By Shamus Cooke
27/05/08 -ICH - - As Barack Obama’s anti-war rhetoric is blasted around the US in his attempt to seal the Democratic nomination, his real position on US militarism is being revealed discreetly to his political, military, and corporate colleagues.
Two recent events have proved beyond any doubt that Obama is in total conformity with the US ruling class on the issue of maintaining— or even expanding— the role of the military in the Middle East. This of course is the complete opposite of what he tells those who fill stadiums to hear him speak.
The first event happened on April 7th, when both the top US diplomat and military man in Iraq— Ambassador Crocker and General Petraeus— came to testify before two separate congressional committees. This was a chance, both Democratic campaigns boasted, for the two nominees to show that they had the ability to perform as the country’s commander and chief (a rightwing debate in itself). It was quickly evident that during the questioning, both candidates were operating from the vantage point of the military and the US financial interests it protects, not the millions of people who have hopes that either candidate will end the war, as they’ve both promised.
Obama did not insist, let alone demand to either man that all the troops should come home immediately; nor did he even suggest that they come home quickly. This was made painfully clear when he announced he was against a “precipitous withdraw”. His comments about a “phased withdraw” were in fact vague enough to be interpreted as meaning that the Iraq war will continue in a similar fashion for years to come. The likelihood of this actually happening later increased, when Obama said that it would be “stupid” to ignore commanders advice “on the ground”. The commander’s recommendation in this case was that— after taking the “surge” troops out of Iraq— troop levels should be maintained, and then an indefinite wait and see period would ensue.
Especially frightening during the congressional Q and A was the numerous saber-rattling comments made by Petraeus and Crocker against Iran. Obama did nothing to point out the extremely dangerous implications of these remarks, but instead chose to dump fuel on the fire by claiming that the invasion of Iraq was an especially bad idea because of how much Iran had benefited (not because it was, and continues to be an obvious war crime).
His “alternative
strategy” for
the “strategic
interests” of
the US can be
easily
summarized by
Obama himself,
who said that
“…we have to
think about more
than just Iraq,
that we've got
issues with Iran
and Pakistan and
Afghanistan, and
our singular
focus on Iraq I
think has
distracted us”.
There is not
even a hint of
anti-war
sentiment
expressed here.
And this leads
to the latest
event which
utterly destroys
any notion that
Obama is against
war. President
Bush was so
pleased with
Petraeus’ war
mongering
testimony that
it was later
announced that
Petraeus would
be made the head
of the US
Military Central
Command, where
he would be in
charge of
operations
across the
Middle East and
Central Asia.
Petraeus is not
only a
consistent
puppet of Bush
and his “war on
terror”
policies, but
has a unique
military
specialty:
counter-insurgency
operations (he
in fact wrote
the guidebook),
suggesting that
there will be
future military
attacks and
consequent
occupations that
require his
particular
expertise.
Obama’s response
to Petraeus’
nomination? An
enthusiastic
endorsement! “I
think Petraeus
has done a good
tactical job in
Iraq ... My hope
is that Petraeus
would reflect
that wider view
of our strategic
interest.”
If he is
eventually
elected
President, the
contradiction
between Obama’s
public anti-war
face and his
real pro-war
beliefs will
produce
incredible shock
and
disappointment
in millions of
people. The need
for a political
alternative to
the two-parties
of big-business
will thrust
itself onto the
public’s agenda
once again. A
mass party of
Labor directly
connected to the
unions already
contains the
resources to
make this
proposal a
reality. It is
up to the rank
and file to
fight for its
creation.
www.socialistappeal.org
