The American
Empire Project
Americans have long
believed that the very notion of empire is an offense against our
democratic heritage, yet in recent months, these two words --
American empire -- have been on everyone's lips. At this moment of
unprecedented economic and military strength, the leaders of the
United States have embraced imperial ambitions openly. How did we
get to this point? And what lies down the road?
Read more>>
|
The Books
Imperial Ambitions
Conversations on the Post-9/11 World
by Noam Chomsky
Now available!
|
Empire's Workshop
Latin America, the United States, and the Rise of the New Imperialism
by Greg GrandinNow available!
|
A Question of Torture
CIA Interrogation, from the Cold War to the War on Terror
by Alfred McCoyNow available!
Alfred McCoy on How Not to Ban Torture in Congress
|
Blood
and Oil
The Dangers and
Consequences of America's Growing Petroleum Dependency
by Michael T. Klare
Now available in paperback, including a new afterword! |
visit tomdispatch.com |
|
![](https://web.archive.org/web/20090407050411im_/http://www.americanempireproject.com/images/vertline_bkgrnd.gif) |
New from The American Empire Project |
The Limits of Power
by Andrew J. Bacevich
From
an acclaimed conservative historian and former military officer, a
bracing call for a pragmatic confrontation with the nation's problems
The Limits of Power identifies a profound triple crisis facing America:
the economy, in remarkable disarray, can no longer be fixed by relying
on expansion abroad; the government, transformed by an imperial
presidency, is a democracy in form only; U.S. involvement in endless
wars, driven by a deep infatuation with military power, has been a
catastrophe for the body politic. These pressing problems threaten all
of us, Republicans and Democrats. If the nation is to solve its
predicament, it will need the revival of a distinctly American
approach: the neglected tradition of realism.
by Andrew J. Bacevich
|
![](https://web.archive.org/web/20090407050411im_/http://www.americanempireproject.com/covers/blog_header.jpg)
|
Global Crime Wave?
A Syndrome of Crime, Violence, and Repression on the Way
By Michael T. Klare
In all catastrophes, there are always winners among the host of losers
and victims. Bad times, like good ones, generate profits for someone.
In the case of the present global economic meltdown, with our world at
the brink and up to 50 million people
potentially losing their jobs by the end of this year, one winner is
likely to be criminal activity and crime syndicates. From Mexico to
Africa, Russia to China, the pool of the desperate and the bribable is
expanding exponentially, pointing to a sharp upturn in global crime. As
illicit profits rise, so will violence in the turf wars among competing
crime syndicates and in the desperate efforts by panicked governments
to put a clamp on criminal activity.
Take Mexico, just now in the headlines. In late March, during her
first trip there as Secretary of State, Hillary Clinton was repeatedly
asked about the burst of narcotics-related violence in that country,
the thousands of deaths that have gone with it, the patent inability of
the Mexican military to contain, no less repress, the drug trade, and
the possibility that the country might be at risk of becoming a "failed
state." Mexico itself may not be in danger of collapse, she replied
diplomatically, but a very real danger threatens both countries from a
rise in violent crime along the U.S.-Mexican border. "The criminals and
kingpins spreading violence are trying to corrode the foundations of
law, order, friendship, and trust between us," she declared at a press
conference in Mexico City. To counter this danger, the secretary of
state promised a militarized response that reflected the level of
danger she imagined -- a significant increase in U.S. anti-narcotics
assistance, including the expedited delivery of Black Hawk helicopters.
|
The Great Afghan Bailout
It's Time to Change Names, Switch Analogies
By Tom Engelhardt
Let's start by stopping.
It's time, as a start, to stop calling our expanding war in Central and
South Asia "the Afghan War" or "the Afghanistan War." If Obama's
special representative to Afghanistan and Pakistan Richard Holbrooke
doesn't want to, why should we? Recently, in a BBC interview,
he insisted that "the 'number one problem' in stabilizing Afghanistan
was Taliban sanctuaries in western Pakistan, including tribal areas
along the Afghan border and cities like Quetta" in the Pakistani
province of Baluchistan.
