Weekly Analysis – 6/29/03
U.S. Global Force
By Kirt R. Poovey
The Los Angeles Times reported on June 27th that Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld is talking about “the possibility of the United States organizing a standing international peacekeeping force that could be dispatched to trouble spots around the globe.” This global force would not operate under the United Nations or NATO and would include permanent U.S. military personnel that would be trained for peacekeeping work.
While this may seem contrary to President Bush’s stated views while running for election, (he was opposed to using U.S. troops in international peacekeeping operations) it is really no surprise to those that have read Rebuilding America’s Defenses by The Project for the New American Century. This guide for establishing a global American Empire calls for expanding the “constabulary duties” of our military and was published in September 2000.
This report details four missions for the military in the new century. The report summarizes the third mission as, “…the Pentagon must retain forces to preserve the current peace in ways that fall short of conduction (of) major theater campaigns. A decade’s experience and the policies of two administrations have shown that such forces must be expanded to meet the needs of the new, long-term NATO mission in the Balkans, the continuing no-fly-zone and other missions in Southwest Asia, and other presence missions in vital regions of East Asia. These duties are today’s most frequent missions, requiring forces configured for combat but capable of long-term, independent constabulary operations.”
The Time’s article stated, “Senior Bush administration officials are coming to believe that the best solution is to create a standing constabulary force made up of troops from a range of countries – but led and trained by the U.S.” Paul Wolfowitz was one of the participants that created the Rebuilding America’s Defenses report. Looks like the Bush administration is taking pages directly out of the report and making them policy.
As the Times says, “as envisioned, creating a standing international peacekeeping force that is U.S.-led or -trained would allow the Pentagon to exert considerably more control over peacekeeping than in the past.” Global government anyone?
In my June 25th column I said, “At the appropriate time Mr. Wolfowitz will surely confirm that another reason for the Iraqi War was to set up this global positioning for the American Empire.” Tied into establishing this global peacekeeping force with constabulary duties is the obvious fact that they will be positioned around the globe in strategic areas. Also, our regular military will be set up in other militarily tactical areas. It seems that Mr. Rumsfeld has confirmed my supposition almost as soon as I stated it.
Interestingly, the Rebuilding America’s Defenses report states the following regarding Iraq, “While the unresolved conflict with Iraq provides the immediate justification, the need for a substantial American force presence in the Gulf transcends the issue of the regime of Saddam Hussein.” This just proves the point that Global Positioning was definitely one of the main factors in the Iraqi War along with oil as Wolfowitz confirmed recently.
The Bush administration officials themselves are confirming what many of us have been claiming from the beginning. Earlier our claims were purported to be inaccurate and full of conspiracy theories, but now the administration’s own spokespeople our proving that we were correct then and now.
The real question is whether the conservatives blindly following the Bushies, and the American public in general will pay attention to our warnings, or if our counsel will go unheeded by those that refuse to open their eyes to the impending doom that lies ahead of them.
"We will stand, fight, and die to defend our country; but we will not blindly trust it. Even our Founding Fathers distrusted a large, centralized, all-powerful federal government -- so should we. Always be on guard to discern the truth and defend it at all costs."