51吃瓜

America’s war on terror has听now spread to 76 countries across the globe.听

He left Air Force Two behind and, unannounced, 鈥�,鈥� flew on an听听transport plane into Bagram Air Base, the largest American garrison in Afghanistan. All news of his visit was听听until an hour before he was to depart the country.

More than 16 years after an American invasion 鈥渓iberated鈥� Afghanistan, he was there to offer some good news to a , once again听on the rise. Before a 40-foot American flag, addressing 500 American troops, praised them as 鈥渢he world鈥檚 greatest force for good,鈥� boasted that American air strikes had recently been 鈥渄ramatically increased,鈥� swore that their country was 鈥渉ere to stay,鈥� and听insisted听that 鈥渧ictory is closer than ever before.鈥� As an observer听, however, the response of his audience was 鈥渟ubdued.鈥� (鈥淪everal troops stood with their arms crossed or their hands folded behind their backs and listened, but did not applaud.鈥�)

Think of this as but the latest episode in an upside down geopolitical fairy tale, a grim, rather than Grimm, story for our age that might begin: Once upon a time 鈥攊n October 2001, to be exact 鈥� Washington launched its war on terror. There was then just one country targeted, the very one where, a little more than a decade earlier, the , during which it had financed, armed or backed an extreme set of Islamic fundamentalist groups, including a rich young Saudi by the name of Osama bin Laden.

By 2001, in the wake of that war, which helped send the Soviet Union down the path to implosion, Afghanistan was largely (but not completely) ruled by the Taliban. Osama bin Laden was there, too, with a relatively modest crew of cohorts. By early 2002, he had fled to Pakistan, leaving many of his companions dead and his organization, al-Qaeda, in a state of disarray. The Taliban, defeated, was pleading to be allowed to put down its arms and go back to the villages, an abortive process that vividly听described听in his book,听.

It was, it seemed, all over, but the cheering and, of course, the planning for yet greater exploits across the region. The top officials in the administration of President George W. Bush and Vice President Dick Cheney were geopolitical dreamers听of the first order who couldn鈥檛 have had more expansive ideas about how to extend such success to 鈥� as indicated听only days听after the 9/11 attacks 鈥� terror or insurgent groups in more than 60 countries. It was a point would听reemphasize听nine months later in a triumphalist graduation speech at West Point.

At that moment, the struggle they had quickly, if immodestly, dubbed the global war on terror was still a one-country affair. They were, however, already deep into preparations to extend it in ways more radical and devastating than they could ever have imagined with the invasion and occupation of Saddam Hussein鈥檚 Iraq and the domination听of the oil heartlands of the planet that they were sure would follow. (In a comment that caught the moment exactly,听听quoted听a British official “close to the Bush team” as saying, “Everyone wants to go to Baghdad. Real men want to go to Tehran.”)

So many years later, perhaps it won鈥檛 surprise you 鈥� as it probably听wouldn鈥檛 have听surprised the who turned out in the streets of American cities and towns in early 2003 to oppose the invasion of Iraq 鈥� that this was one of those stories to which the adage “be careful what you wish for” applies.

Seeing War

It is a tale that’s not over yet 鈥� not by a long shot. As a start, in the Trump era, , the one in Afghanistan, is only getting longer. There are those ; those ; the 听of significant sections of the country; an 听ever more successfully in its eastern regions; and, according to the听latest report听from the Pentagon, 鈥渕ore than .鈥�

Think about that: 20 groups. In other words, so many years later, the war on terror should be seen as an endless exercise in the use of multiplication tables, and not just in Afghanistan either. More than a decade and a half after an American president spoke of 60 or more countries as potential targets, thanks to the invaluable work of a single dedicated group,听the 听at Brown University鈥檚 Watson Institute for International and Public Affairs, we finally have a visual representation of the true extent of the war on terror. That we鈥檝e had to wait so long should tell us something about the nature of this era of permanent war.

The Costs of War Project has produced not just a map of the war on terror, 2015-2017, but the first map of its kind ever. It offers an astounding vision of Washington鈥檚 counterterror wars across the globe: their spread, the deployment of US forces, the expanding missions to train foreign counterterror forces, the American bases that make them possible, the drone and other air strikes that are essential to them and the US combat troops helping to fight them. (Terror groups have, of course, morphed and expanded riotously as part and parcel of the same process.)

A glance at the map tells you that the war on terror, an increasingly complex set of intertwined conflicts, is now a remarkably global phenomenon. It stretches from the Philippines (with its own ISIS-branded group that just fought an almost i, a city of 300,000) through South Asia, Central Asia, the Middle East, North Africa and deep into West Africa where, only recently, .

No less stunning are the number of countries Washington鈥檚 war on terror has touched in some fashion. Once, of course, there was only one (or, if you want to include the United States, two). Now, the Costs of War Project identifies no less than 76 countries, 39% of those on the planet, as involved in that global conflict. That means places like Afghanistan, Syria, Iraq, Yemen, Somalia and Libya where US drone or other air strikes are the norm, and US ground troops (often听) have been either directly or indirectly engaged in combat. It also means countries where US advisers are training local militaries or even militias in counterterror tactics and those with bases crucial to this expanding set of conflicts. As the map makes clear, these categories often overlap.

