Anti Americanism Research Essay

1
How has the perception of Anti-Americanism influenced the US decision to
rely more on smaller military bases? How effective have these smaller
bases been in addressing Anti-Americanism?
Introduction:
Anti-Americanism is defined as “a predisposition to hostility toward the US and
American society”1. This hostility develops from the things the US supposedly is,
or the particular things the US does. What the US ‘is’ refers to the particular
conceptions of, and ideas popularly associated with the US, while what the US
‘does’ can be understood as specific policies and activities the US undertakes2.
Anti-Americanism exists in a variety of forms including protests or violent
reactions, and can develop for a number of different reasons. One of the primary
causes of Anti-Americanism has been the actions of US military, and the lasting
presence of the US military in foreign territories. This essay investigates the
particular issue of anti-Americanism as caused by the presence US military bases
overseas.
While opposition to US military presence has always existed among local
populations, Anti-Americanism has become a particularly significant issue for
the US military in relation to its bases. The extent of anti-Americanism has been
1 Hollander. Paul. Anti-Americanism: Rational and Irrational, Transaction
Publishers, USA, 2005, p.17
2 Markovits. Andrei. Uncouth Nation: Why Western Europe Dislikes America,
Princeton University Press, US, 2003, p.7

2
so significant in some of these cases (e.g. Okinawa) that the US has been forced to
reconsider and change the nature of its military presence. One such change is a
fundamental shift in US military strategy, drawing away from large, permanent
deployments to small, scale, fluid military installations, known as “lily-pads”3
Since 2001, the US has streamlined its defenses, relying less on large military
bases4. In order to counteract the rising tide of anti-Americanism, the US has
opened smaller, less invasive military installations. Military strategists argue this
shift would address the fundamental issue of anti-Americanism, while
maintaining a strong military presence. These new bases are argued to be less
politically difficult, with respect to anti-American sentiment, but whether this is
the reality of the arrangement is contested. Furthermore, whether anti-
Americanism was the decisive factor in determining this strategy shift, is also
contentious.
3 Vine. David. ‘The Lily-Pad Strategy: How the Pentagon is Quietly Transforming
its Overseas Base Empire and Creating a Dangerous New Way of War’, Huffington
Post, 16 July 2012 (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/david-vine/us-military-
bases_b_1676006.html) Accessed 27th May 2013
4 Gillem. Mark. America Town: Building the Outposts of Empire, University of
Minnesota Press, USA, 2007

3
The Problem of Larger Bases: Okinawa and South Korea
The problem of larger bases is most clearly articulated by Chalmers Johnson:
“The permanent deployment of American soldiers, sailors and airmen, whose
culture, lifestyles, wealth and physical appearance guarantees conflict with local
people is irrational in terms of any cost-benefit analysis”5. Johnson recognizes
the essential problem of any lasting US military presence in a region not familiar
or comfortable with the particular habits and behaviors of the US military.
Johnson recognizes the deployment of American military personnel is not simply
the placement of a defense force in a foreign territory, but a potentially serious
imposition on the lifestyles and cultures of local populations. Furthermore, any
security benefits these forces may provide has to be weighed against the social
and cultural damages they are likely to inflict.
Larger military bases are primary sources of anti-Americanism. Large bases have
been identified as a major influence on perpetrators of violence against the US,
can generate retaliatory responses, and are themselves targets for violent action.
The problem of larger bases for the US is demonstrated by the ongoing issues
related to the US base in Okinawa. Following their surrender in World War 2,
Japan signed a security pact with the US, allowing them to build military bases
across the country. Bases like Okinawa gave the US a foothold in the region, and
a lasting military presence in Asia. The base has been at the centre of significant
5 Johnson. Chalmers. The Sorrows of Empire, Metropolitan Books, NY, 2004, p.
253

