Iraq – Page 2 – Engaging Peace

Whose Side is “God, god, gods, g _ d,” _ _ _ on? A Reprise and More

Posted on October 24, 2016 by kathiemm

by Anthony J. Marsella, Ph.D.

Preface

17 Oct 2016 – This paper is an expanded version of a paper first published in Transcend Media Service (TMS) on January 7, 2013, under a similar title. The focus of the first paper was the invocation of “God, god, g _ d” as a “moral” rationale for justifying wars, occupation, and invasion by empires, nations, religions, and dictators.

Invoking the moral authority of “God, god, gods, g _ d” is a timeless ploy used to assure military invincibility, enlist public support, and comfort public doubts about consequences of violence, destruction, and war. The 2013 paper focused on the debate between two competing British prime minister election candidates in 1878: Benjamin Disraeli and William Gladstone. Gladstone raised the question of whether “God” favored Britain or Afghanistan following British invasion and occupation. Gladstone argued eloquently, God would have no preferences because God valued all lives.

Of special interest in those times was the controversial decision to divide Afghanistan between Britain and Russia according to the 1893 Durand Line; this line established specific spheres of influence and control between the two nations, ignoring any Afghanistan concerns. (see: Durand Line, en.m.Wikipedia.org. October 14, 2016, 11:47).

Fifteen Anniversary Day of Invasion: October 7, 2016

USA Global War on Terrorism (GWOT)

October 7, 2016 is the Fifteenth Anniversary day of the NATO (USA) invasion, occupation, and on-going destruction of Afghanistan. In some quarters, the Anniversary will be celebrated as an example of Western (USA) determination to avenge the 9/11 attacks with military, economic, and political responses, and to assert USA military power and global domination. The Afghanistan invasion was adroitly sanctioned by the G.W. Bush infamous Global War on Terrorism (GWOT), with its ridiculous “Manichaean” duality: “You are either with us, or against us!”

The 2001 invasion of Afghanistan has become “America’s” longest war. No victory is in sight. Some suggest the USA may remain forever. The human, environmental, economic, and moral costs are beyond comprehension (See Costs of War Project. R. Khouri, (October 12, 2016, Al-Jazeera).

While the USA and Europe recall, relive, and celebrate June 6^th as the D-Day WWII landing in Europe, it is unlikely similar status will be assigned to the Afghan invasion date. Perhaps this reflects the growing shame and guilt associated with the blood stained decision (“Out, Out Damn Spot!” Thank you, Lady Macbeth, for reminding us guilt is difficult to erase).

The GWOT is now acknowledged to be a surreptitious-failed policy, contrived in Pentagon rooms by neo-cons, militarists, and right-wing zealots; it was presented as a triumphal stance asserting Bush’s legacy of leadership. The GWOT continues to be used by President Barack Obama’s Administration whenever needed. It is essentially “carte blanche” to invade at will, without remorse, regret, accountability, or risk of criminal prosecution.

Long-Planned Invasion Plans

The fact of the matter is the United States government developed plans for the invasion of Afghanistan and Iraq years before the 9/11 attack on the World Trade Center (see Corbett, 2016 for detailed and illuminating revelations of the secret government policies and decisions behind the tragic invasions). The 9/11 bombings merely became an opportunistic excuse. Carpe Diem!

There are now informed views proposing the 9/11 attack was itself part of a false-flag conspiracy; these views acknowledge (1) the architectural impossibilities of the towers’ orchestrated collapse; (2) the targeted location destruction of the Pentagon budget office and personnel office. This office location was investigating billions of dollars in military fraud; (3) obvious failures to prevent the 9/11 tragedy when information was available weeks prior to the actual attack.

Was the 9/11 tragedy a radical Islamic terrorist attack, a state-sponsored terrorist attack, or a carefully contrived plan to justify the destruction and decimation of Middle East invasions and regime changes (e.g., Afghanistan, Egypt, Iran, Iraq, Libya, Syria, Turkey). The destructive role of the infamous 1996-1997 Project for a New American Century (PNAC) remains to be explored (Wikipedia reference).

9/11: False Flag?

