Hydro-power:

Charting the Global South

Toward a Critical Ocean Studies for the Anthropocene ………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………..

elizabeth deloughrey

Abstract Recently, scholars have called for a “critical ocean studies” for the twenty-first

century and have fathomed the oceanic depths in relationship to submarine immersions,

multispecies others, feminist and Indigenous epistemologies, wet ontologies, and the

acidification of an Anthropocene ocean. In this scholarly turn to the ocean, the concepts

of fluidity, flow, routes, and mobility have been emphasized over other, less poetic terms

such as blue water navies, mobile offshore bases, high-seas exclusion zones, sea lanes

of communication (SLOCs), andmaritime “choke points.” Yet this strategicmilitary gram-

mar is equally vital for a twenty-first-century critical ocean studies for the Anthropocene.

Perhaps because it does not lend itself to an easy poetics, the militarization of the seas is

overlooked and underrepresented in both scholarship and literature emerging from what

is increasingly called the blue or oceanic humanities. This essay turns to the relationship

between global climate change and the US military, particularly the Navy, and examines

Indigenous challenges to the militarism of the Pacific in the poetry of Craig Santos Perez.

Keywords blue humanities, Anthropocene, climate change, militarism, Pacific studies

W hile this special issue of ELN on “Hydro-criticism” was being written, the largest maritime exercise in history was taking place in the Pacific Ocean.

Twenty-five thousand military personnel descended on the ocean area between the Hawaiian archipelago and Southern California to participate in “war games,” including nearly fifty naval ships, two hundred aircraft, and five submarines. The twenty-sixth biennial Rim of the Pacific (RIMPAC) exercise comprised themilitary forces of twenty-five predominantly Pacific Rim nations, with the notable excep- tions of China and Russia.1 The theme of the five-week-long RIMPAC 2018 was “Capable, adaptive, partners”; its purpose, according to the US Navy, was to “dem- onstrate the inherent flexibility of maritime forces” in regard to everything from disaster relief to “sea control and complex warfighting.”2 Past war games had included exercises like sinking warships; this time the agenda listed amphibious operations, explosive ordnance disposal, mine clearance, and diving and salvage work, as well as the live firing of antiship and naval-strikemissiles.3WhileUS impe- rial interests in the region have categorized the largest ocean on our planet as an

english language notes

57:1, April 2019 doi 10.1215/00138282-7309655 © 2019 Regents of the University of Colorado

Downloaded from https://read.dukeupress.edu/english-language-notes/article-pdf/57/1/21/562638/21deloughrey.pdf by UNIV CA LOS ANGELES SERIALS user on 08 April 2019

“American Lake,” military incursion by the People’s Republic of China into the Spratly and Paracel Islands has increased the Pentagon’s concern that the Pacific is rapidly becoming a “Chinese Lake” and incentivizing military buildup in the region.4

Recently, scholars have called for a “critical ocean studies” for the twenty-first century and have fathomed the oceanic depths in relationship to submarine immer- sions, multispecies others, feminist and Indigenous epistemologies, wet ontolo- gies, and the acidification of an Anthropocene ocean.5 This is a welcome move after decades of scholarship that positioned the ocean as an anthropocentric and colonial “aqua nullius,” or a blank space across which a diasporic masculinity might be forged.6 In this new scholarship, an animated ocean has come into being as “wet matter” rather than inert backdrop.7 In this recent scholarly turn to the ocean, the concepts of fluidity,flow, routes, andmobility have been emphasized over other, less poetic terms such as blue water navies, mobile offshore bases, high-seas exclusion zones, sea lanes of communication (SLOCs), and maritime “choke points.” Yet this strategic military grammar is equally vital for a twenty-first-century critical ocean studies for the Anthropocene. Perhaps because it does not lend itself to an easy poetics, the militarization of the seas is overlooked and underrepresented in both scholarship and literature emerging from what is increasingly called the blue or oceanic humanities.

This is surprising, given that while the oceanmayoften be out of sight, theUS Navy has long devoted its budgets to the visual reproduction of its military power at

Figure 1. US Nuclear Test Swordfish, Operation Dominic, 1962.