And isn't he right? After all, the U.S. seems to be in the process of trading in
a limited war in a mountainous, poverty-stricken country of 27 million
people for one in an advanced nation of 167 million, with a crumbling
economy, rising extremism, advancing corruption, and a large military
armed with nuclear weapons. Worse yet, the war in Pakistan seems to be
expanding inexorably (and in tandem with American war planning) from the tribal borderlands ever closer to the heart of the country.
|
Is the Israel Lobby Running Scared?
Or Killing a Chicken to Scare the Monkeys
By Robert Dreyfuss
Is the Israel lobby in Washington an all-powerful force? Or is it, perhaps, running scared?
Judging by the outcome of the Charles W. ("Chas") Freeman affair this
week, it might seem as if the Israeli lobby is fearsome indeed. Seen
more broadly, however, the controversy over Freeman could be the Israel
lobby's Waterloo.
Let's recap. On February 19th, Laura Rozen reported
at ForeignPolicy.com that Freeman had been selected by Admiral Dennis
Blair, the director of national intelligence, to serve in a key post as
chairman of the National Intelligence Council (NIC). The NIC, the
official in-house think tank of the intelligence community, takes input
from 16 intelligence agencies and produces what are called "national
intelligence estimates" on crucial topics of the day as guidance for
Washington policymakers. For that job, Freeman boasted a stellar
resumé: fluent in Mandarin Chinese, widely experienced in Latin
America, Asia, and Africa, a former U.S. ambassador to Saudi Arabia
during the first Gulf War, and an ex-assistant secretary of defense
during the Reagan administration.
|
A Falcon of Peace
Who Wants to Be a Dove? (They Always Lose.)
By Tom Engelhardt
How come they get to be the hawks? And we get to be the doves? A hawk is a noble bird. A dove. Well, basically it's a pigeon. The sort of bird that, in New York City anyway, messes your building's window sills, is always underfoot, and, along with the city's rats, makes a hearty lunch for the red-tailed hawks which now populate our parks. Even a turkey would be less of a turkey than a dove. We get to carry that olive twig -- okay, they call it a "branch" -- around in our beaks, but you can bet your bippy that they get the olives, or, more likely, the opportunity to trample the olive groves into oil. They get to swoop and prey. We get to pace the sidelines, cooing our complaints. Their ideas -- it never matters how visibly dumb they are -- get tried. Ours never do. And when theirs fail miserably, they get to recalibrate and try again. We never get to try once.
|
Breaking the Banks
The Struggle to Feed America's Nouveau Needy
By Nick Turse
The message is simple. Ever more Americans need food they can't afford.
As tough economic times take their toll, increasing numbers of
Americans are on tightened budgets and, in some cases, facing outright
hunger. As a result, they may be learning a lot more about food banks
and soup kitchens than most of them ever wanted to know.
In recent interviews with TomDispatch.com, representatives from food
banks -- the non-profit organizations that distribute groceries to
those in need via food pantries, shelters, and soup kitchens --
expressed alarm at the recent surge in need all across the country. At
the same time, most stated that, however counterintuitive it might
seem, financial contributions to their organizations are actually on
the rise. So, too, are food prices, however -- and donations,
unfortunately, are not keeping up with demand.
|
The Imperial Unconscious
Afghan Faces, Predators, Reapers, Terrorist Stars, Roman Conquerors, Imperial Graveyards, and Other Oddities of the Truncated American Century
By Tom Engelhardt
Sometimes, it's the everyday things, the ones that fly below the radar, that matter.
Here, according to Bloomberg News, is part of Secretary of Defense Robert Gates's recent testimony on the Afghan War before the Senate Foreign Relations Committee:
"U.S. goals in Afghanistan must be 'modest, realistic,' and 'above all, there must be an Afghan face on this war,'
Gates said. 'The Afghan people must believe this is their war and we
are there to help them. If they think we are there for our own
purposes, then we will go the way of every other foreign army that has
been in Afghanistan.'"
|
A Planet at the Brink
Will Economic Brushfires Prove Too Virulent to Contain?
By Michael T. Klare
The global economic meltdown has already caused bank failures,
bankruptcies, plant closings, and foreclosures and will, in the coming
year, leave many tens of millions
unemployed across the planet. But another perilous consequence of the
crash of 2008 has only recently made its appearance: increased civil
unrest and ethnic strife. Someday, perhaps, war may follow.
