Iraq: The Quagmire The occupation of Iraq by the US/British coalition repre- sents another stage in the global offensive of the new impe- rialism. Despite its initial success, the coalition is increas- ingly under attack. Characterised by retired US General William Nash in June this year as "a quagmire', things have gone from bad to worse for the coalition. By early September foreign workers of most NGOs, such as the Red Cross, Save the Children and Oxfam, were withdrawn after the bombing of the UN headquarters in Baghdad. This was rapidly followed by truck and car bomb attacks on the Najaf mosque, killing nearly one hundred, and the police station in Baghdad. There is a complete lack of security for Iraqis who also have few of the basic utilities. And under constant attack, there have been more US and British personnel killed since the cessation of 'hostilities' than during the war. This is leading to divisions within the US ruling class, while in Britain the opposition among some sections of the estab- After massive demonstrations during the war, when tens of millions of people on the streets across the world showed their opposition to imperialism, the international anti-war movement continues to organise against the occupation. It is difficult to understand how the US superpower could have gone into Iraq 'failing to prepare for the conse- quences of victory' but that is just what seems to have happened. How can we explain such incredible arrogance Perhaps we need to stand back and look at the political and economic situation US imperialism finds itself in, as well as at its motives in invading Iraq. While 'No Blood for Oil' was and is a good slogan, as Alan Thornett argues in this issue, it is an inadequate tool for the analysis of the situation. Although control of oil was one of the reasons for going to war with Iraq - its oil fields hold the world's second largest reserves after Saudi Arabia - the need to guarantee the flow of that raw material is part of a bigger picture. And in order to oppose imperialism in this new century, we need to analyse and comprehend what that bigger picture is. Globalisation The US is economically and militarily dominant in the world. and at the heart of globalisation, which is in part an objective process of capitalist development but also a cover for the new imperialist offensive after the collapse of Stalinism. It is also at the heart of the contradictions of that process. For there remains the issue of inter-imperi- alist competition between the US, the EU and Japan, and increasingly, between imperialism and the newly emerging and rapidly developing China. The military attacks against Afghanistan and Iraq, overwhelmingly victorious because of military technology and simple fire power, are also part of a process that is intertwined with political and economic objectives. Not simply to put fear into the heart of any people trying to stand up to the might of US imperialism, but more specifically, along with US bases in other parts of central and South East Asia, to encircle China. For China is now the second largest economy after the US, outperform- ing Japan, and likely, on current projections, to outstrip the US during this century. Whether the US will allow this to happen is another matter. Bush's 'Neo-Con' Advisors In order to deal with this increasingly urgent situation, the neo-conservative advisors to Bush, given the green light by 9/11, are engaged in pushing forward economic globali- sation and political objectives through military might to ensure US dominance for the new century. Just how far this group is prepared to go to achieve this end, is clarified by the right wing think tank, the Project for a New American Century, which in 2000 proposed a US military budget of 3.8% of GNP. This vast sum was achieved during the war against Iraq. According to Newsweek, 24 March 2003, this military budget exceeded the combined military spending of all the 191 other coun- tries of the planet put together. In addition, a whole range of new weapons is being devel- oped, including battlefield weapons for ground forces and a tactical nuclear arsenal, suggested for but not used in Iraq. Some of these are designed for a new form of 'urban war'. In pursuing what they see as their strategic inter- ests, the US is preparing to deal with those peoples made destitute by decades of neo-liberal policies - in the conti- nent of Africa, in the Latin and South American nations - as well as those who, like China, may come to challenge US hegemony. Globalisation, with the US at its helm, reveals the inter- dependence of capital and militarism. But can the US maintain a growing economy amidst a world of dire poverty? The dominance of finance capital and the stric-
- ti ti + + tures of the neo-liberal economic programme of the IMF, imposing unpayable debt on countries barely able to feed and clothe their people, let alone educate and keep them healthy, is just one of the contradictions working its way through the system. Economic Weakness However, there is a structural weakness at the heart of the beast. Seeking to maintain profit at the cost of wages, the service sector of the US economy under Reagan was allowed to dominate the industrial, as in Britain under Thatcher. Using a flexible workforce, with poor conditions, low wages and part-time workers, often women and young people, as well as immigrant labour, the service sector has undermined trade unionism and the idea of a trained and skilled work force, leading to an explosion of inequality in the US and here. This is best exemplified by the yawning gap between the annual wages of US company bosses and their workers. In 1970 this gap was 1 to 40; now it stands at 1 to 531. Bush's determination to enact huge tax cuts for the rich is also a destabilising factor, not simply because this widens the gap between rich and poor, but also because welfare, state education and health care will be cut to shreds as a consequence. Further, in 2000, US productive activities as a whole (manufacturing, extraction, construction and agricul- ture) represented only 23.4% of GNP; with the addition of transport, wholesale and retail this figure climbs to only 51.6% of GNP. The rest is represented by 'personal services' (21.9%); finance/insurance/real estate (19.6%) and state spending (12.3%). Another destabilising factor is that, foreign investors hold more than 18% of the stock issue_001 autumn, 2003 Socialist Outlook exchange capitalisation of American / ong term credits and 42% of the stoc of Treasury bills. These investment could be transferred to another country at the flick of a switch. Despite the excuse of 9/11 and the 'War on Terror', the spectacle of the huge increases in military expenditure alongside tax cuts of 550 billion dollars for the richest in the US is unlikely to convince investors that the US economy is a good long term bet. However, we should not confuse ten- dencies of average and long duration with the completed process. There is structural weakness in the US economy, but US economic dominance and world- wide military hegemony remain reali- ties. Many are the armchair strategists like Fukuyama in The End of History and The Last Man and Hardt and Negri in Empire, whose bright ideas have been swept away by events. N The Anti-War Movement C The element left out of these equations is of course the world working class itself, and its potential allies amongst the lower middle classes and small farmers. The huge international anti- war movement, drew on the experiences (and person- nel) of the anti-globalisation campaigns, movements of the landless and those fighting for the cancellation of the debt. It refused to align itself with any wing of imperial- ism, despite the Chirac, Schroeder and Putin opposition to the drive to war at the UN. Although unable to stop the war itself, this movement has left several governments, includ- ing those of Britain and Australia, weaker now than before the conflict. More importantly, the anti movement gained the support of a significant number of trade unions, in Britain and else- where, both the 'usual suspects', and others to their right. Borrowing the slogan, 'Another World is Possible' from the movement for global justice, the anti-war movement, at a higher level and with broader forces than the Vietnam solidarity campaigns of the 1960s and early 1970s, has linked up with sections of the labour movement and move- ments of the oppressed, both in Britain and internationally, to become a force to be reckoned with. The process of globalisation and the new imperialist offen- sive is politicising a whole generation, including the very young. Educating them in the realities of capitalism and imperialist domination, the continuation of Bush's 'war on terror' along with neo-liberal economic policies and the attacks on civil liberties, will be increasingly opposed, both in the neo-colonial world and in the capitalist heartlands. This growing opposition to new imperialism's projects is of the utmost importance, for, as Roland Rance's article in this issue also concludes, we will need to be ready to fight a battle for socialism and against barbarism.