Unending War on Terror
Millions dead costing trillions of dollars
By Philip GiraldiApril 29, 2015 "Information
Clearing House" - "The
Unz Review" -The admission by the White House that
two western hostages were killed by an errant drone strike in Pakistan
serves as only an ugly little footnote to what has been nearly fifteen years
of undeclared war waged by Washington against a large part of the world.
The New York Times
notes that “…most individuals killed [by drones] are not on a kill list,
and the government does not know their names,” adding that “the
proliferating mistakes have given drones a sinister reputation in Pakistan
and Yemen and have provoked a powerful anti-American backlash in the Muslim
world.”
The most recent ex-judicial killings come on the heels of
a report by the highly respected Nobel prize winning Physicians for Social
Responsibility that
reveals that more than 1.3 million people were killed during the first
ten years post 9/11 as part of the so-called “global war on terror” (GWOT)
in Iraq, Afghanistan and Pakistan alone. The GWOT has been euphemized by the
current Administration as “overseas contingency operations,” which has a
nicer sound and does not appear to be so preemptive or premeditated. The
relabeling also suggests that the process is both responsive and occasional,
which it is not as it has been the driving component of American foreign
policy since 2001 until the present day.
The report by the physicians received only limited
coverage in the U.S. media. As one might reasonably add Syria, Libya,
Somalia and Yemen to the carnage and update the numbers on Pakistan, Iraq
and Afghanistan for all areas where the U.S. in engaged militarily the
current total might easily exceed two million or more. The report stresses
that the estimate of the dead is “conservative” based on the most reliable
sources, suggesting that there are large numbers of deaths that have been
reported but could not be confirmed.
To be sure not all of those millions of potential war on
terror victims were killed by American bullets or bombs but their deaths are
the consequence of ill-advised military interventions and operations to
destabilize and replace existing governments, starting with the Taliban and
continuing in the present with operations directed against Syria. Iran is
the next intended target, one should reasonably presume.
American deaths represent only a tiny percentage of the
overall toll, even if one includes the victims of 9/11, less than 10,000
total, which in no way should suggest that it diminishes the impact of those
losses on individual families and communities. And the cost in dollars has
also been devastating. Economist Joseph Stiglitz of Columbia University
has estimated that Iraq alone will cost over five trillion dollars
before all the debts and legacy expenses relating to it are paid and that
does not include the current re-engagement in that country by the U.S.
military.
Perhaps not surprisingly, the killing of more than a
million people and the spending of trillions of dollars has not made
terrorism go away. On the contrary, it now threatens to take over the Arab
heartland and metastasize into Europe and the United States after some of
ISIS’s own volunteer “wounded warriors” return home. That is because the
policies driving the American interventions have been effectively and
consistently based on a number of misconceptions, most notably that it is
possible to use force to remake in one’s own image ancient cultures that
possess their own values and ways of doing things.
The unrelenting expansion of Washington’s military role is
consequently little more than a simplistic response to many diverse overseas
developments that are poorly understood, most of which are not actually
genuine threats to the United States. This is demonstrated by the White
House decision to extend the U.S. terrorism fight to the entire continent of
Africa and also by the militarization of the ill-conceived campaign against
Ebola, which was described as a “national security threat.”
Ironically, terrorism was clearly a dying profession, both
literally and metaphorically before Washington stepped in recently to revive
it. In 2011 terrorist attacks were down 12% from 2010 and 29% from 2007.
Most attacks, and most victims, roughly 65%, came from Afghanistan, Iraq,
Pakistan, Nigeria, and Somalia, all war zones where security is poor.
Engaged in conflicts that are frequently better describable as civil wars,
the terrorist-designated groups bomb and execute their opponents and are on
the receiving end of a corresponding government response as a consequence.
Each shooting or bombing is therefore counted as a terrorist attack.
Al-Qaeda, the gold-standard terrorist group, has long been in sharp decline,
being upstaged by more radical groups like ISIS.
For me, the physicians’ report’s statistics revealing a
pattern of worldwide carnage invites both horror and a cost/benefit
analysis. Collateral damage that is killing civilians in the hundreds of
thousands is hard to justify by any metric, but if a country is actually
threatened with extinction there is at least an argument to be made. So the
question must be asked, “Even given the current revival of terrorism in the
Middle East, is the United States actually under siege by terrorism as
reflected from the number of Americans who were actually victimized in 2013
(the most recent year when the
the State Department has compiled the numbers)?” And “What is Washington
spending and doing to deal with the threat? And why?”
