176 of 186 people found the following review helpful:
5.0 out of 5 stars
Timely -, August 20, 2010
This review is from: Dismantling the Empire: America's Last Best Hope (American Empire Project) (Hardcover)
Chalmers Johnson is professor emeritus at the University of California, San Diego. Chalmers Johnson minces no words on his concerns with a U.S. overemphasis on the military. "The failure to begin to deal with our bloated military establishment and the profligate use of it in missions for which it is hopelessly inappropriate will . . . condemn the U.S. to . . . imperial overstretch, perpetual war, and insolvency, leading to a likely collapse similar to that of the former Soviet Union."
The 2008 Pentagon inventory includes 190,000 troops in 46 nations and territories, and 865 facilities in more than 40 countries and overseas U.S. territories. In just Japan, we have 99,295 connected to U.S. forces living there. The only purpose is to provide control over as many nations as possible. Britain, Germany, France, The Netherlands, and Japan have given up their empires, and we should too. Per Nick Turse ('The Complex: How the Military Invades our Everyday Lives') we could net $2.6 billion selling our base assets at Diego Garcia in the Indian Ocean and another $2.2 billion for Guantanamo Bay - just two of those facilities. The Pentagon also has 234 golf courses around the world, 70 Lear Jet airplanes for generals and admirals, a ski resort in the Bavarian Alps.
Meanwhile, we continue trying to pacify Afghanistan, seemingly oblivious to the fact that Britain and the Soviet Union previously failed. Even Pakistan cannot command the Pashtun tribes in its own area; worse yet, its army trains Taliban fighters in suicide attacks and orders them to fight American and NATO soldiers in Afghanistan, while extorting huge amounts of money from Saudi Arabia, Persian Gulf emirates, and the U.S. to train 'freedom fighters.' Our linkage, however, with anti-Muslim Israel and India makes full Pakistani commitment impossible.
Another problem is that our overseas troops often bring sexual violence against local women and girls, 83% of which were not punished between 2001-08 in Japan. Our uniformed 18-24 year-olds have become 'ugly ambassadors' for the U.S. around the globe. As for U.S. military females, 90% of the rapes are never reported.
Johnson asks "What harm would befall the U.S. if we closed those bases that we garrison around the world?" Our prior predictions of disaster (falling Asian dominoes) proved false after the Vietnam War, and it was Vietnam, not the U.S. that put an end to the murderous reign of Pol Pot in neighboring Cambodia. Imagining that China would want to start a war with the U.S., even over Taiwan, would mean a dramatic change of personality for that country. The author believes that no evidence exists to suggest U.S. efforts advance global peace - in fact, we make it less likely (eg. Iraq), and our weapons and tactics (eg. cluster bombs, 10 million unexploded mines in Afghanistan, and 'surgical strikes') enrage locals. As for why few of the world's billion+ Muslims like the U.S. - estimates range from 500,000 to 1 million Iraqi children were killed as an outgrowth of U.S. sanctions. Johnson also goes on to document U.S. blocking contracts to improve Iraqi water and other utilities just prior to our invasion. Then there are the matters of torture and secret renditions - how did these acts reduce terrorism?
Statistics compiled by the Federation of American Scientists analyzed by Gore Vidal show 201 military operations initiated by the U.S. against others between the end of WWII and 9/11 - none of which directly resulted in the creation of a democracy. These included Iran (1953, 1979), Guatemala (1954), Cuba (1959-present), Congo (1960), Brazil (1964), Indonesia (1965), Vietnam (1961-73), Laos (1961-73), Cambodia (1969-73), Greece (1967-73), Chile (1973), Afghanistan (1979-present), El Salvador, Guatemala, and Nicaragua (1980s), Iraq (1991-present), Panama (1989), Grenada (1983). (The Korean War is a notable positive exception.)
Another example - instead of radical demobilization after the Soviet Union's demise, we attempted to shore up Cold War structures in Europe, Asia, and Latin America, and repeatedly irritated both Russia and China. Space has become militarized. Per Johnson, Carter's national security adviser Zbigniew Brzezinski and former CIA director Gates made it clear that U.S. aid to the mujaheddin began six months prior to the Soviet invasion, and helped provoke it.
The author recommends cutting the number of dependents, mercenaries, and civilians stationed overseas, along with their expensive facilities, stop being the world's largest exporter of arms and munitions and educating Third World militaries in torture and coups, abolish ROTC (militarizes campuses) and the CIA (history of dismal intelligence and operational failures), and bring our troops home.
