A Global Citizen Thinks About War
Published February 04, 2003
From the flight deck of the U.S. Abraham Lincoln, which is heading now from the Pacific Ocean to the Gulf region, a U.S. Air Force pilot told a TV journalist recently: "Our job is power projection. We have guys flying hundreds of miles off this ship to do the nation's business." The pilot's voice was untinged by the reticent or embarrassed tones that characterized U.S. military pronouncements for three decades after the Vietnam War. It was the pure, unconflicted, pitch-perfect voice of the world's newest global empire.
America maintains five global military commands posted on four continents; its economy pumps life-giving capital into scores of developing countries; its consumer goods and movies and music are universally admired and accepted; its language is the international language; its currency is a safe haven; and for all the resentment our global presence engenders, just ask the people where it really counts - e.g., South Korea, Israel, Bosnia, or Kosovo - whether they approve of America's global prowess and military might.
Our cushy lives so rich in material pleasures, educational possibility, health care, and leisure, are all supported by commercial tendrils of empire that efficiently suck low-priced goods from developing countries, while also inexorably attracting the smartest and most ambitious natives of other countries to our shores. Compared to our next-door-neighbors here in the U.S., we may feel we don't own enough or make enough money and thus we may want more. But compared to the rest of the world, we already have everything. We have everything because we as individuals have an empire - a commercial, cultural, and military global power - supporting us.
We are a military global power, and if we were not we would not enjoy the commercial and cultural advantages that we do.
XI
The key questions that citizens of America's global empire must therefore ask themselves are: Do I believe in the motivating ideals of this empire? Am I willing to accept the costs - in taxes and other forms of treasure - that it takes to maintain the empire and the lavish life that I am able to live because I am the citizen of the empire? Do we have the stomach to face the reality that we have much of what we have because of our brute military power, and not because we are smarter or better than everyone else?
Will we be able as a society to develop into the first global empire that is also liberal, democratic, humble, and wise? We will be able to develop the needed leadership skills to engender in the rest of the world an attitude of respect and fondness and gratitude towards us, instead of the anger and bitterness and resentment of our arrogance that is now so common? In other words, will we learn what we need to become the first global empire in world history that actually survives to a ripe old age?
- A Global Citizen Thinks About War
- Published: February 04, 2003
- Type:
- Section: Culture
- Writer: Doug McGill
- Doug McGill's BC Writer page
- Doug McGill's personal site
- Spread the Word
- Like this article?
- Email this
Save to del.icio.us
Comments
Nice utopian worldview, oh citizen, so full of holes I can't address it here, I should start my own blog, I suppose. Go out and do a few of those things you suggest, and if that causes Saddam to step aside and let his people live their lives freely, and causes terrorists to stop attacking us around the world, I will say you are correct. You won't of course, and neither Saddam nor the terrorists will either. In short, great ideas on paper, not likely in real life. You may have all the benevolent goodwill in the world, but not everyone does, and those people mean harm to others like you.
It may be idealistic but I don't think it's utopian. The suggestion that we all try to be good neighbors is practical and idealistic at the same time, and is something we can all do to help.
Interesting analysis, and one I applaud in principle. However, it seems to me that the assumption that "this war is for oil" is necessarily a bad thing might be just a tad irrational. In other words, so it's about oil. So what? As a good friend of mine put it, "If you thought about it for a while, you might find one or two reasons to put a steady, guaranteed supply of petroleum as the second most important natural resource need in the world, but most likely, you'd have to put it right at the top of the list."
Surprisingly, the "humanitarian angle" still works admirably well even from this perspective. Not only do we liberate Iraq from a brutal dictator (which, by the way, is still a noble pursuit regardless of whether it is a primary casus belli.) but we at least partially secure the Arabian Peninsulaand all its vast oil reserves. Now when we do that, we guarantee that 1) Oil is available all over the world for direct concerns such as moving products to and from markets, thereby directly keeping world infrastructure alive, and 2) America's infrastructure is kept alive and working at a reasonable level of efficiency.
Now, the first point is self-explanatory, but the second, as self-serving (not that there's anything wrong with that, necessarily) as it seems, also has a profound effect across the world. To wit: if the American economy is damaged, you can expect worldwide economic devastation. A dip in the stock market here gives brokers in London and Tokyo the cold shivers. A fluctuation in price here means people in our enormously affluent market quit buying quite so much, which means that folks in Venezuela experience untold economic hardship. People starve. Riots occur.
Now, as a global citizen, I view this little matter to be just as much a reason for action as any other. "No blood for oil?" Ha. Strategically guaranteeing that a madman can't choke off a significant part of the world's petroleum supplies, and that he can't destroy those reserves, AND that he can't indulge his expansionist tendencies to cover the Arabian Peninsula may be the most humanitarian approach we could possibly take.
Would you believe I'm not even a Republican? :)



Very thoughtful and balanced look at the most difficult topic of our time. I very much like your ideas on personal responsibility. Thanks!