Workers Vanguard No. 1020
|
22 March 2013
|
Bourgeoisie Debates Drones, Military Costs-Fine-Tuning U.S. Imperialist Terror Machine
In the nearly 12 years since the attacks on the World Trade Center
and Pentagon, America’s capitalist rulers have implemented an unprecedented
enhancement of their repressive powers in the name of fighting the “war against
terrorism.” While unleashing its unrivaled military might from Iraq to
Afghanistan, Washington has instituted massive wiretapping, surveillance and
detention without trial at home. This trampling of basic rights was implemented
first by the Bush administration and expanded by the Obama White House, as the
ruling class sought to inculcate fear and acquiescence in the population. In
obtaining legal sanction for its crimes at home and abroad, the government has
made permanent fixtures of measures that in the main were portrayed as temporary
exigencies. This is a deadly danger to the working class and oppressed
minorities, the principal targets of capitalist repression.
The recent sparring between some on Capitol Hill and the White
House over the targeted killings of U.S. citizens is all about making the state
apparatus more effective in its murderous work. For weeks, various Senators made
noises about holding up the confirmation of John Brennan as Obama’s CIA chief.
Four years ago, Brennan was so tarred by his association with torture under
George W. Bush that Obama did not pursue his nomination to the same post. But he
since became the architect of Obama’s drone program.
Brennan’s critics demanded that the White House release secret
legal memos that had authorized the assassination of U.S. citizens, although
neither Democrats nor Republicans have batted an eye over the thousands of
Pakistanis, Yemenis and others slaughtered by drones. When the Justice
Department White Paper summarizing the memos surfaced in February, politicians
on both sides of the aisle overwhelmingly hailed this augmentation of the lethal
powers of the imperial presidency. In urging Brennan’s rapid confirmation,
Democratic Senator Dianne Feinstein intoned, with presumably unintended menace:
“He draws on a deep well of experience.”
It was to be expected that the Democrats would go along with their
Commander-in-Chief. So it was right-wing Republican Senator Rand Paul of
Kentucky who challenged Obama, mainly about the prospect of the assassination of
U.S. citizens on American soil. Paul’s 13-hour filibuster on March 6, aimed at
blocking Brennan’s confirmation vote, was widely covered in the media and
received plaudits from some liberal antiwar activists and others. Make no
mistake, libertarians like Paul, a Tea Party favorite, hate unions and spending
government money on black people—or anyone else for that matter—far more than
they object to the evisceration of civil liberties.
The Obama administration demonstrated its determination to
assassinate U.S. citizens when it killed New Mexico-born Islamist Anwar
al-Awlaki by a drone strike in Yemen in 2011. His son and several Yemenis were
similarly blown away some months later. And all along, the White House has kept
open the option of assassinating U.S. citizens on American soil as well. In a
March 4 letter to Rand Paul, Attorney General Eric Holder dismissed the scenario
of drone strikes inside U.S. territory as “entirely hypothetical” but granted
that the president could “conceivably” authorize such attacks in the context of
a “catastrophic attack” like Pearl Harbor or September 11.
On the day after the filibuster, Holder issued a curt follow-up
letter claiming the right of the president to assassinate anyone, anywhere
except for citizens “not engaged in combat” on U.S. soil. For the imperialists,
who is “engaged in combat” is a very elastic concept. In May 2002, U.S. citizen
Jose Padilla was arrested at Chicago’s O’Hare Airport on trumped-up charges. One
month later, he was declared to be an “enemy combatant” and was disappeared into
a Navy brig in South Carolina. In the end, he was railroaded to 17 years in
prison. In an amicus brief filed by the Spartacist League and the
Partisan Defense Committee on Padilla’s behalf, we stressed that the “rationale
of the ‘war against terrorism’ is a construct justifying not only the right to
disappear citizens, but the right to assassinate them as well.”
Imperialist Crimes
A week after Brennan’s confirmation, a UN official presenting an
investigation into U.S. drone strikes declared that such attacks carried out in
Pakistan over the objections of local authorities violated international law.
The UN investigation, carried out at the request of Russia and China as well as
Pakistan, identified some 330 strikes in that country, totaling at least 2,200
dead. With U.S. drones firing with impunity on the population, including
emergency response personnel, funeral processions and schools, life in the
tribal areas along the Afghanistan border has been shattered. Some imperialist
strategists worry, with reason, that the unbridled drone program is creating a
lot more “enemy combatants” around the world.
To mollify those in Washington who worry about the excessive
secrecy of the drone program and have qualms about deploying drones against U.S.
citizens, proposals have been made for a special court to approve the “targeted
killings.” This is a total sham. Such a court would be modeled on the Foreign
Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) courts for wiretapping applications. FISA
courts have never been more than a rubber stamp for the executive office.
In another proposal to refine U.S. imperialist policies, a New
York Times (9 March) editorial called for repealing the 2001 Authorization
for the Use of Military Force (AUMF). This legislation, which was adopted three
days after the September 11 attacks, gave the executive carte blanche in
the global “war on terror,” providing a go-ahead for the invasion of Afghanistan
and also much of the basis for “anti-terror” measures on the home front. The
Times—whose services to the “war on terror” included reporter Judith
Miller retailing the fiction of Saddam Hussein’s “weapons of mass
destruction”—now laments “an unintelligible policy without express limits or
protective walls” implemented under the 2001 authorization. The Times
editorialists worry mainly that the greatly enhanced powers of the executive
will someday be wielded by one less enlightened than the former constitutional
law professor Obama—namely, a Republican less to their liking.
