|
by mim3@mim.org The final piece of the jigsaw puzzle of military recruitment in the united $tates is in. Retention rates in the military will be too low to sustain the imperialists' vision of the world, so the draft is coming unless there is a desperately radical struggle that develops soon--something we find unlikely but which we support nonetheless. The Amerikan anti-war struggle will develop, but later than it should most ideally. A survey of over 1000 spouses at military bases in January and February 2004 indicates that half believe the military will have problems recruiting as current enlistments expire. This figure came at a time when 64% said the war was going well in Iraq and Bush was receiving approval ratings in the 60s percentage-wise from the military spouses.(1) Half of the spouses expect there to be "major" problems with recruitment in the near future as people refuse to re-enlist after their terms are up and new recruits dwindle for the mercenary army. 21% of all spouses were already saying they had wished their spouses had made another career choice. Only 39% were certain their spouses would re-enlist when their terms were up. On April 15th, USA Today pointed out that the overall trend is already showing up, even in troop re-enlistments which may include people expecting to stay at desk jobs and which definitely started before the recent upsurge in Iraqi struggle. This fiscal year Army retention is already down 10 percentage points from the previous year. Miltary sociologist David Segal says that parents will now start clamping down on the idea of children going into the military.(2) It is not reflected in the press or the jubilation of the Iraqi people, but in fact, the Iraqi people have already landed a huge politico-military blow against Uncle $am in one short year. If imperialism depended on English imperialism as the lynchpin globally and not Uncle $am, such a blow landed under Maoist leadership could have been the turning point to bring down the whole global capitalist system. It is the combined imperialist strength of Uncle $am and others that makes this a protracted struggle of generations. Both Bush and Kerry will try to sidestep the draft issue leading up to elections in November, 2004. In 2005, the push for the draft will be on. MIM does not generally like being in the fortune-telling business, but our record on Iraq is clear relative to both the Democrats and Republicans leading the u$a. We think we deserve greater credibility than these bourgeois politicians always catering for votes and corporate donations. We told the public the truth about WMDs, the likelihood of Iraqi resistance and why it is that only sending dead Amerikans back in body bags changes the political balance. The peace movement did not succeed, because of its petty-bourgeois basis. On all of this we are right and our printed record can be checked against any political leader with access to inside information from intelligence agencies spending 11 digits a year in dollars. Now we tell you this: the draft is coming, so fight now to prevent it and gain political experience for upcoming battles. Military illusions 1) The crumbling of military illusions and the manipulation of the military for political gain is the reason the draft is coming. The loose situation in Fallujah and Afghanistan benefits a political agenda that says more troops are necessary in Iraq and therefore a draft. The rulers will make it appear that the demand for a draft came from the situation itself, not any particular military official or the president. Keeping control on the ground for contractors to do their business in Iraq cannot be done with Predator spy planes alone. Even driving about expensive tanks eats up fuel. Unemployed or potentially unemployed people walking on the ground of Iraq seems a cheap solution for the rulers; although we caution readers that as long as the imperialists do not pay the expense, they may not care how expensive a war is. 2) The military thinks that Iraq has much less population than Vietnam did and GI Joe is much better technically equipped. In fact, the longer the troops stay there, the more experienced Iraqis will get in fighting, while Amerikans rotate in and out. Johnson had 500,000 Amerikans in Vietnam at the peak. The military thinks it has already reached that level proportionately speaking in Iraq and its illusions about the Vietnam War say that China and the Soviet Union were the reasons for failure there. Bush will believe his own rhetoric about a "small minority" of "terrorists" and "thugs" fighting, (600 killed in Fallujah alone in one week) because certain Amerikans never realized it was not "outside agitators" doing the fighting in Vietnam. This confidence in victory in Iraq will lead to the draft. 3) There has been talk in Congress about raising pay and improving mail delivery to improve retention.(3) This angle will fail miserably. That fact will also point to the draft. Neo-conservative illusions 1) The neo-conservatives believe correctly that a portion of rural white u.