4
turmoil and controversy however, representing a major source of anti-American
sentiment.
The base at Okinawa is situated in a densely populated area, surrounded by
schools, public buildings and homes. Military activities have proven disruptive to
the daily lives of Okinawans6. In addition, a substantial number of accidents, and
a high incidence of crime have damaged local opinion of the US. Crimes include
murder, arson, assault, prostitution, noise pollution, rape and environmental
degradation. Violence against women is particularly troublesome at Okinawa, as
demonstrated by the 2008 rape of a 14 year old girl, and a gang rape in 19957.
Drunk driving, sexual harassment and homosexuality are also common, with
local Okinawans claiming US marines were “trampling on human rights”8. In
2010, more than 90,000 Okinawans protested against the base, urging the
government to move the base elsewhere. Opposition to the base reached its peak
following the Osprey dispute when a US helicopter crashed into a local school.
Not only are Okinawans apprehensive over accidents related to the base, many
Okinawans believe they are vulnerable to attack as a result of the US military
presence.
6 Sturdevant. S. and Stoltzfus. B. Let the Good Times Roll: Prostitution and the US
Military in Asia, New Press, NY, 2003, .p26
7 Ibid.
8 Al Jazeera, ‘101 East: Okinawa – The Future of US Military Bases’, Uploaded 31st
May 2010, (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bB2STxdGmXI), Accessed 3rd
June 2013

5
One major objection of many Okinawans is the US Status of Forces Agreements
(SoFA). Under these arrangements, US troops are not subject to the laws of the
countries in which they are based. SOFA means US troops, if found guilty of a
crime, are to be tried in accordance with US law, under US jurisdiction. SOFA
extends to issues of environmental degradation where the US is not liable for any
damage its bases do. This prevents Japanese legal system from intervening in US
jurisdiction.
James Blaker discusses the particular problem of environmental damage. Large
US bases such as those in Okinawa and South Korea have caused significant land
damage as a consequence of their size and contents, “these bases are essentially
small American towns which have been transported across the world”9. Some of
these artificial metropolises exist in sparsely populated rural areas, which often
are under-developed. These regions lack the infrastructure to manage the
environmental impact of a military base. As a result, the waste and pollution
from the urban sprawl, including fast-food chains and strip malls, causes
significant environmental degradation.
The increasing problem of anti-Americanism at US military bases is summed up
in the following: “South Korea provides a useful example of the changing nature
of anti-base anti-Americanism. In the last 20 years, South Korean anti-
Americanism has spread from student radicals to the broader population. The
source of resentment was US political influence and the presence of US military
9 Blaker. James. United States Overseas Basing: An Anatomy of the Dilemma,
Praeger, USA, 1990, p. 41

6
forces, which were seen by some local opponents as evidence of imperialism” 10.
While anti-American sentiment used to be concentrated among a small group,
the damage of these bases has spread negative perceptions to the wider
population.
New Base Strategy: Lily-pads
The structure and size of US military bases has transformed significantly in the
past decade. Large bases, like Okinawa in Japan and Ramstein in Germany, have
increasingly damaged perceptions of the US military. These mega-bases
(complete with Pizza Huts, recreation facilities and strip malls, housing up to
10,000 US troops11) have damaged local attitudes to the US. These large bases
have proven costly, not only in treasure, but more significantly in popular
opinions of the US military12. The damage caused by these bases has forced
military strategists to consider alternatives. In order to reverse the trend in anti-
Americanism while retaining a strong international posture, the US military has
been forced to adjust its approach. Rather than dedicate significant resources to
larger bases, a new strategy has been adopted by the military.
10 O’Connor. Brendon. and Griffiths. Martin. Anti Americanism in the 21st Century,
Greenwood World Publishing, Oxford, 2007 p.115
Minnesota Press, USA, 2007, p. 27
12 Al Jazeera, ‘101 East: Okinawa – The Future of US Military Bases’, Uploaded
31st May 2010, (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bB2STxdGmXI), Accessed
3rd June 2013

