War in Iraq has Little Impact on Deficit?

April 12, 2006

Diaz Hendropriyono
Washington, DC

Hold on a second! You know what? The cost of funding the Iraq War might have been made deliberately to appear to have a little effect on the deficit. Although the use of supplemental appropriations dwindled in the 1990s, spending through supplementals soared, as the War on Terror unfolded. Both the Afghan and Iraq Wars were funded through emergency supplemental appropriations. By doing so, the deficit in the president’s annual budget proposal would look smaller, as a huge chunk of spending is taken out of the regular budget and put in the budget later during the year. It's quite tricky, isn't it? It's like magic!

Some costs associated with the Iraq War should be definitely taken out of the emergency supplementals as many of the expenses could have been anticipated in the regular budget. Such a practice used by the Bush administration may have been performed to defend the economic viability to fund the Iraq War.

Why the War in Iraq is (not) Cheap !

April 10, 2006

Diaz Hendropriyono
Washington, DC

The War in Iraq certainly has not been, and is not going to be, cheap. But, i always wonder why it is so, considering what many thought, before the war began, that it was not going to be an expensive war.

When President Bush announced the War in Iraq, various differing opinions emerged in public in regards to the financial consequences of the war. The Congressional Budget Office estimated that the war would cost at least $44 billion. The House Budget Committee expected that it was going to be a short kind of war, one that could be accomplished within two months, followed by a three-month occupation. It was estimated to cost from $48 to $60 billion

The Bush Administration, however, forecasted that the cost of the Iraq war would not exceed the total cost of the first Gulf War, $80 billion in 2003 dollar, and on March 23, 2003 requested $74.7 billion to fund for an emergency spending plan. The cost would include $62.6 billion to fund for the Iraq War, $4.24 billion for antiterrorism defense in the U.S., $5 billion for key allies, and $2.4 billion for humanitarian relief and reconstruction efforts in Iraq

The administration argued that the estimated cost of the Iraq War would amount to less than 1 percent of Gross Domestic Product (GDP), and would be considered much cheaper than other wars. The Korean War and the Vietnam War cost U.S. taxpayers 15 percent and 12 percent of U.S. GDP respectively, while World War II spent a whopping 130 percent of GDP, or around $3 trillion, in 2003 dollars. It was then believed that the war could be executed at reasonable cost. John Cogan of the Hoover Institution defended that “at 1% of GDP, the war looks like a bargain.” Furthermore, the defense spending of other countries—such as Israel, the United Kingdom, and Germany, which spent 8.1%, 2.5%, and 1.5% of their GDP in 1999, respectively—made the Iraq War budget appear reasonable.

When considering the cost of the Iraq War, an alternative strategy should also be looked at. Economists from the University of Chicago considered the cost of continuing containment of Saddam. The direct cots of troops and equipment were expected to be $13 billion a year. Since past containment efforts had not been successful, the budget for containment may need to be increased by 50%, raising the cost to $19 billion a year. Furthermore, containment would have to be in place for at least 33 years, an optimistic duration considering the lifetimes of Eastern Europe, Soviet Union, North Korea and Cuba. When the expected cost of containment is discounted to the present, the cost of containment of Saddam would be around $380 billion. Adding the cost for homeland security would bring the total cost to $630 billion. The high cost an alternative strategy made the cost of Iraq War look incredibly small, and thus the Operation Iraqi Freedom was considered the more favorable strategy.

In his testimony to the House Apropriations Defense Subcommittee on September 30, 2003, Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld urged legislators to approve the $87 billion supplemental request for FY 2004 as an investment in peace in the Middle East. Rumsfeld compared the administration’s request with the Marshall Plan, or the European Recovery Program. The Marshall Plan provided the basis for European economic recovery after World War II, in a hope to prevent the influence of the communist parties in Western Europe. The reconstruction plan cost about $6 billion. Yet, Rumsfeld continued, “It cost about $90 billion in today’s dollars,” justifying the cheap cost of the reconstruction efforts in Iraq.

Finally, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Air Force Gen. Richard Myers claimed that the U.S. would not be “going it alone” in these wars. At least 49 nations would send their troops to Iraq and Afghanistan. The North Atlantic Alliance would also participate. And he was convinced that 70 other countries around the world would help the war on terror worldwide. These factors have driven down the cost of the War in Iraq reflected in the budget request and made the budget seem even more appealing.

Unfortunately, U.S. policies are full of uncertainties. It is mainly because of these that the cost of war becomes unmanageable.