$. society is dumb enough to believe that September 11th 2001 is connected to Iraq. For many in the rural areas and even some in the suburbs, it is difficult to distinguish Third World or rich Arab peoples in general. Iraqis, Saudis, Muslims--it hardly matters, because a solid 30% of the whites is of the Crusader mentality. In the military that figure is 37% evangelicals based on the spouses' poll--a plurality. Making use of the attack on Amerikan soil and the rural whites correctly referred to as "hamburger meat" by one self-described politically incorrect humorist, the neo-conservatives erred in thinking they can transfer that into making Iraq a Japan or Germany. They really have no idea how FDR, Truman and Eisenhower did it. After filling their heads with Ann Coulter, it's a wonder neo-conservatives know anything. The truth about "hamburger meat" only led the neo-conservatives to make an error related to thinking Iraq is not Vietnam. 2) Neo-conservatives told the public that Iraqis would roll over and play dead. They told this tale partly to get the war started. This suited the Zionists and apocalypse-centered Christians. The rulers do not know why their repressions in Iraq and Afghanistan fail while they succeeded in Japan and Germany. This is the central hit-or-miss proposition of bourgeois dictators everywhere. The vast majority of bourgeois authoritarians fail in their missions for reasons they do not know. They repress and repress and get no where, unlike Lenin, Stalin and Mao. In Iraq and Afghanistan, even though the united $tates represents a more advanced mode of production, Uncle $am is not able to bring progress and therefore stability and peace on Amerikan terms. 3) Afghan warlord Dostum has been kicking up a storm as we write this. Mao had a solution for warlords in China. The neo-conservatives think they do in Afghanistan, but they do not. The imperialists have no idea how to bring progress and hence stability to Afghanistan. That means they will try to employ more troops. That means the draft. 4) The single greatest hope of the neo-conservatives is this: they believe they negotiated with Saddam Hussein and Osama Bin Laden in the past, so they wonder why it is impossible to strike up a deal with Sunnis, Shiites and Kurds in Iraq now. If there is such a deal, the military resistance should roll over and play dead they think and the draft won't be necessary. MIM has to admit that the resistance in Iraq is not proletarian-led. Nonetheless, we do not believe this critical neo-conservative assumption that the Iraqis can be bought out will prove correct. This appears to be a miscalculation. Easing the sanctions and spending U.$. tax dollars will not create the bridge of stability to a future where Iraq pays for its own quietude. Already the New York Times has reported on cooperation among Kurds, Sunnis and Shiites to kick out the Amerikkkans. Economic reality says that they will be better off sharing their resources among themselves rather than among themselves and the Amerikkkans. The imperialists may try to partition Iraq along Korea/Vietnam lines before giving up Iraq. That is another reason why the draft may go forward, with the imperialists thinking they will have an easy time of it through partition and then end the draft with stability achieved in a smaller region. 5) Some neo-conservatives may have the illusion that since Bush said the united $tates would hand over government control on June 30th, then u.$. troops will leave. That is unlikely. The date is an obvious political escape hatch for Bush, but it does not mean he will take it the way some of his own supporters might think. Realistically, the Iraqi people would have to land a devastating military blow before June 30th that makes it clear to even the most backward Amerikan that there is nothing to be gained in taking over Iraq. Then Bush might back out and use some other get-tough action to cover his ass. Democratic Party illusions 1) Led by Ted Kennedy and the European-sympathizing imperialists, one wing of imperialists wishes the 2003 war on Iraq was through the UN. Some continue to believe there might be a way to coax the UN back in, which concretely means getting Russian, Chinese and French troops on the ground followed quickly by Indian troops and others. At this point, as Kerry said about Bush making things "harder" for military success, many may see the UN as a "deus ex machina." The positive side of this, is that the Amerikan public probably would not accept any political truth about disaster in Iraq that did not arrive from trying to go through the UN first. Just as rural Amerika will not believe any political truth that says Amerikan might cannot conquer all, the educated Amerikan petty-bourgeoisie won't support withdrawal without trying a UN takeover first. The UN is not likely to succed in getting involved, but at first glance the opposite may seem the case. Blair has called for a new Security Council resolution for UN involvement in Iraq. Spain has said troops will leave if the UN does not take over by June 30th and Bush had left open the door to such a result long ago by setting the June 30th deadline in the first place. It's sort of a last chance for him to salvage his election prospects if that's what he decides. We are not saying Bush could not do it, but only he knows if he is willing to give the rest of the world a more even shake on business in Iraq. His administration has said the UN is not efficient enough to administer the process of turning to democracy in Iraq, but some may believe political pressure at home and abroad will force Bush's hand. Along these lines, Bush's tough pro-Sharon policy may help him cover a humiliating backdown in Iraq. Most of the rest of the world does not want to cover for the united $tates and has no interest in sanctioning u.