As people lose confidence in the ability of markets and governments to
solve the global crisis, they are likely to erupt into violent protests
or to assault others they deem responsible for their plight, including
government officials, plant managers, landlords, immigrants, and ethnic
minorities. (The list could, in the future, prove long and unnerving.)
If the present economic disaster turns into what President Obama has referred to as a "lost decade," the result could be a global landscape filled with economically-fueled upheavals.
|
Burning Questions
What Does Economic "Recovery" Mean on an Extreme Weather Planet?
By Tom Engelhardt
It turns out that you don't want to be a former city dweller
in rural parts of southernmost Australia, a stalk of wheat in China or
Iraq, a soybean in Argentina, an almond or grape in northern
California, a cow in Texas, or almost anything in parts of east Africa
right now. Let me explain.
As anyone who has turned on the prime-time TV news these last weeks
knows, southeastern Australia has been burning up. It's already dry
climate has been growing ever hotter. "The great drying," Australian
environmental scientist Tim Flannery calls it. At its epicenter,
Melbourne recorded its hottest day ever
this month at a sweltering 115.5 degrees, while temperatures soared
even higher in the surrounding countryside. After more than a decade of
drought, followed by the lowest rainfall on record, the eucalyptus
forests are now burning. To be exact, they are now pouring vast quantities of stored carbon dioxide, the greenhouse gas considered largely responsible for global warming, into the atmosphere.
|
The "Best Men" Fall
How Popular Anger Grew, 1929 and 2009
By Steve Fraser
Obtuse hardly does justice to the social stupidity of our late,
unlamented financial overlords. John Thain of Merrill Lynch and Richard Fuld
of Lehman Brothers, along with an astonishing number of their
fraternity brothers, continue to behave like so many intoxicated
toreadors waving their capes at an enraged bull, oblivious even when
gored.
Their greed and self-indulgence in the face of an economic cataclysm
for which they bear heavy responsibility is, unsurprisingly, inciting
anger and contempt, as daily news headlines indicate. It is undermining
the last shreds of their once exalted social status -- and, in that
regard, they are evidently fated to relive the experience of their
predecessors, those Wall Street "lords of creation" who came crashing
to Earth during the last Great Depression.
|
Whistling Past the Afghan Graveyard
Where Empires Go to Die
By Tom Engelhardt
It is now a commonplace -- as a lead article in the New York Times's Week in Review pointed out recently -- that Afghanistan is "the graveyard of empires." Given Barack Obama's call
for a greater focus on the Afghan War ("we took our eye off the ball
when we invaded Iraq..."), and given indications that a "surge" of U.S.
troops is about to get underway there, Afghanistan's dangers have been
much in the news lately. Some of the writing on this subject, including
recent essays by Juan Cole at Salon.com, Robert Dreyfuss at the Nation, and John Robertson at the War in Context
website, has been incisive on just how the new administration's policy
initiatives might transform Afghanistan and the increasingly unhinged
Pakistani tribal borderlands into "Obama's War."
In other words, "the graveyard" has been getting its due. Far less
attention has been paid to the "empire" part of the equation. And
there's a good reason for that -- at least in Washington. Despite escalating worries
about the deteriorating situation, no one in our nation's capital is
ready to believe that Afghanistan could actually be the "graveyard" for
the American role as the dominant hegemon on this planet.
|
The Looming Crisis at the Pentagon
How Taxpayers Finance Fantasy Wars
By Chalmers Johnson
Like much of the rest of the world, Americans know that the U.S.
automotive industry is in the grips of what may be a fatal decline.
Unless it receives emergency financing and
undergoes significant reform, it is undoubtedly headed for the
graveyard in which many American industries are already buried,
including those that made televisions and other consumer electronics,
many types of scientific and medical equipment, machine tools,
textiles, and much earth-moving equipment -- and that's to name only
the most obvious candidates. They all lost their competitiveness to
newly emerging economies that were able to outpace them in innovative
design, price, quality, service, and fuel economy, among other things.
