Pentagon and the military-market mix
13 Jul, 2002 · 787
Atul Bhardawaj is apprehensive that the military-market mix might end up as marketization of the military industry
In the wake of the 9/11 terrorist air strikes on
America
, many skeptics pronounced the end of globalization. However, they have been proven wrong. Globalization, is rejuvenating itself in the military area. Thanks to Osama-bin-Laden, the American military global presence is more pervasive now than at any time in American history. The fear generated by terrorism is proving to be more effective than, ‘human rights violations’ and ‘democratic pacifism’. The ease with which nations ranging from Uzbekistan to Pakistan are offering help to US troops, shows that the ‘war on terrorism’ has diluted the Post-War definition of sovereignty to a large extent.
India
too has accelerated its ‘military reforms’ process by agreeing to jointly patrol the piracy prone Malacca straits with the
US
navy.
US
is spreading its military tentacles into
Asia
merely to fight terrorism. The Asian energy needs would double in the next twenty years. The region is likely to witness greater economic growth, but also experience political turmoil on a large scale. Therefore, the
US
military presence in
Asia
is designed to secure the stability of the Asian oil trade and their markets rather than for obvious national security imperative reasons.
Washington
is enhancing the longevity of its hegemony over the world, for which it is harnessing its military-market power. According to Thomas Barnett, a professor at US naval war college, “the national security and financial establishments are in the same business; the effective processing of international risk.”
America
has built up an international coalition against terrorism with various states and international agencies, similarly, on the home front too, it is forging meaningful relationships with civilian business organizations for global and homeland security. The
US
military Joint Vision 2020, talks about the need for ‘interagency’ cooperation, and coordination between the department of defence and diverse non-governmental and private voluntary organizations. Towards this end the
US
naval war college has been collaborating with the broker-dealer firm Cantor Fitzgerald in conducting a series of economic security exercises, for example, an attack on Wall Street.
US
government for this purpose.
US
government’s policy of regulating the defence sector.
It would be naïve to imagine that the
One of the American aims is to evolve as a global military leviathan to protect its national economic interests in global markets.
Military and trade have always been bosom friends. However, one essential difference between the Clausewitzian era, when war was a continuation of politics by other means, and the post-modern era is that, while in the earlier era guns followed trade, today, trade follows guns and guns follow the TV camera. War news, telecast live, draws far more ‘eyeballs’ than any other entertainment programme; this has made war a lucrative business proposition for television channels.
Just as
The changed security imperatives after the 9/11 attacks have led both the military and market forces to join hands to meet future challenges. The business community has realized that security is no longer the sole responsibility of the Pentagon, as security implies much more than great games played by the government in foreign lands. Therefore, efforts are on to bridge the public-private divide in the realm of security. According to Fortune, the private sector will spend $150 billion on ‘homeland’ security –approximately four times the money allocated by the
The links between venture- capitalists and the military dates back to 1958, when Eisenhower created the Small Business Act. According to this Act the government lent money at much lower interest rates to entrepreneurs, who were ready to invest in risky R&D projects. According to David J Rothkopf, (Foreign Policy, June 2002) the “partnership between the security and venture-capital communities has had a circular, self- reinforcing quality.” Information technology and internet are such areas where cooperation between the Pentagon and private business has proved efficacious for the
Apart from the physical security of businesses the other area which demands much enhanced levels of public-private coalition building is cyber-security. The ever increasing threats to computers from hackers have led to business houses sharing their databases with the government and stow them in different places.
There could be hardly any argument against public-private partnership in defence, especially in
POPULAR COMMENTARIES
