War on Terrorism: Geopolitical Interests Beyond Ideology

Introduction: Ideology as Cover for Geopolitical Aims

The War on Terror is a war unlike other wars. It is not a war on peoples or places. It is a war on ideology. And it is more than that. As Kayhan Barzegar notes, the "concept of terrorism" has been manipulated and used by policy writers to serve as a cover motive for real geopolitical aims. The War on Terrorism was given full-fledged support and encouragement on September 20, 2001, by leading members of the Project for the New American Century (PNAC), William Kristol and Richard Perle among many others of the so-called "neo-conservative" alliance, when they signed a letter to President G. W. Bush calling for a "war on international terrorism."

Pat Buchanan, one of the few political voices to warn against such an aim, criticized PNAC as a "cabal of intellectuals" out to revolutionize America. Kristol would later set his sights on eliminating oppositional voices, such as Buchanan and Ron Paul, admitting in 2012 at B'nai Jeshurun synagogue that he had been "encouraged" when Buchanan had been marginalized in the Presidential Elections and would be "happy" if Ron Paul were to "go". So while on the face of it, the War on Terrorism is a necessary battle against al-Qaeda and affiliates (ISIS, etc.), underneath, it is a political ruse—a gambit formulated by a highly-motivated group of Washington insiders and foisted on the American people through the strong arm of mainstream media. This paper will describe what the War on Terrorism is and what it is not.

PNAC's Blueprint: From Theory to Military Intervention

William Kristol, PNAC chairman and editor of The Weekly Standard, Donald Kagan, Project co-chairman, Eliot Abrams of the National Security Council, John Bolton, Richard Perle, Thomas Donnelly, Donald Rumsfeld, Paul Wolfowitz, and others formed PNAC in 1997 and wrote the blueprint for the "war on terror" in the 2000 paper called "Rebuilding America's Defenses." The ninety-page paper called for "American global leadership" and anticipated a "new Pearl Harbor" as a catalyst for beefing up the Pentagon and maintaining "American military preeminence" in the world.

PNAC pushed for the invasion of Iraq, and PNAC member I. Lewis Libby promoted the reporting of fake evidence of yellowcake uranium being smuggled into Iraq to justify military intervention. When former Ambassador Joseph Wilson challenged Libby and the White House, investigated the claims independently, and proved them false in the national media, Libby outed Wilson's wife, CIA agent Valerie Plame, jeopardizing both her and her contacts abroad. Libby would later be convicted for this crime, but the "evidence" for mobile weapons labs in Iraq would be sold, with the help of Colin Powell, to the American people. The public would eventually learn that no weapons of mass destruction ever existed in Iraq—but that did not matter to the PNAC members. The American invasion of Iraq was part of their geopolitical plan.

Kristol admitted to purging Congress of anyone who was anti-Israel, which means the War on Terrorism had at its core a group of people supportive of one of the biggest sources of regional conflict in the world.

Orwellian Rhetoric and Middle East Strategy

The political rhetoric of the past decade has become increasingly Orwellian. Political pundits, candidates, and representatives alike spout a "War IS Peace"-style propaganda. Senator Lindsey Graham called America a "battlefield," and the usage of chemical weapons in Syria nearly took American forces into direct confrontation with the Middle Eastern allies of Russia and Iran. A peace plan did prevail at the eleventh hour, largely thanks to an off-the-cuff gaffe made by Kerry and the quick pickup of Kerry's proposal by Russia.

Syria, however, remains within the crosshairs of the PNAC members, and recent talks with Iran have upset Israeli leaders, who believe their Middle Eastern neighbors are still planning to develop nuclear weapons. Israel continuously calls for more aggressive action, and had Netanyahu had his way, the Republican candidate Mitt Romney (whom Netanyahu openly endorsed) would have won the White House and begun an all-out offensive in Syria and Iran. That did not happen, but it very well could have, and the call for action is evident in the PNAC papers.

The Military-Industrial Complex and Perpetual War

The real goal of the War on Terrorism is perpetual war, and perpetual war is good for business—business for the military-industrial complex (MIC). President Eisenhower warned of the rise of the MIC before he left office, but every administration since has continued to foster its ascent. In fact, the MIC was even powerful before World War II was ever contemplated. General Smedley Butler toured America in the 1930s denouncing the MIC, or the war profiteers as he called them. These same profiteers feed off the War on Terrorism today.

Companies like Lockheed Martin, Boeing, Northrop Grumman, and Halliburton (former Vice President Dick Cheney's own contracting company, which L. Steel called "the world's largest war profiteer") all make up the new military-industrial complex. The MIC needs perpetual war just as badly as the Israeli lobby pushes for perpetual conflict in the Middle East: destabilizing countries is good for business. "Fighting Terrorism" is just a ploy.