Although celebrated in some quarters, in other quarters, the Anniversary of the Afghanistan invasion will be recognized as yet another example of the continual efforts by Western international military-industrial cabals to provide causes and/or reasons to invade, occupy, and exploit non-Western nations. Although noble cries of liberty, democracy, and freedom are voiced by the USA and its NATO allies, more sinister reasons are always denied, including concerns for access to implement and exploit natural resources (e.g., oil, rare metals), strategic military positions (Silk Road gateway, military missile defense locations), and chess-board game dominance tactics enjoyed by foreign affairs experts (e.g., Samuel Huntington, Zbigniew Brzezinski).

In the non-existent world of principled media and journalism, the October 7, 2016 Fifteenth Anniversary would elicit challenging headlines of remorse, using forceful words and analyses condemning USA’s “lust” for war using the aegis of lies, deceit, fraudulent misrepresentations, celebrity endorsements, movies, games, medals, and, bombs and bullets.

Total War: Learn from Nazi Leaders

Unfortunately, headlines of this nature are unlikely to occur. Unlikely, also to appear in headlines, will be accusations of the slaughter of soldiers, enemy fighters, and innocents. The sterile term for innocent-citizen deaths is “collateral damage.” How quaint! Deaths of soldiers and enemy fighters, however, are considered acceptable legal and legitimate actions! A death is a death! Enemy fighter deaths are inscribed in impersonal accounting-ledgers as numbers’ soldier deaths on tombstones.

The “Total War,” military strategy policy was advocated by Nazi Minister Public Enlightenment and Propaganda, Josef Goebbels (1897 – 1946). “Total War” is now accepted logical military strategy. When you make war, use every tactic you can to win. Among militarists, war brings a calculated indifference to human suffering, destruction, and death. Reflexive reliance upon limited military solutions raises questions about the consequences for both targets and the perpetrators. “Total War” offers flexibility to destroy.

Interestingly, an article on a recent Government Accounting Office (GAO) report (see Claire Bernish, October 14, 2016, Activist Post), alleges the Pentagon uses more than five hundred million dollars annually to “galvanize public support for its wars.” At some point, invoking “God, god, g _ d” would by an excellent PR tactic. Can’t lose if “God” is on your side, even if it is a lie!

I wonder? Is there some functional value considering war-making a psychological, behavioral, and moral disorder? While it is notably absent as a category in the two arbiters of insanity, Diagnostic and Statistical Manual and ICD 10, it could be argued chronic pursuit of war warrants a disorder, disease, and/or deviancy status for either a nation, society, and or culture. Perhaps it could be called the “The Pentagon Syndrome.”

Lessons from 19th Century “Imperialism”

In 1877-1878, as Great Britain struggled to expand its imperialistic global empire spanning six continents, two men, dramatically different from one another in political ambitions and moral values, were pitted against each other in a fierce election struggle to become prime minister: Benjamin Disraeli and William Gladstone.

At this time, Britain and Russia were at war against each other in Afghanistan, in what was euphemistically called the “Great Game,” romanticized in the novel, Kim, by Rudyard Kipling (1865 – 1936). The two nations were fighting over the division of Afghanistan. Little concern was given to the wishes of the Afghan peoples, who were considered by both sides to be war-like uncivilized hill tribes, deserving Western civilization’s fateful invasions.

Disraeli and Gladstone

Benjamin Disraeli (1804-1881), believed Britain should continue to expand its colonial wars and occupations. He argued the pursuit of “Empire” reflected Britain’s destiny to lead the world; Britain’s moral responsibilities to “civilize” the world. Disraeli pointed out the extensive economic wealth brought by Empire, as evidenced by the financial profits of generated from the Industrial Age (Edwardian – Victorian periods). Can you hear English composer Edgar Elgar’s (1857–1934) rousing Pomp and Circumstance Marches?

William Gladstone (1809-1898), leader of the opposition Liberal Party, argued in favor of re-considering Britain’s imperialistic expansion because of its social and moral consequences for both the people colonized, and for the moral standing of Britain’s citizens. Gladstone saw colonial wars as a “criminal assaults on innocent people” (Porch, 2001, p 42).

