WASHINGTON – US President Trump’s decision to pull out of the JointComprehensive Plan of Action has created tensions in the Middle East thatcould escalate into a bloody war.
The situation may have generated excitement among warmongers sitting in thepower corridors of Tel Aviv and Washington, but it has traumatised thepeople of Syria and other parts of the region who are already grapplingwith the effects of a Western-backed jihadist insurgency.
The war in Syria has already killed more 500,000 people and displaced 11million others. The country has also lost more than $230 billion owing tothe destruction wreaked by this war. Around 13.5 million Syrians aredependent on UN humanitarian assistance. It is not clear whether Trump’sdecision will affect Iran or not. But it has the potential to turn Syriainto a battleground between Tel Aviv and Tehran.
Why doesn’t the plight of those battered by wars in Syria, Iraq,Afghanistan and other parts of world prompt Americans to prevent their ownrulers from unleashing destruction. Why do Americans elect warmongers whoplay with the lives of millions? Why haven’t they elected a president overthe last seven decades who isn’t involved in some conflict or the other?Why are wars a permanent phenomenon in American history?
According to some historians, the US has militarily intervened more than223 times since its independence. So, does the fault lie in the evil natureof individuals who ascend to power or it is the gargantuan appetite of themilitary-industrial complex that prompts every US president – whether he isa pacifist Democrat or a hawkish Republican – to wage a war. Does thenature of the American economy contribute to this phenomenon of permanentwar that the mighty superpower has been unable to wipe out despite having aplethora of nuclear arms?
Economists believe that US economy is heavily dependent on the warindustry. America is a state that is created from the womb of war andgenocide. It is believed that the alliance between the US arms industry andthe government is as old as the country itself.
Even the American Civil War turned out to be immensely profitable for armsmanufacturers. The end of the war resulted in a collapse in demand andpushed several gun-makers towards bankruptcy. But those who managed tosecure foreign contracts continued to make money. Later, theSpanish-American War also helped warmongers and arms manufacturers.
The dependence of the American economy on wars and conflicts continued togrow in the 20th century as well. Under capitalism, the destruction of onecountry or region feeds into the prosperity of another state or region.This is what exactly happened during World War I. The US remained neutralduring most of WWI and only entered the conflict in April 1917. But themobilisation of its economy was extraordinary. Over four million Americansserved in the armed forces and the American economy produced a vast supplyof raw materials and munitions.
The end of the war caused a drastic slump in production. Some historiansclaim that the state of peace was one of the contributing factors that ledto the Great Depression. The economic crisis created joblessness and someexperts claimed that the unemployment rate was over 25 percent.
The situation prompted Roosevelt, the then US president, to launch theambitious New Deal. But it is believed that the deal created jobs for onlyfour million Americans while World War II provided every American with ajob.
According to Dr Jacques Pauwels, it cannot be denied that the GreatDepression in America only ended during, and because of, WWII. “Economicdemand rose spectacularly,” Pauwels writes. “The war allowed Americanindustry to produce unlimited amounts of war equipment… In addition, [the]American industry also supplied gargantuan amounts of equipment to theBritish and even the Soviets via Lend-Lease. The key problem of the GreatDepression – the disequilibrium between supply and demand – was thusresolved because the state ‘primed the pump’ of economic demand by means ofhuge orders of a military nature”.
The war put an end to the effects of the Great Depression, giving Americanshigher wages and increasing their purchasing power. It is believed thatAmerican corporations also immensely benefited from this great slaughter ofthe 20th century.
According to historian Stuart D Brandes, “between 1942 and 1945, the netprofits of America’s 2,000 biggest firms were more than 40 percent higherthan during the period 1936-1939… This largesse benefited the Americanbusiness world in general, but in particular that relatively restrictedelite of big corporations known as ‘big business’ or ‘corporate America’.During the war, less than 60 firms obtained 75 percent of all lucrativemilitary and other state orders”. Many economists claim that a phenomenalincrease was witnessed in economic activity during wartime. For instance,the GDP growth skyrocketed to over 17 percent in 1942.
After WWII, the USSR was used as a bogey to continue military spending. TheKorean War may have killed three million people but it helped Washingtonachieve a GDP growth rate of 11.4 percent in 1951 despite the fact thatWWII was over. Although this growth decreased in subsequent years, it onceagain witnessed a boost in 1966 during the Vietnam War.
So, the entire cold war supported the American arms industry. The industrysimultaneously became one of the largest sources of employment forAmericans. The arms industry’s role in job creation continues to this day.To some extent, such dependence fuels conflicts as well. After the collapseof the Soviet Union, the arms industry witnessed a downward spiral. Butsoon, the bogey of Al-Qaeda and the war on terror was coined.
The dependence on the arm industry for jobs and the immense profit thatbegan during the American Civil War continues even today. The largestAmerican export deal is related to arms. Trump struck a deal worth over$300 billion with Saudi Arabia. His administration is also making effortsto strike arms deals with Japan, Qatar and other states. So, the questionis: who is going to buy American arms if there is peace in the world?
According to an article penned by history professor Robert Reich in 2010:“Over 1,400,000 Americans are now on active duty; another 833,000 are inthe reserves, many full time. Another 1,600,000 Americans work in companiesthat supply the military with everything from weapons to utensils”. Thisreflects the dependence of Americans on arms companies for job creation.After 2008, the spectre of unemployment haunted Americans. Reich believedthat if the country did not have this giant military jobs programme, itsunemployment rate would be over 11.5 percent in 2010 instead of 9.5 percent.
Intellectuals believe that the US needs to get rid of this militaryspending and direct its resources towards other sectors that could createmore jobs. A research report of Brown University found that investments inelementary and secondary education create nearly three times as manyAmerican jobs as defence spending while healthcare creates about twice asmany jobs. While $1 million spent on defence creates 6.9 direct andindirect jobs, the same amount spent on elementary and secondary educationcreates 19.2 jobs. Around$1 million spent on healthcare creates 14.3 jobs.
America’s ruling elite needs to divert its people’s hard-earned moneytowards such sectors. This policy will not only end Washington’s relianceon wars to create jobs at home but will also save millions of lives thatare annihilated due to the gargantuan appetite of the military-industrialcomplex.
By: Abdul Sattar: The writer is a freelance journalist.
Email: egalitarianism444gmail.com