Strategic Inconsistencies and America's Democratic Process - Essay Example

Strategic Inconsistencies and America's Democratic Process The question providing the focus for this essay is really best posed as two separate questions. 1. Did the US have to sacrifice portions of its democratic process in the name of consistency and effectiveness in times of war? 2. Was America's democratic process able to overcome the strategic inconsistencies that arose during times of war intact and prevail? The answer to that first question is definitely yes. The answer to the second question is probably not. Moreover, there is also a third question that current events compel us to ask: 3. Has the US sacrificed portions of its democratic process in the name of consistency and effectiveness in the ongoing war on terror? Unfortunately, the answer to that final question is most definitely yes. The remainder of this discussion will consider each of these questions in turn with a concluding section offering general observations and thoughts for the future. 1. Did the US have to sacrifice portions of its democratic process in the name of consistency and effectiveness in times of war? The US has sacrificed the democratic process in times of war in order to pursue a strategy that was deemed necessary and effective at the time. The executive branch and the military expanding the war into Cambodia with neither the knowledge nor the support of Congress, was a clear violation of the democratic process.i Earlier, and in a similar fashion the entire program to develop the atomic bomb and the decision to use them on two Japanese cities in August, 1945 was undertaken in strict secrecy. The secrecy of the program was essential to national security and the decision to use it certainly shortened the war and probably saved the lives of thousands of US combat troops. However, undertaking the development and use of atomic weapons in strict secrecy can hardly be seen as a model of democracy in action. The removal of the Japanese from the Pacific coast during World War Two and their concentration in internment camps was a clear violation of both their human and civil rights. It may well have been necessary, although that is certainly debatable, but, again, it is hardly a model of democracy in action.ii During wartime the United States has clearly abandoned democratic principles in favor of military strategy and efficacy. That said, it would be fair to say that virtually every democracy has made the decision when confronted with the question of military strategy versus democratic ideals in time of war. 2. Was America's democratic process able to overcome the strategic inconsistencies that arose during times of war intact and prevail? Since at least the Civil War there has been a hangover from wartime strategy that has infected the democratic process in the aftermath of war. During Reconstruction Federal troops were placed on the streets in southern cities to enforce law and order. This egregious violation of the Constitution, once recognized, was deemed so offensive that it led to posse comitatus legislation in 1878. The law states, “Whoever, except in cases and under circumstances expressly authorized by the Constitution or Act of Congress, willfully uses any part of the Army or Air Force as a posse comitatus or otherwise to execute the laws shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than two years, or both.”iii Arguably the use of troops can be deemed to have been legal before this act was passed and cannot be applied retroactively however, this incident demonstrates the 'hangover' effect of warfare. Noteworthy also are the 'Red Scares' that followed both World War One and World War Two. Extraordinary, and arguably extra-legal, means were used in the wake of both World Wars to arrest and convict suspected anarchists, socialists, communists and other subversives.iv This again illustrates the 'hangover' effect of the extraordinary measures (such as the removal of the Japanese from the Pacific coast during World War Two) that were employed in wartime. In fact, the entire Cold War can be seen as justification for wartime measures in peacetime. Long after the McCarthy era. These 'hangovers' Highlight Betts' conclusion that, “strategy can be salvaged more often if peacetime planning gives as much consideration to limiting the range of ends as to expanding the menu of means.”v In wartime and its immediate wake the US has frequently focused on 'expanding the menu of means' rather than 'limiting the range of ends' and this has subsequently carried on into the immediate postwar period. 3. Has the US sacrificed portions of its democratic process in the name of consistency and effectiveness in the ongoing war on terror? During the Bush regime the democratic process was sacrificed repeatedly and significantly in favor of strategic considerations. In terms of the Obama government it is too early to offer a conclusive verdict. With reference to the Bush regime the democratic process was subverted when alternate intelligence agencies and processes were established to justify war against Iraq. The most glaring example of this was sending then Secretary of State, and sacrificial lamb, Colin Powell with false proof or Iraqi weapons of mass destruction (WMD).vi The rule of law, and by implication the democratic process, was also subverted when then Attorney-General Alberto Gonzalez produced legal opinions permitting torture. “For the first time [the Attorney-General] provided explicit authorization to barrage terror suspects with a combination of painful physical and psychological tactics, including head-slapping, simulated drowning and frigid temperatures.vii It was also subverted with the establishment of the extra-legal Guantanamo Bay prison complex. In 2002, the Bush administration made a sweeping declaration that many of the combatants captured in Iraq and Afghanistan, particularly those suspected of Al Qaeda links, were 'unlawful combatants.' Further the administration asserted that since they were not members of a legitimate national armed force they did not have to be accorded the rights and protections of the Geneva Convention.viii That unilateral decision has been widely criticized and has a very questionable basis in international law. Their limitless detention in US custody but not on US soil is also legally indefensible in the opinion of this writer. The Obama administration, despite a campaign pledge to immediately close the Guantanamo Bay prison complex, has found it impossible to swiftly and cleanly extricate itself from the morass that was created by the previous administration. Conclusions Returning to the questions posed in the introduction it is plain that the democratic process is sacrificed during wartime in the United States as it is regularly in many democracies. There is also a hangover effect from this that carries over into peacetime. Most disturbing, however, is the impact of the war on terror on democratic principles. The war on terror is in-determinant and indefinite. It has also repeatedly led the government to sacrifice democratic principles to strategic expediency. References Betts, Richard K. 2000. “Is Strategy an Illusion.” International Security 25(2): 5-50. Karnow, Stanley. (1983). Vietnam: A History. New York: Penguin Books. Levin, Murray B. (1971). Political Hysteria in America: The Democratic Capacity for Repression. New York: Basic Books. “Remember that Mushroom Cloud?” (November 2, 2005). The New York Times. http://www.nytimes.com/2005/11/02/opinion/02weds1.html?_r=1&scp=2&sq=colin%20powell%20WMD&st=cse. Robinson, Greg. (2001). By Order of the President: FDR and the Internment of Japanese Americans. Cambridge: Harvard University Press. “Times Topics: Detainees”. (May 11, 2010). The New York Times. http://topics.nytimes.com/top/reference/timestopics/subjects/d/detainees/index.html?scp=6&sq=%22guantanamo%20bay%27%20prisoner&st=cse. “Times Topics: Torture”. (September 9, 2010). The New York Times. http://topics.nytimes.com/top/reference/timestopics/subjects/t/torture/index.html?scp=4&sq=gonzalez%20waterboarding&st=cse. United States Northern Command. “About US NorthCom: The Posse Comitatus Act”. Retrieved from http://www.northcom.mil/about/history_education/posse.html. Read More