The Empire at Dusk

American pundits decry the onset of sharp defense cuts, but the Pentagon can’t even account for $1 trillion in its own spending. Isn't it time to rein in the beast?

BY STEPHEN GLAIN | AUGUST 16, 2011

In ancient times, empires exacted tribute from their dependencies. In the age of American hegemony, just the opposite is the case. In return for the global commons, the United States bankrolls a geopolitical welfare state that allows some of its largest beneficiaries to neglect their basic responsibilities as sovereign states and allies. A national debate over the economic and moral costs of this exchange is noteworthy for its absence. Segregated from the military and its burdens, with no reason to fear the consequences of war for themselves or their loved ones, a great majority of Americans are easily manipulated into backing a militarized response to challenges more suited to diplomacy. The purpose of hegemony is to preempt potential threats rather than respond to a clear and present danger. As voters are unlikely to support such a policy on its merits, hegemonists resort to gross exaggerations of speculative rivals, be they Russia and China or geopolitical runts such as North Korea and Iran.

The price of this deception is vast. If the Pentagon were a corporation, it would be the largest in the world as well as the most sloppily run. Its procurement budget, at a staggering $107 billion in 2010, expands even as the number of deployable warplanes, combat ships, and troops diminishes. To entice lawmakers into approving costly weapons programs, the Pentagon dangles the prospect of jobs in the states and districts of key lawmakers, a costly way of manufacturing but an astute political maneuver. Waste, inefficiency, and political patronage, no stranger to military-legislative affairs, get more lavish by the year. In April 2008, the Government Accountability Office found that 95 major Pentagon projects exceeded their original budgets by a total of nearly $300 billion. A year later, it concluded that nothing had changed. In 2009, lawmakers larded the Pentagon's annual budget proposal with nearly $5 billion in programs and weapons it did not request. With arms factories scattered like feeding troughs nationwide, America has become the equivalent of a company town with the Pentagon as primary employer. The making of war, or at least the preparation for it, has become a money center, a business line --- a racket, as Marine general and Medal of Honor recipient Smedley Butler put it nearly a century ago.

Though the Pentagon did not ask for empire, neither did it shirk from its calling. From 2001 to 2010, the baseline defense budget grew at an inflation-adjusted rate of 6 percent a year, to more than double its pre-September 11 size. Like interlocking threads in a great tapestry, no one really knows where the military's preserve begins and where it ends. Pentagon financial statements have been all but unauditable since 1991, the year it began submitting its accounts to Congress. In an October 2009 report, the Defense Department's Inspector General exposed more than a dozen "significant deficiencies" in Pentagon balance sheets from fiscal years 2004 to 2008. Mining opaque audit trails and murky contracting systems, the report uncovered more than $1 trillion in unsupported account entries. In September 2010, the Senate Finance Committee issued a report that slammed the Pentagon's "total lack of fiscal accountability" for "leaving huge sums of the taxpayers' money vulnerable to fraud and outright theft."

Even as defense officials and warfighters acknowledge that America's adversaries cannot be defeated with armed might alone, the Pentagon still has more lawyers than the State Department does diplomats. Washington's foreign aid budget routinely comes under assault by Congress as overly generous when in fact the United States is among the most miserly of countries when it comes to overseas assistance. The White House has called for 2,200 new Foreign Service officers for the State Department and USAID -- a drop in the bucket given the mismatch between the nation's resources and its commitments overseas. The number of State Department diplomats and support staff is only 10 percent greater than what it was a quarter century ago, when there were 24 fewer countries in the world and U.S. interests were concentrated in Europe and northeast Asia. The Pentagon, in contrast, has 1.5 million active-duty military personnel, an equal number of reservists and National Guardsmen, and 790,000 civilian employees. Moreover, unlike the U.S. military, which bases a fifth of its personnel overseas, nearly three-quarters of America's diplomatic corps are posted abroad. At any one time, a third of U.S.-based Foreign Service jobs are vacant, while 12 percent of the overseas positions, not including those in Iraq and Afghanistan, are unmanned. Foreign language proficiency, a core competency of the service, has languished due to funding gaps. Salaries have been slashed, and stingy retirement benefits have undercut retention rates.

