Email this page

Bases Fuera

Bases Fuera
No Military Bases Network Launch Conference
Quito, Ecuador. March 5, 2007

Dr. Joseph Gerson*

As a U.S. American it is a humbling honor to be invited to address this gathering which marks a new and important moment in the struggle for peace, independence and freedom.

In the US, every 4^th of July newspapers print the U.S. Declaration of Independence, but almost no one reads it. There you will find that one reason the founders of the U.S. declared their independence from the British Empire was that the British had imposed "standing armies" in the colonies during peace time which committed unacceptable "abuses and usurpations." It was only years later, when began working with exiles from the U.S. imposed Marcos Dictatorship that I began to understand the meaning of "abuses and usurpations.".

My education continued in the early 1980s, when I first traveled to Japan, where I was shocked to learn that the U.S. still maintains more than 100 military bases and installations from Okinawa to Hokkaido in the north. Since then, it has been my privilege to work in solidarity with community-based and national anti-bases movements in many countries.

It is a special privilege to be learning from Latin American movements in this time of hope when the new Ecuadorian government has declared its intention to end the U.S. military presence here, and when much of Latin America is reaffirming national sovereignty and working for real security.

The Current Context

Even as the U.S. has lost its war in Iraq, the Bush Administration has not relented in its pursuit of imposing what Vice President calls "the arrangement for the 21^st century" to ensure continued U.S. global dominance. This explains why the last ten U.S. president have prepared and threatened first strike nuclear attacks - most recently against Iraq, Iran and North Korea; why the U.S. military budget is greater than the rest of the world's nations' combined; why there was near panic in U.S. elite circles when China demonstrated its anti-satellite missile capabilities; why the U.S. Embassy lies about the number of U.S. foreign military bases, and why Washington is reorganizing and reinforcing the global infrastructure of its more than 700 military bases and installations, especially in Asia, the Pacific, and Africa.

It was to reconsolidate dominance of the oil-rich Middle East that the Bush Administration invaded and still occupies Iraq and is building permanent military bases there.

The Bush wars, the expansion of its global network of bases, and its nuclear threats are desperate attempts to resist a major dynamic at work in the world: the relative decline of U.S. power. The 2005 National Intelligence Council Report predicted that " The likely emergence of China and India, as well as others, as new major global players…will transform the geopolitical landscape…."  Richard Hass, of the Council on Foreign Relations tells us that "this the end of the American era in the Middle East - a moment comparable to the collapse of British and French influence in the region…." With the mammoth U.S. national and trade deficits, the dollar is in a sharp decline. In Davos this year the U.S was "somewhat peripheral," while the "shift of power" toward Asia was the focus of attention. And, here in Latin America, with one election after another resulting in the ouster of U.S. clients and allies, the imperial legacies of the almost 200 years of U.S. colonialism and neocolonialism are finally coming to an end.

In November, for the first time since 9-11, U.S. voters refused to dance to the tune of Bush-Cheney manipulation of their fears, and ousted Republican apologists from control of Congress. This resulted from popular disgust with the war in Iraq, Bush lies, and Republican corruptions.

Bush has been weakened, but he still can to inflict vast destruction. Many, including senior U.S. generals and admirals, are worried that the U.S. military build up around Iran will lead to a devastating and self-defeating attack against Iran.

The challenge in the Middle East goes beyond "troops out" of Iraq. Middle East oil is a central pillar of U.S. global dominance. Because Iraq long served as the Sunni barrier against Shia Islam and the Arab barrier against Persian influence, its destruction places U.S. Middle East client states and U.S. global domination in considerable jeopardy. After initially rejecting the Iraq Study Groups call for the U.S. to pursue diplomacy with Iraq's neighbors, especially Syria and Iran to help stabilize that shattered and warring nation, Bush escalated the war, increased military pressure on Iran, and the primary focus of its diplomacy has been to build an alliance of Sunni states to contain Iran.

The dangers are not limited to Bush and Cheney, but are systemic. Most leading Democrats cannot imagine alternatives to Empire. Most fear challenging the power of the military-industrial complex, the Pentagon, and powerful multinational corporations.

