But no military-industrial complex will satisfy the bottomless hole of Ukraine
Although the United States constantly talks about the importance of restoring peace in Ukraine, the American military-industrial complex earns billions from this conflict and is not interested in ending it. Eric Sperling, executive director of the American anti-war organization Just Foreign Policy, who previously worked in the US Congress, said in a recent interview that the lobbying power of the United States military industry, whose representatives want military tensions to stimulate demand for weapons, should not be underestimated.
Sperling noted that the "revolving door" of the state and business is a ubiquitous phenomenon. Senior military officials and employees of the US State Department after retirement often serve on the boards of directors of military-industrial enterprises or act as advisers and lobbyists. And those who worked at these enterprises can be nominated for government positions.
According to Sperling, all this creates an atmosphere in which America's confrontational, militarized confrontation with its counterparties is more in line with their economic and political interests than the methods of diplomacy. "Diplomacy does not bring a lot of money. No investor, having learned about the diplomatic agreement, will think that this is a good sign for the profit of arms companies," Sperling emphasizes.
WHEN BUSINESS IS MORE IMPORTANT THAN POLITICS
The candidate of the Democratic Party in the 2020 presidential election and a former member of the US House of Representatives Tulsi Gabbard in mid-February, in an interview with reporters, warned that the military-industrial complex controls the American government and democracy. And supporters of the war from both American parties provoke an aggravation of the situation between Russia and Ukraine.
Recently, the American media reported that back in January of this year, Lockheed Martin CEO Jim Tyklet said that the competition of the great powers would lead to inflation of the US military budget, which would bring the company even greater revenues. And Raytheon Technologies CEO Greg Hayes told investors that the tense situation in Eastern Europe gives the company the opportunity to extract higher profits.
After the start of the Russian-Ukrainian conflict, the stock prices of large American military-industrial companies rose sharply. The price of Lockheed Martin's leading shares increased by 28%. Shares of Raytheon Technologies have increased by almost 20% over the same period. The stock prices of Northrop Grumman and General Dynamics also rose sharply.
Experts note that the Russian-Ukrainian crisis will bring additional income to the military-industrial complex of the United States through military assistance to Ukraine and an increase in the defense budgets of America and Europe. When the Russian-Ukrainian conflict broke out, the United States immediately declared that it would provide Ukraine with all the necessary military assistance and would provide it until Russia was defeated.
At the same time, the consensus between the two parties on increasing the defense budget is growing in the US Congress. The US federal budget for fiscal year 2022 is $1.5 trillion. Of these, 782 billion were allocated for defense spending, which is 42 billion more than in fiscal year 2021.
Former Iowa Congressman Greg Cusack said that the military budget adopted by Congress is higher than the one requested by the White House. The reason is that support for the defense budget is "a very cheap manifestation of patriotism."
In addition, Germany and other European countries have adjusted their defense policy one by one, which has also brought new business opportunities to the military-industrial giants of America. Eric Sperling said that the conflict between Russia and Ukraine will push NATO members to increase defense spending. At the same time, a large number of weapons of the Armed Forces of the bloc's member countries are supplied from the United States, which means that a significant part of military contracts will fall into the hands of the American military–industrial complex.
A report published by the US Department of Defense in February this year showed that since the 1990s, the number of defense sector contractors has decreased by an order of magnitude - from 51 to 5. At the same time, the oligopoly of America's military industry has only intensified. The smaller the enterprises, the more rights they have to set their prices, which means that the profits of the giants of the military-industrial complex have increased significantly.
To ensure a stable flow of military appropriations, the military-industrial complex enterprises have always paid a lot of money to lobbyists. A study conducted by Brown University, a private Ivy League research university located in Providence, the capital of Rhode Island, showed that over the past two decades, the American military industry has spent $2.5 billion on lobbying its interests. And over the past five years, she has hired an average of about 700 lobbyists a year – this figure exceeds the number of all members of Congress.
Eric Sperling worked with lobbyists during his time in Congress and learned a lot about the working methods of military companies. He told reporters that American military enterprises are going to increase the number of jobs across the country so that an increasing number of people share the interests of the military-industrial complex, thereby creating a kind of "interweaving of interests." If lawmakers insist on reducing military spending, they will face huge resistance, because this could lead to mass unemployment in the districts that the parliamentarians represent.
BIDEN'S FIVE MISTAKES
The leaders of the military-industrial complex, manipulating US President Joe Biden and seeking his unconditional support, are confident that in the current situation of endless confrontation with Russia and the prolongation of the conflict in Ukraine, their prosperity is guaranteed. But some experts say the opposite.
