Best-selling journalist Antony Loewenstein trav­els across Afghanistan, Pakistan, Haiti, Papua New Guinea, the United States, Britain, Greece, and Australia to witness the reality of disaster capitalism. He discovers how companies such as G4S, Serco, and Halliburton cash in on or­ganized misery in a hidden world of privatized detention centers, militarized private security, aid profiteering, and destructive mining.

Disaster has become big business. Talking to immigrants stuck in limbo in Britain or visiting immigration centers in America, Loewenstein maps the secret networks formed to help cor­porations bleed what profits they can from economic crisis. He debates with Western contractors in Afghanistan, meets the locals in post-earthquake Haiti, and in Greece finds a country at the mercy of vulture profiteers. In Papua New Guinea, he sees a local commu­nity forced to rebel against predatory resource companies and NGOs.

What emerges through Loewenstein’s re­porting is a dark history of multinational corpo­rations that, with the aid of media and political elites, have grown more powerful than national governments. In the twenty-first century, the vulnerable have become the world’s most valu­able commodity. Disaster Capitalism is published by Verso in 2015 and in paperback in January 2017.

Profits_of_doom_cover_350Vulture capitalism has seen the corporation become more powerful than the state, and yet its work is often done by stealth, supported by political and media elites. The result is privatised wars and outsourced detention centres, mining companies pillaging precious land in developing countries and struggling nations invaded by NGOs and the corporate dollar. Best-selling journalist Antony Loewenstein travels to Afghanistan, Pakistan, Haiti, Papua New Guinea and across Australia to witness the reality of this largely hidden world of privatised detention centres, outsourced aid, destructive resource wars and militarized private security. Who is involved and why? Can it be stopped? What are the alternatives in a globalised world? Profits of Doom, published in 2013 and released in an updated edition in 2014, challenges the fundamentals of our unsustainable way of life and the money-making imperatives driving it. It is released in an updated edition in 2014.
forgodssakecover Four Australian thinkers come together to ask and answer the big questions, such as: What is the nature of the universe? Doesn't religion cause most of the conflict in the world? And Where do we find hope?   We are introduced to different belief systems – Judaism, Christianity, Islam – and to the argument that atheism, like organised religion, has its own compelling logic. And we gain insight into the life events that led each author to their current position.   Jane Caro flirted briefly with spiritual belief, inspired by 19th century literary heroines such as Elizabeth Gaskell and the Bronte sisters. Antony Loewenstein is proudly culturally, yet unconventionally, Jewish. Simon Smart is firmly and resolutely a Christian, but one who has had some of his most profound spiritual moments while surfing. Rachel Woodlock grew up in the alternative embrace of Baha'i belief but became entranced by its older parent religion, Islam.   Provocative, informative and passionately argued, For God's Sakepublished in 2013, encourages us to accept religious differences, but to also challenge more vigorously the beliefs that create discord.  
After Zionism, published in 2012 and 2013 with co-editor Ahmed Moor, brings together some of the world s leading thinkers on the Middle East question to dissect the century-long conflict between Zionism and the Palestinians, and to explore possible forms of a one-state solution. Time has run out for the two-state solution because of the unending and permanent Jewish colonization of Palestinian land. Although deep mistrust exists on both sides of the conflict, growing numbers of Palestinians and Israelis, Jews and Arabs are working together to forge a different, unified future. Progressive and realist ideas are at last gaining a foothold in the discourse, while those influenced by the colonial era have been discredited or abandoned. Whatever the political solution may be, Palestinian and Israeli lives are intertwined, enmeshed, irrevocably. This daring and timely collection includes essays by Omar Barghouti, Jonathan Cook, Joseph Dana, Jeremiah Haber, Jeff Halper, Ghada Karmi, Antony Loewenstein, Saree Makdisi, John Mearsheimer, Ahmed Moor, Ilan Pappe, Sara Roy and Phil Weiss.
The 2008 financial crisis opened the door for a bold, progressive social movement. But despite widespread revulsion at economic inequity and political opportunism, after the crash very little has changed. Has the Left failed? What agenda should progressives pursue? And what alternatives do they dare to imagine? Left Turn, published by Melbourne University Press in 2012 and co-edited with Jeff Sparrow, is aimed at the many Australians disillusioned with the political process. It includes passionate and challenging contributions by a diverse range of writers, thinkers and politicians, from Larissa Berendht and Christos Tsiolkas to Guy Rundle and Lee Rhiannon. These essays offer perspectives largely excluded from the mainstream. They offer possibilities for resistance and for a renewed struggle for change.
The Blogging Revolution, released by Melbourne University Press in 2008, is a colourful and revelatory account of bloggers around the globe why live and write under repressive regimes - many of them risking their lives in doing so. Antony Loewenstein's travels take him to private parties in Iran and Egypt, internet cafes in Saudi Arabia and Damascus, to the homes of Cuban dissidents and into newspaper offices in Beijing, where he discovers the ways in which the internet is threatening the ruld of governments. Through first-hand investigations, he reveals the complicity of Western multinationals in assisting the restriction of information in these countries and how bloggers are leading the charge for change. The blogging revolution is a superb examination about the nature of repression in the twenty-first century and the power of brave individuals to overcome it. It was released in an updated edition in 2011, post the Arab revolutions, and an updated Indian print version in 2011.
The best-selling book on the Israel/Palestine conflict, My Israel Question - on Jewish identity, the Zionist lobby, reporting from Palestine and future Middle East directions - was released by Melbourne University Press in 2006. A new, updated edition was released in 2007 (and reprinted again in 2008). The book was short-listed for the 2007 NSW Premier's Literary Award. Another fully updated, third edition was published in 2009. It was released in all e-book formats in 2011. An updated and translated edition was published in Arabic in 2012.