Figure 2. The ships of the RIMPAC exercise, 2018.

english language notes 57:1 … April 201922

Downloaded from https://read.dukeupress.edu/english-language-notes/article-pdf/57/1/21/562638/21deloughrey.pdf by UNIV CA LOS ANGELES SERIALS user on 08 April 2019

sea, suggesting the mutual imbrication of technoscience and militarism. This includes the spectacular Cold War photography and films of nuclear weapons test- ing in the Marshall Islands (1946–62), which are widely available on YouTube. In figure 1 we see just one example of the visual display of a US naval vessel in direct relationship to the violent force of a nuclear weapon. Taken from Operation Dom- inic, where theUS launched thirty-one nuclear weapons in the Pacific in thewake of the Bay of Pigs invasion, it shows the twenty-ton antisubmarine nuclear explosion named Swordfish, fired by the ship in the foreground, the USS Agerholm. In Paul Virilio’s terms, this is the way in which “observation and destruction . . . develop at the same pace . . . so that every surface immediately became war’s recording surface, its film.”8 As a mode of warfare, the US military’s visual reproduction of its destructive power over sea and airspace—the global commons—continues today in its social media blitz about RIMPAC exercises, including the show of force in fig- ure 2, ample online videos, and its Twitter feed (see fig. 2 and #ShipsofRIMPAC).

Althoughmarine biologistsmay point out that “every breath we take is linked to the sea” and that planet Earth is in fact “amarine habitat,”9 another kind of plan- etary metabolism is equally constitutive—American militarization of the oceans is foundational to maintaining the global energy supply that undergirds what some call the Capitalocene.10 Over 60 percent of the world’s oil supply is shipped by sea, and over 20 percent of the Pentagon’s budget goes to securing it.11 Securing theflow of oil has been a vital US naval strategy—not to say “mission”—since the 1970s.12 Some havewarned that there is a “dangerous feedback loop betweenwar and global warming” because the Pentagon, in protecting its energy interests through exten- sive maritime and overseas base networks, estimated at over seven thousand, is the world’s largest consumer of energy and the biggest institutional contributor to global carbon emissions.13 This seems shocking because carbon emissions are reg- ularly tied to citizen consumption rather than to military expansion.

The USNavy and its associated air force emit some of the dirtiest bunker and jet fuels to secure the passage of maritime oil transportation; this energy in turn is consumed and emitted by themilitary in rates disproportionate to any nation.14Not only is this fuel cycle common knowledge in military circles, but the Pentagon was exempted from all the major international climate accords and from domestic car- bon emission legislation.15 It should concern Anthropocene scholars and those in the emergent field of the energy humanities that “militarism is themost oil exhaus- tive activity on the planet.”16

Transoceanic militarism—via sail, coal, steam, or nuclear-powered ships and submarines—has long been tied to global energy sources, masculinity, and state power. Hosted by the US Navy’s Pacific Fleet since 1971, RIMPAC’s oceanic war games have been a way tomake visible what the nineteenth-century naval historian Alfred Thayer Mahan famously termed “the influence of sea power upon history.” While CaptainMahan recognized the sea as a commons, and even as “the common birthright of all people,”he spent his influential career advocating “the development of sea power,” for the United States, which was critical to its nineteenth-century expansion to an “insular empire” from Puerto Rico to the Philippines.17 Mahan’s political influence helped convince US leadership of the importance of sea and

DeLoughrey … Critical Ocean Studies for the Anthropocene 23

Downloaded from https://read.dukeupress.edu/english-language-notes/article-pdf/57/1/21/562638/21deloughrey.pdf by UNIV CA LOS ANGELES SERIALS user on 08 April 2019

wind currents in positioningHawai‘i as a vital naval base and coal-refueling station as well as a bulwark against China.18 The 1898 annexations reflected the rise of American naval imperialism, where newly acquired colonies like Guam (Guåhan) were administered by the US Navy as if the island were a ship. A few years later islands and atolls like American Samoawere claimed as essential to fuel theUSmil- itary and ruled by theNavy as coaling stations.19 From the (illegal) US annexation of Micronesia in 1947, creating the Trust Territory of the Pacific Islands, to the current US practice of claiming permanentmilitary exclusion zones on the high seas to test weapons—nowhere has this sea power been more apparent than in the world’s larg- est ocean.20

The Pacific Ocean as defined by geographers covers one-third of the world’s surface area (63 million square miles), but to the US military it extends all the way to the western coast of India, a nation that now participates in RIMPAC and repre- sents the largest naval force in South Asia. Significantly, in the spring of 2018 the US military renamed its largest base, the Hawaiian-located Pacific Command, the “US Indo-Pacific Command” (USINDOPACOM) in recognition of its new mari- time regime, which has expanded to 100 million square miles, or a stunning “fifty-two percent of the Earth’s surface.”21 This unprecedented naval territorial- ism was almost entirely overlooked in the press and has not yet factored into any scholarly discussions of the Anthropocene or oceanic humanities.

