December 24, 2007.
© Project HumanbeingsfirstTM. Permission granted to use freely as per copyright notice.
To: John Feffer, Emira Woods, Emily Schwartz Greco
Cc: Miriam Pemberton
Dear distinguished Editors, FPIF
Seasons greetings from Pakistan.
I earlier sent you an email from my Project's address Humanbeingsfirst.org and sometimes it can end up in the spam bit-bucket, and since I did not receive any acknowledgment from you, I am retrying from my MIT address.
Your lead story this week on 'nuclear security' by Zia Mian was so interesting that I spontaneously wrote the attached response. I usually read FPIF as you carry some interesting diversity of perspectives (but in a rather restricted gamut). I hope you can also carry mine which entirely rebuts this distinguished expert from Princeton on matters 'nuclear' and extends your gamut a bit. Please do note the tiny critique therein of FPIF as well, as an august forum carrying disinformation articles from well known 'domain experts'.
You must be aware of the drum beat for the new wars, not much different from the drum beat for the previous two wars. When such drum beats are going on - many tend to lose focus on what America's Foreign Policy means, and has meant, from its very inception. Many also tend to lose focus on how modern 'empires' are constructed on the backs of primarily 'doctrinal scholarship' that lays the foundation of social discourse which is subsequently mindlessly repeated by the mainstream newsmedia to mobilize the public “United We Stand”, and of course by the vested interests of the various imperial 'circus clowns' who repeat the mantras from its august institutions to continually add fuel to the fire.
This exercise has been judged necessary by the most 'ubermensch' thinkers of the 'empire' themselves, as indeed the most prominent realpolitik strategist among them argues that “democracy is inimical to imperial mobilization” except in the case “of a sudden threat or challenge to the public's sense of domestic well-being”, and “except in the circumstance of a truly massive and widely perceived direct external threat”, because the “economic self-denial (that is defense spending), and the human sacrifice (casualties even among professional soldiers) required in the effort are uncongenial to democratic instincts” and which “requires a high degree of doctrinal motivation, intellectual commitment, and patriotic gratification.”
Please note the really important point in this quote from Zbigniew Brzezinski's 'the Grand Chessboard' - “high degree of doctrinal motivation, intellectual commitment”.
This is what my rebuttal to Zia Mian's essay is about, as I claim, through the rational deconstruction of his brilliant essay, that it is classic 'doctrinal motivation' to perpetuate the myth of 'loose nukes' – the new boogie man after the 'missing WMDs' in Iraq for which Rumsfeld had glibly claimed “absence of evidence is not evidence of absence” and was never called upon this bit of 'Alice in Wonderland' by anyone, including FPIF (if my memory serves me well) when the mantra still had currency in its heyday – the new enabler for continued “imperial mobilization”.
Surely none of this can be news to any real American Foreign Policy analysts who know their craft and their domain, as I am certain of this distinguished team of editors.
There really aren't too many ways to look at America's Foreign Policy other than through her own words - i.e., the words of her ardent 'imperial' exponents and office bearers - which going back to George Kennan in 1948 I reproduce for you below. We can certainly go back even further to gain even deeper perspective, but this suffices as the transition point of 'modernity' du jour between the decline of an empire upon which the Sun once never set, and a new 'empire' upon which the Sun is perhaps about to set, and upon the thousands of whose gullible sons and daughters, slaves of economic conscription, the Sun has lamentably already set.
As you will note in Kennan's famous PPS Memo, dealing in 'straight power concepts' it was then, as it is now, and not just in theory as noted in Brzezinski 1997 book, in order to “perpetuate America's own dominant position for at least a generation and preferably longer” such that “no Eurasian challenger emerges, capable of dominating Eurasia and thus also challenging America” (Brzezinski), but also by-way of practice in the present Bush Administration which mainly arose from the PNAC group, and which also argued the same theme as Brzezinski, that it necessitates asserting the “Reaganite policy of military strength and moral clarity” by forcing everyone on the planet to accept “America's unique role in preserving and extending an international order friendly to our security, our prosperity, and our principles.” (PNAC).
You can clearly, and rationally see nothing changed between 1948 and today's 2002-Nuclear Posture Review which only exercised the 'ubermensch' “American Primacy and its Geostrategic Imperatives”! It is interesting to note how naturally, even the supposedly objective intellectuals in America, accept this “Primacy Imperative” as the underlying unquestioned axiom upon which they build all their analysis of the world, and indeed, of America's Foreign Policies. This is precisely the issue in Zia Mian's disinformation masterpiece as is solidly deconstructed in my response-essay.