Though not included in "Dismantling the Empire," a recent 'Newsweek' article also pointed out waste in the Pentagon - Secretary Gates estimates there are 30 levels between himself and line officers, and expects by 2020 for the U.S. to have 'only' 20X China's number of advanced stealth fighters; other researchers recently found 530 deputy assistant secretaries of defense, compared to 78 in 1960.
Bottom-Line: Chalmers Johnson wishes he could be more optimistic about the future; unfortunately, he believes it is time to lower the flag on the 'American Century' (actually only 70 years - 1940-2010). I would also suggest we stop supporting Israel - an enormous burden that has led to the Arab Oil Embargo, 9/11, and our current never-ending War on Terror in Iraq, Afghanistan, Pakistan, Yemen, Somalia, and endless Homeland Security often bufoonish efforts to accomplish the impossible - 'terrorist-proof' America.
Help other customers find the most helpful reviews
Was this review helpful to you? Yes
No
62 of 68 people found the following review helpful:
5.0 out of 5 stars
Chalmers Johnson has provided insight for years. Now I listen carefully, August 29, 2010
Professor Chalmers Johnson, a Korean War veteran and former CIA consultant, obviously is well-informed. This review is based on the unabridged audio CD.
Chalmers has the catchiest book titles: Blowback: The Costs and Consequences of American Empire; The Sorrows of Empire: Militarism, Secrecy, and the End of the Republic; Nemesis: The Last Days of the American Republic; and now Dismantling the Empire: America's Last Best Hope. His stature as an author, critic of U.S. foreign policy and declinist has grown with his audience.
In summary, Chalmers presents a well-researched and well-reasoned argument that the U.S. has to urgently scale back its commitments around the world, including withdrawal from military bases abroad, to save its democracy. The alternative appears to be bankruptcy and some form of dictatorship. It's not difficult to imagine either when listening to Chalmers' calm presentation of the facts.
Retreat from any type of venture is never easy. Yet Chalmers is calling on the U.S. to retreat from Empire. The listener would have benefited from examples of empires that deliberately and methodically scaled down - if for no other reason than to be assured it is possible. Observance of current events does not provide encouragement that any of Chalmers' recommendations will be followed.
I recommend this book not because there is any likelihood that policy will be informed by it, but because it may help prepare the listener/reader for what lies ahead. The arguments presented herein can't hurt you.
Help other customers find the most helpful reviews
Was this review helpful to you? Yes
No
41 of 46 people found the following review helpful:
3.0 out of 5 stars
Not Up to the Nemesis Trilogy, October 15, 2010
This review is from: Dismantling the Empire: America's Last Best Hope (American Empire Project) (Hardcover)
I have read, reviewed, and urged Johnson's work on others for years, going back to his work on peasant nationalism vs communism. This time, however, I am saddened to make a case that this book can be skipped. Of course, any critic of Johnson stands on a land mine of his prescience but in this case, I feel quite safe. Why does one read him? In the first place, to learn from his incredibly skillful research methods which are, sad to say, absent here. No footnotes. Check for yourself before you buy, on p197. The footnotes are online only and may have disappeared. Secondly, we read Johnson for his wit and razor like critique, which is here, but for the most part, it has been elsewhere, online at TomDispatch. That is doubly no fair when he criticizes others for the same thing in his Dismantling text. Moreover, Johnson softens in this book his sharp analysis of fascism in the US, which appears all the time elsewhere. Next, we read Johnson for his insider knowledge, perhaps most of it drawn from his days as a CIA asset. This is here too. But it's just not as keen. Dismantle the Empire? Like the British? Probably not. The US does not have the Brits to hide behind. But Johnson, a die-hard anti-Marxist and something of a patriot (maybe he picked that up from mentor Hannah Arendt who could well have recruited him to the CIA and bear in mind that his Marxism is always conflated with Sovietism or Maoism)still insists that imperialism is hubris mixed with militarism. It is far more than that. It is the birth twin of capital. It is necessary to the socio-economic system as it searches for cheap labor, raw material, markets and regional control. Anti-Marxism seems to be the reason that Johnson winds up with two suggestions on what to do, equally untenable for most people: leave the US and take your cat, or, Dismantle the empire. Every other book Johnson has written is much better and I urge you to buy and learn from every one of them. That's a demonstration of my respect as well as my hope that this review does not cost him or his wife a dime.
Help other customers find the most helpful reviews
Was this review helpful to you? Yes
No