7
As their name suggests, lily-pads (or Cooperative Security Locations) operate
primarily as strategic jump-off points for military action, for counter-terrorism
and to stop the trafficking of drugs. The lily-pads have “little to no permanent
U.S. personnel presence, may contain pre-positioned equipment/logistical
arrangements and serve both for security cooperation activities and contingency
access”13. Lily-pads are much smaller operations than bases like Okinawa, and
are consequently much lower maintenance. To avoid intrusion, and disruption of
local communities, lily-pads are situated in remote areas, with limited amenities
and restricted access14. Since 2001, the US has actively developed its network of
lily-pads, expanding into Honduras, the Cocos Islands, Mauritania and the
Seychelles15. The US has sought to consolidate its defense by establishing a
military presence in as many regions as possible.
The lily-pads represent one part of a broader strategy which seeks to streamline
US military presence overseas. President Obama has continued to develop these
bases as part of his Asia Pivot, while also increasing US operations in Africa.
These bases will relocate troops from Main Operating Bases (MOBs), dispersing
the US influence into other regions. These new, small-scale bases will reduce the
adverse effects of the more conspicuous bases in Japan, Korea and Guam.
13 United States European Command, ‘Strategic Theater Transformation’, 14
January 2005,
(http://web.archive.org/web/20070204141322/http://www.eucom.mil/englis
h/Transformation/Transform_Blue.asp), Accessed 4th June 2013
Post, 16 July 2012 (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/david-vine/us-military-
bases_b_1676006.html) Accessed 27th May 2013

8
Though the transition to the lily-pad strategy is scaling back troop deployments,
these changes will not compromise global US hegemony. While the US is
reducing the size of some individual operations, the scope of its global military
empire is expanding significantly. Lily-pads allow the US to further project its
forces, and to be militarily engaged in regions it previously did not have a
presence. By reducing the size of individual bases, the military can spread itself
across the globe.
The lily-pads have a variety of different purposes and applications for the US.
Setting aside their obvious military and surveillance capacities, the lily-pads can
also act as strategic outlets for building and strengthening regional alliances,
assisting in trade, and providing the US access to foreign markets that were
hitherto unreachable16. The smaller bases allow fluid movement and
transportation of weapons and personnel. These bases also provide the US with
control of sea-ways, and control of global commerce. As such, the lily-pads
represent an exceeding valuable resource to the US in broader foreign affairs,
promoting more positive perceptions of the US internationally.
16 Fields, T .W. “Eastward Bound: The Strategy and Politics of Repositioning US
Military Bases in Europe”, Journal of Public and International Affairs, Princeton-
15 (2004): 79-98

9
Part 3: Lilypads as remedy to Anti-Americanism. Has the change in strategy
been successful?
The preliminary response to the lily-pad strategy has been mixed. In some ways,
the new installations address the pressing concerns of the larger military bases,
such as the local resentment in places like Okinawa and South Korea. The lily-
pads are not without their own set of issues however. While some historians
argue the smaller bases have addressed the fundamental problems of their
predecessors, others claim the lily-pads attract similar criticism to the larger
bases, while additionally presenting a whole new set of problems.
While criticism of larger US bases came primarily from sources local to the base,
lily-pads have spread and dispersed Anti-American sentiment to a broader mass.
The lily-pads have disseminated anti-Americanism from a few critical sources to
a much wider population. As argued by Marc Lynch “The lily-pad empire of bases
has created a corresponding empire of anti-Americanism”17. Lily-pads have
drawn criticism from international critics, broadening the scope of anti-
American sentiment.
David Vine outlines four key problems with the lily-pad strategy. Firstly, “the lily
pad language can be misleading, since by design or otherwise, such installations
17 Lynch. Marc. ‘The Persistence of Anti-Americanism’, Foreign Affairs, May/June
2013 (http://www.foreignaffairs.com/articles/139120/marc-lynch/the-
persistence-of-arab-anti-americanism), Accessed 5th May 2013.

