Obama's Expensive Wars

Published in Aftenposten
(Norway) on 1 March 2009
by (link to originallink to original)
Translated from by Lars Erik Schou. Edited by Bridgette Blight.
President Barack Obama has proposed a budget with a historically large deficit. But at the same time the basic defense budget also increases by 4 percent, or $20.4 billion. The wars in Afghanistan and Iraq are on top of that; they are $205 billion for this year and next year. The number is almost astronomical. In total, the U.S. will spend $664 billion for military purposes in the 2010 budget year, which starts on Oct. 1.

War is expensive. Security is expensive. But this budget contains a very critical estimate on whether the costs are equal to the results. The influential American defense industry had it easy for too long, and used America's national security concerns to make money. The research group Center for Responsive Politics has revealed that five large weapons manufacturers spent $65 million for lobbying in Washington last year, and that their employees gave $11.3 million in contributions to both political parties in 2007 and 2008. This is not small change. Former president George W. Bush had no scruples with spending money on his “War on Terror” and the money has poured richly into the military industry.

America’s economic crisis has many reasons. Still, it didn't help that defense expenditures have increased by 78 percent since 2000. The wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, especially Iraq, are a main cause. But at the same time the defense industry has been allowed to run expensive programs that have increased in price every year, without either the president or Congress hitting the brakes.

Two examples – where one could be important for Norway – is the development of the F-22 and F35 fighter jets. F-35 (JSF) is what Norway deems to be best suited for its needs. The F-22 is already flying, but at a huge cost per aircraft. The JSF is still in development and has become 38 percent more expensive than the 2001 estimate, official American numbers show. It will be even more expensive before development is complete.

Now Obama says, “the defense budget should be reformed so that we do not pay for Cold War systems we do not use.” The air force, army and navy will feel the reform. All defense programs will be scrutinized, and they are far from certain to survive, even if the lobbying is intense. Obama is also promising to withdraw the forces from Iraq, not as quickly as he estimated, but so quickly that the war expenditure will decrease significantly in 2011, in spite of a surge of 17,000 troops into Afghanistan.

Obama's promises about Iraq will be kept. The arms industry will notice.


PRESIDENT BARACK OBAMA har fremlagt et forslag til statsbudsjett med et historisk høyt underskudd. Men samtidig øker det regulære forsvarsbudsjettet med fire prosent, 20,4 milliarder dollar. Krigene i Irak og Afghanistan kommer på toppen, de vil koste 205 milliarder dollar tilsammen i år og til neste år. Beløpet er nesten astronomisk: totalt vil USA bruke 664 milliarder dollar til militære formål i budsjettåret 2010, som innledes 1. oktober.

KRIG KOSTER. Sikkerhet koster. Men dette budsjettet innvarsler likevel en meget kritisk vurdering av om kostnadene står i rimelig forhold til resultatet. Den innflytelsesrike amerikanske militærindustrien har altfor lenge har hatt det for enkelt og brukt USAs nasjonale sikkerhet til å mele egen kake. Forskningsgruppen Center for Responsive Politics har avslørt at fem store våpenprodusenter i fjor brukte hele 65 millioner dollar på lobbyvirksomhet i Washington, og at deres ansatte ga 11,3 millioner dollar i bidrag til begge politiske partier i 2007 og 2008. Dette er ikke småpenger. Den tidligere president, George W. Bush, skydde hverken penger eller andre midler i sin «krig mot terror», og pengene har rislet over militærindustrien i rikt monn.

USAS ØKONOMISKE krise har mange årsaker. Likevel, det har ikke hjulpet på statsfinansene at forsvarsutgiftene har økt med 78 prosent fra 2000 og til i dag. Krigene i Irak og Afghanistan, spesielt den førstnevnte, er en hovedårsak. Men samtidig er det ingen tvil om at forsvarsindustrien har fått holde på med dyre programmer, som er blitt dyrere for hvert år, uten at hverken president eller kongress har satt bremsene på.