As the Operation Iraqi Freedom continued, uncertainties began to appear. The U.S. military has to always deal with some local resistances: the Jihad group led by Abu Musab Al-Zarqawi, the Saddam loyalists, such as the Ba’athist, the Fedayeen, and the Republican Guards, independent Islamic extremists, and other criminals who kidnap individuals for profits. This unexpected and relentless confrontation has extended the U.S. operation in the area and thus has contributed to the increased costs of the war.

What was once thought to be a cheap operation, then, turned out to be one of the most expensive wars in the U.S. history. At $252 billion, the war’s costs in Iraq and Afghanistan had already exceeded those of World War I and the first Gulf War by mid 2005. Although the amount spent on the War in Iraq had only hit $186 billion by that period, budget professor at the Kennedy School of Government at Harvard University Linda Bilmes estimated that it will cost $1.4 trillion by 2010. Meanwhile, economist Joseph Stiglitz assessed the final figure at $1 trillion to $2 trillion. The Congressional Budget Office estimated more conservatively, however, that the war expenses will amount to $600 billion. It seems plausible that these costs will expand as the Pentagon is spending around $6 billion a month on the Iraq War, according to CBO. In fact, the spending increase is reflected in President Bush’s $2.77 trillion budget request in early February 2006, which included increased outlays for the Iraq War.

With the staggering estimates offered by those scholars, it is perhaps arguable that the War in Iraq would still be cheaper than the containment strategy of Saddam Hussein mentioned earlier, estimated to cost around $630 billion.

In addition, The hope that the costs of war and reconstruction efforts could be shared by other allied forces has not fully yet become a reality. Rather than having more allied forces joining the war, the U.S. has started to lose its coalition partners as uncertainties occurred. Bulgaria withdrew its troop in January 2006 after losing 13 soldiers and two truck drivers, who were kidnapped and killed by the Abu Musab Al-Zarqawi group, and two-thirds of its 7.8 million citizens at home voiced out opposition with the war. Ukrainian troops left Iraq in December 2005 after losing 18 soldiers and having three engineers taken hostage. Meanwhile, Nicaraguan soldiers left Iraq for financial reasons, as its President Enrique Bolanos emphasized that the country could no longer afford to keep them there.

As more and more forces left Iraq because of these uncertainties, the U.S. will likely bear most of the costs of the War in Iraq. Thus, a continued budget increase for the war is simply unavoidable. Furthermore, the fact that the U.S. did not win a widespread support as it did in the first Gulf War—that its allies agreed in advance to share the costs of war—forced the U.S. to put much financial burden on its taxpayers, said Leon Panetta, a former budget director for the Clinton administration.

Life is full of uncertainties. Had the world not filled with them, the War in Iraq was actually going to be a cheap war. Really. Perhaps, the current administration just does not realize the extent of these uncertainties on the cost of war.

U.S. Constitution Needs an Update

February 20, 2006

Diaz Hendropriyono
Washington, DC

The U.S. Constitution was written not only to create and distribute federal power into three separate branches, but also to ensure that it was exercised legitimately. And most importantly, it was to be considered as the “Supreme Law of the Land.” The Constitution was meant to be a broad guideline for the republic that, like most rules and regulations, it does not encompass specificity. Regrettably, I argue that for this very reason the Constitution, to a certain extent, fails to serve its purpose.

The Constitution could have been intentionally written broadly, avoiding details. William J. Brennan Jr. asserted that the Framers had anticipated that a changing society would need an elastic and flexible document that could conform to the ages. For example, the word “slavery” was not clearly mentioned in the Constitution although three provisions refer to it: the three-fifths clause in Article 1 Section 2, the importation clause in Article 1 Section 9, and the fugitive clause in Article IV Section 2. It was believed that such a word was impossible to be stated clearly because it was an embarrassment for the American people to allow slavery. In fact, the Framers themselves hoped that this practice would be abolished in the future. And allowing slavery at that time was only a way to secure the Union using general words that would neither sanction slavery nor stain the Constitution.

More elaborately, Frederick Douglass claimed that slavery was treated as a “scaffolding” to build the Union. And once the “building” is built, it was to be removed. It seems that the vagueness of the Constitution was a deliberate attempt by the Framers, realizing that they could not agree on everything, and thus decided that it was wiser to leave interpretation to future generations.