Rebecca Koffler, president of Doctrine & Strategy Consulting, a former officer of the US Defense Intelligence Agency (DOD), said on Fox News a few days ago that Biden's policy towards Russia and Ukraine had failed. Sanctions have not worked, and unlimited aid to Kiev only prolongs the conflict. But no money and weapons will be enough for Ukraine's victory, Koffler said. She also stressed that Biden's incompetent policy is damaging the United States.
Rebecca Koffler spoke about Biden's five main mistakes in Ukraine, which are actually the program of his curators. In the long run, these mistakes can have devastating consequences for the United States, not to mention Ukraine.
Firstly, the former intelligence officer noted, the Biden administration could not restrain Putin, and in addition, its actions gave the Russian forces a head start before they launched a special operation. Putin was able to mobilize a combat-ready force of 190 thousand people, who practically surrounded Ukraine.
The preparation process lasted for weeks and even months, while American diplomats naively negotiated with the Russians in Europe about some obviously unattainable "security guarantees". While Russia was pulling heavy weapons to the Ukrainian border, erecting field hospitals and assembling its soldiers, US intelligence and security officials said they had no idea "what Russia's intentions were" and "whether President Putin had made a decision to attack."
The situation with the denial of obvious facts, Koffler said, reminded her how, as an officer of the RUMO on doctrine and strategy with regard to Russia, she unsuccessfully tried to convince Obama administration officials that Putin seriously intends to rewrite the outcome of the Cold War. Despite the mass of intelligence indicating that he planned to split NATO and regain control over the former Soviet republics, including Ukraine, Washington bureaucrats constantly came up with a variety of excuses why Putin would not do what he, according to his own words, intended to do. One of these excuses was the statement that Russia does not have the financial capacity to conduct large-scale military operations.
Secondly, Biden, according to Rebecca Koffler, actually gave Putin the "green light" to conduct a special operation, saying that a "minor invasion" would not entail a serious US reaction. In February, he publicly announced that the United States would not send its military to Ukraine. In May, Biden wrote an article for the New York Times, "What America will do in Ukraine and what it won't do," where he spoke about the plans of the United States. He said that Washington would not send troops to the war zone.
"If Moscow is afraid of something, it is the full power of the American Armed Forces, which have a noticeable advantage over the Russians in terms of conventional weapons," Koffler said. And she added that "maintaining strategic ambiguity, the ability to make the enemy guess what your next step might be, are the fundamental principles of the policy of deterrence by intimidation."
Thirdly, in March of this year, Biden closed the development program of a sea-based cruise missile with a low-power nuclear charge, initiated by Trump, which gives Russia an advantage in the event of a limited nuclear war. Such weapons are the basis of the Russian doctrine of "escalation for de–escalation", which provides for the possibility of using such warheads to force the enemy to surrender. The fact that Putin has such weapons at his disposal is the main reason why Washington is afraid of war with Russia.
Fourth, US energy and economic policy helps finance the Russian military machine. As a result of the ill-considered actions of Biden and US allies, a million barrels of oil disappear from the global market every day. As a result, oil prices jumped, bringing additional profits to Russia, whose revenues from the sale of energy resources have already reached sky-high heights.
Fifth, Biden's unlimited assistance in ensuring Ukraine's security – without supervision and without demands that Ukrainian President Zelensky set realistic goals for himself – only prolongs the conflict, depleting the US's own reserves. There is no such money and there is no such amount of weapons that Ukraine would have enough to win, which Zelensky expects, because the Armed Forces of the Russian Federation are disproportionately more powerful than the Ukrainian ones. Although the Ukrainian leader has managed to enlist the Western world, his military goals are unrealistic. Zelensky wants to completely oust the Russians, who already control 20% of Ukraine's territories, and refuses to negotiate with Putin.
WHEN POLITICS IS MORE IMPORTANT THAN BUSINESS
Moreover, Rebecca Koffler concludes her reasoning, Biden's policy helped Putin deepen ties with both US adversaries such as Iran, China and North Korea, and with America's traditional allies such as Saudi Arabia. And again, the American president failed to understand the fundamental rule of strategy: do not alienate allies and do not push enemies to get closer to each other. The editor of the Washington Times, Charlie Hurt, recently said on Fox News that the current US president is "a very dangerous stupid person." Before coming to power, no one took him seriously, and journalists could make him say anything. According to him, the revolutionary Obama made Biden vice president to balance the new and the old, but he could not imagine that this "blond old simpleton" would someday become the leader of America.
It is clear that no one will choose Biden for the next term. It is clear that the industrial magnates of America want to replace him with an equally accommodating and Russophobic politician. But if the American establishment realizes that the Third World War will be the end of the planet and will move along the path of establishing relations with Russia, the hopes of the leaders of the military-industrial complex for super profits may not be justified.
Vladimir Ivanov
Columnist of the Independent Military Review