Chip Somodevilla/Getty Images

 

Stephen Glain is author of State vs. Defense: The Battle to Define America's Empire, from which this essay was excerpted. Reprinted by permission of Crown Publishers, an imprint of the Crown Publishing Group.

DIANA RELKE

7:09 PM ET

August 16, 2011

Wow.

That's tellin it like it is.

One cliche and one superstition came to mind as I read this:

Cliche: To a man with a hammer, everything looks like a nail. (Solution: relieve the man of the hammer.)

Superstition: If you want peace, you have to prepare for war. (In truth, if you prepare for war, that's exactly what you'll get.)

I don't suppose anyone inside the beltway or at the Pentagon actually reads FP, do they?

 

MCD1970

9:29 AM ET

August 17, 2011

Interesting but flawed

Overall a great article and both generally accurate and incisive, but it's a bot closed minded to lay the bulk of the blame on the Pentagon. It's the Administration (both parties) who dictate the National Security Strategy and propogate the myth of American international benevolence in the name of security and prosperity and it's as much Congress pushing their own jobs programs on the military as it is the DoD looking for new toys.

Having sat through way too many Armed Services Committee testimonies, it's somewhat disengenious to say "To entice lawmakers into approving costly weapons programs, the Pentagon dangles the prospect of jobs in the states and districts of key lawmakers, a costly way of manufacturing but an astute political maneuver" when DoD constantly tries to kill programs only to be stonewalled by MoCs more concerned with votes than with fiscal responsibility and military effectiveness.

 

PARIS GIRL

9:45 PM ET

August 16, 2011

EMPIRE MUST BE TERMINATED!! NOW"! AND THEIR SUPPORTERS!

ITS ABOUT TIME WE CUTE THEIR BALLS OFF AND MADE THEM OBEY THE AMERICAN PPL NOT THE BANKSTERS AND OLIGARCHS OF INDUSTRY!!

THE USA CORPS CAN DIE A SLOW DEATH AND DEATH TO THEIR FASCIST GLOBALISM!! TOOO!!
THAT IS SUCKING THE LIFE OUT OF ALL AMERICANS!!

 

BIG BOY

10:10 PM ET

August 16, 2011

"Isn't it time to rein in the beast? "

Rather, isn't it time to kill the beast altogether?

The American Empire should be dissolved. It was never meant to be an empire. A nation of individual freedoms should not be built on the oppression of others.

The sooner the US gets rid of the plutocrats that are slowly sucking both the moral and economic legitimacy of a once admired country the better it will cope in a multipolar world.

 

JOHNBOY4546

1:18 AM ET

August 17, 2011

"Not once did they appeal to lawmakers for a declaration of war"

Well, yeah, and there's a reason for that.

The USA is a signatory to the UN Charter, and that charter forbids nations from CHOOSING to go to war.

Make no mistake; the UN Charter explicitely says (Article 51) that member states can defend themselves for an armed attack, but Article 2(4) prohibits states for CHOOSING war as a means of settling arguments.

Think about it....
Think about it....

Still nothing?

A formal declaration of war is a statement that you are CHOSING to go to war, and as such a Congressional Declaration of War is a blatant violation of Article 2(4) of the UN Charter.

Still looking blank?

This author is quite correct to point out that post-ww2 no US President has asked Congress for a formal declaration of war.

But he might also like to note that **no** member state of the UN has issued a formal declaration of war since 1945.

Britain hasn't.
Nor France.
Nor Israel
Nor, indeed, anyone else.

Honestly, the insularity of American "expert commentary" is simply hilarious.

There is a world outside the Ol' USofA, you know.

No? Well, it's that thing that you guys go BANG! on with rather monotonous regularity.

 

DAVID_BV2334

8:39 AM ET

August 17, 2011

Sadam Hussein had had a lot

Sadam Hussein had had a lot of mass-destroy weapons kept in sectret, but the very good ideea to remember is that he don't used them.

