Perpetual War far Perpetual Peace: How We Got to Be So Hated - Book Review

Naval War College Review, Summer, 2003 by Michael Morgan

Vidal, Gore. Perpetual War far Perpetual Peace: How We Got to Be So Hated. New York Thunder's Mouth Press, 2002. 160pp. $10

It would be difficult to find a book on world affairs more contrary to the opinions of most readers of the Naval War College Review or other members of the American national security community than Gore Vidal's Perpetual War for Perpetual Peace.

As a military officer myself, I disagree with many of Vidal's assumptions and propositions, but the book is worthwhile because it challenges one to think about inconsistencies and issues in American foreign policy as well as domestic security. The book is extremely well written, as one would expect from a writer of Vidal's caliber. It is highly engaging, and most military professionals interested in American national security will probably find it easy to read (although fewer may find it easy to agree with).

Gore Vidal is a noted novelist, perhaps one of the most prominent living American authors. In 1943 he enlisted in the Navy and served in World War II, so his background lends relevant experience in military affairs. He wrote his commentary shortly after the 11 September attack, but after both Vanity Fair and The Notion declined it, a version of this book was printed in Italy, where it became a best-seller. After subsequent publication in Europe, Vidal was finally able to get the book published in its present form.

Perpetual War for Perpetual Peace contains seven chapters and an introduction, but much of the material predates "9111," which is one of the book's chief weaknesses. Three chapters were reprinted from his The Last Empire (Doubleday, 2001), and these were recycled from earlier articles. Another chapter, "The Meaning of Timothy McVeigh," appeared in the September 2001 issue of Vanity Fair. There are sparse updates throughout the older chapters, including asterisked footnotes and comments, such as one briefly comparing the Oklahoma City bombing to "Dark Tuesday" ("9111"). However, the meat of the new work appears in the first chapter, "September 11, 2001 (A Tuesday)." Vidal's sharp mind and readable writing style make his arguments on the World Trade Center attacks and the aftermath compelling. For instance, the declaration of an ambiguous war on terror has been the subject of much discussion in the pages of foreign affairs journals and newspaper editorials. Vidal notes that insurance companies benefit from a state of war due to exception clauses in insurance agreements, although previous U.S. case law has established that "acts of war" can originate only from "a sovereign nation, not a bunch of radicals."

Some of his other comments lean more toward "Swiftian literary exaggeration," of which he accuses H. L. Mencken in a letter to Timothy McVeigh. His portrayal of Secretary Donald Rumsfeld and Vice President Dick Cheney as eager for a police state seems excessive. Also, he compares the terrorist attacks in the United States to such statesponsored atrocities as the burning of the Reichstag (secretly perpetrated by the Nazi government in order to consolidate Hitler's police power) and rapes by bogus Vietcong squads to discredit the communist insurgency. This paranoid proclivity toward conspiracy theory is revealed in his assertion that Opus Dei is a conservative Catholic conspiracy in the United States. He makes a point about Thomas lefferson's and John Adams's opposition to Jesuit activity in America, which is probably more an indicator of American anti-Catholic bigotry several hundred years ago than any prescient warning of the dangers of religious incursion into state affairs.

There are, however, several arguments that are more convincing. Vidal contends that terror attacks caused more damage to civil liberties than to the nation's physical well-being. "Once alienated, an 'unalienable right' is apt to be forever lost." He documents this assertion with a list of police killings of innocent people in their homes and of indefensible searches and seizures. While a reasonable reader may dismiss these discomforting examples as well researched exceptions to normal law enforcement activity in the United States, Vidal also brings up the changing nature of the law. He refers to U.S. v. Sandini (1987), which established that police were able to seize property permanently from an individual if the property has been used for criminal purposes, even if the individual has had no involvement with any crime. This ruling has highly negative implications, considering that 90 percent of American paper currency has traces of narcotics on it from use in the drug trade. Vidal also points out a common pro blem that is not commonly pondered-- the incidence of homosexual rape in the U.S. prison system, a violation of the cruel-and-unusual-punishment clause of the Bill of Rights. For anyone who doubts that such punishment is state sanctioned, Vidal quotes a state attorney general who refers to this practice in a public statement made in the course of his official duties. He is reminiscent of the military author Colonel Charles Dunlap, U.S. Army, in his references to blatant disrespect to President Bill Clinton on a naval vessel by seamen, who called Clinton "the Praetorian Guard of the Pentagon," and our "ruling junta."