A REPUBLIC NOT AN EMPIRE

Posted: 7/7/2003
The Cost of Empire - U.S. Military Bases Overseasby Royce Carlson

The idea of United States military bases in other countries is accepted as normal by most Americans. This concept is, however, decidedly abnormal for the citizens of most countries. Can you imagine, say, a French military base in South Dakota? Or how about a Chinese military base in California? I don't think any American would be happy about a foreign military presence on our soil. Yet that is the case for the citizens of almost 60 countries and territories around the globe who have to live with a foreign military power in their midst.

Practically every time the United States is involved in a military action, the result is a permanent, or semi-permanent, military presence in or near the country involved. This has been going on since the Spanish American war, about a hundred years ago, when the bases in the Philippines and Guantanamo Bay, Cuba were built.

After World War II, the U.S. planted bases in Germany, France, Italy, Spain, and Great Britain. These bases still exist almost 60 years later. American bases in Korea have been in operation since the early 1950's. The United States has been reluctant to abandon any base once it acquired it. On the few occasions that the U.S. government did relinquish their presence in a country, it made up for it by opening more bases in neighboring countries. For example, the bases in Panama were given up in 1999 but replaced with bases in other Caribbean countries.
There are currently about 1,000 U.S. military bases and installations in foreign countries and territories. There are nearly 100,000 American troops in NATO countries alone. In addition to permanent bases, there are also temporary operations and exercises. According to the Defense Department, before September 11, 2001 operations involving approximately 60,000 troops in 100 countries were going on at any given time.

The number of U.S. bases abroad has fluctuated over the last 60 years from a maximum right after World War II, when there were nearly 2000 bases in 100 countries. Half of those were dismantled within five years. The number began increasing again with the onset of the Korean War and grew until after the Vietnam War. Since then the numbers decreased. By 1988 the number of bases was down to 794. The first Gulf War marked the beginning of an expansion that continues to this day.

Since 9/11 the number of American bases has increased dramatically. The war on Afghanistan allowed the United States to open bases in Kyrgyzstan, Pakistan, and Uzbekistan. Following the ousting of Saddam Hussein, the Pentagon is planning to establish four US bases in Iraq. According to a World Tribune article in May of 2003, the U.S. has been probing North African countries for the purpose of establishing permanent bases there. It just opened the first North African base in Djibouti.

Now for the questions. Why are these bases there? What is the effect on global politics and the countries hosting these bases? Are America and the world safer because of American military bases overseas? Let’s go through these questions one at a time.

The easy answer to the first question is that the bases exist for the global projection of U.S. power and the protection of its interests abroad. When there is a military action overseas, bases are required to make deployment of troops and equipment practical. Each war produced a corresponding increase in bases in the area. Once a base is created, however, it tends to perpetuate itself.

According to a 1970 report issued by the Subcommittee on Security Agreements and Commitments Abroad, U.S. Senate Committee on Foreign Relations, "Once an American overseas base is established it takes on a life of its own. Original missions may become outdated but new missions are developed, not only with the intention of keeping the facility going, but often to actually enlarge it." This tendency prompted Zoltan Grossman, in his article, "New US Military Bases: Side Effects or Causes of War?" to comment, "…the establishment of new bases may in the long run be more critical to U.S. war planners than the wars themselves."

The long-term presence of American bases on foreign soil creates some animosity amongst the populations. Protests of American military presence are common. Even though some populations are thrilled that Americans helped to liberate their countries via military action, bases that do not go away shortly after the war become an irritation. As mentioned above, some of these bases have been in operation for almost a hundred years. An American base can be a constant reminder that their country is somehow under the thumb of a foreign power – not necessarily good for national pride.

There are other consequences as well. There is a positive effect on the local economy when a base opens and during its existence. But economic growth might not always be seen as positive. The bases at Subic Bay in the Philippines, used mostly as a recreational facility for American soldiers deployed in the Far East, created a market for prostitution. It is estimated that, before the base closed in 1999, nearly 5,000 prostitutes made their living from the base. When bases are closed, local economies built over the years to serve the military personnel suffer due to the withdrawal of the troops.

