Military-industrial complex: a "monster" who likes to "cook" war (Global Hotspot)
On April 13, local time, the U.S. Department of Defense held a meeting with leaders of eight major U.S. military-industrial enterprises to discuss issues such as increasing arms assistance to Ukraine.
The Department of Defense has reassembled a team to expedite the sale and transfer of weapons produced by U.S. government-approved U.S. defense contractors.
U.S. military-industrial enterprises have doubled their profits.
This also makes the US military-industrial complex once again become the focus of attention of the international community.
The military-industrial complex refers to a huge interest group composed of the US military, the Department of Defense, arms manufacturers, members of Congress, national defense scientific research institutions, think tanks, and public opinion circles. It is a secret super-interest group alliance.
Over the years, the influence of the "cancerous tumor" of the military-industrial complex has penetrated deep into the fabric of American society.
In order to ensure the long-term prosperity of the arms business, the US military-industrial complex has been creating imaginary enemies, "handing knives" for "counting tickets", and doing "warmongers".
Peter Kuznick, a professor of history at American University, pointed out: "War is big business for the United States."
Origin and development——
From growing to scale to getting out of control
The term "military-industrial complex" was first proposed by former US President Eisenhower.
In 1961, Eisenhower warned the public in his departure speech to be wary of the "monster" of the military-industrial complex.
He said at the time that "the marriage of a powerful military organization and a huge arms industry is a new phenomenon in the course of American history" and that "we must prevent the military-industrial complex from knowingly or unintentionally gaining undeserved influence."
Interestingly, Eisenhower, who was the first to criticize the military-industrial complex, was also an important promoter of it.
On April 27, 1946, Eisenhower signed a document emphasizing the establishment of close contractual relationships between military and civilian scientists, engineers, industry, universities, and other related fields, which would require greatly expanding the nation's security system, allowing Both the scientific and industrial sectors are united around the army.
In 1956, Wright Mills, a well-known American political scientist, published his book "Power Elite", which was the first to discuss the military-industrial complex from an academic perspective.
The book argues that the United States is a pseudo-democratic society composed of power elites as the ruling class.
And this power elite is composed of American corporate tycoons, political directors and military leaders, who jointly make decisions with national effects. It is a "small group" that controls centralized power.
The military-industrial complex is not built overnight.
"From the end of the 19th century to the end of the First World War, the United States grew into the world's largest industrial power. This drives it to expand and protect overseas interests through the development of military power, laying the foundation for the formation of the military-industrial complex." China Institute of International Studies Asia Pacific Zhang Tengjun, deputy director of the research institute, told the newspaper that during the First World War, the US military industry achieved relatively obvious development, and military enterprises such as Lockheed Martin and Boeing gradually had large-scale and industrialized production capacity.
World War II and the Cold War provided an important opportunity for the explosive growth of the U.S. military-industrial complex.
Zhang Tengjun believes that the participation of the United States in the middle and late World War II brought a new round of great development to the military-industrial complex and paved the way for its overall rise during the Cold War.
During the Cold War, the military-industrial complex developed rapidly through the continuous distribution of orders by the government.
But this growth does not have an effective safeguard mechanism.
After the Korean War broke out, the military-industrial complex pushed the U.S. government to further institutionalize this cooperation model between the government and military-industrial enterprises, thereby maintaining a state of rapid development.
The Spanish "Insurgent" website recently published an article "The United States and its Love for War" that pointed out that for the U.S. military-industrial complex, it is crucial to have some manufactured, manipulable and believable enemies.
“After the disappearance of the Soviet Union as an external threat, the U.S. military-industrial complex fell silent for a while. Against this backdrop, they launched propaganda campaigns and lobbying efforts to find new 'enemies'. Later, 'anti-terrorism' became the best excuse. From the 1990s Since the 1990s, the United States has successively launched foreign military interventions such as the Iraq War and the Afghanistan War. Since the end of the Cold War, the military-industrial complex has ushered in a new period of development in order to maintain the hegemony of the United States as the only superpower in the world.” Zhang Tengjun said.
"After the end of the Cold War, most of the wars the United States launched abroad were the result of the military-industrial complex." Wang Wei, an associate researcher at the Institute of American Studies at the Chinese Academy of Social Sciences, told this newspaper that the United States occupies a favorable geographical position and the favorable situation of the unipolar era, trying to Occupy as many strategic advantages as possible, and play under the banner of "democracy", "human rights" and so on.
These value outputs are also often the results of research funded by the military-industrial complex.
In addition, the military department has popularized and popularized the values of some interest groups in the military-industrial complex by subsidizing think tanks and media forces, forming a pattern of interaction between top and bottom.
The military-industrial complex disguises its own interests as national interests and implements them through the state apparatus.
Expansion and belligerence—
From lobbying around to participating in decision-making
Philip Zimbardo, a retired professor at Stanford University in the United States, pointed out in the book "The Lucifer Effect: How Good People Become Demons" that war requires someone to prepare and "cook".