Unfortunately, as a result of these ambiguities in the Constitution, Americans have unnecessarily quarreled over the content and the meaning of the text. For example, the issue of separation of power that the Constitution establishes has created confusion. Each of the three branches is supposed to perform a different and independent task. However, although Article I Section 1 states “All legislative Powers herein granted shall be vested in a Congress,” the other two branches could actually become legislative in practice as well.

While the Congress is still entrusted to make laws, the president, having the attention of the public, retains the greater power to propose legislation and veto what the Congress proposes. And even though the Supreme Court is tasked to interpret the law, some of its decisions—such as the 2000 presidential election, criminal procedure and abortion—have turned it into a law-making body. Therefore, a gray area in the Constitution has created a loophole that resulted in an interdependent relationship among the three branches rather than a pure system of separation of powers.

Realizing that these branches share power does not mean that each has an equal power. In fact, each dangerously tries to increase its power over the others. For example, the Supreme Court declared in Marbury v. Madison (1803) that it could nullify an act of Congress if it found the act to be in conflict with the Constitution. The practice of judicial review has altered the balance of power among the three branches. It came as a surprise knowing that the Supreme Court in its early years was not powerful and did not have much “energy, weight, and dignity,” as John Jay said when he was leaving his Chief Justice post to become the Governor of New York in 1795.

The ambiguity of the Constitutional role of the executive power, whether a president is a clerk or a leader, has had a profound impact on the placement of public administration—which actually has no place in the Constitution (well, some say it’s implied). Supporters of a strong legislative branch maintain that the president is the former since he is to execute whatever the Congress legislates. Yet, others argue otherwise by comparing two Articles in the Constitution.

Article II Section 1 states “The executive power shall be vested in a President” while Article I Section 1 states “All legislative powers herein granted shall be vested in a Congress.” The omission of the word herein granted in Article II suggests that the president may legislate whatever the Congress does not legislate. That is, according to some, Congress only possesses legislative powers that are granted by the Constitution. Obviously, this uncertain condition forces public administrators to choose their constitutional master, whether the Congress or the president.

Because of the confusion of who has the power to do what, public administrators are forced to use their own “instinct” to determine an acceptable behavior, which I think is difficult to establish. For example, in 1832 President Jackson worked to dismantle the Bank of the United States and asked the Treasury Secretary William J. Duane to divert the U.S. government deposits away from the Bank. The Secretary refused and thus was replaced by the more cooperative Roger Taney. Duane’s refusal to comply with such a directive provides an ethical argument. Those who believe that the President has the executive power and “shall take Care that the Laws be faithfully executed” think it ethically unacceptable to have refused such a presidential order. Yet, others emphasizing the impeachment clause from Article I Section 2 think otherwise. The President and his “men,” whom he shall commission, are actually the Congress’s “men.”

Therefore, although constitutional ambiguities have brought positive effects—such as securing the Union—its ambiguities of the separation of power, the executive and the legislative power, and even the place of the public administration in the government structure, has also created a havoc. Unless this “Supreme Law of the Land” is written in a much more specific manner, this balance of power would undoubtly prevail. I am not asking for intricate details to be added to the U.S. Constitution. But, at least some part of it needs to be updated to avoid unnecessary complication, confusion, and quarrel, so that it provides a clearer balance of power within the three branches without giving the chance for one branch to be harmfully more powerful than the others.

The House that Joko Built

April 7, 1998

Diaz Hendropriyono

Northfield, VT

Banyan trees are the first things you see before entering this place. One would wonder what is behind this massive three-meter high brick wall covered with beautiful green vines of ivy. At the center of this immense wall is a huge iron gate with two computerized doors operated by a sentry in the guardhouse behind this fence. With the exception of special events, cars are forbidden to come in through the gate. As one approaches this main gate, the sentry in uniform would come out asking for an identification card before permitting you to make an entrance. Once you are given permission to proceed through the gate, you will see a two-meter-wide asphalt road that brings you through a forest-like environment with nothing but big trees on each side whose leaves and boughs sometimes fall on the street, reflecting the janitors’ negligence.

The shaded road and the overpowering scent of Indonesian garden flowers make you feel as if you were in the celestial Kingdom. In addition, the sounds of birds chirping seem to “embellish” the divine atmosphere. You would feel unusually cooler walking through this esplanade because of the sheltering trees.