A similar, if far less well known, crisis exists when it comes to
the military-industrial complex. That crisis has its roots in the
corrupt and deceitful practices that have long characterized the high
command of the Armed Forces, civilian executives of the armaments
industries, and Congressional opportunists and criminals looking for
pork-barrel projects, defense installations for their districts, or
even bribes for votes.
|
Airport to Nowhere, Waltz with Bashir, Part 2
By Tom Engelhardt
A pack of ravenous dogs, a nightmare, a visit from a war-haunted
friend, this was how film director Ari Folman's period as an Israeli
"grunt" in the 1982 invasion of Lebanon first returned to him. But when
he began to search for his own memories of that war, what he found
instead was a puzzling, disturbing blank. Tentatively setting off in
pursuit of those missing memories, horrors buried for almost a quarter
of a century, he also launched himself on a path that would lead to his
award-winning, Oscar-nominated animated film, Waltz with Bashir, and an accompanying graphic memoir of the same title, developed in tandem with it.
|
Waltz with Bashir, Part 1
By Tom Engelhardt
As a 19-year-old Israeli soldier, Ari Folman took part in the 1982
invasion of Lebanon and was on duty in Beirut during the notorious
massacres in the Palestinian refugee camps of Sabra and Shatila. Just a week ago, Waltz with Bashir,
the animated documentary film Folman directed in which he explores his
own nightmarish, half-suppressed memories of that period, was given
its first underground screening in Lebanon -- not far, in fact, from
Hezbollah headquarters in southern Beirut -- though the film is
officially banned in that country. It has also been screened in
Palestinian Ramallah and is reportedly soon to be shown in the Arab
Gulf states. It has already won six Israeli Academy Awards, best
foreign film at the Golden Globes, and is now nominated for an Oscar as
best foreign film.
|
The Day the Earth Still Stood
What Will Obama Inherit?
By Tom Engelhardt
Inauguration day!
Gazillions of Americans descended on Washington. The rest of us were
watching on TV or checking out streaming video on our computers. No one
was paying attention to anything else. Every pundit in sight was
nattering away all day long, as they will tomorrow and, undoubtedly,
the next day about whatever comes to mind until we get bored. And in
the morning, when this post is still hanging around in your inbox,
you'll be reading your newspaper on… well, you know… the same things:
Obama's speech! So many inaugural balls! Etc., etc.
So I'm thinking of this post as a freebie, a way to lay out a little
news about the world that no one will notice. And all I can say -- for
those of you who aren't reading this anyway, and in the spirit of the
clunky 1951 sci-fi classic, The Day the Earth Stood Still -- is: Klaatu barada nikto!
Okay, no actual translation of that phrase (to the best of Wikipedia's knowledge)
exists. We do know that, when invoked, the three words acted as a kind
of "fail-safe" device, essentially disarming the super-robot Gort
(which arrived on the Washington Mall by spacecraft with the alien
Klaatu). That was no small thing, since Gort was capable not just of
melting down tanks but possibly of ending life on this planet. Still, I
remain convinced, based on no evidence whatsoever, that the phrase
could also mean: "Whew! We're still here!"
|
Future Shock at the Army Science Conference
Eco-Explosives, a Bleeding BEAR, and the Armani-Clad Super Soldier
By Nick Turse
[Research support for this article was provided by the Investigative Fund at the Nation Institute.]
On paper, every session looked like gold to me. Technology and the Warfighter. Neuroscience and Its Potential Applications. Lethality Technologies. Autonomous/Unmanned Systems. (Robots!)
But when I got to the luxury hotel in sunny Orlando, Florida, for the
26th Army Science Conference, all that potentially glittered, it often
seemed, was nowhere to be found -- except, perhaps, in the threads of
the unlikeliest of military uniforms.
I expected to hear about nefarious new technologies. To see
tomorrow's killing machines in a dazzling exhibit hall. To learn
something about the Army's secret plans for the coming decades. To be
awed -- or disgusted -- by a peek at the next 50 years of war-making.
What I stumbled into, however, seemed more like a cross between a
dumbed-down academic conference and a weekend wealth expo, paired with
an exhibit hall whose contents might not have rivaled those of a
regional auto show. I came away knowing less about the next half
century of lethal technologies than the last eight years of
wheel-spinning, never-winning occupations of foreign lands.
|
The Apology
How to Turn Over a New Inaugural Leaf
By Tom Engelhardt
We consider ours a singular age of individual psychology and
self-awareness. Isn't it strange then that our recent presidents have
had nothing either modest or insightful to say about themselves in
their first inaugural addresses, while our earliest presidents in their
earliest moments spoke openly of their failings, limitations, and
deficiencies.
