最近的战争起源的选择.doc

Origins of the Recent Wars of Choice—and Their Impact on U.S. Global Markets By Ismael Hossein-zadeh, Professor of Economics, Drake University (This paper was originally presented to the Annual Symposium of the Center for Global Trade and Development, Chapman University, CA, April 6-8, 2006. It will soon be published in ILSA Journal of International Comparative Law.) Introduction While they may have been immoral, external military operations of past empires often proved profitable and, therefore, justifiable on economic grounds. Military actions abroad usually brought economic benefits not only to the imperial ruling classes, but also (through trickle-down effects) to their citizens. This was the case with both pre-capitalist empires of distant past and the capitalist imperial powers of Europe. The United States, too, has often used military power as a means for economic and territorial gains. These included not only the expansion of its territory from the Atlantic to the Pacific, but also the considerable non-territorial economic gains abroad, especially in the immediate aftermath of Word War II. This pattern of economic gains flowing from imperial military operations, however, seems to have somewhat changed in recent years, especially in the post-Cold War era. Moralities aside, U.S. military expeditions and operations of late are not justifiable even on imperialistic economic grounds. Indeed, escalating U.S. military expansions and aggressions have become ever more wasteful and cost-inefficient in the post-Cold War period. Evidence shows that even the widely-held claim that such expansions and aggressions are driven largely by concerns for fossil fuels seems increasingly dubious. Not surprisingly, official justifications for the post-Cold War military actions have become increasingly fuzzy and shifting: humanitarian concerns, international drug trafficking, global terrorism, militant Islam and, most recently, democratic ideals. The fact that external U.S. milita