naiman/can-jeff-sachs-get-us-out_b_847995.html

Understanding Deep Politics – From a Conference at UC Santa Cruz

Byron Belitsos, friend and publisher, writes in his blog,

“As oil gushes in the gulf, debt gushes in Greece, and blood gushes in futile conflicts in central Asia, and while the U.S. gets ready to implode from a fraud-ridden financial system…the Understanding Deep Politics conference in Santa Cruz delved deep in its quest to uncover the covert realities behind such “overt” phenomena that now dominate today’s headlines.”

The following presentations, to my mind, were most thought-provoking and far-reaching in their implications.

  • David Ray Griffin, philosopher and theologian, author of five books on 9/11, continued his meticulous dissection of omissions and deceptions in the official accounts of this crime of the century. (Wikipedia)
  • Peter Dale Scott is a former Canadian diplomat, poet and author,  who coined the concept of “deep politics” to describe the hidden undercurrents of public policies. Scott revealed how under the cover of assuring the “continuity of government” the United States executive branch has laid the foundation for the imposition of martial law, the suspension of the constitution and the mass detention of dissidents – all without congressional oversight or discussion. (Wikipedia)
  • Peter Phillips, who recently retired from organizing and publishing the annual Project Censored compilations of under-reported news – gave an over-view of provocative high-lights from the 2010 edition.
  • Ellen Brown, an attorney and author of the recent book Web of Debt, gave a most lucid and illuminating account of the intricate financial maneuvers of the “casino economy” – and outlined steps individuals and communities can take to protect their assets.
  • As a person of bi-national origin myself the most engaging presentation for me personally was by Dahlia Rasfi, MD, daughter of an Iraqi Muslim father and New York Jewish mother – who honored her parents and their respective peoples by presenting a clear-headed and warm-hearted analysis of the Mid-East conflict situation. The US occupation of Iraq and the Israeli occupation of Palestine, she averred, are expressions of the same policies of colonial domination.

As I wrote in Roots of War and Domination (p. 33):

“Imperialism and colonialism involves one dominant state or nation taking the resource base of another, and imposing their rule on the subject population, exacting tribute or taxes. Genocide, from the perspective of the dominators, is simply a strategy for removing an entire population from a certain area, and replacing it with another population, which then takes over the existing resources. The cost of maintaining the original population is reduced or eliminated by extermination.”

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 1,446 other followers