Whatever their policy differences at various times, the Democratic
and Republican parties are united in furthering the interests of U.S.
imperialism against the exploited and oppressed around the world. During the
recent “sequestration” circus, there was bipartisan consensus that the U.S.
military could stand some trimming, particularly now that the Iraq occupation is
officially over and the deployment of troops to Afghanistan is coming to a
close. Of course, any cuts to the Pentagon budget that Washington comes up with
would still leave the U.S. as the overwhelmingly predominant military force on
the planet. There is also bipartisan consensus on the strategic military “pivot”
toward Asia announced last year by Obama, the primary target of which is the
Chinese deformed workers state. The retailing of endless scare stories about
Chinese “cyberattacks” is above all a means for the administration to justify
its increased belligerence toward China.
Blood-Soaked American “Democracy”
The New York Times has apparently decided that it, too,
lacked some transparency in regard to Army Private Bradley Manning. After
providing WikiLeaks with a trove of classified material documenting U.S.
imperialist crimes and duplicity, Manning was thrown into a military brig three
years ago, suffering enormous abuse, and now faces a potential life sentence.
Last month, WV wrote a letter to Margaret Sullivan, the Times’
Public Editor, noting the omission of any mention of Bradley Manning in two
February 9 articles condemning cover-ups in the drone program and charging that
this was “simply cowardice on the part of the Times” (see WV No.
1018, 22 February). With his court martial approaching, Manning confessed on
February 28 to having released the materials to WikiLeaks after unsuccessfully
trying to interest the New York Times and the Washington Post.
Judging by Sullivan’s subsequent article “The Danger of Suppressing
the Leaks” (9 March), we were not alone in calling attention to Manning’s
disappearance by this major bourgeois mouthpiece. Sullivan’s column notes that
the military has charged Manning with “aiding the enemy” for breaking through
the wall of official secrecy. The next day, the Times ran an op-ed piece
by Bill Keller, its former executive editor, which suggested that the
Times might well have suppressed many of the files and would certainly
feel no obligation to come to his defense in any case.
In “Hail Bradley Manning! Free Him Now!” (WV No. 1019, 8
March), we wrote: “In lifting a bit of the veil of secrecy and lies with which
the capitalist rulers cover their depredations, Bradley Manning performed a
great service to workers and oppressed around the world. All who oppose the
imperialist barbarity and machinations revealed in the material he provided must
join in demanding his immediate freedom.” Manning’s admission to being the
source of the leaks has garnered him wider support, forcing even the Times
to take note. With his trial slated to begin on June 3 at Fort Meade,
Maryland, his supporters should turn out to demand his immediate freedom.
One writer in the bourgeois media who has given Manning extensive
coverage is Glenn Greenwald. In a March 4 speech at Brooklyn College, the London
Guardian columnist observed that the torture of Manning by the U.S.
military was intended as a message to chill political dissent. In condemning the
open-ended “war on terror,” Greenwald noted, among other things, how what
started as a crackdown on immigrants from the Muslim world after September 11
became a far broader net of repression, even extending into the Occupy protests.
The civil libertarian Greenwald painted a picture of democracy
dying after September 11. But attacks on the working class, minorities and
perceived political opponents of the ruling class are built into the very fabric
of this “democracy,” which is but a veil over the class dictatorship of the
capitalist exploiters. As Bolshevik leader V.I. Lenin taught:
“There is not a single state, however democratic, which has no
loopholes or reservations in its constitution guaranteeing the bourgeoisie the
possibility of dispatching troops against the workers, of proclaiming martial
law, and so forth, in case of a ‘violation of public order,’ and actually in
case the exploited class ‘violates’ its position of slavery and tries to behave
in a non-slavish manner.”
— The Proletarian Revolution and the Renegade Kautsky (1918)
U.S. history is replete with the intentional slaughter of citizens,
from gunning down workers in strike battles to cops shooting black youth in the
streets. As a Spartacist comrade said in the discussion period following
Greenwald’s talk: “I have a memory of what American capitalism is all about:
Black Panthers killed in their beds while they’re asleep, 1969, Chicago;
internment of Japanese Americans. These are not excesses. The deception and the
repression are inherent within the capitalist system. It has to be abolished
through fighting for workers revolution.”
In the last five years, millions of workers in the U.S., and many
more around the world, have lost their livelihoods and even their homes due to
the grinding capitalist economic crisis. The enormous tensions between the tiny
class of exploiters and the mass of people at the base of society are the seeds
of future sharp class battles. When the workers are propelled into struggle
against their conditions, they will be confronted with the exercise of naked
state repression. This underscores the crucial need for the proletariat to
oppose all imperialist wars and occupations and all domestic measures
strengthening the capitalist state apparatus. The principal task for Marxists is
to forge a revolutionary workers party—a tribune of the people—to lead the
proletariat in sweeping away capitalist class rule and replacing it with a
workers government.
No comments:
Post a Comment