"Why We Fight" - Jarecki’s collective analysis of American war making

-- Leah Otto Johnson

"In the councils of government, we must guard against the acquisition of unwarranted influence, whether sought or unsought, by the military-industrial complex. The potential for the disastrous rise of misplaced power exists and will persist."

"We must never let the weight of this combination endanger our liberties or democratic processes. We should take nothing for granted. Only an alert and knowledgeable citizenry can compel the proper meshing of the huge industrial and military machinery of defense with our peaceful methods and goals, so that security and liberty may prosper together."

~ Excerpt from President Dwight D. Eisenhower’s "Farewell Address," 1961

Documentary filmmaker Eugene Jarecki ("The Trials of Henry Kissinger") poses his film titled "Why We Fight" as a question: "What are the reasons we’re fighting for?" His question extends beyond the current war in Iraq to the overall anatomy of American war making.

To build his answer, Jarecki utilizes newsreels, TV footage, research and military films in "Why We Fight," along with a variety of original interviews, which include Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz; former CBS news anchor, Dan Rather; former Pentagon policy advisor, Richard Perle; and former CIA analyst, Chalmers Johnson.

"When I start out a project, I go out and I seek people whose views are very different from my own," said Jarecki. "It’s in that very tension between everyone I bring together from all sides of the political spectrum…the film’s democratic value lies."

Inspired by the warning of a United States military-industrial complex in President Dwight D. Eisenhower’s 1961 presidential farewell address, "Why We Fight" considers the political and corporate interests of The Military, The Government and The Arms Industry as a trinity in our war making anatomy.

According to Senator McCain’s interview, "President Eisenhower’s concern about the military-industrial complex, his words have unfortunately, come true. He was worried that priorities are set by what benefits corporations as opposed to what benefits the country."

To consider whether U.S. priorities are set by what benefits corporations, "Why We Fight" examines the Revolving Door practices of individuals rotating between working for industry and working for government, as recently brought to light during the 2003 Cheney/Halliburton controversy.

The documentary recalls that in 1992, while Vice President Dick Cheney was Secretary of Defense, Kellogg, Brown and Root (KBR), a subsidiary of Halliburton, was awarded the U.S. Army’s first Logistics Civil Augmentation Program (LOGCAP) contract.

Halliburton, where Vice President Cheney was CEO from 1995-2000, is "the number one recipient of [government] contracts," said Charles Lewis during his interview, investigative reporter and founder of The Center for Public Integrity.

The Center for Public Integrity Web site explains LOGCAP as a "cost plus award fee" contract, "meaning that KBR is paid a fee above the cost of the service," and "its total value is undefined since services are provided in response to changing military needs."

As of Sep. 2003, KBR had been awarded several task orders through the LOGCAP contract which totaled $2.2 billion. The U.S. Army continues to contract work from KBR through LOGCAP and other contracts in Iraq and Afghanistan today.

In fact, the 2006 fiscal defense budget increased from last year by five percent to $419 billion, as reported by the White House Office of Management and Budget (OMB). According to the Budget of the United States Government, Fiscal Year 2006 report, the U.S. government spends more on defense than on all remaining areas of its discretionary budget combined.

Furthermore, the "2005 SIPRI Yearbook" (Stockholm International Peace Research Institute) reveals in its eighth chapter that the U.S. made up 47 percent of the world’s military expenditure in 2004, and thereby "exceeded the combined military spending of Africa, Latin America, Asia (except Japan but including China) and the Middle East… that is, the entire developing world."

"There’s too close a relationship, and there’s outright—I hate to use the word—corruption, but it borders on it: The behavior of some of these individuals, both in industry and in the Pentagon," said Senator McCain.

"Why We Fight" also contends Think Tanks are a fourth factor recently added to the military-industrial complex, which according to Princeton University’s WordNet, are "a company that does research for hire and issues reports on the implications."

"Policy isn’t really generated…within the policy apparatus," said Joseph Cirincione in his interview, former national security specialist. "A great number of ideas come from outside the government from various Think Tanks, like the Project for the New American Century (PNAC)."

According to their Web site, PNAC was established in 1997 and is a non-profit, educational organization whose goal is to promote American global leadership. In an open letter from 1998, PNAC urges former President Bill Clinton to "turn your Administration’s attention to implementing a strategy for removing Saddam’s regime from power."

Signed by 18 individuals, including the now Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld and the now Deputy Security of Defense Paul Wolfowitz, this letter can be read via PNAC’s online archives.

PNAC also authored the 2000 report, Rebuilding America’s Defenses, which "Why We Fight" identifies, specifically targets Iran, Iraq and North Korea as adversaries of America. In 2002, President George W. Bush renamed these countries the "axis of evil" in his "State of the Union Address."

PNAC is an initiative of the New Citizenship Project, who according to Media Transparency’s Web site, received grants totaling over $2.7 billion between 1994-2001 from The Lynde and Harry Bradley Foundation, John M. Olin Foundation and Scaife Foundations.

In his 2001 New York Times article, Tamar Lewin reported that these three foundations "provide a hefty share of the support for the bastions of American conservative thinking," and that they have "played a role in supporting some of the experts who have been advising the Bush administration and who are filling government jobs."

Carefully titled after the seven-film propaganda series commissioned by the U.S. government during World War II and filmed by Frank Capra ("Mr. Smith Goes to Washington"), "Why We Fight" documents that the majority of Americans believe we fight for freedom—though many are left with questions about the U.S. government’s motives.

"Why We Fight" challenges what has come to be known as "The Bush Doctrine" publicized in President Bush’s 2002 National Security Strategy of the United States of America: The right to preemptive war and military primacy.

With regard to the invasiveness of the USA Patriot Act of 2001, "Why We Fight" reminds viewers of President Eisenhower’s warning that "we must never let the weight of this combination [the unwarranted influence of the military-industrial complex] endanger our liberties or democratic processes."

By constructing a tight narrative of personalized stories, even-handed assessments and opinions throughout his jaw dropping documentary, Jarecki forms a staggering case behind America’s war making anatomy that, at its end, will leave you speechless.

What are we fighting for? "We need to look at ourselves with tough love… [and] really take stock," said Jarecki during his interview on "The Daily Show with John Stewart."

We need to be an alert and knowledgeable citizenry.

This Grand Jury Prize winner of the 2005 Sundance Film Festival has a PG-13 rating for disturbing war images and brief language. Available on DVD Jun. 27, 2006. For further information about the documentary, visit its official Web site at http://www.sonyclassics.com/whywefight.