Missions of Bases:

The purpose of the U.S. global infrastructure of military bases is imperial domination. At any given moment approximately 400,000 U.S. troops are deployed at or supported by more than 700 bases in Europe, Iraq and elsewhere in the Middle East, and the remainder in Latin America, Africa, Central Asia and at sea. Pentagon spokesmen have been clear that, "the purpose of military units is to fight and win the nation's wars, and they should be stationed in locations that enable the [U.S.] to use them most efficiently and with minimal political restrictions." Condoleezza Rice put it succinctly saying that "The centerpiece of the President's strategy is our strong forward presence…"

U.S. military bases exist to:

• To reinforce the status quo: For example U.S. bases in Middle East, Central Asia and Colombia serve to ensure continued U.S. privileged access to those regions' oil.
• To encircle enemies. This was the case with the Soviet Union and China during Cold War and it continues to this day. U.S. bases in Korea, Japan, Guam, Australia and in Central Asia are all designed to contain China. We also see encirclement with the "missile defense" bases to be built in the Czech Republic and Poland.
• To serve U.S. naval power: Interventionist U.S. warships depend on bases in Spain, Italy, Israel, Bahrain, Qatar, Japan, and other countries.
• To train U.S. forces: Bases in Germany and Britain long served as training centers, as was Vieques. Jungle war fighting, live fire, low altitude training continues across Okinawa and elsewhere in Japan.
• Bases serve as jumping off points for foreign military interventions. Bases across Europe are used to launch attacks and wars against North African, Middle East and Central Asian nations. Bases in Japan were essential to the U.S. wars in Korea, Vietnam, and the Persian Gulf.
• To facilitate command, control, communications and intelligence for "conventional" and nuclear war and for spying. U.S. bases in Britain, Italy, Scandinavia, Australia, Japan, Qatar, and Australia serve these functions.
• To secure access to new oil and gas resources. We see this in the new Africa Command and U.S. bases in Central Asia.
• To control or influence host nation governments. Japan, Korea Germany, Saudi Arabia , and today's Iraq begin the list.
• To "show the flag". Small bases demonstrate the U.S. commitment to be taken seriously as a power in a country or region. For torture, as in the case of Guantanamo.
• [While it is too early to call them military bases, as U.S. military power has moved to dominate land, seas and air, it is now moving into space. The Pentagon's "Vision 2020" boasts that the U.S. Strategic Command is now working to control the earth from space. Today "Rover" is on the moon. Tomorrow we may well see a base there for war fighting on earth, to control the moon-earth "space well", and as a base for the colonization of the solar system.]

Abuses and Usurpations

There is an obvious irony in this North American describing the abuses and usurpations that many of you have experienced and which define too much of reality in your communities.

1. First, military bases increase the chances of war and undermine security.

With "forward deployed" troops, weapons systems and munitions and spare parts, and C4I resources, bases increase the possibility that U.S. presidents will order unilateral military attacks during international crises and confrontations. Witness the 1998 war against Serbia, the invasion of Panama, and the current wars in Colombia, the Philippines and Iraq.

2. Bases increase the chances of nuclear war. Since the A-bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki, which destroyed each of those cities in 9 seconds and whose radiation is killing victims to this day, U.S. presidents have prepared and/or threatened to initiate genocidal nuclear wars at least 30 times most recently against Iraq, Iran, and North Korea. In many ways, the U.S. first-strike nuclear doctrine is made possible by the forward deployment of nuclear weapons in Europe and Japan. So-called "missile defenses" are being deployed in Japan and Israel, with more planned for Poland and the Czech Republic. And communications bases in Britain, Japan, Australia and other nations are essential for targeting and sending orders to attack.

3. Bases undermine the sovereignty of host nations. Hawai'i, the Philippines, Guam, Puerto Rico and Cuba were conquered to provide bases needed to open markets in China, elsewhere in Asia, and Latin America. Until they were moved to Qatar, Kuwait and Bahrain in 2002, the U.S. maintained military bases in Saudi Arabia near the holy cities of Mecca and Medina. Japan and South Korea still "host" massive U.S. air bases and other U.S. military facilities in their national capitals.

4. Bases undermine democracy and human rights.

The U.S. has supported or imposed dictators and repressive governments to gain or preserve access to military bases. Two recent examples are Saudi Arabia and Kuwait, where the U.S. has defended repressive monarchies to secure its military bases as well as privileged access to oil reserves.