Marferiky.com

 

RAYFIN3

8:50 AM ET

August 17, 2011

bond-bombs

Since we have invested so much of our national treasure into creating this powerful armada, don’t you think that most Americans will be tempted to use it to maintain, and perhaps expand, the American way of life? None of the pirates off the Somali coast have to worry about national debt, and given the increasingly belligerent tone of Washington politicos, suspect that the American dollar will soon be backed by raw military power (isn’t it already?). If China and other holders just try to redeem their bonds, we will simply bomb them! The uber-wealthy understand that they will need a loyal praetorian guard to protect their assets, so watch for military pay-raises in the 2012 budget.

 

QUATRA

9:09 AM ET

August 17, 2011

POWER HUNGRY

Just like people, countries get hungry for power, whatever the cost. What do they get in the end? Enemies who won't forget.

 

FORLORNEHOPE

12:12 PM ET

August 17, 2011

History lesson

"America has been spared foreign invasion for more than 200 years"

Just remind me, why is the White House painted white? That statement won't be true for another couple of years old boy!

 

EXMOD 27

6:58 PM ET

August 18, 2011

Our English cousins don't count

Minor squabble among family members don't really count as wars.

 

COWBOYJOURNALISM

1:55 PM ET

August 17, 2011

No biggie

We Southerners have been painted as villains in movies for as long as movies have been around. Southern accent = evil, obviously.

 

HEYTHERE

3:23 PM ET

August 17, 2011

dod

the military complex needs an enemy. when i served(20 yrs) it was the soviet union and china was a distant thought. When the soviet union semi dissolved - china became the hated enemy and all assets where swung that way. this way the military complex gets to keep producing products not needed and making money. As to the middle east conflicts quite a few people got promoted to general that would never have made it. we kept people in the service who are losers. we have just now started to kick people out again as the conflicts wind down. we have totally wasted lives and lots of money for nothing. the world is not a safer place - Afghanistan is a crap hole and will continue to be so the roads and schools we built won't be maintained(billions wasted). Iraq is still a piece of garbage and will continue to be so, as is all the middle east.

 

EXMOD 27

7:05 PM ET

August 18, 2011

the military is just the tip

It is congress and job creation so that means labor unions and industrialists in bed together, it is academia who get huge research contracts and it is our entire society that gets cheap energy and cheap goods. We are all feeding at the trough. We spend 700 billion a year on this stuff. The troops get a pittance and even the Generals get little compared to the elites who run this experiment in funneling money to the wealthy.

 

DR. SARDONICUS

8:42 PM ET

August 17, 2011

Circular firing squad

Congress has perfected a circular firing squad approach to the budget, carefully favoring the rich at the expense of everyone and everything else. There's been nary a hint of improvement and quite a few that this massive public ripoff will persist shamelessly until blood flows in the streets. Have the powers that be ever shown that they care, one way or the other, in the last decade or two?

One could be forgiven an admittedly cynical assumption that Afghanistan and Iraq were mere warmup exercises for this national insurgency at home.

We now have an Army manned wall-to-wall with expert counterinsurgents. They are imbued with the Republican ripoff ideal; many of them are red state, rural heartlanders with no job prospects but the military and no love at all for Democratic urbanites. All they need do is come home and set up for the real thing. Mission accomplished.

Lose-lose all around -- as usual these days.

 

NULIZ

10:35 AM ET

August 18, 2011

Dept is a gun

Now lets take a look who is biggest US debtor - well what a surprise, it is China. Country witch fallowing ideology, that US was fighting for half century. Al that it takes is that China would ask to pay dept. And that's all folks. All the world would be at her knees. paskolos.

 

EXMOD 27

7:09 PM ET

August 18, 2011

not sure you understand how too big to fail works...

China has invested way too much money and their own society in propping up the American consumer. China CAN NOT ask for their money back because we would just say "no". Come collect China. China's economy would collapse and all those Chinese leaders would be slowly twisting in the wind. suicide is not a rational option.

 

AFGHANGOOD

11:54 AM ET

August 18, 2011

Sad but true...

As the United States goes through a state of financial turmoil not witness since the great depression, it is often times depressing to see how much taxpayer dollars are being spent in Afghanistan. There seems to be sharp and distinct disconnect between the reality of a National Debt of $14.5 trillion dollars and nearly 10% unemployment while on a daily basis, we have a literal army of people trying as hard as they can to spent these tax dollars on things such as: Promoting business development, building hospital and clinics, building schools to ensure Afghan children can get a solid education, promoting women’s development (always a fan favorite to get quick cash!), and basically nearly anything you can imagine. All of this as we are borrowing money from others to display US Largesse. The sad truth is that regardless of how much money we spend in Afghanistan, it will be what it has always been for most of its history that we have recorded, a rugged land with people who will change at a glacial pace. Sure, they have adopted new ideas and concepts during the course of their history, but do we intend to spend 300 years here?