The US military-industrial complex is a "monster" with a penchant for "cooking" war.
This huge interest group continues to push the US's foreign policy in the direction of war, and obtain huge profits by creating wars and conflicts and instigating an arms race.
"The military-industrial complex does not influence U.S. foreign policy from a peripheral perspective, but is itself part of the U.S. foreign policy makers, and is the catalyst and driver of U.S. foreign military interventions." Zhang Tengjun analyzed that for a long time, the military-industrial complex has presented to the U.S. Congress. And government departments have sent a large number of talents who obey their orders.
These people have become decision-makers, allowing the policy preferences of military-industrial interest groups to directly enter government decision-making; in the seemingly open policy-making system of the United States, the "revolving door" of political and business colluded with the media, giving the military-industrial complex a huge right to speak. Encourage the government to continuously wage foreign wars or participate in conflicts around the world.
According to the "Open Secret" website of the United States, in the past 20 years, in order to influence national defense policy, the US military industry has spent as much as 2.5 billion US dollars on lobbying alone.
The political and business "revolving door" in the United States has continuously boosted the development of the military industry.
From 2014 to 2019, 1,718 senior defense officials or procurement officials, including former U.S. Secretary of Defense James Mattis, moved to arms dealers.
Wang Peng, assistant director of the China Foreign Strategy Research Center at Renmin University of China, told the newspaper that the military-industrial complex plays four main roles in U.S. foreign policy: first, think tanks, which provide opinions and suggestions for U.S. foreign policy at the policy and strategic level; The second is the talent pool, which trains and reserves talents for the US foreign policy; the third is the policy executor, the "revolving door" of politics and business has accelerated the implementation of the US military intervention in foreign countries; the fourth is the kidnapper, through financial support, talent support, grasping public opinion, etc. Manipulate the decision-making direction of the U.S. government.
Franklin Spinney, who has worked in the Office of the Secretary of Defense for 26 years and is well versed in the various "routines" of the U.S. military-industrial complex, pointed out that the U.S. Department of Defense is led by capital.
The enormous impact of the military-industrial complex on U.S. foreign policy is often overlooked by academia and the media.
The military-industrial complex first affects key constituencies through the economy and employment, thereby swaying politicians’ claims, while manipulating voter sentiment by demonizing adversaries and exaggerating security threats.
"As part of the U.S. ruling class, the military-industrial complex has kidnapped U.S. foreign policy." Zhang Tengjun said that American-style democracy advocates that every American has one vote, but ordinary voters simply cannot compete with the campaign investment paid by the big financial groups in the military-industrial complex. counterbalance.
As a result, the voice of ordinary people in American political life has been greatly diluted.
"The United States' global interventionist policy can become a core of its foreign policy, which is directly related to the super-scale expansion of the military-industrial complex during the Cold War." Wang Wei said that during the Cold War, the U.S. military-industrial complex has formed a kind of trinity global strategic projection capabilities.
Many military blocs and treaty systems in which the United States participates have written or unwritten provisions that all member states must purchase American weapons and equipment.
By building an alliance system, the United States has expanded its weapons, equipment and strategic ideas to a global scale, forming a monopoly mechanism for arms supply.
Bloodlust and Greed--
From crazy wealth accumulation to high military spending
"Since the outbreak of the Russian-Ukrainian conflict, the Pentagon, K Street (the gathering place of lobbying companies in Washington, the capital of the United States), the military industry, and the entire Capitol have quietly opened champagne to celebrate!" Recently, Franklin Spinney in " How the Drugs of Defense Spending Destroy the Rational National Plan” wrote that the entire interest chain of the military-industrial complex has made a lot of money in the past 30 years.
Taking the war in Afghanistan as an example, a survey report released by the Institute for Security Policy Reform, an independent think tank in the United States, shows that from October 2001 to August 2021, Lockheed Martin, Raytheon, General Dynamics, Boeing and Northrop - The total amount of congressional appropriations received by the five US military giants Grumman is as high as 2.02 trillion US dollars.
In fiscal year 2020, the Department of Defense signed a total of $420 billion in federal contracts, more than all other federal government agencies combined, according to data released by the Congressional Research Service.
In fiscal 2019, the five giants "hoarded" nearly one-third of the total DoD contracts.
The Defense Department often refers to the Big Five simply as "general," meaning "general contractor," who then subcontracts out contracts.
On March 14 this year, the global arms sales trend report released by the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute in Sweden showed that in the five years from 2017 to 2021, although the global arms trade volume fell by 4.6% compared with 2012 to 2016, the same period However, U.S. arms exports rose 14% against the trend, and the global share rose from 32% to 39%.
U.S. military spending has also hit record highs.
On March 16, local time, U.S. President Biden signed the federal budget for the 2022 fiscal year worth up to $1.5 trillion, of which defense spending was as high as $782 billion, an increase of 5.6% over the previous fiscal year.