In fact, the very first inaugural address
-- George Washington's in New York City on April 30, 1789 -- began with
a personal apology. In a fashion inconceivable in a country no longer
known for acknowledging its faults, our first president, in his very
first words, apologized to Congress for his own unworthiness to assume
the highest office in the new country he had helped to found. "On the
other hand," he said, "the magnitude and difficulty of the trust to
which the voice of my country called me, being sufficient to awaken in
the wisest and most experienced of her citizens a distrustful scrutiny
into his qualifications, could not but overwhelm with despondence one
who (inheriting inferior endowments from nature and unpracticed in the
duties of civil administration) ought to be peculiarly conscious of his
own deficiencies."
Inferior endowments… unpracticed in the duties of civil administration… his own deficiencies. Remind me when you last heard words like those from an American president.
|
Oil 2009
Be Careful What You Wish For
By Michael T. Klare
Only yesterday, it seems, we were bemoaning the high price of oil.
Under the headline "Oil's Rapid Rise Stirs Talk of $200 a Barrel This
Year," the July 7 issue of the Wall Street Journal warned that prices that high would put "extreme strains on large sectors of the U.S. economy." Today, oil, at over $40 a barrel, costs less than one-third what it did in July, and some economists have predicted that it could fall as low as $25 a barrel in 2009.
Prices that low -- and their equivalents at the gas pump -- will no
doubt be viewed as a godsend by many hard-hit American consumers, even
if they ensure severe economic hardship in oil-producing countries like
Nigeria, Russia, Iran, Kuwait, and Venezuela that depend on energy
exports for a large share of their national income. Here, however, is a
simple but crucial reality to keep in mind: No matter how much it
costs, whether it's rising or falling, oil has a profound impact on the
world we inhabit -- and this will be no less true in 2009 than in 2008.
The main reason? In good times and bad, oil will continue to supply
the largest share of the world's energy supply. For all the talk of
alternatives, petroleum will remain the number one source of energy for
at least the next several decades. According to December 2008 projections
from the U.S. Department of Energy (DoE), petroleum products will still
make up 38% of America's total energy supply in 2015; natural gas and
coal only 23% each. Oil's overall share is expected to decline slightly
as biofuels (and other alternatives) take on a larger percentage of the
total, but even in 2030 -- the furthest the DoE is currently willing to
project -- it will still remain the dominant fuel.
|
The Ponzi Scheme Presidency
Bush's Legacy of Destruction
By Tom Engelhardt
It may finally be 2009, but in some ways, given these last years, it might as well be 800 BCE.
From the ninth to the seventh centuries BCE, the palace walls of the
kings who ruled the Assyrian Empire were decorated with vast stone
friezes, filled with enough dead bodies to sate any video-game maker
and often depicting -- in almost comic strip-style -- various bloody
royal victories and conquests. At least one of them shows Assyrian
soldiers lopping off the heads of defeated enemies and piling them into
pyramids for an early version of what, in the VCE (Vietnam Common Era)
of the 1960s, Americans came to know as the "body count."
So I learned recently by wandering through a traveling exhibit
of ancient Assyrian art from the British Museum. On the audio tour
accompanying the show, one expert pointed out that Assyrian scribes,
part of an impressive imperial bureaucracy, carefully counted those
heads and recorded the numbers for the greater glory of the king (as,
in earlier centuries, Egyptian scribes had recorded counts of severed hands for victorious Pharaohs).
Hand it to art museums. Is there anything stranger than wandering through one and locking eyes with a Vermeer lady, a Van Eyck portrait,
or one of Rembrandt's burghers staring out at you across the centuries?
What a reminder of the common humanity we share with the distant past.