 

EXMOD 27

7:36 PM ET

August 18, 2011

Nice start but the blame goes to "we the people"

The military industrial complex spent government money. Lots and lots of tax payer money. That money, spent by capitalists/investors, bankers, white collar, Colleges, or blue collar in turned fueled our economy. Government spent, everyone benefitted. With that money we supported politicians who would continue to spend the money. Having a bit of a recession (1981) and what do we do? We elect a President who will spend a bunch of government money on "Defense". Who wins? Well we do. And so does most of the wealthy people in the world. Globalism is fueled by a stable security situation in the world. America's military guarantees the rich countries won't start shooting at each other again. Why does China continue to funnel money at us? They need us, desperately. Shooting is very bad for most businesses. It is far better to make things that shoot and get a long-term parts/repair contract. Does the US military overstate the threat? God yes. They have to or the slow, yet peace loving American folk (no disrespect intended), would demand an end to the feeding trough that is the Congressional/Industrial/Union/Military complex.

 

IMANT

5:38 AM ET

August 23, 2011

America has too many enemies,

America has too many enemies, and the goverment realizes that. So, to my mind it multiplies and multiplies the military power to be always ready when attacked. The children are brought up with the notion that there is no better country and that the rest of the world is nothing compared to the poweful USA. But it seems that it is just the fear that America is trying to beat up with the attempts to make the rest of the wolrd to be scared of them, so nobody would dare touch this powerful and grandeur country. But I think someday it will happen inevitably, as it cannot go on like that forever.
datingservices

 

NMSRJAGMH

11:50 PM ET

September 4, 2011

Military might is not the answer

Every country should and must be able to defend itself. But if it spends so much on military at the expense of the taxpayers, then it is accountable to them regarding matters of the military especially how it makes use of them. What I cannot understand is why the US insists on taking matters into their own hands and act above other countries in NATO and other allies. Examples are the war in Iraq where despite objections, they carried on incurring trillions in expenditure putting themselves in a tight spot. And what do they get at the end of it? Bragging rights? Not even that. Countless of Americans dead and a country in turmoil. But who am I to argue? Just sad at the state of the world. And US are just creating more problems by antagonizing people. If they play nice and stop being arrogant and act as they think is right not bothering what others think, then they should not need to worry so much. Even things like plasmatelevisiontv are being manufactured in China and other countries. There is clearly a shift of power going on. I just hope and pray that I can see world peace in my lifetime.

 

ANNA VAN Z

12:52 PM ET

September 5, 2011

It's not ONE Trillion...

It's 2.3 TRILLION in expenditures that the Pentagon can't account for. This was announced publicly by Donald Rumsfeld on 9/10/2001.

Conveniently, the databases/ paper trail that Pentagon budget analysts had begun examining were all destroyed on 9/11/2001, when a _____ hit the Pentagon.... in the precise area of the Pentagon where these records were kept.. Many of the budget staff were killed as they worked at their desks.

 

DAYE

8:42 PM ET

September 5, 2011

Imagine Peace not War!

The impending defense cuts will not affect the Pentagon. Period. After brewing paranoia of war for decades, suspecting, accusing and portraying all the powerful nations as security threats, all that it could do was being a financial drain on the US economy. But, the paranoia itself has acquired the nature of a postnasaldrip cough situation where in, the country dangles forth between the so-called impending war and its tumultuous diplomatic relations that have been wreaking havoc with the country’s foreign policy. The Pentagon should look inwards to recognize the threat rather than gauging the other nations and thus save its country from losing face.

 

MADCLIVE

12:06 PM ET

September 15, 2011

Won't affect the Pentagon

Interesting article. Some good really good points made above about The impending defense cuts , I agree with some of them. I don't think they will affect the PentagonThanks for the article. Kindest regards, Mad DJ Clive