In fact, this recent change in transoceanic hydro-politics has produced all kinds of material for cultural analysis, suggesting an interesting relationship between militarism and literary production (and consumption). The commander of theUS Indo-Pacific Command, Admiral Phil Davidson, has recently posted a fas- cinating “professional development reading and movie list” on their website.22 The book list includes titles one would expect from a military command, such as those about war histories and strategies, with a particular focus on cyberwar. Condoleezza Rice’s (nonironically) titled bookDemocracy is on the reading list, which may not be surprising, but the appearance of the bookAthena Rising: How andWhyMen Should MentorWomen, certainly is. Female protagonists are central to a number of the nov- els, such as a women’s coming-of-age story by the Japanese author Mitsuyo Kakuta andMichael Ondaatje’sAnil’s Ghost, which excavates the legacies of state-sponsored violence in Sri Lanka and Argentina. The movie list also includes some titles of interest to humanities scholars, particularly to postcolonialists: Beats of No Nation, a film about child soldiers in Africa based on Uzodinma Iweala’s novel, and Lion, based on Saroo Brierly’s memoir of Indo-Pacific adoption. There is certainly rich material to consider here in themaking of transoceanic naval literacy, and the inter- section of hydro-criticism with military hydro-politics.

Like the expansion into the Pacific Islands in the nineteenth century, the US Navy’s inclusion of the Indian Ocean in its definition of the Pacific derives from strategies of energy security. There are five vital “sea lines of communication” (SLOCs) that connect both oceans through a lifeline of oil shipments from theMid- dle East: the Straits of Malacca, Hormuz, and Bab el-Mandeb, and the Suez and Panama Canals. According to the US Navy website, “RIMPAC is a unique training opportunity that helps participants foster and sustain the cooperative relationships

english language notes 57:1 … April 201924

Downloaded from https://read.dukeupress.edu/english-language-notes/article-pdf/57/1/21/562638/21deloughrey.pdf by UNIV CA LOS ANGELES SERIALS user on 08 April 2019

that are critical to ensuring the safety of sea lanes and security on the world’s oceans.”23 Because the majority of oil exports are over water, US energy policy has become increasingly militarized and secured by the Navy, the largest oceanic force on the planet. Scholars such as Michael Klare have characterized the US military since the 2003 Iraq war “as a global oil protection service, guarding pipelines, refin- eries, and loading facilities in the Middle East and elsewhere.”24 US Navy spokes- people readily admit that RIMPAC is an exercise in “power projection,” a political and military strategy to use the instruments of state power quickly and effectively in widely dispersed locations far from the territorial state. Others might use the term transoceanic empire, with the recognition thatmuch of this (often nuclear) power is also submarine. Fluidity, mobility, adaptability, and flux—all terms associated with neoliberal globalization regimes aswell as the oceanic or blue humanities—are also key words and strategies of twenty-first-century maritime militarism.

Postcolonial scholars recognize that Cold War politics reshaped academic funding channels, training and hiring, the formulation of departments (such as area studies), and even their vocabularies. Thus when the US annexed territories in Micronesia and put them in the hands of the Navy, it made academic funding available to anthropologists, includingMargaret Mead, to study Pacific Islander cul- tures.25 The rise of a twenty-first-century oceanic humanitieswouldbenefit from an interrogation of how it may participate in, mitigate, or challenge larger strategic interests, examining how our current geopolitics shape academic discourse, not to say funding. SimonWinchester, writing in the early 1990s at the inception of glob- alization studies, described what he called “Pacific Rising,” noting that this oce- anic turn—following the logic of transnational capital—was “quite simply” about “power.” And that power was represented, celebrated, and contested in the rise of globalization studies, Asia-Pacific studies, and Indigenous Pacific studies, fields largely informed by new models, epistemologies, and ontologies of the sea.26

