The midterm elections have come and gone, but the analyses of what makes voters tick remain as the 2020 presidential bids are set to soon pour in. According to a recent Gallup poll, one of the top issues for voters, and something that’s been a key concern for Americans since September 2001, is foreign policy. Unfortunately, since Sept. 11, both Democrats and Republicans have largely agreed that fighting wars in the Middle East, and ignoring the spending implications, is the only solution.
But the rising cost of maintaining our presence abroad can no longer be ignored.
Seventeen years ago, the United States began launching airstrikes in Afghanistan, desperate to take out al Qaeda leader Osama bin Laden. Nearly two decades since the Sept. 11 attacks, the U.S. military is still waging war in the Middle East — even after capturing and killing bin Laden. The U.S., too, has been heavily involved in conflicts in Iraq, Syria, and Libya, and other nations. But these wars have only taken the lives of thousands of troops and civilians, leading to increased political instability and, arguably, more terrorism. Given these terrible results and the fact that these conflicts are ongoing, we have to ask — how much have these wars cost us?
A shocking report makes the extremity of our expenditure clear. The Stimson Center, a nonpartisan policy research center focused on national security issues, released it earlier this year with the title, “Counterterrorism Spending: Protecting America while Promoting Efficiencies and Accountability.” They examined the massive price tag of the war on terror, offering solutions of increased transparency on what exactly we’re funding.
From 2002 to 2017, counterterrorism cost us $2.8 trillion, about four times the 2019 defense budget. The sum was used for homeland security efforts, international programs, and the conflicts in Afghanistan, Iraq, and Syria. At the height of counterterrorism spending in 2008, spending totaled $260 billion —16 times higher than the $16 billion spent in 2001.
The most recent spending number from 2017 is still 11 times higher than the 2001 costs at $175 billion. Since Sept. 11, 100 people have died in terrorist attacks by Muslim extremists, about six per year.
Meanwhile, opioid fentanyl overdoses killed 20,000 people just in 2016. In Iraq, Afghanistan, and Pakistan, between 480,000 and 507,000 people (U.S. troops, civilians, contractors, and otherwise) have been killed since Sept. 11. The lives of Americans and our allies are more valuable than unwinnable wars overseas.
There’s no reason to believe that counterterrorism spending will decline in coming years, according to the report. Terrorism cannot be eradicated completely, as there will always be evil people in the world. It’s time to acknowledge that Americans should not have to fight these wars forever. Today, 17-year-olds who were not even alive during the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks can now enlist in the war in Afghanistan. While the Stimson Center’s report is shocking, it doesn’t begin to cover the full price tag of these conflicts.
Americans can demand a cap on this wasteful spending, if, that is, they actually know the extent of the bill. We can hold the Pentagon accountable by forcing the government to create an annual counterterrorism funding report and to adopt a clear definition of what constitutes counterterrorism spending.
Of course, it’s essential that we fight terrorism when it poses a threat. Yet we need a better way to track what’s happening overseas and assess the decisions the U.S. military is making. If there is no oversight, no clear goals, and no accurate ways to determine the impact of foreign involvement, taxpayer dollars will inevitably be wasted. The cost of fighting unwinnable wars is massive. The sad truth is that terrorism will continue to plague the world no matter how much the U.S. spends fighting it. Let’s instead put our money toward the things that might, in the end, help those who need it most.
Jake Grant (@thejakegrant) is a contributor to Young Voices.