Gladstone appealed to conscience at a time when Western imperialism was colonizing Africa, Asia, and South America, exploiting natural and human resources, killing conquered people with impunity, and celebrating (Joseph Conrad’s gripping novel, The Heart of Darkness, 1899 & 1902, captures the sheer madness and horror of imperialism).

Results of the 1878 British election would have profound implications for the entire world. Amid the accusations, character insults, and personal attacks, fundamental questions emerged regarding (1) the morality of wars, invasion and occupation, (2) colonial domination and exploitation, and (3) national economic growth and development. Issue: “Invoking God as a moral justification for ending imperialistic invasions and wars.

Disraeli and disliked each other intensely; their quick wit made for memorable political insults. At one social gathering,” Gladstone said to Disraeli, “I predict, Sir, you will die either by hanging, or of some vile disease.” To which, Disraeli replied, “That all depends, Sir, upon whether I embrace your principles, or your mistress.”

Although quick-witted character insults brought laughter, applause, and well-known British triumphal affirmations of shared opinion: “Hear! Hear!,” but a pivotal moral moment was at hand. The election came down to Gladstone’s views the Zulu War and Afghan War (“The Great Game”) were essentially “slaughters of innocents” by British Redcoats;” an indelible stain on British identity and civility. It was a time of choice! At the height of the debate, Gladstone appealed to the British public’s sense of conscience:

“Remember the rights of the savage. . . . Remember the sanctity of life in the hill villages of Afghanistan, among the winter snows, is as inviolable in the eyes of Almighty God as can be your own.”

Timeless words and wisdom! Anyway you spell it, Gladstone asserts God does not play favorites. Disraeli lost the election. Britain’s pursuit of empire continued, but lacked the prior resolve and support of its citizens. A nation’s conscience was laid bare. Some claim Gladstone’s words signaled the beginning of the end of the British Empire! Imperialism, of course, continues today via violent wars and invasions and associated immoral political and economic exploitation and abuse.

Question: Can awareness of the Afghanistan invasion Anniversary date lift American “public conscience” to rises in protest: Whose side is God, god, gods, g _ d, on? Gladstone’s words remain one of the most powerful arguments against the “exceptionalism” used by the USA, Great Britain, and allies (e.g., NATO) to justify invasions, occupations, and domination. No nation can claim moral superiority as a sanction from “god” or any other force or history, to justify its violent actions.

Enduring Lessons

Are there any enduring lessons to be learned from the fateful words of this 19th Century election in Britain? I believe so. Some lessons come from sacred religious texts, too often forgotten amidst carefully selective proclamations from Monotheistic religion pulpits and lecterns. Some come from secular texts (e.g., Magna Carta, UDHR, and USA’s Declaration of Independence and Constitution), which speak of the enduring human values of peace, liberty, freedom, beauty, and god-given rights. Some lessons are in the daily utterances of people who see the tragic consequences of militarism and violence.

The following is a list of enduring lessons coming to mind as I reflect on the endless wars of our times. With Gladstone’s words ringing in my ears, I offer them to you:

You reap what you sow!
Who lives by the sword, dies by the sword.
“Whoever sheds man’s blood, by man his blood shall be shed”
“Thou shalt not kill!”
“What causes quarrels and what causes fights among you? Is it not s that your passions are at war within you?”
“They shall beat their swords into plowshares, and their spears into pruning hooks.”
Do unto others, as you would have them do unto you (Golden Rule in every major religion)
Violence begets violence; violence begets hate; hate begets hate; hate begets violence.
Every empire in human history has collapsed.
Empires collapse from within.
As empires collapse, leaders impose domestic controls, and assert their dominance.
It is easier to conquer a people and their land, than it is to leave depart in peace.
Wars are easy to start, difficult to end.
The legacy of Imperialism is enduring resentment.
Wars require money; public services are denied.
Major beneficiaries of war, are war industries, arms dealers, and generals.
Exceptionalism is always self-deceit!
There are no winners in wars.
Wars scars are permanent.
When you go forward for revenge, dig two graves.
Oaths of office cannot be used as excuses for war. The best defense for a nation is peace and justice.
War socializes a “culture of war; a “culture of war” socializes citizens.
“Nation shall not lift up sword against nation.”
“God, god, g _ d,” does not have favorites!

