According to a New York Times report, the US Defense Department plans to raise the 2003 defense budget to US$20 billion while the conflict in Afghanistan is underway. The Pentagon has said that the budget is expected to pass amid the anti-terrorism atmosphere.
When the Pentagon requires a huge budget to speed the procurement of weapons, the US economy suffers a much deeper dent. US President George W. Bush said a federal budget deficit is a price that may have to be paid to counter terrorism and ensure national security. In other words, Americans now have to pay a heavier price for retaliation for the terrorist attacks on their soil.
In fact Operation Enduring Freedom has inflicted great losses on Americans. Setting aside the fact that they have suffered the loss of their personal freedom, sources show that expenses in the first three months of the conflict totaled US$3.8 billion. At this rate, the US$40 billion budgeted shortly after the Sept. 11 attacks by the Congress, will be largely consumed by the end of next month.
Robert Reich, a labor secretary in the Clinton administration, has been a vocal critic, saying that a majority of the anti-terrorist outlay came from the tax revenues of the working class. When the global economy is in the doldrums and major enterprises are laying off employees, is it worth spending so much money on such a conflict?
In addition to the losses sustained by Americans, the expensive war has also sped famine and death, as well as highlighting a bizarre logic. The US president Dwight Eisenhower once said the world spends not only money in manufacturing weapons but also "the sweat of its laborers, the genius of its scientists, the hopes of its children." He also bluntly pointed out that "every gun that is made, every warship launched, every rocket fired, signifies, in the final sense, a theft from those who hunger and are not fed, those who are cold and are not clothed."
By waging war, the US has driven its domestic economy to rock bottom due to immense military expenses. Places outside the US are also pushed to the fringe of famine and destruction as a result of useless waste of resources. In fact, every penny spent in war could be used in a better way.
Estimates show that the price of a missile purchased during the Gulf War could provide student lunches in a school for five years. The US$33 billion budgeted by the US for this year could provide clean drinking water for developing countries for more than 10 years. If all countries could spare their military expenses for 18 days, approximately 4 million sick children could get medical treatment. This is definitely not a game of numbers, but a choice human beings have to make between devastation and survival.
According to the statistics from the World Bank in 1996, an average of more than 800 million people have to endure hunger every day and 4 million people die of starvation annually. Since the conflict in Afghanistan began, the UN Children's Fund has repeatedly warned that more than 100,000 Afghan children will die of poverty and starvation.
While technology has developed at a tremendous pace, humanity still cannot resolve the basic problem of survival. The Bread for the World Institute, which promotes anti-poverty programs, made a cruel complaint that the collapse of humanitarianism is the main cause leading to famine.
For wars, Americans have to face a more woeful economic predicament. For wars, humanity has to suffer more famine and poverty. If peace could be obtained in return for such exorbitant prices, why has human civilization repeatedly been struck by wars and devastation?
Chien Hsi-chieh is a legislator and the director of the Peacetime Peace Foundation.
Translated by Jackie Lin
The gutting of Voice of America (VOA) and Radio Free Asia (RFA) by US President Donald Trump’s administration poses a serious threat to the global voice of freedom, particularly for those living under authoritarian regimes such as China. The US — hailed as the model of liberal democracy — has the moral responsibility to uphold the values it champions. In undermining these institutions, the US risks diminishing its “soft power,” a pivotal pillar of its global influence. VOA Tibetan and RFA Tibetan played an enormous role in promoting the strong image of the US in and outside Tibet. On VOA Tibetan,
Sung Chien-liang (宋建樑), the leader of the Chinese Nationalist Party’s (KMT) efforts to recall Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) Legislator Lee Kun-cheng (李坤城), caused a national outrage and drew diplomatic condemnation on Tuesday after he arrived at the New Taipei City District Prosecutors’ Office dressed in a Nazi uniform. Sung performed a Nazi salute and carried a copy of Adolf Hitler’s Mein Kampf as he arrived to be questioned over allegations of signature forgery in the recall petition. The KMT’s response to the incident has shown a striking lack of contrition and decency. Rather than apologizing and distancing itself from Sung’s actions,
US President Trump weighed into the state of America’s semiconductor manufacturing when he declared, “They [Taiwan] stole it from us. They took it from us, and I don’t blame them. I give them credit.” At a prior White House event President Trump hosted TSMC chairman C.C. Wei (魏哲家), head of the world’s largest and most advanced chip manufacturer, to announce a commitment to invest US$100 billion in America. The president then shifted his previously critical rhetoric on Taiwan and put off tariffs on its chips. Now we learn that the Trump Administration is conducting a “trade investigation” on semiconductors which
By now, most of Taiwan has heard Taipei Mayor Chiang Wan-an’s (蔣萬安) threats to initiate a vote of no confidence against the Cabinet. His rationale is that the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP)-led government’s investigation into alleged signature forgery in the Chinese Nationalist Party’s (KMT) recall campaign constitutes “political persecution.” I sincerely hope he goes through with it. The opposition currently holds a majority in the Legislative Yuan, so the initiation of a no-confidence motion and its passage should be entirely within reach. If Chiang truly believes that the government is overreaching, abusing its power and targeting political opponents — then
RSS