Crime is a problem. The base on Okinawa was in the news not too long ago because a few American soldiers were accused of raping an Okinawan girl. Since the military has its own police and judicial system, the host countries complain that American soldiers who commit crimes overseas are not properly prosecuted and punishments are lenient if they happen at all.
Cultural clashes are another problem in some countries, and particularly with bases in the Middle East and Asia. American soldiers spread American culture. Some people welcome it and some resist. Inadvertent violation of local social codes is responsible for much misunderstanding between the people of a country and the military presence.

The presence of American bases presents problems for environmental cleanup. When a base is closed, the U.S. government abandons jurisdiction and responsibility. Bases have been closed leaving unexploded munitions, toxic waste dumps, and other dangerous situations. The host country is left to deal with this.

Are America and the world safer because of this extensive global network of military installations? We can never know what the world would have been like without American military bases in other countries but the answer is not a clear "yes." It’s a tough question.
After 9/11, when the hunt for Osama bin Laden was on, he released a tape claiming that one of the main reasons he and Al Qaeda considered the United States an enemy was because of the military bases in Saudi Arabia (considered the holy land for Islam). The presence of the bases may have protected U.S. interests from the likes of Saddam Hussein during the 12 years between their creation and now, but it also increased the likelihood of terrorist attacks from Al Qaeda.

It’s possible that America’s aggressive pursuit of a global military presence is actually putting Americans more at risk rather than less. The world may be a more dangerous place now because of the U.S. desire to militarily ensure that it remain the world’s only superpower. There may be other, more effective, means to promote world stability and American interests than the threat of "the big stick" that the U.S. military represents.

In closing, I would like to offer a final question. With a faltering economy, and social problems at home, can we afford to create and maintain a global empire at the expense of such important domestic responsibilities as educating our children, taking care of our sick and elderly, and improving our economy? The answer is critical to the future of America.
Resources and References

How American Power Girds the Globe with a Ring of Steel - by Ian Traynor http://www.truthout.org/docs_03/042303G.shtml
GlobeMaster Airbases Search Enginehttp://www.globemaster.de
U.S. Military Bases and Empire - Harry Magdoff, John Bellamy Foster, Robert W. McChesney, Paul Sweezyhttp://www.monthlyreview.org/0302editr.htm
U.S. Military Bases in Latin America and the Caribbean - by John Lindsay-Polandhttp://www.americaspolicy.org/briefs/2001/body_v6n35milbase.html
New US Military Bases: Side Effects or Causes of War? - by Zoltan Grossman http://www.counterpunch.org/zoltanbases.html
U.S. eyes permanent military bases in North Africa – WorldTribune.comhttp://216.26.163.62/2003/ss_military_05_06.html

A Republic, not an Empire America is a Constitutional Republic, not a democracy and certainly not an empire. While we as a nation have democratic processes in support of our Republic, nothing in our Constitution suggests that we are to be an empire. Further, when a Republic seeks to become an empire, it does so at the contempt of the law and the rule of law by which it seeks to operate.

*And if we are saying we will eventually LEAVE IRaq, then WHY are we speding BILLIONS to build PERMANENT MILITARY BASES THERE?

*As the worlds military super power is it any wonder these "terrorists" see us as the supporters to certain regiems whom terrorize their citenzenry? enslave them? AKA Saudi Arabia.

Under the guise of Religion, g-d has belssed one GW BUSH to go forward and multiply? F NO!

It's all going to unravel as the lemming American public sleeps and nods in approval as our Constitution gets trampled as the bend over Congress nods in approval and rubber stamps instead of defiantly defending our Constitution.

We have military bases in 177 Countries?? Sounds like EMPIRE building to me! ALL this to protect our freedom at home? Is that why we are wittingly helping to build up the chinese military empire?

D