And So . . .

Today the national dish of Britain is “Curry.” Britain and Russia remain rivals. The United States of America is involved in hot-wars and cold-wars around the globe; USA sullied and flawed invasions and regime-change strategies and tactics have resulted in millions of deaths, displaced people, floods of refugees, and mass migrations redefining nation identities and boundaries.

The United States of America has been at war in Afghanistan for 15 years. Estimations of human, environmental, economic and moral costs are staggering; yet even so, they do not capture the full consequences of our tragic invasion for Afghanistan, for Afghani people, and for our conscience. Numbers are tossed before us as a balance sheet of assets and liabilities. My “God, god, gods, g _ d,” or whatever force may be! The horror is apocalyptic!

This is genocide and ethnic cleansing by any name, term, or definition! It is endless war; destruction of a nation, people, culture, and history. This is savagery at the hands of the USA’s paradoxical self-defeating counter-terrorism war. This war fills immoral military-industrial complex coffers, and a suffering people’s coffins. Gladstone’s words echo today if we choose to hear them: “Remember the sanctity of life . . . “

And Now Africa . . .

And as if to dismiss any semblance of moral authority, the USA has announced it will send USA troops to 35 African nations. The strategy is the same: advisers, troops, occupation, regime change, exploitation. Stop it! We are not the Empire of “God, god, gods, g _ d!” We are a cruel, brutal, merciless, vicious nation. No amount of PR can disguise this fact! Have we no shame?

We punish and abuse our own citizens! Stop this delusional portrayal of our nation as sanctioned by “God, god, gods, g _ d.” We are not! We are a corrupt and bought nation, sold like a slave to the highest financial bidders! What happened to us? Are the roots of our actions traceable to our own savage history? Are we now? Have we always been a “Culture of War?”

References:

Corbett, J. (2016, October 12). Afghanistan War: What you are not being told? Corbett Report: 10:16 PM.

Khouri, R. (October 12, 2016). The frighteningly high human and financial costs of war. Al-Jazeera.

Marsella, A.J. (2014). War, peace, and justice. Alpharetta, GA: Mountain Arbor Press.

Marsella, A.J. (2011). The United States of America: A “culture of war.” International Journal of Intercultural Research, 35, 714-728.

Porch, D. (2001). Wars of empire. London, UK: Wellington House.

Wikipedia: Durand Line, October 14, 2016, 11:47 AM.

Wikipedia: Project for a New American Century, October 16, 2016 8:54 AM.

__________________________

Anthony J. Marsella, Ph.D., a member of the TRANSCEND Network, is a past president of Psychologists for Social Responsibility, Emeritus Professor of psychology at the University of Hawaii’s Manoa Campus in Honolulu, Hawaii, and past director of the World Health Organization Psychiatric Research Center in Honolulu. He is known nationally and internationally as a pioneer figure in the study of culture and psychopathology who challenged the ethnocentrism and racial biases of many assumptions, theories, and practices in psychology and psychiatry. In more recent years, he has been writing and lecturing on peace and social justice. He has published 21 books and more than 300 publications noted for challenging the ethnocentricity and biases of Western psychology and psychiatry, and for advocating peace and social justice. He can be reached at marsella@hawaii.edu.

This article originally appeared on Transcend Media Service (TMS) on 17 October 2016.

Anticopyright: Editorials and articles originated on TMS may be freely reprinted, disseminated, translated and used as background material, provided an acknowledgement and link to the source, TMS: Whose Side is “God, god, gods, g _ d,” _ _ _ on? A Reprise and More, is included. Thank you.

WORLD ORDER AND DISORDER: THE “GAMES” AND “GAMBLES” OF LIFE AND LIVES ©

Posted on January 5, 2016February 1, 2016 by kathiemm

More than Nations . . .

by Guest Author Anthony Marsella

Contrary to the widespread myth, nations are not the sole source of massive international political, economic, and social international events, forces, and changes. It is true the story of history is often told with nations as the grand hand behind unfolding events. Reality, however, is very different. Nations are merely one player among many players shaping history each day amid a complex crucible of “games and gambles” serving many interests.