10
are capable of quickly growing into bloated behemoths”18. While the lily-pads are
initially created small and inconspicuous, many are expected to grow into the
future. Intentionally or not, lily-pads can become much bigger than their names
suggest. Bases in the Africa have already grown exponentially since their initial
creation.
Secondly, the lily-pads (like their larger predecessors) are likely to draw the US
into unseemly alliances with tyrants and despots in unfamiliar regions. Vine
argues new bases in Asia and the Middle East will require the establishment of
new diplomatic alliances. This could draw the US into civil wars and conflicts.19
Third, while the lily-pads were supposed to address the problem of local
opposition, domestic complaints have emerged already, “Although lily pads seem
to promise insulation from local opposition, over time even small bases have
often led to anger and protest movements. (Consequently) The United States is
likely to be drawn into new conflicts and new wars, generating unknown forms
of blowback, and untold death and destruction”20. Not only have the lily-pads
generated the same local resentment as their predecessors, the expansion of the
US military presence into the problems of unstable new regions may threaten
national security, compromising the very safety the bases are supposed to
ensure.
Post, July 16 2012, (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/david-vine/us-military-
bases_b_1676006.html), Accessed 27th May 2013
19 Ibid.
20 Vine. David. “David Vine on the proliferation of lily-pad bases”, Princeton
University Press Blog, July 19 2012
(http://blog.press.princeton.edu/2012/07/19/david-vine-on-the-proliferation-
of-lily-pad-military-bases/), Accessed 2nd June 2013

11
Finally, the lily-pads could compromise US relations with existing allies, “Like
real lily pads - which are actually aquatic weeds - bases have a way of growing
and reproducing uncontrollably. Indeed, bases tend to beget bases, creating
"base races" with other nations, heightening military tensions, and discouraging
diplomatic solutions to conflicts”21. Lily-pads have the potential to inflame
tensions with US allies, as exemplified by Russia’s alarm over the development of
US bases in Kazakhstan22. Lily-pads have the potential to antagonize nations
who feel threatened by the further expansion, albeit in a new form, of the US
military empire.
Part 4: Anti Americanism or Practical Necessity?
Anti-Americanism has been a persistent issue for the US military long before the
transition to the lily-pad strategy. This is illustrated by a long history of protest
and opposition to the US base at Okinawa. It would appear, then, that the
transition to a lily-pad strategy has had less to do with anti-Americanism, and is
more a reflection of the changing nature of warfare.
The lily-pad strategy reflects the military’s vision for future warfare. Rather than
becoming bogged down in large-scale, long-term conflicts, the lily-pads
exemplify the more mobile and decentralized approach the military is adopting.
21 Ibid.
22 Novosti. Ria. ‘Russia Alarmed by Planned US bases in Central Asia’, Centre for
Research on Globalization, 16 December 2008
(http://www.globalresearch.ca/russia-alarmed-by-planned-u-s-bases-in-
central-asia/11414), Accessed 1st June 2013

12
Historian Nick Turse argues “lily-pads allow special operations forces, proxy
armies, the militarization of spying and intelligence, drone aircraft, cyber-
attacks, and joint Pentagon operations with increasingly militarized 'civilian'
government agencies”23. With lily-pads strategically dotted around the globe, the
new bases will hasten mobilization. Military strategists project the lily-pads will
mark the end of lasting warfare, heralding a new era of endless interventions and
globally dispersed military bases24.
Turse highlights a different perspective in this excerpt. This quote suggests the
shift to lily-pads represents a practical change, with the military adapting to the
changing nature of warfare. According to Turse, the move to smaller installations
is the US adjusting its infrastructure in response to an evolution in military
strategy. Turse’s ideas are echoed by Nazif Shahrani, “with the widespread use
of drones, long-range missiles and extremely mobile US military force,
establishing large military bases are not cost effective. Under these new
conditions, small lily pads will suffice”25. These authors argue innovations in the
military industry have meant future wars will not be fought using traditional
means (e.g. large military deployments). As such, transition to a lily-pad strategy
is the US responding to the changing nature of modern warfare, utilizing
23 Turse. Nick. in Vine. David. ‘The Lily-Pad Strategy: How the Pentagon is Quietly
Transforming its Overseas Base Empire and Creating a Dangerous New Way of
War’, Huffington Post, 16July 2012 (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/david-
vine/us-military-bases_b_1676006.html), Accessed 27th May 2013
24 Ibid.
25 Shahrani. Nazif. ‘America’s Lili-Pads in Afghanistan and Central Asia: Pentagon
to Increase Number of Small Military Bases’, Centre for Research on Globalization,
18 January 2013, (http://www.globalresearch.ca/americas-lili-pads-in-
afghanistan-and-central-asia-pentagon-to-increase-the-number-of-small-
military-bases/5319528?print=1), Accessed 4th June 2013.

