PEACE ECONOMY PROJECT: REFLECTIONS ON THE FIRST FEW MONTHS OF 2019
By Charles Kindleberger
On March 16th, PEP members met for brunch in order to give people the opportunity to meet our Executive Director, Jason Sibert, several of our interns, and a review of our current priorities. This is an expanded version of remarks by Board Member Charlie Kindleberger made at that event.
It is a scary time to be alive. Scary at the local level where mass shootings keep occurring in houses of worship and scary at the existential level as articulated recently by the Bulletin of Atomic Scientists
Doomsday Clock – 2 minutes to midnight. Times are as dangerous as they were in the early 1950’s when both Russia and the USA were testing nuclear weapons. Now we are canceling more treaties, spending trillions on “nuclear modernization,” getting ready to try building missile defense systems in space, and spinning our wheels with North Korea and Iran. And on top of this, there is fast-moving cyberwarfare progress, artificial intelligence, and run-away climate change.
A Few Good things. But rather than despair, let us attempt to recognize a few promising events. Here, for example, are some that you may find promising.
- 2018 Election. Forty new democratic congressmen have joined the House of Representatives, and with the change in majority status there is new political power among progressives.
- “National Emergency.” Recently there were enough votes in both the House and Senate to successfully challenge the President on his wall “emergency”, if not his veto. Twelve Republicans decided that the President’s effort to avoid the appropriation powers assigned to the Congress by the Constitution were not proper. Cynics may note that only one of them is up for re-election in 2020. Those of us in Missouri should recognize that Senator Roy Blunt was one of those who stood up.
- AUMF – The last Authorization of Military Force was approved in 1991 and 2002. Senators (D-Va.) Tim Kaine and (R-Ind.) Todd Young have introduced bi-partisan legislation to end them. Last year Congresswoman (D – Calif.) Barbara Lee -the only member who voted against invasion of Iraq – almost succeeded in this effort. Who can deny that these votes authorizing our involvement in Gulf war and the Iraq war are far outdated?
- A resolution passed in the Senate this week by a vote of 54 to 46, as seven Republicans broke with Trump to “begin the process of reclaiming our constitutional authority by ending United States involvement in a war that has not been authorized by Congress and is unconstitutional.” The UN calls this the world’s worst humanitarian crisis. This becomes the first time legislation enforcing the 1973 War Powers Act will land on the president’s desk since the Vietnam War. Meanwhile the Trump Administration has missed a deadline to report to Congress on objectives and costs associated with Yemen.
- The prime minister of Pakistan returned the downed Indian pilot to India thereby reducing tension between these two nuclear powers. Imagine the tension that could have resulted if the pilot had been imprisoned or perhaps tortured.
- North Korea. Limited progress, was made in Hanoi by the leaders of North Korea and the United States “on denuclearization.” But at least we have not returned to the threatening “rocket man” and “fire and fury” language. Nor have there been large scale joint exercises between South Korea and the U.S. On the other hand, there is evidence that North Korea is rebuilding its nuclear capabilities. When will renewed testing occur?
- Talks between the Taliban and US troops have occurred the in Middle East. They have been described as positive by a special representative for Afghanistan Reconciliation at the State Department. There seems to be wide differences as to when the Taliban wants us to leave (6 months) and when the US Military wants to leave (3 years). Moreover, the Afghan government understandably feels left out, as do many Afghani women with memories of Taliban persecution.
- No First Use Act. Congressman (D-Wash.) Adam Smith, head of the Armed Services Committee, and Senator (D – Mass.) Elizabeth Warren introduced in January the No First Use Act – a bill to make it US policy never to be the first to use a nuclear weapon. They argue that this would reduce the chances of miscalculation, and preserve our second-strike capability. See Smith’s remarks at the 2018 Ploughshare Conference < ploughshares.org/issues-analysis>
No Shortage of Troubling things:
- President Trumps Proposed Budget. In some sense this is a meaningless document – $716 billion to $750 for defense. The Democrats have no interest in a budget that would expand the amount allocated to the military and cut other domestic budgets by large amounts – e.g. EPA, State Department, Medicare and Medicaid, and many other programs.
- Selected Proposed Expenditures -Trump Defense Budget – This includes a 3.1 percent military pay raise – the largest in a decade – and the largest ship building request in 20 years, 15 vessels at a cost of $34.7 billion. In addition, we also have the largest research agenda in technology in 70 years with $9.6 billion for Cyberwar operations and capabilities, $14.1 billion Space Force developments and $57.7 billion for 78 F-35, 24 F/A Super Hornets, 8 FX 15, etc. etc.
- Overseas Contingency Operations Account. Recall that unlike the regular budget this account (referred to by many including, previously, Chief of Staff Mick Mulvany as a “slush fund”) has no cap as required for most line items in the Budget Act of 2011. This year the OCO includes lots of construction projects around the word (for example, Souda, Greece ($41 million); Ramstein, Germany ($119 million), Great Britain (49 million) all having little to do with the diminishing wars in Syria, Iraq and Afghanistan. The proposed OCO amount for FY 2020 is $174 billion. It has been noted that if the OCO was a governmental department, it would be second only to the Pentagon, in terms of proposed funding.
More Expensive Aircraft Carriers. The Pentagon just ordered two more nuclear powered, Ford class aircraft carriers, due for delivery in 2028 and 2032. Still lots of problems with the first one ($13 billion), not to mention that these are floating targets. We have 11, Italy has 2, nobody has more than one.
Nuclear Upgrades – $31 billion next year ($1.2 plus trillion over time) including: B-21 Long Range Strike Bomber ($3 billion next year); Columbia Class Submarine ($2.2 billion); Long Range Stand Off Missile ($0.7 billion); Ground Based Strategic Deterrent – ($0.6 million.)
Lots of High Tech Stuff – All kinds of drones ($3.7 billion); artificial intelligence etc. ($927 million); hypersonic weapons ($2.6); directed energy/lasers ($235 million and more.
INF Treaty – President Trump announced withdrawal from the Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces Treaty, as signed by Mikhail Gorbachev and Ronald Reagan in 1987. The treaty banned land-based ballistic missiles, cruise-based missiles and missile launchers with ranges between 300 and 3,400 miles. The US suspended compliance with the treaty in early February, followed immediately by the Russians. Familiar names have tried to persuade the US to preserve the treaty – people like former Senators Richard Lugar and Sam Nunn, and former Secretary of State George Shultz. The US, Russia and perhaps other countries like Ukraine, are developing ground based missiles again – sad and scary.
US Arms Sales – The U.S. remains way ahead of the rest of the world in military sales to some 98 countries. The Stockholm International Peace Research Institute (SIPRI) reported in March that US exports between 2014 and 2018 were 75 per cent higher than Russia’s in the same period. France (6.8), Germany (6.4) and China (5.2), along with the US and Russia account for 75 percent of the world’s total military sales.
Can you think of other good news or bad news that has characterized the military-industrial-congressional situation during the first part of 2019? We would like to hear from you.