The myth of “nation” determinism is encouraged by a select group of individuals, organizations, and nations who seek to hide their wealth, power, position, and privilege in shaping the world order and disorder. It is to their advantage to function as shadow forces, often beneath the mantle of nations. Their immediate visibility may be hidden, but their influence is profound. The players are displayed in Figure 1.

The question must be asked: Can any nation or groups of nations control and dominate the many powerful agencies, organizations, and rogue nations immune or resistant to a nation’s power? Have the times, which nurtured and now sustain, a new array of powers capable of cooperation or contention according to their interests, created a chaotic and desperate dance unresponsive to policies and strategies of control and domination once accepted as successful? A partially visible system now exists, dedicated to the preservation of powerful military-industrial-congressional complex, cited by President Eisenhower in his farewell address (January 17, 1961), as an emerging danger to our nation.

It is assumed nations will pursue the interests of their citizens and state. This too is a myth! What is accurate is certain powerful or rogue nations with access to unlimited military have the capacity to intervene at will to shape the world order through (1) imposed regime changes, (2) invasion and occupation, (3) war, death, destruction, (4) economic and financial controls, (5) sanctions, (6) cultural and religious systems, and (7) many other illegal and immoral policies and actions. Using secretive policies, strategies, and tactics, nations can become shills for private interests. But this Orwellian dystopian situation, relying heavily on military power and private wealth, is now leading the world toward disaster.

In today’s global community, many competing nations, and their hidden shadow groups, have access to military power and might. They also have access to other means of exercising power including economic, historic, moral, religious, and information communication technology (ICT). For the latter, the word and process becomes both a shield and weapon.

I must include “protest groups and factions” because they are present, and exercise some direct and indirect influence. Indeed, responses to these groups and factions (e.g., unions, abolish nuclear groups, Wall-Street protestors, environment activists, peace advocates) often require even more assertions of power and might by those in power. In this respect, the groups and factions are players, albeit often desperate amid their limited numbers and organizational stature.

The World Order: “Games” and “Gambles”

The seductive “games” and “gambles” to control and shape world order has been played for thousands of years by individuals, societies, and “nations.” The prize for winners: Empire! Global domination, control, and wealth! Why? With domination and control comes power to impose selfish interests on conquered people, regions, and societies. A certain “cache” is also sought! Etching the names of individuals, groups, and nations, amid the famous and infamous collection of empire, suggests “immortality.” We may despise those enshrined in history, but we cannot deny they remain alive in memory — now omnipresent in Google.

Even a passing knowledge of world history reveals the pursuit of “empire” has ancient roots (e.g., Egypt, Greece, Rome, China, Aztec, Inca, Ottoman, Mayan). The words of the romantic-era poet, Percy Bysshe Shelly’s (1792-1822), Ozymandias, capture the inevitable demise of empire. But while it lasts, it is an intoxicating and blinding stimulant, feeding heart and mind with the pleasures of adulation and comforts of power:

Ozymandias

I met a traveler from a distant land, who said:
“Two vast and trunkless legs of stone
Stand in the desert . . .
Near them, on the sand,
Half-sunk, a shattered visage lies . . .

And on the pedestal these word appear:
“My name is Ozymandias, king of kings:
Look on my works ye mighty, and despair!”

Nothing beside remains
Round the decay of that colossal wreck,
Boundless and bare,
The lone and level sands stretch far away.”

The Pursuit of Empire

The pursuit of empire continues! Ozymandias embody the tragic impulse and result. Power, its inevitable rise and fall! No lessons learned! Only the deceptive rush of visions immune to reason! Empire remains the quest for nations and their private supporters seeking protection and opportunity. Empire is no longer confined to a sovereign state or nation. There are too many competing players. Most are unwilling to yield to a single supreme authority, but eager to use its mantle to pursue their interests.