13
technological innovations and a new military apparatus. These arguments
suggest the shift to lily-pads is a strategic necessity for the US military, rather
than a response to anti-American pressure.
Conclusion:
Anti-Americanism represents a significant challenge to the US military. At the US
base in Okinawa, anti-Americanism has become so significant, some believe it
has forced the military to fundamentally adjust its positioning. Protests and
demonstrations over criminal misbehavior of US marines and the environmental
damage caused by the base itself put significant pressure on the US to change its
approach. Military strategists believed a general restructure would resolve the
major problems of the larger bases. The shift to a lily-pad strategy addresses
some of the more pressing concerns of the US military posture. Nonetheless, the
strategy presents a whole new set of potential threats to the perception of US
military.
The lily-pads do not address the problems of larger bases as they have a
tendency to expand to a similar size. Also, while the lily-pad strategy may
consolidate US military presence new regions (such as Asia), these incursions
could potentially be seen by key allies as a threat into their national interest. The
introduction of a US military presence into such regions represents an additional
challenge to national sovereignty and regional autonomy26. Intrusion into an
26 Markovits. Andrei. Uncouth Nation: Why Western Europe Dislikes America,
Princeton University Press, US, 2003

14
allies’ perceived sphere of influence, (while an economically and politically
attractive alternative to larger, long-term military deployment), could imperil
the US in new ways. The lily-pads have failed to reduce anti-Americanism from
local sources, instead increasing resentment from the international community.
Much like the lily-pad strategy itself, anti-Americanism has spread and dispersed
in response.
There is little doubt that large US military bases, such as Okinawa and South
Korea, have produced significant anti-American attitudes amongst local
populations. Whether these attitudes were powerful enough to force a shift in
military strategy however, is unclear. Other factors, such as technological
innovation and the changing nature of warfare are likely to have influenced the
decision to develop lily-pad bases.
Chalmers Johnson examines the strategy change:
“After the attacks of September 11th, 2001 we waged two wars and acquired
fourteen new bases (in Eastern Europe, Iraq, the Persian Gulf, Pakistan,
Afghanistan, Uzbekistan and Kyrgyzstan). It was said these wars were a response
to the terrorist attacks and would lessen our vulnerability to terrorism in the
future. But it seems more likely that these new bases and other American targets
of vulnerability will be subject to continued or increased terrorist strikes”27
27 Johnson. Chalmers. The Sorrows of Empire, Metropolitan Books, NY, 2004,
p.215

15
Johnson argues this strategy shift has made the US more susceptible to anti-
American attacks.
The extent of anti-Americanism at US bases in Okinawa and South Korea forced a
fundamental change to the US military posture. This new posture however still
poses significant problems for the US and the spread of anti-American sentiment.
There is not sufficient scholarly material to argue any consensus view on the
effectiveness of the lily-pads in addressing anti-Americanism. The concerns
raised here, however do raise valid questions about the effectiveness of the lily-
pad strategy in reducing anti-Americanism.