In a darker sense, it's no less a reminder of our kinship across time
to spot a little pyramid of heads on a frieze, imagine an Assyrian
scribe making his count, and -- eerily enough -- feel at home. What a
measure of just how few miles "the march of civilization" (as my
parents' generation once called it) has actually covered.
|
"We killed her… that will be with me the rest of my life"
Lawrence Wilkerson's Lessons of War and Truth
By Nick Turse
Nations in flux are nations in need. A new president will soon take office, facing hard choices not only about two long-running wars and an ever-deepening economic crisis, but about a government that has long been morally adrift. Torture-as-policy, kidnappings, ghost prisons, domestic surveillance, creeping militarism, illegal war-making, and official lies have been the order of the day. Moments like this call for truth-tellers. For Truth and Reconciliation Commissions. For witnesses willing to come forward. For brave souls ready to expose hidden and forbidden realities to the light of day.
Lawrence B. Wilkerson is such a man. He came to national prominence in October 2005 when -- having left his post as chief of staff to Secretary of State Colin Powell earlier in the year -- he laid bare some of the secrets of the Bush White House as he had experienced them. He had been inside the halls of power as the invasion and occupation of Iraq took shape. In Bush's second term, on the outside, he found that he had had enough. The American people, he thought, had a right to know just how their government was really working, and so he offered them this vision of the Bush administration in action: "[S]ome of the most important decisions about U.S. national security -- including vital decisions about postwar Iraq -- were made by a secretive, little-known cabal. It was made up of a very small group of people led by Vice President Dick Cheney and Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld."
|
Obama's Toughest Challenge
America's Energy Crunch Comes Home
By Michael T. Klare
Of all the challenges facing President Barack Obama next January, none is likely to prove as daunting, or important to the future of this nation, as that of energy. After all, energy policy -- so totally mishandled by the outgoing Bush-Cheney administration -- figures in each of the other major challenges facing the new president, including the economy, the environment, foreign policy, and our Middle Eastern wars. Most of all, it will prove a monumental challenge because the United States faces an energy crisis of unprecedented magnitude that is getting worse by the day.
The U.S. needs energy -- lots of it. Day in and day out, this country, with only 5% of the world's population, consumes one quarter of the world's total energy supply. About 40% of our energy comes from oil: some 20 million barrels, or 840 million gallons a day. Another 23% comes from coal, and a like percentage from natural gas. Providing all this energy to American consumers and businesses, even in an economic downturn, remains a Herculean task, and will only grow more so in the years ahead. Addressing the environmental consequences of consuming fossil fuels at such levels, all emitting climate-altering greenhouse gases, only makes this equation more intimidating.
As President Obama faces our energy problem, he will have to address three overarching challenges:
|
Expanding War, Contracting Meaning
The Next President and the Global War on Terror
By Andrew J. Bacevich
A week ago, I had a long conversation with a four-star U.S. military officer who, until his recent retirement, had played a central role in directing the global war on terror. I asked him: what exactly is the strategy that guides the Bush administration's conduct of this war? His dismaying, if not exactly surprising, answer: there is none.
President Bush will bequeath to his successor the ultimate self-licking ice cream cone. To defense contractors, lobbyists, think-tankers, ambitious military officers, the hosts of Sunday morning talk shows, and the Douglas Feith-like creatures who maneuver to become players in the ultimate power game, the Global War on Terror is a boon, an enterprise redolent with opportunity and promising to extend decades into the future.
Yet, to a considerable extent, that very enterprise has become a fiction, a gimmicky phrase employed to lend an appearance of cohesion to a panoply of activities that, in reality, are contradictory, counterproductive, or at the very least beside the point. In this sense, the global war on terror relates to terrorism precisely as the war on drugs relates to drug abuse and dependence: declaring a state of permanent "war" sustains the pretense of actually dealing with a serious problem, even as policymakers pay lip-service to the problem's actual sources. The war on drugs is a very expensive fraud. So, too, is the Global War on Terror.
Anyone intent on identifying some unifying idea that explains U.S. actions, military and otherwise, across the Greater Middle East is in for a disappointment. During World War II, President Franklin D. Roosevelt laid down "Germany first" and then "unconditional surrender" as core principles. Early in the Cold War, the Truman administration devised the concept of containment, which for decades thereafter provided a conceptual framework to which policymakers adhered. Yet seven years into its Global War on Terror, the Bush administration is without a compass, wandering in the arid wilderness. To the extent that any inkling of a strategy once existed -- the preposterous neoconservative vision of employing American power to "transform" the Islamic world -- events have long since demolished the assumptions on which it was based.
|
|