The riches of the country are dependent on the wounded. The American image is well cultivated as a superpower across the globe. But we often tend to forget the fatal tactics the country uses that go casually unnoticed. However, the USA has an impression of being the ultimate yardstick of global development. America has been actively supported by immense war and profiteering. The USA produces about 37% of the weapons and arms used for mass destruction across the globe. The weapons industry is a prominent business supporting an annual global arms trade worth around $100 billion, significantly contributing to the country's GDP growth rate. War profiteering is a term that emphasises the profits earned from warfare or by trading weapons and other goods to parties at war. Washington has a prominent image of outsourcing war to private defence companies and contractors, primarily US-based companies. The superpower's tactics are in such a manner that the only country that enjoys the ‘cost’ of war is the U.S. Between 2002–2016, America sold arms and ammunition worth 197 billion dollars to almost 167 countries. From 2001–2021, companies that are the top 5 military contractors, Lockheed Martin, Raytheon, General Dynamics, Boeing and Northrop Grumman, earned 2.02 trillion dollars in public funding. The private weapon industries make the most profit every time the USA invests in wars across the globe. These companies sell weapons to countries such as Iraq, Libya, Yemen and Sudan without considering whether the nations follow the principles of democracy or civil rights. The USA fought an outsourced war in Afghanistan with private contractors and companies associated with the USA. They claim to have spent 2 trillion dollars on Afghanistan, but this investment did not translate to development in the country. Another instance of war profiteering and selling and trading ammunition is the recent Ukraine Conflict. Since Russia invaded Ukraine in 2022, the U.S. has provided Ukraine with $44.2 billion in military assistance. Companies like Halliburton and its subsidiary KBR have also been criticised for profiting from the Iraq War. They received billions in contracts for services ranging from logistics to construction, often amid allegations of overcharging and poor performance. The U.S. Department of Defense sources ammunition from various countries, often prioritising geopolitical alliances over internal governance issues. This focus on alliances, counterterrorism, economic interests, and defence industry profits leads the U.S. to overlook the political and civic conditions in the countries they trade with. Therefore, it doesn't matter which country is victorious in a war; the companies that supply arms, without exception, earn more profit. In exploring pertinent issues, the Iron Triangle in the U.S. emerges as a crucial framework. This concept underscores the intertwined nature of its three essential components. They include- The weapons industry, the Department of Defence and the National Congress. The weapons industry funds the campaigns of candidates who stand for the elections. This funding acts as an inducement. It Persuades the elected candidate to motivate the Department of Defence to increase the defence budget. Ultimately, they buy weapons from the same companies that fund the government. Hence, the share prices and the campaign funding are directly proportional, increasing simultaneously. Another factor contributing to this issue is lobbying. Lobbying involves individuals or organisations attempting to influence government decisions, particularly legislation. Lobbyists work to shape defence budgets and policies. For example, they advocate for increased military spending, which benefits their clients through contracts for weapons, technology, and services. Lobbying is often criticised for giving undue influence to wealthy and influential groups, potentially at the expense of the general public. As the number of wars fought increases, the triangle strengthens. Nation-building is often used as an excuse for obtaining funds. When American taxpayers propose to rebuild a nation, they focus instead on rebuilding their economy. American alliances utilise such tactics on a global scale. Thus, strategic self-interests often underlie purported nation-building efforts. American strategies significantly pivot on enhancing its financial standing under the pretext of international development.War-Profiteering
Profits Over Peace
Global Corruption Unchecked: A Pressing Question Remains
23 Aug 2024
Riya Rode