While globalization studies of the late twentieth century emerged in relation- ship to the rise of transoceanic capital and its flows of “liquidmodernity,” to borrow from Zygmunt Bauman, we might raise the question as to how twenty-first-century articulations of an oceanic humanities and a turn to “hydro-criticism” might be informed by larger geopolitical and geontological (or sea-ontological) shifts.27 Since the Obama era the United States has made a “Pacific pivot” that includes transoceanic militarism as well as a trade treaty that, according to Robert Reich, entails “forty percent of the world economy.”28 The Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP)—critiqued as “NAFTA on steroids”— includes an attempt to solidify transna- tional energy and seabedmining interests over state environmental protections.29Of course, its key security agents are naval forces, particularly evident in the highly con- tested military “mega buildup” on Guåhan, one of the Navy’s many “lily pads” and refueling stations, which some American pilots refer to as “the world’s largest gas station.”30 In a remarkable erasure of Indigenous presence, many militarized islands and atolls of US-occupied Micronesia have been referred to as “unsinkable aircraft carriers” since theWorldWar II era.31 This is howmilitarized “ocean-space” is transformed into a “force-field,” a term Philip E. Steinberg uses to describe the

DeLoughrey … Critical Ocean Studies for the Anthropocene 25

Downloaded from https://read.dukeupress.edu/english-language-notes/article-pdf/57/1/21/562638/21deloughrey.pdf by UNIV CA LOS ANGELES SERIALS user on 08 April 2019

merging of the “ideological value of sea power” with “the key role of a strong ‘blue- water’ fleet in troop mobility, naval warfare” in the quest toward the “domination of distant lands.”32

Wemight rightly turn the focus of hydro-criticism toward hydro-power, defined as energy, force, militarism, and empire. This raises the question as to the purpose of literary criticism in an era of expanding transoceanic militarism. Clearly it is no longer fashionable to publish literary anthologies celebrating the masculine heroic achievements of the Navy in verse, as it was for the British and Americans in the nineteenth and early twentieth centuries. But it should interest us that the largest military command on the planet is offering reading lists. As we turn to new sites of planetary expansion, flow, energy, and fluidity, we might ask, Where is the body of literature and scholarship responding to these global shifts in hydro-power?Where is the literary, artistic, and cultural critique of an aquatic territorialism of 52 percent of the Earth’s surface?

Amitav Ghosh raises similar questions in tracing the relationship between energy, petrocapitalism, narrative, and the Anthropocene. In The Great Derange- ment he builds on his earlier observation that, given the ways in which the world economy is undergirded by oil, it is peculiar that there have been so few “petrofic- tion” novels. Twenty-five years later he asks why, in an era of disastrous climate change, we see so few literary responses that take on its global scope.33 While he focuses exclusively (and problematically) onwhat he calls “literary fiction,” I believe Ghosh’s observations are relevant to calling attention to the lacuna in oceanic stud- ies scholarship and literary production about USmilitarism more broadly.34Ghosh concludes that the European novel—which I would addwas developed at the advent of an industrialism fueled by the labor and resources of the colonies—conceals “the exceptional” to promote “regularity” and thus naturalize bourgeois life.35 This devel- opment narrowed the scale of what he terms “serious fiction” to an anthropocentric focus as well as a time scale that cannot account for the longue durée.36 Thus, when facedwith catastrophic climate change or nonhuman agency, the European-derived novel has difficulty engaging the “uncanny intimacy of our relationship with the nonhuman.” He raises a provocatively maritime question: “Are the currents of global warming toowild to be navigated in the accustomedbarques of narration?”37

Of course, no other region on the planet has been so deeply engaged with oceanic and maritime metaphors as Indigenous Pacific studies, which has drawn extensively on the image of the voyaging canoe as a vessel of the people and meta- phor for navigating the challenges of globalization and ongoing colonialism.38 Ghosh may had come to different conclusions if he had extended his analysis to Indigenous, feminist, and/or postcolonial fiction, which often challenge the human/nonhuman binary of western patriarchal thought and depict violence against non-European, nonnormative others as precisely that which prevents access to the “regularity” of bourgeois life. (In fact, his own novels might be considered as part of this postcolonial critique.) However, his analysis is particularly valuable for thinking about a history of silence and erasure when it comes to telling stories about the energies that undergird global capitalism—and, I would add, global militarism—in “the preserves of serious fiction.”39

english language notes 57:1 … April 201926

Downloaded from https://read.dukeupress.edu/english-language-notes/article-pdf/57/1/21/562638/21deloughrey.pdf by UNIV CA LOS ANGELES SERIALS user on 08 April 2019

In the space I have remaining I want to turn to the Chamorro author Craig Santos Perez, who has written extensively about the voyaging-canoe metaphor in the wake of transoceanic militarism, and might be the only poet on the planet to turn to the RIMPAC exercises and inscribe their impact on both human and non- human ocean ecologies. While his medium is experimental poetry rather than the realist novel, his challenges to western binary thinking, the uniformity of tradi- tional genre, and the separation of militarism from the transoceanic imaginary havemuch to say about decolonizingboth genre and the broader Pacific, orOceania.