On March 28, the Biden administration submitted a draft federal budget for fiscal year 2023, including the defense budget, to Congress.
The draft shows that the total defense budget for fiscal year 2023 is $813.3 billion, breaking the $800 billion mark for the first time in history.
In order to maintain an "absolute advantage" over its rivals at the same time in terms of military capabilities, the United States has almost "burned money" in the research and development of weapons and equipment without blinking an eye.
In the latest military budget request, the procurement research and development program expenditure reached as high as 276 billion US dollars, a record high for the Pentagon.
Adam Smith, chairman of the U.S. House Armed Services Committee, has harshly criticized the U.S. Department of Defense's procurement process over the past 20 years, calling it "a complete disaster."
Smith has said that the U.S. has always sought military overwhelming superiority, which is neither possible nor desirable.
This tends to send false signals and plunge the world into a new Cold War.
"Arching Fire" and "Handing Knife"——
From harming people's livelihood to endangering peace
At the same time as military spending is high, the financial support for various livelihood issues in American society is stretched.
On December 8 last year, when the U.S. House of Representatives successfully passed the defense budget for fiscal year 2022, compared with the annual budget of about $175 billion for "rebuilding a better future" in the field of people's livelihood, Robert Lake, a professor at the University of Berkeley and former secretary of labor, said: The military-industrial complex out of control!
"Where's the outcry over this National Defense Authorization Act? Why haven't lawmakers and economists complained loudly about its impact on inflation and the national debt?" asked Robert Lake sharply. "There's very little news about it in the mainstream media reports, and no national debate.”
"The military-industrial complex has made the United States a country with constant wars and wars. Huge military expenditures have seriously crowded out expenditures in other areas of society, resulting in unfair distribution of social resources and directly affecting the welfare of the American people." Zhang Tengjun said.
US Congressman Corey Bush said on social media: "In the United States today, it is more difficult to carry out activities such as climate action, universal child care and prevention of community violence than to provide nearly $800 billion to the military-industrial complex to fund death and destruction. Much more."
Can the military-industrial complex keep America's own security?
"Because there are too many enemies in launching wars, the military-industrial complex has severely limited the ability of the United States to ensure its own social development and homeland security." Zhang Tengjun analyzed that for the legitimacy of arms sales orders, the military-industrial complex has constantly created excuses for the United States to launch wars and sought external sources. "enemy".
It keeps exaggerating that the United States faces various security threats, and has been looking for external "scapegoats" to pay for the domestic problems of the United States.
Not only does this cause America's real social problems to be covered up, it also makes the country less secure.
"As early as before the First World War, then-US President Wilson proposed that if the United States maintains a strong military department for a long time, it will lead to the problem of centralization." Wang Wei believes that the military-industrial complex operates by a secret under-the-table transaction method. The infiltration of members of Congress, government officials and the media is comprehensive, "opening the back door" for the United States to launch foreign military interventions, and bringing American society into a dangerous situation without the knowledge of the public.
In addition, the military-industrial complex promotes the formation of technological determinism.
The United States believes that its technology is the most advanced in the world, which in turn has formed a sense of cultural superiority and self-inflated social psychology, which has contributed to the development of populism.
Al Jazeera commented that the US government is actually a government from interest groups and serves the interests of these groups, and the military-industrial complex is at the top of these groups.
The military-industrial complex is a serious threat to world peace.
Wang Wei analyzed that in order to maintain the intergenerational lead in the military, the United States will lead to a global security dilemma, intensify the arms race, increase the risk of conflict and instability, and eventually form a spiral conflict in the world.
According to a study released last year by the Quincy Institute for Responsible Governance, an American think tank, the United States has 750 military bases in 80 countries and regions overseas, almost three times the number of American embassies, consulates and missions abroad. Running costs could be as high as $55 billion.
Since 2001, these overseas military bases have supported U.S. wars or military operations in at least 25 countries.
David Vine, a scholar on the history of foreign warfare in the United States, believes that the existence of overseas military bases has reduced the difficulty of US military intervention and has become a major source of geopolitical tension.
"National security and world peace are inseparable. Without world peace, no country can have absolute security." Wang Wei believes that it is necessary to expose the crimes of the US military-industrial complex to the sun, so that more countries can fully realize that following the United States is only a matter of Get into a security dilemma instead of getting real security.
In addition, lasting peace needs to be based on the mutual tolerance of different civilizations, rather than suppressing or even destroying each other through military means.
Therefore, when faced with differences and disputes, countries should consider peaceful solutions such as negotiation rather than resorting to force.
"The international community can try to establish some mechanisms and rules to distinguish and regulate the interest chain of the military-industrial complex through common resolutions or agreements, so as to better determine the interests of military departments, military-industrial enterprises and other stakeholders in foreign military intervention. responsibility." Zhang Tengjun said.