16
List of References:
Al Jazeera, ‘101 East: Okinawa – The Future of US Military Bases’, Uploaded 31st
May 2010, Accessed 3rd June 2013,
(http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bB2STxdGmXI)
Blaker. James. United States Overseas Basing: An Anatomy of the Dilemma,
Praeger, USA, 1990
Cottrell. Alvin and Moorer. Thomas. US Overseas Bases: Problems of Projecting
American Military Power Abroad, 1977
Dozier. Kimberley. ‘Drone Strike comes despite Transparency Pledge’, US News,
30 May 2013
(http://www.usnews.com/news/politics/articles/2013/05/30/drone-strike-
comes-despite-transparency-pledge), Accessed 4th June 2013
Ferguson. Niall. Colossus: The Rise and Fall of the American Empire, Penguin
Press, USA, 2004
Gillem. Mark. America Town: Building the Outposts of Empire, University of
Hollander. Paul. Anti-Americanism: Rational and Irrational, Transaction
Publishers, USA, 2005, p.17
Johnson. Chalmers. The Sorrows of Empire, Metropolitan Books, New York, 2004
Lutz. Catherine. The Bases of Empire, New York University Press, New York, 2009
Markovits. Andrei. Uncouth Nation: Why Western Europe Dislikes America,
Princeton University Press, US, 2009
Novosti. Ria. ‘Russia Alarmed by Planned US bases in Central Asia’, Centre for
Research on Globalization, 16 December 2008
(http://www.globalresearch.ca/russia-alarmed-by-planned-u-s-bases-in-
central-asia/11414), Accessed 1st June 2013
O’Connor. Brendon. and Griffiths. Martin. Anti Americanism in the 21st Century,
Greenwood World Publishing, Oxford, 2007
Parmar, Inderjeet, “Responding to Anti-Americanism: The Politics of Public
Diplomacy”, in Brendan O’Connor Anti Americanism: History, Causes, Themes, Vol.
4 (Oxford, UK: Greenwood World Publishing, 2007), 239-262
Shahrani. Nazif. ‘America’s Lili-Pads in Afghanistan and Central Asia: Pentagon to
Increase Number of Small Military Bases’, Centre for Research on Globalization,

17
18 January 2013, (http://www.globalresearch.ca/americas-lili-pads-in-
afghanistan-and-central-asia-pentagon-to-increase-the-number-of-small-
military-bases/5319528?print=1), Accessed 4th June 2013
Sturdevant, S P and Stoltzfus, B 1993, Let the Good Times Roll: Prostitution and
the US Military in Asia, New Press, New York
United States European Command, ‘Strategic Theater Transformation’, 14
January 2005,
(http://web.archive.org/web/20070204141322/http://www.eucom.mil/englis
h/Transformation/Transform_Blue.asp), Accessed 4th June 2013
Vine. David. Island of Shame: The Secret History of the US Military Base on Diego
Garcia, Princeton University Press, USA, 2009
Vine. David. ‘The Lily-Pad Strategy: How the Pentagon is Quietly Transforming its
Overseas Base Empire and Creating a Dangerous New Way of War’, Huffington
Post, 16th July 2012 (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/david-vine/us-military-
bases_b_1676006.html), Accessed 27th May 2013

18
http://globalpublicsquare.blogs.cnn.com/2012/08/09/world-to-america-we-
want-soft-not-hard-power/
The US has been criticized for its military-centric foreign policy by scholars and
academics alike. The size and number of US military bases, both large and small
reflects the focus of US policy. This focus has created problems for the US, and
criticisms relating to its approach. A lack of public diplomacy and ‘soft power’ to
buttress the hard power investment has created lasting internal problems,
creating resentment of the US amongst local populations. The US needs to
introduce and develop the necessary political and social mechanisms locally to
create stability, and allow for a smooth transition of power. This will address the
primary concerns of many anti-American critics.
Historian Inderjeet Parmar argues “public diplomacy is about openness
transparency and authentic engagement with foreign publics”. The only way to
stem the rising tide of anti-Americanism is to fundamentally redress US
approaches to foreign intervention. Rather than adjusting the style of military
intervention, the focus of foreign intervention must shift away from its current
military emphasis towards soft power and diplomacy. The US must move beyond