Quote-George Kennan PPS 23 1948:
“We have about 50% of the world’s wealth, but only 6.3% of its population …. In this situation, we cannot fail to be the object of envy and resentment. Our real task in the coming period is to devise a pattern of relationships which will permit us to maintain this position of disparity without positive detriment to our national security. To do so, we will have to dispense with all sentimentality and day-dreaming, and our attention will have to be concentrated everywhere on our immediate national objectives. We need not deceive ourselves that we can afford today the luxury of altruism and world-benefaction …. We should cease to talk about vague and - for the Far East - unreal objectives such as human rights, the raising of living standards, and democratization. The day is not far off when we are going to have to deal in straight power concepts. The less we are then hampered by idealistic slogans, the better.”
And just as the distinguished halls of the Ivys in the past have served this distinguished job-function of supporting their nation's 'empire' in its “imperial mobilization” very well by synthesizing “the high level of doctrinal motivation”, they still continue to do so just as admirably today.
Being quite familiar with the Ivys as having studied at MIT - which though not an Ivy per se, is more prominent among the lot, and also gets as much as 90% of its martial research budget from the various agencies of the martial state and its private corporate collaborators, thus serving the technology needs of the 'empire' equally admirably in 'actual war making toys' in cahoots with the soft 'doctrinal scholarship' peddled from the Ivys such as 'Clash of Civilizations' and 'WMDs' - the twain craft of “doctrinal motivations” and technological innovations for “full spectrum dominance” must go together to fuel an empire for which Brzezinski rightly claims that its “populist democracy” is unburdened by “la mission civilisatrice” of traditional empires!
From the 'Maine' through the “Gulf of Tonkin” to '911' – are all one continuum of American Foreign Policy Initiatives for “American Interests Abroad”, or putting it in its syntactically unsugared form, “imperial mobilization”. It is the naked empirical reality for those who are scientists among us and can objectively evaluate the reality around us and artfully able to distinguish between the 364 days of 'unbirthday' party celebrations, and one genuine day of birthday! It is also the brutish reality for those on the receiving end of this syntactic sugaring!
Therefore, lest all of us unwittingly acquire deep red blood upon our clean hands as we continue to fish for truth while it stands stark-naked right before us as the trumpeting shitting elephant in the newlywed's bed, I humbly submit my detailed analytical deconstruction of Zia Mian's essay, attached as a PDF file, for your consideration to carry right alongside Zia Mian's stellar piece of work for the 'empire' from its most prestigious Ivy.
You can also glean this response-essay on my website as “Response to Zia Mian's 'How Not to Handle Nuclear Security'”.
I hope that you will very kindly at least acknowledge my letter, even if you choose to not carry my response-essay for whatever reason, perhaps with an explanation why you did not carry it which will of course be duly posted on my website.
But I do feel quite hopeful for a positive response as my rebuttal not only intellectually speaks for itself and begs for a rational and cogent rebuttal in turn to further the rational debate on a subject that can soon mean life-and-death for millions – the hallmark of democracy if it is to mean anything other than singing with the choir among its ruling elite - but also lends a fresh perspective to really put the Foreign Policy in Focus for a “think tank without walls”. I do believe in your concept of “without walls” but naively interpret it to mean in the best interest of all nations and all humanity. I am also (un)happy to be corrected in that assumption if it is unwarranted. Let's all be mature enough to call a spade a spade, at least in this august forum.
I am further Cc'ing your resident disarmament expert who can perhaps weigh in on the merits of the arguments as a 'domain expert' with real world experience.
You may further be interested in “Wakeup to the grotesque reality of the Grand Chessboard” on my website.
It is okay with me if you choose to also print this letter in FPIF for the benefit of your readers.
founder, Project Humanbeingsfirst.org
public email: firstname.lastname@example.org
The author, an ordinary researcher and writer on contemporary geopolitics, a minor justice activist, grew up in Pakistan, studied EECS at MIT, engineered for a while in high-tech Silicon Valley (patents here), and retired early to pursue other responsible interests. His maiden 2003 book was rejected by six publishers and can be read on the web at http://PrisonersoftheCave.org. He may be reached at http://Humanbeingsfirst.org.
All material copyright (c) Project HumanbeingsfirstTM, with full permission to copy, repost, and reprint, in its entirety, unmodified and unedited, for any purpose, granted, provided the URL sentence and this copyright notice are also reproduced verbatim as part of this license, and not doing so may be subject to copyright license violation infringement claims pursuant to remedies noted at http://www.copyright.gov/title17/92chap5.html. The rights of the author to express these views are based on inalienable rights noted at http://www.hrweb.org/legal/undocs.html, and to do so freely without suffering intimidation and duress. All quotations and excerpts are based on non-profit "fair use" in the greater public interest consistent with the understanding of laws noted at http://www4.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.html. Full copyright notice and Exclusions at http://www.humanbeingsfirst.org.
Letter to FPIF