Thoughts on the Process of Militarization

Over the course of the semester I have learned a great deal about militarization, and know that I will never be able to think of the process in the same ways that I once did. Most importantly, I will no longer be able to avoid noticing the militarization that is all around us. Nor would I want to. The military and its supporting institutions play a critical role in the lives of people across the globe, including of course my own. We have been raised in a society that is thoroughly militarized, and without doubt the process continues as strongly as ever. The end of militarization is, unfortunately, unforeseeable, but I can still make sure to be aware and to interact with the process in a constructive way. I still have much more to learn about militarization, its past, present and future, but this has been as good a start as I could ask for.

I would also like to discuss briefly the outlook for the future of militarization that we covered Monday. As always, it seems that the military continues to expand and grow into any new realms that might arise. Space and cyberspace cannot avoid the process of militarization. As stated in the report on current U.S. space policy, these new areas are equated with "air power and sea power." Potential threats are everywhere, and so we must take care to guard everywhere. It is very unfortunate that our government has come to think in these ways, a thought process that is itself emblematic of the degree to which militarization has permeated our society and its institutions. It seems to me that as we move forward we have to find a way to alter the assumptions and ingrained sensibilities that serve as the foundation for militarized thinking, a task that will take considerable time and effort and that must itself be as powerful and deep-seeded as the process of militarization itself. I don't think that anybody enjoys living in a militarized world, and ultimately it is because of the mistrust and fear that seem inherent in human societies and interactions that we do. But whether it is possible to dispel these things or not, it is important that we try.

The Future of the U.S. Military in Iraq

Given what we have learned thus far this semester, I find it difficult to believe that the U.S. military will actually be completely out of Iraq by 2011. It seems very rare that the U.S. leaves any strategic location willingly, especially one in as critical an area as Iraq. Even Barak Obama has said that he is interested in leaving residual forces in Iraq beyond the SOFA deadline, and I would be very surprised if some sort of agreement were not worked out in the future to arrange for an extended U.S. military presence in some capacity.

As for the SOFA as it stands right now, based on what I know I am for the most part satisfied and pleased. I don't think that those who are against an extended U.S. presence in Iraq could have expected any better, and though there will undoubtedly be considerably more debate over the issue down the road, I think it is a good first step. A Korea-like basing policy in Iraq would only create many of the same problems that we see in Korea--not to mention in other base locations around the world--and would likely not provide worthwhile security to the United States, especially given all the other bases already in the region.

Increasing our global military footprint seems to me to be the opposite of what the U.S. should be doing right now. Our military is already overstretched and its presence often strains foreign relations and views towards the U.S. rather than improves them. We must be careful to respect the wishes of the Iraqi government and people regarding future U.S. military presence in their country or we will likely cause greater problems than we solve.