19
its short-sighted, militarist attitude and adopt a strategy which effectively
communicates with its public.
There are however, mixed feelings over the base at Okinawa. A significant
number of Japanese recognize the necessity of the base on Okinawa. Tomohiko
Taniguchi of Keio University argues “Okinawa island sits on the frontline of East
Asian security. The US military presence is a lynchpin of Japan’s national
security”. Taniguchi argues the base in Okinawa is of increasing importance to
Japan’s defense capacity. Japan’s limited national defense has meant a reliance
on the US for frontline military support. (regional instability regarding North
Korea and uncertainty about China’s posture)
The shift to smaller bases is the product of a change in the nature of geopolitical
affairs. The new lily-pad strategy is a reaction to an increasingly multi-polar
world. In this context, the US faces competition on a number of different fronts.
Emerging powers in Asia, resource rich regions of Central and South America
and European stalwarts all represent challenges to US dominance. For this
reason, the US is forced to adapt its military strategy
There has been limited scholarship on the effects of the recent US shift to the lily-
pad strategy. Much of the commentary on the change has come from sources
within the US, focusing on the With everyone looking for ways to trim the deficit,
closing overseas bases offers easy savings. Indeed, increasingly influential types
are recognizing that the country simply can't afford more than 1,000 bases
abroad.

20
The current approach is fundamentally flawed. If the goal or intent of the
transition to smaller bases was to stem the rising tide of global anti-
Americanism, this strategy is already showing preliminary signs of failure. Public
reactions to lily-pad bases have raised similar concerns to their larger
predecessors. In order to stop the spread of anti-American sentiment, the US
needs to fundamentally change its attitude to foreign intervention
The central problem isn’t how the US chooses to conduct their military
operations, but they fact they conduct them at all. Systemic or structural
adjustments overlook the deeper problem of US militarism and unwanted
intervention. This is reflective of what Cottrell and Moorer have called US
military “Tunnel Vision: If the military is the problem, the military is the
solution”28. Little, if any, consideration is given to alternative means, such as soft
power and public diplomacy, which at best become a backdrop to large-scale
military intervention.
“Most of the new post-Cold War or post September 11 bases are in fact access
agreements that are deemed to be in the interests of both parties. As such
America’s network of bases is best understood as a ‘leasehold empire’” O’Keefe,
M, ‘US Military Bases and Anti-Americanism’, Anti-Americanism in the 21st
Century, p.118 (FROM PAGE 115)?????
28 Cottrell, A J and Moorer, T H , US Overseas Bases: Problems of Projecting
American Military Power Abroad, p. 197

21
In some ways, the lily-pads present similar problems to larger military
installations. As aforementioned, the lily-pads house a small number of troops,
with restricted access, and often operate in secrecy. This has raised issues
however, pertaining to the particular activities and operations of the lily-pads.
Local populations in Pakistan argue the goals and aims of a new US bases have
not been made clear to them under this arrangement29. This lack transparency in
US lily-pad strategy has been a significant factor in the spread of anti-American
sentiment, with the military refusing to outline their agenda to local populations
in these circumstances. Uncertainty over the military’s agenda has heightened
local safety and security concerns which could potentially lead violent reactions.
(How much does this have to do with the bases
29 Dozier. Kimberley. ‘Drone Strike comes despite Transparency Pledge’, US
News, 30 May 2013
(http://www.usnews.com/news/politics/articles/2013/05/30/drone-strike-
comes-despite-transparency-pledge), Accessed 4th June 2013.

Anti Americanism Research Essay

Recommended

Recommended

More Related Content

What's hot

What's hot (20)

Similar to Anti Americanism Research Essay

Similar to Anti Americanism Research Essay (16)

Anti Americanism Research Essay