Nexus - 1306 - New Times Magazine-pages

Page Content (OCR)

global dominance policy, we can begin to establish the Who Profits from GDG Policies? parameters of the individuals involved in the Global Dominance Lockheed-Martin has benefited significantly from the post- Group (GDG) among the HCPEs. Knowing the general 9/11 military expansion promoted by the GDG. The Pentagon's parameters of the GDG will provide an understanding of who budget for buying new weapons rose from $61 billion in 2001 to had means, opportunity and motive to have initiated a post-9/11 over $80 billion in 2004. Lockheed Martin's sales rose by over acceleration of neo-conservative military expansion towards the 30% at the same time, with tens of billions of dollars on the goal of assuming full-spectrum military dominance of the world. books for future purchases. From 2000 to 2004, Lockheed Understanding the parameters of the GDG will also allow Martin's stock value rose 300%. researchers to explore the possibilities of insider pre-knowledge New York Times reporter Tim Weiner wrote in 2004: "No of the 9/11 attacks. These are classic sociological questions of contractor is in a better position than Lockheed Martin to do who wins and who loses within c! tructures, policy processes business in Washington. Nearly 80% of its revenue comes from and state decision-making. In this study, we are not seeking to the US Government. Most of the rest comes from foreign identify people involved in specific military sales, many financed with tax acts before or after 9/11. Rather, we dollars."*° seek to understand the sociological As of August 2005, Lockheed Martin phenomenon of how, as collective stockholders had made 18% on their actors, the GDG within the HCPE Benefiting significantly from stock in the prior 12 months.” Northrup had the theoretical circumstances of expanded military spending Grumman has seen similar growth in motive, means and opportunity to the last three years with DoD contracts gain from such events. after 9/11 was a group of rising from $3.2 billion in 2001 to $11.1 F To establish a GPG parameters Department of Defense pation eae taurtn. with ce ist, we included the directors of the . resident Dic eney as former F nine DoD contractors identified and Homeland Security has seen phenomenal growth since above as those corporations earning contractors. 2001. Halliburton had defence over one-third of their revenue from the government or having high contracts totalling $427 million in 2001. By 2003, it had $4.3 billion in defence levels of political involvement. contracts, of which approximately a Additionally, we included members third were sole source agreements. *° of 16 leading conservative global-dominance-advocating Cheney, not incidentally, continues to receive a deferred salary foundations and policy councils. from Halliburton. According to financial disclosure forms, he Connections and associations listed in our GDG are not was paid $205,298 in 2001, $162,392 in 2002, $178,437 in 2003 always simultaneous, but rather reflect links extending close to and $194,852 in 2004, and his 433,333 Halliburton stock options two decades inside an increasingly important group within the rose in value from $241,498 in 2004 to $8 million in 2005.“° HCPE of the United States. The list includes 236 names of The Carlyle Group, established in 1987, is a private global people who have, or recently held, high-level government investment firm that manages some $30 billion in assets. positions in the George W. Bush administration, sit on the Numerous high-level members of the GDG have been involved boards of directors of major DoD contracting corporations in The Carlyle Group, including Frank Carlucci, George H. W. and/or are close associates of the above, serving as GDG Bush, James Baker III, William Kennard and Richard Darman. advocates on policy councils or advocacy foundations. The Carlyle Group purchased United Defense in 1997 and sold Deciding on who to include in such a list and how far to its shares in the company after 9/11, making a one-billion-dollar extend the links is difficult. We believe, however, that in profit." looking for the core of the GDG in the United States that the people listed in = F iz appendix B are many of the principal Thesght if war participants. These people have been +i me to ge drgita\ - some of the strongest advocates for —— _ military global dominance and/or are the la primary beneficiaries of such a policy within the US. They tend to know each other through long periods of active involvement in policy circles, boards of directors, consulting positions, government agencies and project-specific activities. Although far more research on the GDG needs to be done, we can begin to have an understanding of the parameters and operational methods involved by showing major defence contractor links with the GDG and the policy benefits to such companies as Lockheed Martin, Halliburton, Carlyle and Northrup Grumman. Benefiting significantly from expanded military spending after 9/11 was a group of Department of Defense and Homeland Security contractors. (gio it wer +ime “to ge digtta\ . NEXUS +29 OCTOBER — NOVEMBER 2006 www.nexusmagazine.com