As Figure 1 displays, the players in the “games” and “gambles” for world order and disorder, sow and protect their seeds. How can a sovereign nation control diverse powers having no loyalty to nation, but loyalty only to their own existence and security? Amid their privacy, they too often escape condemnation, but they too must know “empire” passes. Privatization, the preferred policy of the neo-liberal and neo-con establishments, provides an omnipresent petard on which to fall.

Conspiracy? Of Course . . .

Is conspiracy present? Yes! Conspiracy is an attempt to hide, conceal, veil, or secrete actual events and forces from recognition. Conspiracies exist to serve special interests, contrary to interests and welfare of others. Conspiracies use an array of methods and tactics to elude attention, lest the methods and tactics be recognized as immoral, illegal, and dishonest or criminal. Recall, the villainous lies, deceit, and abuses used by the Bush-Cheney government to invade Iraq, and cast the Middle-East into flames: Iraq has nuclear weapons; we must use torture to obtain information; a global war on terrorism is necessary. With their actions, they indicted our nation, embedding us in endless war. Citizens became co-conspirators by our passive agreement (See Abby Martin interview with Lt. Colonel Wilkerson, former assistant to General Colin Powell, who was tricked into claiming Iraq had nuclear weapons (see http://fktv.is/the-classic-decay-of empires-us-army-colonel-lawrence-wilkerson-27480). Wilkerson points out the massive deceit used by a small group with access to power to launch the USA into a “total” global war.

The ubiquitous iconic “back room” of politics is not a myth! It exists and functions to maintain public ignorance, under the guise the public does not need to know, for it would not understand what we must do. The conspirators: En loco parentis! We act for your welfare by protecting our welfare. “Trust us! Trust us! If you do not, do not stand in our way!

What tragedy! What a betrayal! What a despicable effort. This effort continues across the spectrum of “players” involved in the “games” and “gambles” of world order and disorder! The players have the political, economic, and military power to continue the “games” and “gambles.” They lack only moral justification. A tangled web of deceit!

Table 1 offers a list of policies and actions used by the world order players. It is frightening! These are not limited to nations or governments. They have become part of the options available to private individuals, groups, and commercial organizations. This is what is so frightening and dangerous! The foe and their methods escape visibility and prosecution. The justice systems normally relied upon to keep order and to protect, are part of the problem. There is an unbounded flow of mutual connections across the nations and groups via common board members, financial supporters, and shared visions of morality.

Table 1:

Policies, Actions, and Alternatives (Alphabetized)
In Support of Nation and Other Organization Aims and Goals

Assassinations/death squads/drones;
Bounties for info/capture, and assassination;
Bribery, purchase, and installation of pro-American leaders and dictators;
Celebration of national “morality” in the face of evil acts;
Collaboration/contracts with foreign universities, scientists, professional organizations, and intelligence agencies defaming their character;
Contingent “humanitarian” aid – implicit and explicit;
Contingent “foreign” aid;
Control of UN via vetoes and economic and political pressures;
Control of IMF and World Bank;
Cooperation with foreign nation security services (e.g., military, intelligence, corporations);
Development of domestic crowd controls (militarization of police);
Drones(Widespread use of drones by domestic/national groups and agencies);
Drug wars. Corruption of local officials;
Disproportionate support of “allies.” Enemification of others;
Entrapments of targeted individuals and groups – persons of interest;
Establishment of military bases [more than 700 known USA foreign bases];
Exportation of unpopular American culture (i.e., consumerism, materialism, commodification, competition, crony capitalism, corruption, celebritization)
False flag operations disguised military and/or economic interventions/invasions);
Foreign student/faculty/consultant exchanges (used for intelligence recruitment);
Fund development of disguised/pseudo-organizations used for national military and security purposes (e.g. Human Ecology Fund, ONR, AID);
Glorification of war, militarism, warrior mentalities and images, machismo;
Hegemonic globalization (i.e., control of socio-technical changes and economy);
Infiltration of peace, anti-war groups, and social activist organizations;
Invasion and overthrow, including regime change;
Justification of torture (“enhanced interrogation”);
Mass surveillance, monitoring, and archiving of info/communication data;
Massive growth in government/private intelligence agencies and organizations;
Media influence and control via biased news and biased news commentators;
Military interventions and occupation of nations and regions;
Mind control technologies (e.g., drugs, EMR, behavior control technologies);
Negotiation/conflict resolution delays are now policy;
No Prosecution of connected military, government, civilian law violators/abusers;
Military occupation of foreign nations, regions, and cities;
Promotion of nationalism, pseudo-patriotism, USA exceptionalism;
Project for a New American Century (Developed to insure USA Hegemony);
Project Infra Guard (Collaboration between FBI and hundreds of thousands of businesses in USA to report on citizens resulting in creation of mass list of citizens with no opportunity for contesting surveillance. (Every mall and every store provides video and other personal information;
Propaganda to instill citizen fear, and vilification of individuals and groups;
Recruitment of spies, informers, collaborators, agents among friends, neighbors. The best spy is a person who doesn’t now they are a spy, but in fact, as they share information on neighbors, friends, and family, the information is collected and archived;
Renditions in numerous countries;
Use surrogate nations and forces to accomplish military goals;
Use false-flag incidents;
Use major philanthropic foundations to influence policy and actions;
Vilification, demonization, enemification of domestic and/or international critics;
Weapons/arms dealer sales for money, and for promoting conflicts;
Witness protection programs.

