Once again the gods of war have united our
Congress like nothing else. Unable to agree on the minimal spending
necessary to save our economy, schools, medical system or
infrastructure, the cowards who mislead us have retreated to the
irrationalities of what George Washington in his farewell address
condemned as “pretended patriotism.”
The defense authorization bill that
Congress passed and President Obama had threatened to veto will soon
become law, a fact that should be met with public outrage. Human Rights
Watch Executive Director Kenneth Roth, responding to Obama’s craven
collapse on the bill’s most controversial provision, said, “By signing
this defense spending bill, President Obama will go down in history as
the president who enshrined indefinite detention without trial in U.S.
law.” On Wednesday, White House press secretary Jay Carney claimed “the
most recent changes give the president additional discretion in
determining how the law will be implemented, consistent with our values
and the rule of law, which are at the heart of our country’s strength.”
What rubbish, coming from a president who
taught constitutional law. The point is not to hock our civil liberty to
the discretion of the president, but rather to guarantee our freedoms
even if a Dick Cheney or Newt Gingrich should attain the highest office.
Sadly, this flagrant subversion of the
constitutionally guaranteed right to due process of law was opposed in
the Senate by only seven senators, including libertarian Republican Rand
Paul and progressive Independent Bernie Sanders.
That onerous provision of the defense
budget bill, much discussed on the Internet but far less so in the mass
media, assumes a permanent war against terrorism that extends the
battlefield to our homeland. It reeks of a militarized state that
threatens the foundations of our republican form of government.
Advertisement
<a
href='http://ads.truthdig.com/banners/www/delivery/ck.php?n=abee66dc&amp;cb=906344108'
target='_blank'><img
src='http://ads.truthdig.com/banners/www/delivery/avw.php?zoneid=8&amp;cb=906344108&amp;n=abee66dc'
border='0' alt='' /></a>
As The New York Times editorialized, the
bill “would take the most experienced and successful anti-terrorism
agencies—the F.B.I. and federal prosecutors—out of the business of
interrogating, charging and trying most terrorism cases, and turn the
job over to the military.” Not only has FBI Director Robert Mueller III
opposed this shift in the law, but so has Defense Secretary Leon
Panetta, who previously ran the CIA.
What’s alarming is not just that one
pernicious aspect of the defense spending bill, but the ease with which
an otherwise deadlocked Congress that can’t manage minimal funding for
job creation and unemployment relief can find the money to fund at Cold
War levels a massive sophisticated arsenal to defeat an enemy that no
longer exists.
Throwing $662 billion, plus hundreds of
billions more in non-Pentagon “security” programs, at what that other
great-general-turned-president, Dwight Eisenhower, condemned as the
“military-industrial complex,” with its tentacles in every congressional
district, is an act of absurdity in a world bereft of a serious
military challenge to the United States. Not even the best-funded
terrorists can afford aircraft carriers.
There is simply no militarily significant
enemy in sight, yet we spend almost as much on our armed forces as the
rest of the world combined, and are already ludicrously superior in
military might to any rogue power, like Iran, that might threaten us.
The hawks who attempt to justify Cold War levels of spending on advanced
weaponry by reviving “Red China” as a formidable enemy are undermined
in their argument by China’s sharply limited regional force projection.
The real leverage that China exercises over U.S. policy options is not
military but rather economic and derives precisely from the fact that we
have gone into debt to those same communists in order to fund our
irrational military spending.
Military spending is rationalized with
patriotic froth, but it is driven by the unfortunate fact that it is the
most reliable source of government-funded profits and jobs. It is an
obviously inefficient use of resources as a means of lifting the overall
economy compared with building infrastructure and training workers for
the jobs of the future, but don’t count on Congress or the president to
change that dynamic anytime soon. The White House’s five-year projection
of defense spending aims not at the one-third budget cut initiated by
the first President Bush in response to the end of the Cold War, but at a
“flattening” of military expenditures between 2013 and 2017.
We had every right to expect President
Obama to stick to his word and veto this bill, not as a means of forcing
a much needed bigger cut in government waste, but more urgently because
its assault on the Constitution’s requirement of due process represents
a direct threat to the freedom of the American people every bit as
menacing as any we face from foreign enemies.
No comments:
Post a Comment