American politics, and he pushed the war button at every opportunity. So when Saddam Hussein invaded Kuwait, Kissinger was an early proponent of a military response. Eventually, of course, George H W Bush launched Operation Desert Storm.
And Kissinger, wrote Grandin, “was once again a man of the moment. But how expectations had shifted since 1970. When President Bush launched his bombers on January 17, 1991, it was in the full glare of the public eye, recorded for all to see. There was no veil of secrecy and no secret furnaces, burned documents, or counterfeited flight reports. After a four-month-long on-air debate among politicians and pundits, ‘smart bombs’ lit up the sky over Baghdad and Kuwait City as the TV cameras rolled.”
I remember that all too well. I remember the sudden enormous void I felt open up as I watched what might have been the onset of World War III hit the airwaves, knowing that most of the country supported this reckless atrocity.
Grandin goes on: “It would be a techno-display of such apparent omnipotence that President Bush got the kind of mass approval Kissinger and Nixon never dreamed possible. With instant replay came instant gratification, confirmation that the president had the public’s backing. On January 18, only a day into the assault, CBS announced that a new poll ‘indicates extremely strong support for Bush’s Gulf offensive.’”
There were yellow ribbons around every light pole as Bush proclaimed that ‘Vietnam syndrome’ was dead. All it took was a permanent shift of responsibility away from the public at large – via elimination of the draft – combined with an ultra-sophisticated public relations effort that successfully turned our former ally, Saddam Hussein, into the Face of Evil. The slaughter of 100,000 Iraqis during the month-and-a-half-long Desert Storm was, apparently, a small price to pay for the good we had accomplished, and seemed not to mar the post-invasion celebrations.
And a different kind of syndrome – Gulf War Syndrome, aka, Gulf War Illness – the name for the serious health consequences suffered by American soldiers due to an array of war-related toxic exposures, including ultra-fine depleted uranium dust, was well off in the future at that point, with bureaucratic denial and media indifference destined to minimise its impact on public awareness and forestall a re-emergence of large-scale public anti-militarism.
A decade later, another Bush in office, the Towers go down. George W proclaims that America will take on evil itself. And even though his successor, Barack Obama, is swept into office on the global hope for peace, war remains the default setting. Fourteen years in, war does, indeed, look endless. Obama recently announced, for instance, that he won’t be the one to pull US troops out of Afghanistan. War is now, as I say, impervious to democracy, despite the incredible harm – the millions killed directly and indirectly because of the war on terror, 60 million refugees worldwide, numerous countries in chaos – it continues to cause.
Maybe, as scattered individuals, we long for peace, but for now, the interests of war are safely fortified from this longing. As we stand against these interests anyway, let’s declare, as a starting place, our belief that war is never the path to peace.
This article originally appeared as: ‘Yellow Ribbons and Endless War’.
Courtesy: Commondreams.org
It is said that this is first time since establishment of Bangladesh that naval ship from Bangladesh is coming to...
NDCs are targets set by nations to reduce fossil fuel use and transition to clean energy resources
Turkish-Pakistani partnership is tale woven with threads of shared beliefs, challenges embraced and actions taken...
Pakistan targets 30% EV penetration by 2030, potentially saving over $800m annually
Core of programme is its unconditional cash transfer known as Benazir Kafaalat
Establishment has taken decisive role in economic matters – not as power grab, but as necessity