Even when one includes all U.S. passport holders or
permanent residents in the tally of those directly affected, the numbers are
disappointing for those who have imagined a world awash with militants all
of whom are seeking Americans to kill while simultaneously planning to
travel to the United States so they can blow themselves up in Times Square.
In 2013, only four Americans were killed by terrorists inside the United
States, all by the Tsarnaev brothers as part of the Boston Marathon bombing
and its aftermath. Only twelve American citizens were kidnapped by overseas
terrorists in that year (11 in Libya, Syria and Nigeria, all of which were
war zones), and only 16 were killed in foreign lands (12 in Afghanistan).
Not to minimize in any way the horror of becoming a terrorist victim, the
numbers are only 0.3% of all terror-related kidnappings and only 0.1% of
terror-related killings. Most, possibly 97%, of people killed or kidnapped
worldwide are Muslims targeted by indigenous groups that are fighting to
change or take control of their own governments. Micah Zenko of the Council
on Foreign Relations has
determined that the number of Americans killed in terrorist attacks is
comparable to the number crushed to death by falling television sets or
furniture each year.
The insight that only a minuscule number of Americans
actually become terrorism victims raises a question: “What does Washington
do to counter the terrorist threat and how much does it cost?” The “what”
part is easily answered as the national government has grown dramatically
since 9/11 due to fear of terrorism, meaning that the response is to hire
more people.
There are currently 4.2 million full time federal employees, both
military and civilian,
supplemented by nearly 500,000 national guardsmen and 400,000
reservists. Defenders of the hiring argue that the number is roughly the
same as in 2001, but they fail to account for the massive hiring of
contractors, who are not included, Most of those new hires were directly
related to the War on Terror for manning the 200 new military and CIA bases
that have sprung up around the world and to serve as Fortress America’s
defenders. More than
half of the employees in key sectors within the intelligence community
and at the Defense Department are reported to be contractors, who cost
roughly three times as much as staff employees.
As for the costs, the numbers are not precise as overall
budgets tend to roll many items in together, but a useful way of addressing
the problem is to subtract the federal budget in 2001 from the budget today
in the key areas relating to defense, intelligence, and homeland security to
determine what the war on terror costs.
The Federal Government is currently operating under a
continuing resolution but the
budget proposed by the White House is $3.9 trillion for 2015 compared
with $1.863 trillion in 2001, $564 billion of which will be debt, reversing
2001’s budget surplus of $127 billion and raising the U.S. total debt to
above 100% of Gross Domestic Product. The Department of Homeland Security’s
share is $38 billion for 180,000 employees, the intelligence agencies get an
estimated $100 billion and employ 100,000, the FBI with 35,000 permanent
employees has over $8 billion, and the Department of Defense
receives $555 billion, which does not include special appropriations for
the war in Afghanistan. In 2001, the Pentagon budget was $277 billion. When
all the increases are added up and compared to the baseline of 2001, the war
on terror currently costs the American taxpayer more than $500 billion per
year directly without including legacy costs like health care for disabled
veterans, of which there are tens of thousands. As there may be only 100 or
so terrorists capable and willing to stage an attack on the United States
directly, that works out to something like $5 billion per year per
terrorist.
And that is only at the federal level. Most states now
have their own departments of homeland security, and nearly all have
dramatically increased both the numbers and firepower of their police
forces. There is full-time security manning the entrances of nearly all
federal and state and even some local and municipal office buildings. The
total costs of state and local expenditures to counter the essentially
overstated terrorist threat might well exceed the federal expenditures, and
then there is the spending on security, often mandated by the government, in
the key areas of the private sector.
So we Americans have killed directly or indirectly maybe a
million people, destabilized or overthrown at least four governments, and
trashed our own economy while spending something like $1 trillion per year
to protect ourselves against a threat that would have been easily
containable before we started engineering global solutions. And let’s not
forget that we created al-Qaeda and also enabled ISIS by destroying Iraq and
supporting the resistance in Syria. Doesn’t make much sense. And more and
better is on the horizon. Republican candidates for presidents across the
board want to increase defense (sic) spending, Senator Tom Cotton
calling for a more than 50% increase to $900 billion per year. And they
are itching to start another war with Iran. Cotton says that strategic air
strikes will do the trick in a few days. If Paul Wolfowitz were still around
he would be telling us that the enterprise would pay for itself. Some people
might even believe them.