In the councils of government, we must guard against the acquisition of unwarranted influence, whether sought or unsought, by the military-industrial complex. The potential for the disastrous rise of misplaced power exists and will persist…The prospect of domination of the nation’s scholars by Federal employment, project allocation, and the power of money is ever present and is gravely to be regardedPresident Dwight D. Eisenhower, January 17, 1961
Every so often Eisenhower’s warning of a growing American military-industrial complex—where armed forces, commerce, and politics are closely linked—flashes on my personal radar. It did so again September 4 while watching CBS News Sunday Morning.
The title of the segment was “HIMARS: How it’s changing Ukraine’s fight against Russia.” I’ve been out of touch for a few months, so I was curious to learn about Ukraine’s success or failure against its invader neighbor to the east.
Indeed, I got a report card. But it played second fiddle to the larger story concerning defense contractor Lockheed Martin’s lucrative development of high-mobility rocket systems (HIMARS), which Ukraine is now successfully deploying against Russia.
On Sunday morning…America’s most popular church day, and for many a day of repose…I digested with my scrambled eggs one dazzling image after another of ground explosions, army tanks, death missiles, fireworks, bombs bursting in air, and sober army generals and Pentagon officials glowingly discussing the success of HIMARS.
HIMARS is being developed, per CBS national security correspondent David Martin, in a “Lockheed Martin plant in rural Arkansas, a seemingly minor outpost in America’s vast military-industrial complex…”
Chief weapons buyer for the Pentagon, Dr. William LaPlante, explained how Lockheed—with the federal government looking over its shoulder—plans to “dramatically increase production” of the high-mobility rockets.
“Can you double production?” asked an earnest Martin of Lockheed COO Frank St. John, as if on the verge of drooling. “Absolutely,” St. John responded, struggling to suppress a smile.
Martin also dangled a juicy morsel in front of retired army Lieutenant-General Ben Hodges. Martin noted that the 16 HIMARS rockets which the U.S. has thus far given Ukraine “doesn’t sound like a lot.” Hodges not surprisingly replied “It’s nowhere near what I think Ukraine can use.”
In 2020 Lockheed Martin received almost 90 percent of its total revenue, totaling 53.2 billion dollars, from defense contracts. Notably, this was before the Russia-Ukraine conflict.
The U.S. is by far the world’s largest weapons exporter, mailing out 9,372 million dollars-worth in 2020.
Watching this broadcast, it struck me that America is now in one of its periodic lulls between wars, yet despite this, conflicts are occurring in other countries, and America, as it usually does, has a significant role to play. And there’s a lot of green to be made in fulfilling this role.
Longitudes won’t weigh in on Eisenhower’s words of warning about “misplaced power” and the “power of money.”
And it won’t take a stance on how involved the U.S. should be in helping Ukraine win its war against an imperial aggressor. For once, I’m in the majority: in support of Ukraine’s David-like fight against Goliath Russia.
What struck me was the cold, clinical manner in which Martin and CBS conducted its segment. Numbers were tossed around, statistics were dispassionately run down, and as I already mentioned, the viewer received an entire war-video game’s worth of destructive images.
The intended takeaway is that America’s military-industrial complex is, even without our own war, doing wonderful work defending freedom around the globe. And, in fact, there’s room for expansion. (Sixteen HIMARS weapons just aren’t enough.) Maybe—this time, anyway—it is a good thing. But for me, the players in this broadcast seemed a bit too cozy.
Since the blaspheme of the Vietnam War, we’ve had multiple jarring examples of how crony capitalism conducts itself in a nefarious fashion. And the 1990 Gulf War and 2003 Iraq War are sterling examples of how the corporate media is a not-insignificant conduit between military, commerce, and politics.
General Electric is a large weapons manufacturer that consistently lands in the rankings of top arms-producing and military service companies. According to the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute (SIPRI), in 2019, General Electric ranked 12th in the United States and 21st in the world out of these companies. GE is a major manufacturer of aircraft parts and missiles that were used extensively in the Gulf War and in Iraq. And, until 2013, GE either directly owned or had shares in the National Broadcasting Company (NBC).Transcend Media Service: Solutions-Oriented Peace Journalism, May 17, 2021
Getting back to that CBS News Sunday Morning broadcast, it would have been nice to have former army General Dwight D. Eisenhower’s prophetic words at least alluded to, for balance purposes.
But I guess providing such balance wasn’t part of Martin’s assignment.
One thought on “The Military-Industrial-Media Complex”
I saw the Sunday Morning piece you reference. When I hear complaints about not being able to afford healthcare for seniors, better services for Vets, rebuilding our infrastructure, food for school kids or green programs to saving the fucking planet, but we send billions in war aid and weapon systems, I climb on my soapbox. While I support helping Ukraine against Russia, too much of our GNP goes to war-related expenditures. More butter, less guns.