5. Bases are often built on seized private and communal property. "Host" nation force their inhabitants to "rent" the land to the U.S., expelling families from their homes and cutting off sources of people's livelihoods. Recently, Daechuri village in South Korea was bulldozed to make way for a new U.S. military headquarters. The most extreme case is Diego Garcia, where all of the island's people were deported to make way for air and naval bases.

6. Bases create a culture of violence toward women and girls. Male chauvinist and violent military culture encourages violence against women. This is compounded by the fact that many bases are surrounded by brothel districts and by Status of Forces Agreements that shield GI's from host nation laws. We saw this last year in the case of a solider convicted of the rape of a Filipina. His comrades were not held accountable, and he is now under the care of the U.S. embassy.

7. Off-duty troops commit great deal of crime in host communities. Residents near U.S. bases often live in fear of crimes and accidents caused by U.S. troops Most G.I.s are law abiding, but alienated and drunken troops commit crimes that range from drunken driving to hit and run accidents, rape, robbery, and murder. Worse, they are often protected by the SOFAs (functionally unequal treaties,) that give the U.S. military, "primary right to exercise jurisdiction over members of the U.S. armed forces." Many are not held accountable for their crimes or receive lighter sentences than in host nation courts. U.S. troops based in Japan have committed an average of 4,000 crimes a year since 1952.  

8. Bases cause environmental contamination jeopardizing people's health. Military toxics are widespread and include cancer causing asbestos, benzene and PCBs. Dioxins and trichloroethylene cause liver and brain damage. In one egregious case, the U.S. military was caught disposing deadly formaldehyde into the Han River which runs through Seoul.

9. Military accidents can kill, impact communities and people's livelihoods, and permanently poison the environment. The most dangerous accidents involve nuclear weapons, such as the nuclear bombs lost off the coasts of Okinawa and Spain and which crashed into Greenland. More common are accidents like the jet that severed an Italian ski lift cable, killing 20 people; or bombs that that missed their practice targets in Vieques and Maehyangri; and the stray bullets and shells that landed in people homes and on their property in Okinawa.

10. Finally, military bases are expensive and divert funding from addressing urgent human needs. The Pentagon squanders tens of billions of dollars on foreign military bases, while the human needs of U.S. and host nation people go unmet. Even in the U.S., thirteen million U.S. children live below the official poverty line, with many going hungry every night, but preparing for war is apparently more important than caring for people.

Restructuring the Global Fortresses

Bush and Rumsfeld came to power committed to "reconfigure" the global architecture to discipline and even expand the U.S. Empire. The goal is to achieve maximum flexibility in sending forces to the Middle East, Central Asia and other potential battlegrounds. Some bases are being closed, others merged, but, the consistent goal is to maximize U.S. war fighting capabilities by increasing the agility, flexibility, and speed of U.S. fighting forces.

In Europe, with the Fulda Gap no longer the geo-political center of the struggle for world power, the lion's share of the U.S. bases being closed are in Germany. While the focus is on building up U.S. forces in Asia and the Middle East, new bases are being built in Poland, the Czech Republic, Rumania, Bulgaria, and possibly in Turkey. This movement of U.S. forces eastward is also designed to ensure that "Old Europe" will not be able to inhibit Washington's use of murderous force then next time it opts for unilateral or "Anglo-Saxon" invasion or attack. As one "senior military official" explained, there is "a purposeful effort to possibly leave places where they may not want us or they are snubbing us"

In the Middle East, under cover of preparations for the Iraq war, the Pentagon removed one of the precipitating causes of the 9-11 attacks: the majority of U.S. troops and bases in Saudi Arabia, which many Moslems experienced as sullying Islam's holiest land. Troops, bases and functions were transferred to Qatar, Kuwait, Djibouti and Bahrain. U.S. ambitions for Iraq were not limited to controlling its vast oil reserves. With bases like Camp Victory in Baghdad, and thirteen other "enduring" U.S. military bases, U.S. war planners see Iraq - especially Kurdistan in the north - as a bastion for U.S. military power in the Middle East, with the added ability to project U.S. force into Central Asia.