What an array of possibilities! In a world of lawlessness, anything goes, and does! We remain in shock at the destructive events occurring across the world. Yet we too often ignore these events as consequences of the protected policies and actions of nations, individuals, private organizations, engaged in protecting their interests. Millions of lives and life are lost oblivious to the sorrow and grief exacted. Protected from harm, the perpetrators of harm are engage in the “games” and “gambles” of world order and disorder. To what end?

This essay was originally posted by Transcend Media Service, December 17, 2015; reprinted with permission.

Anthony J. Marsella, PhD, is emeritus professor of psychology, University of Hawaii, and former president of Psychologists for Social Responsbility (http://www. psysr.org). His recent publications include Marsella, A.J. (2012). Globalization and psychology. Journal of Social Issues, 68, 454-472; and Marsella, A.J. (2011). Nonkilling psychology and lifeism: I am what am. In J. Pim & D. Christie (Eds.), Nonkilling Psychology (pp. 361-378). Honolulu, HI: Center for Global Non-Violence.

Investing in Moral Repair, Part 3, by Ross Caputi*

Posted on November 19, 2015March 11, 2021 by kathiemm

This is part 3 of a 3 part series by Ross Caputi.

Investing in Moral Repair, Part 1

Investing in Moral Repair, Part 2

There are good reasons why in her book Afterwar: Healing the Moral Wounds of Our Soldiers (2015) Nancy Sherman might have wanted to avoid a discussion of afterwar ethical obligations to the victims of American military campaigns. She explains that her lack of focus on the injustices of the invasions and occupations of Afghanistan and Iraq was simply because it was not the focus of the veterans she interviewed. Their moral injury was most often the result of what they perceived to be their failures to protect their fellow soldiers, and in some cases, individual Iraqis and Afghans too. Most of the veterans that she interviewed did not feel burdened by the ethical question of whether the wars they participated in were just or unjust.

That has been my experience too. I’ve met few veterans who were raised with the internationalist perspective that I was, and even fewer who feel, as I do, that the relationship between occupier and occupied is an inherently immoral one. If Sherman were to advocate that we should feel morally responsible for the justness or unjustness of the war itself, as I am willing to do, she would run the risk of burdening veterans with new moral dilemmas that hadn’t previously occurred to them.

She might further have made a deliberate choice to avoid topics that are interpreted in our culture as being radical—such as responsibility for civilian deaths or war crimes, topics that might just be interpreted as ethical issues in other parts of the world—in order to avoid alienating her audience. Instead, by limiting her focus to the invisible wounds that veterans carry, wounds that cannot be healed by prescribing them more medication, and the ways in which the civilian community is essential to their process of moral repair, this book stands to do a great service to veterans by building the sympathetic community that they need. However, such an approach does not fully address all of the post war responsibilities of civilians.

