“As we face our future, a vital element in keeping the peace is our military establishment. Our arms must be mighty, ready for instant action, so that no potential aggressor may be tempted to risk his own destruction. However, our military organization has grown to such an extent that today it bears little relation to that known by any of my predecessors in peacetime. We must guard against the acquisition of unwarranted influence, whether sought or unsought, by the military-industrial complex. If not, the potential for the disastrous rise of misplaced power will exist and persist.”
The “military-industrial complex” is a concept commonly used to refer to policy and monetary relationships between our nation’s legislators, armed forces and the industrial sector that supports them. These relationships include political contributions related to defense spending, lobbying to support bureaucracies, beneficial legislation and oversight of the arms industry. Consequently, over the past 50 years, there have been very few years in which the United States has spent less on the military than it did the year before.
I am reminded of President Eisenhower’s words of warning practically every time I contemplate the nature of our nation’s deficit and how we citizens are all expected to bite the bullet as part of our country’s economic recovery. Certainly we face an economic crisis of historic proportion and it’s vital that our nation’s sovereignty be held secure, but at what cost?
Currently, our military spending represents one of the largest contributors to our deficit, yet most of the proposed budget cuts are being sought after in programs that are already under-funded, such as health care, Social Security and education.
I mean no disrespect to the brave men and women who serve in our armed forces or the workforce that manufactures our nation’s armaments. I only wish to ask the question as to why so few of our elected officials ever propose any serious cuts to our bloated military budget in order to help balance our nation’s crushing deficits.
Could it be that the leaders and vested interests of the military-industrial complex — the ones that President Eisenhower warned us about — have succeeded in buying the complicity of our Congress with generous public campaign contributions through private-sector lobbying efforts? Especially in light of the fact that the most reliable way for a national legislator to bring home a share of federal tax money is channeling it through the Department of Defense.
Certainly it’s not hard to understand that the armaments industry — which profits not only from domestic sales but also from tens of billions of dollars in annual exports — can effectively manipulate public policy to perpetuate itself.
“We must never let the weight of this new reality endanger our liberties or democratic processes. Only an alert and knowledgeable citizenry can compel the proper meshing of the huge industrial and military machinery of defense with our domestic goals, so that our security and prosperity may equally survive together.”
The United States can no longer afford to pay for such bloated military when we have so many more pressing domestic concerns and an education system that ranks 13th in the world. Our enemies need not defeat us militarily when they can do so economically.
It’s clear that our national security is not assured by the power of military force alone, a priority that continues to consume enormous amounts of our national treasure. Referring to Eisenhower’s warnings, Republican Sen. John McCain recently remarked, “The former president’s words have unfortunately come true, that priorities are too often set by what benefits corporations as opposed to what benefits the country.”
“Each proposal must be weighed in the light of a broader consideration: the need to maintain balance in and among our national programs — balance between the private and the public economy — balance between our essential requirements as a nation and the duties imposed by the nation upon the individual; balance between actions of the moment and the national welfare of the future.”
The ever-escalating spending on the military should concern every American, as should the unspoken “rule” that military expenditures are somehow too important to be scrutinized in the same manner as other spending. Eisenhower was concerned about more than just the military’s size; he also worried about its relationship to the American economy and society.
One may conclude that if our nation’s political representatives would rather be confrontational than conciliatory in working together during these difficult times and if they prefer their ideology over others at any cost, they will not be meeting their responsibility to serve all the people all the time.
As our former president reminded us:
“Good judgment seeks balance and progress; lack of it eventually finds imbalance and frustration.”
Merrell Wood is the founder of Middletown Habitat for Humanity, TV Middletown and the Sink Or Swim pool campaign.