To eksempler – der ett av dem kan få betydning for Norge – er utviklingen av kampflyene F-22 og F-35. F-35 (JSF) er det Norge mener er best egnet til nytt kampfly. F-22 er oppe og flyr, til en enorm kostnad pr. fly, JSF er fortsatt et utviklingsprogram, og er blitt 38 prosent dyrere i forhold til anslaget i 2001, viser offisielle amerikanske tall. Det kommer til å bli enda dyrere før utviklingen er ferdig.

NÅ SIER PRESIDENT Obama at «forsvarsbudsjettet skal reformeres slik at vi ikke betaler for kaldkrigssystemer vi ikke bruker». Både flyvåpen, hær og marine vil få merke reformiveren. Alle forsvarsprogrammer skal under lupen, og det er langt fra sikkert at de overlever, selv om lobbyinnsatsen fortsatt er formidabel. Obama lover samtidig å trekke styrkene ut av Irak, ikke så raskt som anslått, men likevel i så stort omfang og så hurtig at krigsutgiftene vil senkes fra 2011, trass i en varslet opptrapping med 17000 mann i Afghanistan.

Obamas valgløfte om Irak holdes. Militærindustrien vil også få merke det.
This post appeared on the front page as a direct link to the original article with the above link .

Hot this week

France: The United States Has Not Abandoned Its Expansionist Ambitions in Greenland

Poland: ‘Trump Brand Is Toxic.’ Australia Will Not Get Its Tallest Skyscraper*

Canada: If the United States Is ‘Fascist,’ What on Earth Are Russia and Iran?

Japan: US-China Leadership Summit: Are the US Economic Results Exaggerated?

China: ‘Trump Is in a Hurry To End the War, Otherwise He Will Have To Ask China To Intervene’

Topics

France: The United States Has Not Abandoned Its Expansionist Ambitions in Greenland

Japan: US-China Leadership Summit: Are the US Economic Results Exaggerated?

Poland: ‘Trump Brand Is Toxic.’ Australia Will Not Get Its Tallest Skyscraper*

South Africa: Trump’s China Visit Was a Diplomatic Disappointment

Israel: Has Trump Had Enough?

South Korea: Precarious US-China Rivalry: Risky Game of Chess

Related Articles

Taiwan: Trump’s Disregard for Peace Should Win Him ‘Most Shameless’ Prize

Hong Kong: Trump’s Obsession with the Nobel Peace Prize Is a Farce

Bangladesh: Machado’s Nobel Prize Puts Venezuela and US Policy in the Spotlight

Norway: Assange Can Be Extradited to the United States, Risks 175 Years in Prison

Norway: Ziwe Fumudoh Has Based Career on Making White Interview Subjects Uncomfortable*

  1. few in the world understand that most americans are imperialists.

    now americans dont know they are imperialists. they think as a super power they have a right to invade and occupy countries.

    americans are not worldly their concept of worldly is traveling to a different state within the united states.

    the industrial military complex has done a brillant job of brainwashing the american people with fear to gain their tax dollars. this industrial military complex has even taken over much of the mass media.

    between corp america and this industrial military complex and corp privitized health care americans are like drones. they vote for more capitalism thinking that our super power status will always be with us.

    we are a bankrupt country and imperialism has been a major cause of that bankruputcy. as the germans lined the streets to congradulate hitler as he invaded poland and france americans have stickers on their cars and trucks stating support our troops and calling our troops heros.

    we even have southern states that raise their children to fight in these wars for profits and call their children heros for fighting and losing their lives in these illegal wars.

    now the world keeps it mouth shut because they want to sell us their stuff. our free trade policies are designed for corp profits not to benefit the american people.

    the reagan economics trickle down sales job trickled up to the top two per cent of americans just like reagan knew they would. brillant move by reagan as the middle class americans lined up to vote for him. twice.

    few will understand my words very few.