Guest Post: “Keeping up with the Kardashians”

I’m guilty! Spend more of my time staying up on the lives of folk in the entertainment world than having meaningful conversations about big ideas. The conflicts around the world and American involvement have slipped off my homepage.

Bryan Jiencke, a sophomore studying in the College of Arts and Sciences — and a seargent in the United States Marine Corp — reminded me, via this guest post, that I’ve got to get back to thinking and talking about our violence, war, and conflicts — they never were and still are not pointless conversations:

Keeping up with the Kardashians

For those who have forgotten, this country is at war. In the eleven months since my release from active duty, I have not seen any indication of it in American society. I have even been asked, by multiple fine citizens, if the Afghanistan conflict is still being fought. In contrast to wars of the past, the burden of our present one falls solely on the shoulders of our military members and their families. Despite the untold number of threats we currently face both at home and abroad, many Americans give more concern to pressing issues like the love lives and wholesome values of the Kardashian sisters.

The separate conflicts of the Global War on Terrorism are sometimes generalized under idealistic notions like a war to spread peace and democracy. In reality, they are much more involved and they each have distinct political causes, strategic considerations, and potential legacies. Although our remaining forces are being withdrawn from Iraq, their story is just beginning and the conflict’s legacy is now in their hands. At present, the situation is unsound and any form of unrest could potentially undo what was established there; it is an enormous, expensive, and dangerous gamble. Recently, an insurgent takeover of a government building resulted in 154 casualties and it highlighted that their presence remains, as quiet as it may be. Iraq is surrounded by countries that are strongly influenced by violent extremist groups and the problem is not going away any time soon. At the same time, deep rooted division remains between Islamic sects and could cause internal conflicts within the unfamiliar and fragile democratic government that we handed to them. The situation is not as simple as many like to believe.

If the primary cause for invasion was the fear of weapons of mass destruction, where was the invasion of North Korea? The Iraq conflict is often called an oil war, but I believe this is only partially true and only a piece of the puzzle. In my opinion, the decision to invade was based on good intentions. It should have been a win for everyone. The West would gain a strong ally in a region that feeds our growing dependence on oil, and the Iraqi people would be delivered from a dictator who butchered them and lead them on a failing and bloody conquest of Kuwait during the First Gulf War. However, the resilience of the insurgency and the global response were miscalculated. Once we committed, there was no pulling out.

Although the basis for invading Iraq may be questionable, we had a clearly defined cause to become involved in Afghanistan after September 2001. Afghanistan provided safe haven for Al Queda terrorist camps and Osama bin Laden. Al Queda and the Taliban were removed in short order, but it is commonly believed that we lost our only real opportunity to get Bin Laden after the Battle of Tora Bora in December 2001. Since the removal of the Taliban, we have invested ten years of war in order to try to establish a democracy there. Our efforts seem to yield no ground. Iraq provided ample education in counter-insurgency operations and our military has proven capable of fighting them, but there are deeper aspects to consider. We can continue the war for another decade but the real cause for our struggles will remain unchecked. Our failure is that we are using a similar strategy in two very different scenarios.

Iraq had oil revenues, modern cities, and literate people essential to assuming control of their government and its security forces. Afghanistan has opium, decentralized villages under tribal warlords, and a mostly illiterate population. This is the base on which we are trying to build a Westernized democracy; it lacks the prerequisites. How many democracies in the West have drug money as their primary and nearly sole source of revenue? Applying the nation building strategy of Iraq demonstrates an absence of understanding for the Afghan people, their infrastructure, and their history of resenting foreign occupation.

Our presence alienates most of the Muslim world and persistently fills the ranks of the insurgency, and they have no shortage of manpower reserve. The insurgents we fight are not the men who took down the Twin Towers; they are the same men we applauded for resisting the Soviets. If I were to find America occupied by a foreign power, I would also become labeled a resistant insurgent. The majority of Muslims have a simple and non-violent way of life; they have made it painfully evident that they prefer their own to that of the West. Violent extremists who deliberately target civilian populations account for only a tiny fraction of one percent of their population.