After going through this winding confined avenue, you would eventually gaze in awe at one of the most wonderful views in the world: an enormous two-storied white house which, on the front part, has a beautifully sculptured figure of a corpulent child with its right hand pointing to the west, as a direction for the Moslems of where to pray. A small “reservoir,” with a water fountain that keeps spurting up around this figure, whose gushing reminds you of a brook, surrounds the statue of the naked cherub. This imposing sculpture, which is always kept illuminated throughout the night, is encircled with the road that proceeds from the main gate, with another going off to the exit gate.

A spacious ravishing garden and its multitude of beautiful flowers color your vision around the house with naturally green scenery. The big trees no longer obscure the sky. You can see the ethereal beauty of this gigantic, yet meticulously built, house in the middle of an exquisite garden that stretches for approximately five hectares.

East of the statue is a walkway which ends up with a three-step staircase leading to the main door of the extravagant palace-like house. The two white giant pillars, with some intricate decorations on them, at the front part of the house and the oval terrace make you feel as if you were about to enter the White House.

On the left and right hand side of the front door are two statues, in the form of human beings--male and female--from the Stone Age only wearing a piece of cloth, kneeling to each other, as if showing respect to people entering the house. Usually a butler, who is always impeccably dressed in a clean white uniform, would open the door as he courteously greets you with a warm Indonesian welcome saying “Selamat datang.” The butler would have probably been told by the guard of a guest’s arrival.

As soon as the door is open, you would see a vast lobby with a gigantic crystal chandelier hung from an approximately four-meter-high arched roof. On each side of the hallway, you would be dazzled by two plushly red carpeted stairways ascending in an outward archlike manner to the second floor.

The room seems to glitter because of the gold colors found in it: the ornate gold-gilded frames of the paintings hanging on the wall, the decorations on the roof and wall, the luster of the marble floor, several Grecian urns, and the glistening crystals.

As you advance inside the house, you would find two paintings, each about two meters in length and 1 ½ meters in width, of my grandfather and grandmother. Continuing on, you would behold some pictures, in much smaller sizes, of the families of my grandparents’ children. These pictures are hung at eye level enabling everyone to see them. My family picture, taken when I was about fourteen, is among them.

The several rooms in this house are luxuriously furnished and decorated. Some rooms even boast private features such as saunas and spa baths. The elegance of the rooms can be seen by noticing the huge beds that can probably fit six people, the extravagant parlors just off the bedrooms, and the marble-in-laid bathrooms that are kept scrupulously clean by the maids.

At the rear of this edifice, you will witness an enchanting extensive golf course with an architecturally man-made pond. As you progress with your dainty steps towards the verge of this golf course, which has a hilly contour, albeit hindered by several big trees, alas, you would see in a far distance an impoverished village down the hill from where you are standing. Amongst those little huts, where you will see a few peasantry who seem to hover on the brink of destitution working on their farms, is a large sign indicating the name of the village: “Desa Gandok, Jogjakarta, Indonesia.”

As you are going back to the front part of the house heading to the exit gate, going through a different way from where you entered, you will see an inscription autographed by a man, who was believed to have been an opulent Dutch entrepreneur, whose nick name was Joko.

My grandfather once told me that his father bought the house from this person, whose real name was unrevealed, when the country was colonized by the Dutch. After going through another forest-like environment, you will see this plaque hung on the exit gate next to another guardhouse.

Banyan trees are the last things you see when exiting. One would keep recalling this historical house that had been refurbished many times.

This is the house that Joko built

I Met an Alien

23 March 1998

Diaz Hendropriyono
Northfield, VT

Many people do not believe whether Alien exists. The governments, of any country, seems to have kept its existence or sightings a secret as many demand to know the truth. Well, at least i am fortunate (or unfortunate) enough to know the truth by having seen one.

One night, a few years back, my sleep was disturbed by the hubbub of voices outside the house. Wanting to know what was happening, I opened my eyes. The clamor of voices seemed to be getting louder; my room was filled by a very bright light. Then, I heard steps coming towards my room. A heavy object leaped through the window shattering the glass.

Along with a buzzing sound, I saw a grotesque creature. I jumped off my bed in consternation. This creature emitted the worst odor I have ever smelled. I thought I had just detected some feces. It had an asymmetrical round head. Its ears did not resemble a human’s. The nose did not look like a human’s either. Its straight and small nose seemed to be overwhelmed by its big head. The mouth was unimaginably tiny. It made me think that the creature did not have one. Its neck, which was probably as scrawny as the arms of the deprived children in Ethiopia, stood approximately 30cm from its body. The huge head did not seem to have enough support from its neck. Thus, the creature’s head appeared to be wobbly as if it were about to fall down or come off.

