Andrew Bacevich challenges the popular narrative that U.S. involvement in the Middle East is simply a response to terrorism. He argues that deeper structural forces drive U.S. foreign policy — mainly the pursuit of global dominance, economic interests (especially oil), and the maintenance of what he calls an “informal empire.” According to Bacevich, America’s political and military leaders have long believed that controlling the Middle East is essential to securing U.S. prosperity and power on the global stage. Saddam Hussein and Osama Bin Laden, while real threats, were used to justify a much larger project of maintaining American influence in a strategically vital region.
Bacevich also draws a crucial link between “freedom” at home and “empire” abroad. He suggests that Americans enjoy a high standard of living, cheap energy, and a sense of global security partly because the U.S. exerts military and political control over far-off regions. In other words, the comforts of American life are, in part, propped up by the military presence and interventions overseas. This relationship is rarely acknowledged openly but is vital to understanding why the U.S. remains entangled in “forever wars.”
As for a way out, Bacevich believes it is possible but requires a profound shift in American priorities. The U.S. would need to fundamentally rethink its definition of national security — focusing less on projecting power abroad and more on rebuilding strength at home: investing in infrastructure, addressing inequality, and conserving resources. Ending the “forever wars” would mean accepting a more modest role in the world and recognizing that military force cannot solve complex political, cultural, and religious issues in the Middle East. Without such a shift, Bacevich warns, the U.S. will continue to repeat the same costly mistakes.
Will Wright 