Author of the multibook project from unincorporated territory (a reference to the political status of Guåhan), Perez is the winner of a PEN award and “imagines the blank page as an excerpted ocean, filled with vast currents, islands of voices, and profound depths.”40 Like other Indigenous poets from Oceania, a term Epeli Hau‘ofa famously suggested as more representative of the flows of the region than the “Pacific,” Perez has positioned his poetry as an oceanic vessel.41 His work has plumbed the depths of an oceanic imaginary, particularly visible in his epic 2016 World Oceans Day “eco-poem-film” Praise Song for Oceania, in which he engages the ocean as origin, breath, body, mother, and absorber of plastic waste. In framing not just the permeability between humans and the ocean but their mutual respon- sibility and accountability, the speaker begs forgiveness for

our territorial hands

& acidic breath / please

forgive our nuclear arms &

naval bodies42

Drawing inspiration from a range of poets and scholars who’ve inscribed a trans- oceanic imaginary—including Hau‘ofa—Perez concludes in praise of “our most powerful metaphor . . . / our trans-oceanic/past, present & future/flowing through our blood.”43 This embodied ocean, represented in the video through the sounds of breath and a heartbeat, foregrounds mergers between the human and a planetary nonhuman other that are naturalized (as breath, mother) and are also violent (“our nuclear arms”).

Since the beginning of his from unincorporated territory series, ([hacha] in 2008), Perez has rendered visible a military that is too often “hidden in plain sight.”44 He has critiqued the history and depiction of Guåhan as a strategic naval base, as “USSGuam,” and has framed his poems as “provid(ing) a strategic position for ‘Guam’ to emerge” from colonial and military hegemony. As such, he draws extensively on Indigenous voyaging traditions to poetically contest and mitigate the US Navy, reshaping what Ghosh has called the “accustomed barques of narra- tion.” The cover of from unincorporated territory [saina] (2010) juxtaposes a drawing of a Chamorro voyaging canoe, or sakman, above a photograph of the aircraft car- rier USS Abraham Lincoln leading smaller naval ships in their patrol of the Indian Ocean in 2008 (fig. 3).45 Although the world ocean has been partitioned into dis- crete national and international territories via the United Nations Law of the Sea (UNCLoS), the US Navy considers each of its aircraft carriers “four and a half acres of sovereign and mobile American territory.”46 Of course, the USS Lincoln is

DeLoughrey … Critical Ocean Studies for the Anthropocene 27

Downloaded from https://read.dukeupress.edu/english-language-notes/article-pdf/57/1/21/562638/21deloughrey.pdf by UNIV CA LOS ANGELES SERIALS user on 08 April 2019

Figure 3. The cover of from unincorporated territory [saina], 2010. Courtesy of the author.

english language notes 57:1 … April 201928

Downloaded from https://read.dukeupress.edu/english-language-notes/article-pdf/57/1/21/562638/21deloughrey.pdf by UNIV CA LOS ANGELES SERIALS user on 08 April 2019

the ship from which George W. Bush infamously declared, “Mission Accom- plished,” in May 2003 after the ship launched “16,500 sorties from its deck, and fired 1.6 million pounds of ordnance from its guns” the previous month during Operation Iraqi Freedom.47 For complex reasons, Pacific Islanders continue to serve in disproportionate numbers in US military campaigns, lending nuance to the juxtaposition of these two maritime vessels of sovereignty in which Chamorro claims are tied to Indigenous sovereignty as well as US patriotism.48

Perez’s four books of poetry engage US naval colonialism in Oceania, partic- ularly in Guåhan, where the Navy occupies one-third of an island that is only thirty miles long.49 In hismost recent book, fromunincorporated territory [lukao] (2017), he incorporates a number of "poemaps" that visualize military buildup and contami- nation in the region (fig. 4), as well as turning directly to the RIMPAC exercises of

Figure 4. Poemap from from unincorporated territory [lukao], 2017. Courtesy of the author.