As I hesitantly positioned myself in front of this heinous-looking freak, I saw its many eyeballs, which looked more like beads floating around in a disorderly fashion, in its round shimmering red eyes; they, at once, stopped as soon as its head faced me. These numerous “beads” began to shine lights through its eyes towards me. What I had in my mind was that it must have been aiming at me, as if it were about to shoot me with its probably much more advanced and sophisticated weapon than we have in this universe.

There were only three fingers on each of this being’s hand. Each of these fingers was much longer than a human’s. The arms extended further down, like those of a Chimpanzee’s. The two arms looked emaciated. They seemed to have neither elbows nor joints; yet, they could bend.
I could not really estimate how tall it was since it did not stand straight; it always bent over. Its body looked very gaunt, very much similar to rocker Marilyn Manson. As it was in my room, it kept bouncing as if it had a sense of buoyancy.

In terms of clothing, it seemed that it had not followed the latest fashion in New York: it did not wear anything. Its body looked as if it were smeared in lotion and seemed as if it had been polished. The combination of the yellow and white color of its body gave me the illusion that it was wearing clothing.

Like its body, its long and as-thin-as-its-arms legs had never stood straight. The two protruding knees reminded me of a person suffering from goitre. Both of its feet were much longer than humans’ feet. I did not pay as much attention as to how many toes it had.

After gawking at me for a few seconds, it attempted to demolish me by hopping towards me with its two hands in the air trying to grab me. Still in fright, I evaded its attack. I could not think of trying to counter its assault since I was in a panic.

Its movements were very fast. All of a sudden, it had its left hand seizing my neck. Somehow, its right hand’s fingers turned into scissors, exactly like the hand of Edward Scissor-hands. With a nimble movement, it cut my T-shirt revealing my chest. As it advanced with its right hand towards my countenance, I screamed as loud as I could. I, then, began to keep a distant from it after it let go of my neck. I threw my first punch right on its face. It did not look hurt. There was no change in its facial expression, except for its eyes: they turned green. The whirring sound began to get louder and louder, as an engine about to spurt and eventually blow.

My feeling of dread grew stronger as I heard more steps coming towards my room, realizing that more of the creatures were coming. Abruptly, the door was kicked open. I saw my mom and my maid at the door. Both of them gaped in shock looking at me in my bed. I saw the window was not smashed. I realized at once that I just had a nightmare.

My mother approached me and asked me, “What happened to you?”

I told her, “I just met an Alien!”

Indonesia, Like the Titanic, is Sinking

February 18, 1998

Diaz Hendropriyono
Northfield, VT

Titanic could be the most popular and most profitable movie ever made. Who has not seen the movie more than once? Many of us went back and forth to the movie theater to watch the same movie over, and over again. Indeed, I like the movie as much as others do. It is a great movie, with a great storyline, and played by great actors. Who does not adore DiCaprio and Winslet, anyway, especially after watching the movie?

However, what I think most interesting about the movie is not one of those I just mentioned. The movie, specifically, reminds all of us, Indonesians, what we are going through right now. It serves as a great analogy to the financial crisis that stifles the nation.

The movie is about a huge ship, once thought to be unsinkable, that sank in 1912. One reason for its accidental dive that killed 1,500 passengers may be the owner’s arrogance and overconfidence in relying fully on the massive ship. The people on the upper decks (mostly the rich)—when the Titanic was sinking—left with some boats, leaving hundreds of people on the lower deck (the poor) behind. The people on the lower decks of the Titanic may not know the statistics of this immense ship. Unfortunately, when the Titanic hit the iceberg, the ones who felt the leakage the first were those on the lower decks.

When the financial crisis came to Asia, Indonesian economists and government officials were confident that it would not come to Indonesia; nonetheless, it did. The poorer Indonesians, similar to people on the lower decks may not know the monetary system, and how it works; however, when the Indonesian “ship” began to leak, they were the ones who felt the changes first, such as price hikes and the likes. The fortunate, on the other hand, may have gained more money and left the country with those “boats,” leaving hundred thousands of lower-income people, who are struggling for life, behind.

While the movie is quite entertaining, that it makes us smile, and sad (especially at the end when DiCaprio shivered to death), it reminds me of a true sadness that we are all facing in reality as the Asian financial crisis continues to deepen. It reminds me of the gap between the haves and the have-nots in Indonesia. It reminds me that only the rich would be safe when a crisis occurs, and the poor would die because of the greediness of the elites.