Bob
Michael Perelman <michael at ecst.csuchico.edu> wrote:
On Fri, Apr 04, 2008 at 12:29:45PM -0700, Robert Wrubel wrote:
> The book's in storage: I cant find the passage. I think she cites publications by think-tanks or "experts" with ties to LM.
Could this be what you are thinking of? Here is a bit from my book, Confiscation of American Prosperity:
Bruce Jackson was an ideal representative for Lockheed Martin, a company that has applied political influence so handsomely. For example, Jackson played a leading role in many organizations that lobbied for increased military spending. He served on the board of the Center for Security Policy, run by Frank Gaffney, another former Reagan Pentagon official, once described as "the heart and soul of the missile defense lobby" (Hartung and Ciarrocca 2000). Jackson was a founder, along with William Kristol, Irving's son, and Robert Kagan, of the Project for a New American Century, often credited with designing the foreign policy of the George W. Bush administration, including the war on Iraq (Hartung and Ciarrocca 2000). A .New York Times. article described Jackson's exploits as director of the US Committee to Expand NATO during the run-up to the 1998 US Senate vote to ratify the inclusion of Poland, Hungary, and the Czech Republic into the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO): ##At night, Bruce L. Jackson is president of the US Committee to Expand NATO, giving intimate dinners for Senators and foreign officials. By day, he is director of strategic planning for Lockheed Martin Corporation, the world's biggest weapons maker. Mr. Jackson says he keeps his two identities separate, but his company and his lobbying group are fighting the same battle. Defense contractors are acting like globe-hopping diplomats to encourage the expansion of NATO, which will create a huge market for their wares. [Gerth and Weiner 1997] Jackson put so much energy into this project because the expansion of NATO meant building a much larger client base for Lockheed Martin weapons. According to the .New York Times.: ##Billions of dollars are at stake in the next global arms bazaar: weapons sales to Central European nations invited to join the North Atlantic Treaty Organization. Admission to the Western fraternity will bring political prestige, but at a price: playing by NATO rules, which require Western weapons and equipment. [Gerth and Weiner 1997] Lockheed's reach extends far beyond NATO: ##Lockheed now sells aircraft and weapons to more than 40 countries. The American taxpayer is financing many of those sales. For example, Israel spends much of the $1.8 billion in annual military aid from the United States to buy F-16 warplanes from Lockheed. Twenty-four nations are flying the F-16, or will be soon. Lockheed's factory in Fort Worth is building ten for Chile. Oman will receive a dozen next year. Poland will get 48 in 2006; the United States Treasury will cover the cost through a $3.8 billion loan. [Weiner 2001] The more weapons Lockheed sells abroad, the more convincing the demands for greater domestic military weapons sound, especially after former allies appear more threatening. In short, Lockheed helps the Pentagon engage in an arms race with itself. Jackson also operated on a more direct political level. He was co-chairman of the national finance committee for Senator Dole's presidential campaign in 1995-1996. In 1996 and again in 2000, he was a delegate to the Republican National Convention, where he served on the Platform Committee and the Platform's subcommittee for National Security and Foreign Policy. In 2000, Jackson served as Chairman for the subcommittee. He bragged at an industry conference in 1999 that he would be in a position to "write the Republican platform" on defense if Bush gets the nomination (Hartung and Ciarrocca 2000). Jeffery St. Clair commented, "Naturally, the platform statement ended up reading like catalogue of Lockheed weapons systems. At the top of the list, the RNC platform pledged to revive and make operational the $80 billion Missile Defense program supervised by Lockheed" (St. Clair 2005, pp. 154-55). In 2002, the Bush administration called on Jackson to set up the Committee for the Liberation of Iraq. "People in the White House said, 'We need you to do for Iraq what you did for NATO,'" Jackson said in a phone interview (Judis 2003). Jackson succeeded in rounding up ten East European governments to support a tough line on Saddam Hussein. According to some reports, he even drafted their statement. Jackson is certainly not the only influence peddler for the military-industrial complex. His career does serve to symbolize the process of creating public policy behind the scenes in a way that starves needed parts of society while heaping riches on military contractors and those who serve them. Of course, Lockheed's influence did not suddenly blossom with the appearance of Bruce Jackson. One of its early patrons was Richard Russell of Georgia, who was so respected by his peers that the Senate named its office building after him. Russell was legendary in his ability to use his lengthy chairmanship of the Senate Armed services Committee to bring government spending into his district. In August 1965 while the Vietnam War was raging, Russell began making sounds like an antiwar protester. He told a national television audience during a Meet the Press interview that if an election were held, Vietnam would certainly elect Ho Chi Minh as its president. He lectured the Senate: "Whenever the people go to calling their leader 'Uncle,' you better watch out .... They have a man in whom they have explicit confidence, you are dealing with a very dangerous enemy." By November, Lockheed's plant in Marietta, Georgia won a huge contract for the monstrous C5-A transport planes (Fite 1991, pp. 443-45; Goldsmith 1993, p. 138). After the award of the contract, Russell's public doubts about the war suddenly evaporated. The Russell episode is a reminder that not everything changed with the right-wing takeover -- that in many respects the change was a matter of degree, although the degree is extreme enough to be alarming.
-- Michael Perelman Economics Department California State University Chico, CA 95929
Tel. 530-898-5321 E-Mail michael at ecst.csuchico.edu michaelperelman.wordpress.com ___________________________________ http://mailman.lbo-talk.org/mailman/listinfo/lbo-talk
--------------------------------- You rock. That's why Blockbuster's offering you one month of Blockbuster Total Access, No Cost.