$.-led pre-emptive strikes. The global imperialists would have to make a hell of a deal to salvage Iraq and we do not think it is likely. It is more likely that the rest of the world's bourgeoisie realizes that Uncle $am cannot salvage the situation. The hostage situation is one major deterrent for the UN to act to use its own legitimacy to stabilize Iraq. Without UN troops, the draft for Amerikans is more likely. The appearance that the united $tates may hand over power on June 30th may be confusing some people who would otherwise be partaking in the anti-war movement. We suspect that by fall, a considerable number of students will draw conclusions and start moving away from the sidelines of the struggle, especially if the UN option recedes more plainly. 2) A large portion of wishy-washy anti-war people belongs to the Democratic Party, but even the minority Democratic Party is divided on the draft. That's why it will go through. The anti-draft members of the Democratic Party will look the other way as the leaders let the draft through. After all, the Democratic Party never took a clear stand against the war and even most Democrats who opposed it want to stay and "finish the job" now. One place where one can see the growing trend of calls for the draft is in the website called democraticunderground.com. Because Democrats do not have the spine to oppose the war, many are now clamoring for a draft. 3) The pseudo-feminist wing of liberalism has representatives in Iraq and Afghanistan trying to teach Iraqis and Afghans how to live the pseudo-feminist lifestyle. They think they know how to bring advance in the wake of u.$. repression. They don't. They've been attacked by the Iraqi people, and rightly so, but in no way will the pseudo-feminists be able to bring progress in Iraq or Afghanistan or the desired stability and hence a reduction of troops according to imperialist wishes. Labor aristocracy illusions 1) The labor aristocracy is used to telling white lies on a daily basis to win its share of super-profits. When Bush told the country clearly in public several times that he planned on a 15 year or more occupation of Iraq, the labor aristocracy did not listen and did not believe him once the casualties started. When Bush and Rumsfeld kept talking about Japan and Germany after World War II,(4) the hamburger meat did not stop to think troops are still there in Japan and Germany, today--sixty years later. After all, the labor aristocracy trusts Bush enough and Paris Hilton was about to appear on TV, so the labor aristocracy did not have time to go into the politics and history. Since the neo-conservatives told the labor aristocracy that Iraqis would greet them cheering with roses and rice, the labor aristocracy filed away any thoughts contrary to the war. This same labor aristocracy is now to be found wondering when its children will come back from Iraq and the war be over. It did not listen to Bush and now it vacillates somewhat. The decrease in labor aristocracy enthusiasm among volunteers for the military means that the draft is more likely to follow. 2) The labor aristocracy thinks it can class struggle against the government for higher military salaries indefinitely--even threatening not to fight or support fighting in Iraq. The imperialists will run much red ink, but the draft will still come. Take action! For anyone aged 18 to 26 or with children or grand-children that age or about to become 18, we recommend that you take action now against the war. It is much harder to stop the draft after it has already taken shape and once it takes shape, the movement will be in better shape if more people get political experience now. Anyone can start out the way the people in Tallahassee did--by copying some fliers and arranging a honk-a-thon for people to honk to oppose the war. Activists paying attention to Congress have noted that the draft will have no college deferments and wimmin will go this time. Last time, it was disproportionately oppressed nationalities from the internal semi-colonies recruited in the draft. Already the federal money is in motion to set up the draft boards.(5) There is talk of mandatory "homeland" service for young people, but MIM finds it more likely that a small percentage of the 18-26 age group, maybe even disproportionately the 18-22 age group will be called up for war duties in late 2005. Activists can try to push Kerry and Bush against the wall during their presidential campaigns. Feel free to heckle them if need be to ask the question whether they support the draft or not. Currently they believe they have the right to risk all our lives for their vision of oil and contractor profits. They are wrong and you are right. The survival rights of draft-age people and Iraqis come before oil, contract profits or even the dubious "democracy" that Bush is yammering about.
Notes: 5. Some related plans are published here: www.sss.gov/perfplan_fy2004.html Thanks to Sophie Lapaire.
|