America sits in the bulls-eye, inviting increasing
enmity, resentment, and unfathomable danger from around the world. People
live in fear precisely because of the global policies of the ruling class, a
fear that makes the implementation of those polices smoother and placates
possible opposition. It is a circle of deceit and convenience. It is
propaganda and manipulation, but, as the polls show, the people aren’t buying
it like they were before.
One monumental deceit is that Bush’s actions in Iraq and
throughout the Middle East will help protect the United States. This is an
absurd notion that is contradicted by all empirical analyses and data. The
truth, of course, is that jihadi terrorists are getting stronger and are
recruiting at unprecedented levels. Osama bin Laden is still at large. Even
Bush cronies like Michael Chertoff are dismayed at our misguided priorities
that further endanger Americans. And then there is that worst case scenario,
the most extreme danger – a nuclear attack.
The United States should be condemned for its failure to
reduce the threat of a nuclear attack. In May, the United Nations hosted its
regular five-year review conference on the Nonproliferation Treaty (NPT),
which was established in 1970. The most important provision in the treaty,
“Article VI,” requires nations to pursue “good faith” efforts to eliminate
nuclear weapons. According to a recent UN report, “we are approaching a point
at which the erosion of the non-proliferation regime could become irreversible
and result in a cascade of proliferation." The United States is hugely
responsible for that erosion.
One of the most vocal critics of our noncompliance is
former President Jimmy Carter. In an op-ed in the Washington Post, Carter
wrote, “Until recently all American presidents since Dwight Eisenhower had
striven to restrict and reduce nuclear arsenals -- some more than others. So
far as I know, there are no present efforts by any of the nuclear powers to
accomplish these crucial goals.” George W. Bush has expanded police powers,
increased surveillance, and curtailed civil liberties all in the name of
“security.” Yet nothing is done to prevent the catastrophe that would be a
nuclear attack.
Carter unambiguously condemns the U.S. as “the major
culprit in this erosion of the NPT. While claiming to be protecting the world
from proliferation threats in Iraq, Libya, Iran and North Korea, American
leaders not only have abandoned existing treaty restraints but also have
asserted plans to test and develop new weapons, including anti-ballistic
missiles, the earth-penetrating ‘bunker buster’ and perhaps some new ‘small’
bombs. They also have abandoned past pledges and now threaten first use of
nuclear weapons against nonnuclear states.” To this grave scenario we should
another of Bush’s indelible contributions: the doctrine of pre-emptive
warfare. The proliferation of weapons of mass destruction (the real ones)
combined with the reckless and illegal international policy have created an
international climate in which more people have desire to hurt us and have
more resources with which to do it. President Carter points out that “The
administration's 2005 budget refers for the first time to a list of test
scenarios, and other nations are waiting to take the same action.”
The U.S. stands as a massive, monolithic threat to global
peace. In a recent article, Noam Chomsky writes that the U.S. spends about as
much on our military as the rest of the world combined and arms sales by
American Companies compose 60% of the world total, a figure which has risen by
a quarter since 2002. Robert McNamara, who, with Henry Kissinger, was
instrumental in planning and implementing the devastation in Indochina during
the Vietnam War, views "current U.S. nuclear weapons policy as immoral,
illegal, militarily unnecessary and dreadfully dangerous." The most chilling
words come from Bill Clinton’s former defense secretary, William Perry (who
preceded William Cohen), who says that "there is a greater than 50 per cent
probability of a nuclear strike on US targets within a decade."
This issue has become even more dire with the recent
passage of the Energy Policy Act and its implications for the use of highly
enriched uranium (HEU). HEU is the material that is easiest for terrorists to
use in manufacturing a nuclear weapon. According to the Center for
Nonproliferation Studies at the Monterey Institute of International Studies
(CNS), “HEU at civilian facilities is particularly vulnerable, since such
facilities are often inadequately secured. To mitigate this risk, the United
States has led efforts since the 1970s to reduce the civilian use of HEU.
Beginning in 1992, the United States restricted its exports of HEU in order to
encourage other countries to convert civilian facilities to low-enriched
uranium (LEU), which cannot be used directly to make nuclear weapons.”
Of course, like the NPT and comprehensive test ban
treaty, the U.S. is moving in the opposite, much more dangerous direction.
While the CNS thinks that restricting civilian commerce in HEU should be a top
priority, the Energy Policy Act of 2005 “includes provisions relaxing
restrictions on HEU exports for medical isotope production…. It essentially
places the economic interests of medical isotope producers above the
nonproliferation interests of the United States and the international
community. It is virtually certain to complicate ongoing efforts to reduce the
risk of nuclear terrorism.”
This is highly disturbing, but unsurprising in its
consistency with American global policy, in which economic interests such as
access to oil and trade-friendly foreign leaders are far more important than
human rights, international law, and civilian safety. This is an issue that
transcends partisan lines and clearly delineates those who care about human
rights and safety versus those who opt for profits over people and empire over
safety.