DeLoughrey … Critical Ocean Studies for the Anthropocene 29

Downloaded from https://read.dukeupress.edu/english-language-notes/article-pdf/57/1/21/562638/21deloughrey.pdf by UNIV CA LOS ANGELES SERIALS user on 08 April 2019

2014. Thus Perez shifts the focus from the US Navy to the larger RIMPAC alliance of twenty-two nations, calling attention to the ways in which transnational milita- rism across the Indian and Pacific Oceans reflects a new era of hydro-politics. For example, the US military’s “Cooperative Strategy for 21st Century Seapower” emphasizes a closer relationship between agencies, such as between the Navy, Coast Guard, and Marine Corps, as well as international alliances that are also evi- dent in the US Department of Defense’s “2014 Climate Change Adaptation Road- map”; both call for a new era of HADRorHumanitarian Assistance/Disaster Relief operations because global warming is considered a threat multiplier.50 It is well known that the commander of the largest US naval base (USPACOM), Admiral Locklear, in 2013 declared climate change the biggest security threat to the nation.51 Since thenUSnaval officers have argued for a “war plan orange for climate change,” which involvesmoreHADRoperations in other countries because “these overtures may increase US access and these nations’ receptiveness to hosting temporary bas- ing or logistics hubs in support of future military operations.”52Hence they call for larger RIMPAC activities, a 25 percent increase in ships sent to theMiddle East, and by 2020 a 60 percent increase in ships and aircraft deployed to the new ocean known to the Pentagon as the “Indo-Asia-Pacific.”53 These are the military hydro- politics of the Anthropocene.

Perez’s RIMPAC poem weaves together the fluid intimacy between mother and newborn daughter alongside the larger-scale militarism of Oceania. The poem is titled “(first ocean),” and its epigraph reads “during the rim of the pacific mil- itary exercises, 2014.” It intersperses the Navy’s ecological damage to all oceanic creatures—human and otherwise—with his newborn daughter’s first immersion in the ocean. The use of parentheses in the poem’s title invokes a placental or bodily enclosure of the infant, perhaps reminding the reader—like the conclusion of “Praise Song for Oceania”—that “our briny blood” connects us to the sea and our first placental ocean.54

The poem employs a second-person address (you) to his wife, highlighting familial intimacy. It traces out the baby’s first introductions to water by her mother in Hawai‘i, moving from being rinsed in the sink to taking a bath to becoming immersed in the sea. Each watery rinsing, bathing, and cleaning is juxtaposed to the repercussions of naval militarism: “pilot whales, deafened/by sonar” emerge “bloated and stranded/ashore.” The speaker wonders “what will the aircrafts, ships, soldiers,/ and weapons of 22 nations take from [us].” In response we learn of the loss of the child’s grandfather, whose asheswere “scattered in the pacific decades ago,” as well as the death of “schools of recently spawned fish” that lie in the tide- lands, “lifeless.”55 In this way the child meets both the body of her grandfather and the necropolitics of US militarism. These are multispecies mergers, but they are primarily about the military violence that undergirds Anthropocene extinc- tions. It has been widely reported that whale strandings and other animal deaths increase during and after RIMPACexercises.56Thepoemconcludeswith a haunting question: “is Oceania memorial/or target, economic zone or monument/territory or mākua.”57Mākua, the Hawaiian word for “parent,” also refers to the highly con- tested military reservation at Mākua Valley on O‘ahu, a place in Kanaka Maoli sto-

Our website has a team of professional writers who can help you write any of your homework. They will write your papers from scratch. We also have a team of editors just to make sure all papers are of HIGH QUALITY & PLAGIARISM FREE. To make an Order you only need to click Ask A Question and we will direct you to our Order Page at WriteDemy. Then fill Our Order Form with all your assignment instructions. Select your deadline and pay for your paper. You will get it few hours before your set deadline.

Fill in all the assignment paper details that are required in the order form with the standard information being the page count, deadline, academic level and type of paper. It is advisable to have this information at hand so that you can quickly fill in the necessary information needed in the form for the essay writer to be immediately assigned to your writing project. Make payment for the custom essay order to enable us to assign a suitable writer to your order. Payments are made through Paypal on a secured billing page. Finally, sit back and relax.

Do you need an answer to this or any other questions?

Order Plagiarism Free Answer Here

About Wridemy

We are a professional paper writing website. If you have searched a question and bumped into our website just know you are in the right place to get help in your coursework. We offer HIGH QUALITY & PLAGIARISM FREE Papers.

How It Works

To make an Order you only need to click on “Order Now” and we will direct you to our Order Page. Fill Our Order Form with all your assignment instructions. Select your deadline and pay for your paper. You will get it few hours before your set deadline.

Are there Discounts?

All new clients are eligible for 20% off in their first Order. Our payment method is safe and secure.

Hire a tutor today CLICK HERE to make your first order

Related Tags

Academic APA Writing College Course Discussion Management English Finance General Graduate History Information Justify Literature MLA