Afterwar is an important challenge to our national war culture. Sherman provides us with a matrix of concepts—such as “affective access” and “self-forgiveness”—that act as a set of tools for a national discussion about moral injury and how best to care for our veterans. This valuable contribution provides a starting point from which we can begin to have a discussion about the jus post bellum that is not limited to the actions of nation states, but rather addresses the ways in which we as citizens can live ethically in a globally connected world. It is a step towards a deeper understanding of the ways in which we as individuals are connected to global events, such as war, and the responsibilities we have towards one another, and the ways in which we can begin to repair what has been broken.

*This review by Engaging Peace Board member Ross Caputi is reprinted from the American Book Review, Volume 36, Number 5, July/August 2015.

Ross is currently on the Board of Directors of ISLAH. He is also a graduate student and a writer. In 2004, he was a US Marine in the US-led occupation of Iraq. His experience there, in particular his experience during the 2nd siege of Fallujah, compelled him to leave the US military and join the anti-war movement. His activism has focused on our society’s moral obligation to our victims in Iraq, and to the responsibility of veterans to renounce their hero status in America.

Investing in Moral Repair, Part 2, by Ross Caputi*

Posted on November 16, 2015November 17, 2015 by kathiemm

This is part 2 of a 3 part series by Ross Caputi. See Investing in Moral Repair, Part 1

Afghanistan War 2001 — Collage of four photos for the Afghanistan War.
By Youngottoman (Own work) [CC BY-SA 2.0 (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/2.0)], via Wikimedia Commons

The common assumption that there is a military-civilian gap in our country is not totally unrelated to another conventional wisdom—that Vietnam veterans were spat on, maltreated, and repudiated by their fellow citizens upon their return from war. Nancy Sherman, in her book Afterwar: Healing the Moral Wounds of Our Soldiers (2015,) devotes 32 pages to analyzing the common refrain “Thank you for your service,” which she argues is a “national reaction to a past negative reaction” when “[r]esistance to [the Vietnam] war turned into antipathy toward its warriors” (30-31). Again, Sherman does not engage with the works that question this assumption. For example, Jerry Lembcke fails to find evidence that a significant number of Vietnam veterans were maltreated by protestors in his The Spitting Image: Myth, Memory, and the Legacy of Vietnam (2000). Instead, he reminds us that veterans were a large, and very welcomed, constituent of the anti-war movement.

These two assumptions taken together ground a common perception of veterans as a special interest group deserving of special care and special benefits. Perhaps it is this cultural assumption about veterans that motivates Sherman’s assertion that civilians’ post war responsibilities are limited to veterans; though, again, she gives no argument for why this is the case. If civilians are morally responsible for the harm that results from war due to their causal contributions to starting and facilitating wars, why aren’t civilians morally responsible to all parties that are harmed by war, including the civilians of other nations involved in the conflict? Particularly in the case of the recent US-led invasion and occupation of Iraq, which caused hundreds of thousands of excess Iraqi deaths, displaced millions, internally and externally, and caused an environmental and public health catastrophe with some of the highest rates of birth defects and cancers the world has ever seen; why are we not morally responsible for what has been done to Iraqis?

Sherman analyzes “Thank you for your service” as a performative expression of gratitude, which she argues is a “token acceptance of . . . shared responsibility and accountability for sending fellow citizens to war, independent of specific causal contributions to war activity or to its support” (39). Correspondingly, she points out the resentment that so many veterans feel towards the ease with which civilians relieve themselves of responsibility by uttering such platitudes. Resentment, after all, is a reactive attitude that “[holds] someone to account” (46). However, there is no acknowledgement of the widespread resentment that Iraqis feel towards Americans and other citizens of Coalition nations. Furthermore, by leaving the vocabulary of our traditional war culture unchallenged, the infelicitous use of the word “service”—and its corresponding semantic frame of a beneficiary, a benevolent act, and a recipient—goes unexamined. By preserving the notion that the war was a service to Americans, a service consciously and willingly performed by our veterans, it obscures any understanding that the war was a wrong done to others and that we might be responsible for the harm that our war caused them. *This review by Engaging Peace Board member Ross Caputi is reprinted from the American Book Review, Volume 36, Number 5, July/August 2015.