With China seen as the United States' most likely "strategic competitor" in years to come, Asia is a major focus of the military reorganization. There the news is that now "all of the Pentagon road maps lead to Guam," which is to "become one of two or three major hubs of U.S. activity in the world." Japan, which has been the keystone of U.S. Asia-Pacific power since 1945, is being given an increased role, with a new Army command center, a second nuclear powered and nuclear capable aircraft carrier, and renewed efforts to trash Japan's peace constitution to make it a war fighting nation. To pacify Okinawans, the Futenma Air Base, which has long tormented Ginowan City is to be moved to more remote Haneko. In South Korea, U.S. troops are being redeployed from the Demilitarized Zone to a massive new base in Pyongtaek, south of Seoul which will be used for power projection across Asia and the Pacific to the Middle East. Elsewhere, U.S. bases in Australia are being augmented. The "Visiting Forces" and access agreements with the Philippines and Singapore, are being expanded, and Tsunami relief operations in 2005 opened the way for U.S. forces to return to Thailand and for greater cooperation with the Indonesian military.

The Bush Administration's invasion of Afghanistan initially promised to the way in for U.S. bases in Central Asia where, as General Wald of the European Command put it, "In the Caspian Sea you have a large mineral [i.e. petroleum] reserve...We want to assure the long term viability of those resources." After the September 11, 2001 attacks, the Bush Administration used its "for us or against us" doctrine, to force dictatorships in Pakistan, Uzbekistan, Kyrgyzstan, and Tajikistan to surrender sovereignty and to open the way for what the Pentagon hoped would become permanent U.S. military bases. These, minus Uzbekistan where U.S. bases were ousted, are also designed augment the encirclement of China and Iran.

And, in Africa, which the U.S. plans to be the source of up to 25% of its oil supply by 2015, we now have the Africa Command, with new U.S. bases and access agreements are sprouting across the continent. With bases already in Algeria and Djibouti and access agreements in Morocco, Egypt, the new focus is south of the Sahara where a "family" of military bases is to be created. This will include major installations for up to 5,000 troops "that could be robustly used." As we saw in the recent air attacks in Somalia, "lightly equipped bases" will be available for U.S. Special Forces and Marines. "Host" nations for the new family include Cameroon, Guinea Mali, and Sao Tome and Principe, with Ethiopia, Senegal, and Uganda providing refueling installations for the Air Force.

And, Washington hasn't forgotten Latin America. Although the Puerto Rican people's fifty year struggle to close the base at Vieques has prevailed, new military bases have sprouted across Andean nations and the U.S. is increasingly militarizing the Caribbean.

Bases Fuera

What can the U.S. movement contribute? I wish that I could promise more, but with so much of our energies focused on stopping the wars in Iraq and Colombia and preventing new ones from Iran to Korea, the material and human resources we can contribute are more limited than any of us would like.

Our first responsibility is to make the U.S. public, and our movement allies aware of the dangers and the "abuses and usurpations" that are inherent in this global infrastructure of warrior fortresses that are unprecedented in human history. With the publication of books, articles, and organizing conferences, speaking tours and scholars networks, we have at least begun to fulfill this moral and political responsibility.

In some cases we can go beyond education to very real acts of solidarity: joining bases out demonstrations in Manila and civil disobedience actions in Vieques, publishing a full page bases out signature as we did in Okinawa's largest newspaper on the first day of the G-8 summit there, holding solidarity vigils and demonstrations, joining national and regional conferences to share information, and providing scientific support to identify the locations and impacts of military toxics, and to support campaigns for clean up, for example in Vieques in the Philippines. As John Lindsey Poland has suggested, now that Democrats control Congress, in some cases we may also be able to get them to hold hearings that could lead to decisions not to build, or in some cases to withdraw from, particular bases, and to provide greater financial and technical support for bases clean up, beginning with Vieques and the Philippines.

I am sure that my fellow and sister North Americans will have other ideas, and I look forward to our using our time together to develop powerful, cooperative, and integrated strategies.

Friends, the U.S. Empire is in crisis and decline, in large measure due to efforts of people like you and me. Let us hasten the day when U.S. imperial wars and the "abuses and usurpations" that inevitably accompany U.S. and other military bases are reduced to nightmares from history. Together, Bases Fuera! For peace, freedom and justice!

* Joseph Gerson is Director of Programs of the American Friends Service in New England and author of The Sun Never Sets...Confronting the Network of U.S. Foreign Military Bases and Empire and the Bomb: How the United States Uses Nuclear Weapons to Dominate the World. He can be contacted at: JGerson@afsc.org, or c/o AFSC, 2161 Massachusetts Ave., Cambridge, Ma. 02140, USA. Web page: www.afsc.org/pes.

^ Top of page