Will the Pentagon stop the war?

Bookman notes the following:

(1) At least five senior generals have turned down the proffered post of “war czar.” Retired Marine General John Sheehan gave this reason: “They don’t know where the hell they’re going.” (He might have added: several other retired officers, including generals, have freely lambasted the conduct of the war for the last year and a half.)

(2) SecDef Gates promised during his confirmation hearings to maintain autonomous judgment of the war, and he seems to have done so. He has made several public statements that Bush loyalists would never make. Bookman notes that at the very time Bush was bitterly criticizing the Democrats for trying to get a commitment to reduce U.S. involvement, Gates was in Iraq saying that the debate in Congress “probably has a positive impact” because it conveys to the Iraqis that the American commitment is not open-ended. (Bookman might have added that Gates also confirmed, several weeks earlier, that the Pentagon does have a withdrawal plan if the “surge” does not yeild sufficient results.)

(3) Admiral William Fallon, head of Central Command, banned the use of the term “Long War” to describe American involvement in the Middle East, because “[t]he idea that we’re going to be involved in a ‘Long War’ at the current level of operations is not likely and unhelpful.”

(4) Iraq commanding general David Petraeus has several times said that he would provide an “honest and accurate” public assessment of progress or failure by September. In other words, the “surge” has that long to produce results. (If that’s not a deadline, what is it? If the “surge” fails, does Bush really think anybody would agree to give him another swing?)

(5) Lt. Col. Paul Yingling, already noted as an very up-and-coming officer, recently published an article  titled “A Failure in Generalship” in the Armed Forces Journal. The article begins with this extraordinary sentence: “Time and again, President Bush has tried to hide his incompetence between our men and women in uniform.” Yingling (who has served two tours in Iraq) aims most of his criticisms at the general officer corps, but the most serious charge he makes is that they have failed to be candid with political leadership about the poor decision-making behind the decision to go to war. He says the generals “blame their recent lack of candor on the intimidating management style of their civilian masters . . .” That a promising and ambitious career officer would publish such statements in a widely-read military journal speaks volumes. It says that not only is it relatively safe to disparage the administration’s decisions on Iraq, but that one might even expect to be admired for such honesty. In other words, it gives some idea what Yingling’s peers, the Army’s middle managers, are thinking.

In addition, Bookman might have noted, as Yingling does in his article, that the war has severely over committed and overtaxed American land forces, leaving the country less able to respond to crises that might arise elsewhere. It also inflicts future damage on the Army and Marine Corps in terms of retention, recruiting, and morale. Others, such as retired General Barry McCaffrey, have warned that continued draining of Army Reserve and National Guard assets may “break” those systems.

In short, the Army has no reason to like being stuck in a no-win situation not because its hands are tied, but because the basic problem in Iraq is political rather than military. The Army can’t even hold its own in this situation. It’s being consumed merely to prolong the no-win situation. Some of today’s senior officers remember the damage that the long inconclusive war in Vietnam did to the services. They do not want to see their branch have to go through that again. Perhaps more to the point: respected figures like Gates, Petreus and Yingling who are not much besmirched with the failure of Iraq, have no reason to jump on board a sinking ship.

So, Bookman concludes:

All these signs point to a storm gathering within the military, especially as the strains imposed on the Army by the surge become more apparent.

In other words, while Congress and the president wrangle about deadlines, a deadline of sorts may already have been set.

2 comments ↪