The resilience of the insurgency is not the only contention we face. Relations between the Afghan government and our own are not where they should be. Hamid Karzai, the leader of their fraudulent government, has a history of laying accusations against the same nation that provides for his survival. Aside from rising diplomatic issues, there is division in our own country between our civil and military leaders. Many in the military feel that Washington has forgotten about their efforts. Some believe that they even hampers our efforts with rules of engagement and policies enacted as attempts to fight a politically war. As evidence, consider the debacle involving General Stanley McChrystal last June. It epitomized the extent to which the division has cut.

For those with a short memory, the Former Soviet Union saw similar failures in Afghanistan for nine years until they were forced to withdraw in 1988. The following year, they collapsed. At our present point, complete withdrawal is not an option. It would reopen the country as a staging ground for future attacks on the West. It is not my place to make a claim towards the appropriate course, but the current one makes a sinkhole out of the conflict in to which we throw hundreds of billions of dollars annually and, more importantly, priceless lives on either side of the conflict. Our failing strategy of massive boots on the ground needs to be reevaluated. Our goal of preventing terrorist activity can be controlled from outside and without the persistent bloodshed we are seeing with our present strategy.

Due only in part to our defense budget, our national debt is skyrocketing to unprecedented levels. At the same time, the pockets of greedy and unnecessary defense contractors are fattened. Our overall military spending suggests preparations for, albeit impossible, a massive war against half the planet. The nuclear deterrent needs to be good for something. Our Navy, for example, has a fleet tonnage greater than the next thirteen combined, many of which belong to our seemingly forgotten NATO allies. In addition, our defense spending outweighs that of China ten fold; it is also more than twice the sum of the next ten nations combined. We have global interests that need protection, but the current level of spending is beyond excessive. The arms race of the Cold War and the necessity of grossly large standing military forces have long since passed.

The general population of this country has an absence of understanding for the military on multiple levels. I am a former Marine, but I worked in the planning field and spent most of my time in an office. Few Marines actually serve in the vicious and entertaining battles of video games that many of you enjoy when you get out of class. From my experience, most Americans also believe that status of a Marine provides a form of crazy street fighting abilities. What good would such abilities do in a firefight? The training builds character and gives Marines and soldiers the tools they need in combat. Combat does not involve roundhouse kicking insurgents. The misconceptions with the military are not limited to the personal level and they have far more dangerous implications. People have lost touch with the role of our military in foreign policy. The idea of combating a deep rooted religious ideology with firepower flies in the face of common sense. The only reason for our apparent success in Iraq is the prerequisites with which we started. Although we are withdrawing, the story is far from over. In consideration of our enormous investment in there, the end does not seem to justify the means. The question of whether or not our national security improved as a result of the conflict is up to debate. In the full context of the current state of our nation, and especially in light of our growing fiscal problems, my opinion is that it weakened our stance and it wore down diplomatic relations with crucial allies. I do not believe that America in 2011 is any safer than America prior to the “Shock and Awe” of March 2003. Although the situation in Iraq is unstable, the future of the Afghanistan conflict is even more dismal. Ten years later, we have nothing to show for our efforts. The levels of insurgent activity are only escalating with time. They have made it painfully clear that they do not care for the Western way of life.

Twenty-first century America is in its eleventh year and has known ten months without war. We successfully stood up Iraq under questionable pretense but have become indefinitely bogged down in a misunderstood conflict in Afghanistan. If there is one lesson to be taken out of both conflicts of the Global War on Terrorism, it is that wasteful and enormous military machines have lost their place in dealing with the threats of the modern world. As we are seeing in Libya, nature corrects itself when it needs to and oppressive dictators will eventually answer for their crimes. Given our nation’s current challenges, such wasteful spending and failures are more dangerous than ever. Few Americans seem to notice. Who wants to think about war or the world’s future when little Kardashian’s fiancé is being a complete jerk? He shouldn’t treat her like that!

Thanks to Bryan for the post and his service. (A version of this post was published as a guest perspective on March 28, 2011, in The Daily Free Press.) Bryan can be reached at bryan.jiencke@gmail.com.

Peace.