The Price Tag

Who could be surprised that such a 鈥渨ar鈥� has been eating American taxpayer dollars at a rate that should stagger the imagination in a country whose ? In a听separate study, released in November, the (with some future expenses included) had already reached an astronomical $5.6 trillion. Only recently, however, President Trump, now escalating those conflicts,听听an even more staggering figure: 鈥淎fter having foolishly spent $7 trillion in the Middle East, it is time to start rebuilding our country!鈥� (This figure, too, seems to have come in some fashion from the Costs of War听听that “future interest payments on borrowing for the wars will likely add more than $7.9 trillion to the national debt” by听.)

It couldn鈥檛 have been a rarer comment from an American politician, as in these years assessments of both the have largely been听. The war on terror has, in fact, spread in the fashion today鈥檚 map lays out with almost no serious debate in this country about its costs or results. If the document produced by the Costs of War project is, in fact, a map from hell, it is also, I believe, the first full-scale map of this war ever produced.

Think about that for a moment. For the last 16 years, we, the American people, funding this complex set of conflicts to the tune of trillions of dollars, have lacked a single map of the war Washington has been fighting. Not one. Yes, parts of that morphing, spreading set of conflicts have been somewhere in the news regularly, though seldom (except when there were lone wolf terror attacks in the United States or Western Europe) in the headlines. In all those years, however, no American could see an image of this strange, perpetual conflict the end of which is nowhere in sight.

Part of this can be explained by the nature of that 鈥渨ar.鈥� There are no fronts, no armies advancing on Berlin, no armadas bearing down on the Japanese homeland. There hasn鈥檛 been, as in Korea in the early 1950s, even a parallel to cross or fight your way back to. In this war, there have been no obvious retreats and, after the triumphal entry into Baghdad in 2003, few advances either.

It was hard even to map its component parts and when you did 鈥� as in an August听听鈥� the imagery was complex and of limited impact. Generally, however, we, the people, have been听听in almost every imaginable way in these years, even when it comes to simply following the endless set of wars and conflicts that go under the rubric of the war on terror.

Let me repeat this mantra: Once, almost 17 years ago, there was one; now, the count is 76 and rising. Meanwhile, great ; 听from their homes; refugees by the millions continue to cross borders, unsettling ever more lands; terror groups have become brand names across significant parts of the planet; and our .

This should be thought of as an entirely new kind of perpetual global war. Take one more look at that map. Click on it and then enlarge it to consider the map in full-screen mode. It鈥檚 important to try to imagine what鈥檚 been happening visually, since we鈥檙e facing a new kind of disaster, a planetary militarization of a sort we鈥檝e never truly seen before. No matter the 鈥渟uccesses鈥� in Washington鈥檚 war, ranging from that invasion of Afghanistan in 2001 to the taking of Baghdad in 2003 to the recent destruction of the Islamic State鈥檚 鈥渃aliphate鈥� in Syria and Iraq (or most of it anyway, since at this moment ), the conflicts only seem to morph and tumble on.

The Only Edge

We are now in an era in which the US military is the leading edge 鈥� often the only edge 鈥� of what used to be called American 鈥渇oreign policy鈥� and the . alone, and the US has so many troops on so many bases in so many places on Earth that the 听of them. There may, in fact, be no way to truly map all of this, though the Costs of War Project鈥檚 illustration is a triumph of what can be seen.

Looking into the future, let鈥檚 pray for one thing 鈥� that the folks at that project have plenty of stamina, since it’s a given that, in the Trump years (and possibly well beyond), the costs of war will only rise. The , passed with bipartisan unanimity by Congress and signed by the president, is a staggering听$700 billion. Meanwhile, America鈥檚 leading military men and the president, while escalating the country鈥檚 conflicts from听听to听,听听to Afghanistan, seem eternally in search of yet more wars to launch.

Pointing to Russia, China, Iran and North Korea, for instance, recently听told听US troops in Norway to expect a 鈥渂igass fight鈥� in the future, adding, 鈥淚 hope I鈥檓 wrong, but there鈥檚 a war coming.鈥� In December, similarly听suggested听that the possibility of a war (conceivably nuclear in nature) with Kim Jong-un鈥檚 North Korea was 鈥渋ncreasing every day.鈥� Meanwhile, in an administration packed with Iranophobes, , possibly as early as this month.

In other words, in 2018 and beyond, maps of many creative kinds may be needed simply to begin to take in the latest in America鈥檚 wars. Consider, for instance, a recent听report听in 听that about 2,000 employees of the Department of Homeland Security are already 鈥渄eployed to more than 70 countries around the world,鈥� largely to prevent terror attacks. That is how it goes in the 21st century.

So welcome to 2018, another year of unending war. While we鈥檙e on the subject, a small warning to our leaders: Given the last 16 years, be careful what you wish for.

*[This article was originally published by .]

The views expressed in this article are the author鈥檚 own and do not necessarily reflect 51吃瓜鈥檚 editorial policy.

Photo Credit:听听/