Friday, October 3, 2008

Protest at the NSA/The Financial Mess & Washington's Wars

Friends,

We need one more person to join us on Saturday for the demonstration at the National Security Agency. Please contact me if you can join us. Thanks.

As part of the October 4 – 12 Keep Space for Peace Week: International Week of Protest to Stop the Militarization of Space, the Pledge of Resistance has called for a demonstration at the National Security Agency from 5 to 6 PM on Sat., Oct. 4. Call Max at 410-366-1637 to carpool. Go to http://www.space4peace.org.

The Financial Mess & Washington's Wars

By Max Elbaum

War Times/Tiempo de Guerras

September 29, 2008

http://progressivesforobama.net

Last month the prime example of Washington's hypocrisy

was John McCain's remark about Russia's military action

in Georgia: "In the 21st century, nations don't invade other nations."

This month it's U.S. hypocrisy about economic policy

that makes front page news. Covering the opening of

this year's UN session, the New York Times reported:

"With a pillar of American power - its financial

leadership - so badly shaken, there was a certain

satisfaction among some of the attendees that the Bush

administration, which had long lectured other nations

about the benefits of unfettered markets, was now

rejecting its own medicine by proposing a major bailout

of financial firms... 'They are all remembering the

unforgiving advice they got from American financial

institutions to let your banks go to the wall... There

is resentment at what they see as evidence of double

standards'... The extraordinary nature of the

outpouring was that it came from some of America's

closest allies and trading partners."

Of course there are more links here than just hypocrisy:

Both Washington's Middle East invasions and its 25-year

deregulation crusade were largely ideology-driven,

fueled by the right-wing belief that American Free

Markets Are Ordained to Rule the World.

Wars and deregulation - and now the bailout - are

justified by lies, fear-mongering (the-sky-will-fall-if

we-don't-invade/ bailout!) and "Trust Us!" demagogy.

("This goes back to the Iraq War," Rep. Sam Farr said

about the bailout Sept. 23. "Nobody on the Hill, of

either party, has confidence in the White House.")

Oil is central to both crises: real petroleum in the

case of Washington's drive to control the Middle East;

and fictitious capital snake-oil in the form of exotic

"financial instruments" that Wall Street has used to

boost profits, swindle home-buyers, and now dump it all

into the public debt.

Structurally, both Washington's militarism and the

financial crisis are connected to deep underlying

features of U.S. capitalism and its role in the world.

Maintaining the global empire that is such a source of

corporate profit requires a huge military - and

entrenches a tendency to use that military to gain

control of other countries' resources. With the spread

of manufacturing and industrial might to rising powers

(China, India, Brazil, and more), U.S. capitalists

have become increasingly dependent on financial

speculation (one bubble after another) to maintain the flow of profit.

SEVERE BLOW TO U.S. HEGEMONY

Finally, there is the parallel between neoliberal

financial policies and the Iraq War that now dominates

the news: Both have crashed. Now the people who are

responsible for these messes are scrambling to find a

way to limit the damage to their fortunes and their

power (and cover their butts).

As with Washington's debacle in Iraq, the impact of

this now-exploded financial mess will not be limited to

the next few weeks. It will take months and even years

for its ripple effects to sink in. Much of what lies

ahead is unpredictable. But already two things seem

all but certain:

1. The bailout of the big financial institutions now

working its way through Congress is a swindle on U.S.

workers and the poor. We will end up holding most of

the bag for the financial elite's two-decade long

party. The extent of public outcry meant that the

current bailout version is not as horrific as the

administration's original proposal (and the fightback

is continueing as of this writing). But it comes

nowhere near meeting even the minimal standards of a

fair-to-ordinary-people measure. For one outline of a

progressive response go to:

http://www.sanders.senate.gov/news/record.cfm?id=303313

2. Even with such a giveaway to Wall Street, this

crisis is a huge blow to U.S. global power. Against

the background of failure in Iraq, this financial

meltdown marks another big step away from U.S.

international hegemony toward a multipolar world.

The essence of the new situation was laid out bluntly

by Germany's finance minister Peer Steinbruck in Berlin

Sept. 24. Steinbruck laid responsibility for the

crisis right in Washington's lap: "the conditions that

gave rise to the current turmoil in the markets were

allowed to develop because of a reckless pursuit of

short-term profit and huge bonuses in Anglo-Saxon

financial centers." He went on to say:

"The U.S. will lose its status as the superpower of

the world financial system. The world financial system

will become multipolar."

This is no isolated statement or reckless boast. An

official U.S. government intelligence forecast being

prepared for the next president envisions "a steady

decline in U.S. dominance in the coming decades"

according to Thomas Fingar, the U.S. intelligence

community's top analyst. The report also concludes that

the one key area of continued U.S. superiority -

military power - will "be the least significant" asset

in the increasingly competitive world of the future.

From the left, Immanuel Wallerstein comes to the same

conclusion via assessing the aftermath of the Ossetia-

Georgia-Russia conflict: "It would be a mistake to

underestimate the importance of the agreement on Sept.

8 between Nicolas Sarkozy of France and the President

of Russia. It marks the definitive end of Act I of the

new world geopolitical order. This accord was reached

between Europe and Russia; the U.S. played no

diplomatic role whatsoever. What is the bottom line?

Russia has gotten more or less what it wanted in

Georgia. The U.S. has no real cards to play. Ignored

in Georgia and under attack by its closest allies in

Iraq, Afghanistan, and Pakistan, the U.S. is somewhat

unhappily entering the realities of the post-Cold War

world, in which it has to play by new rules... [all

this] has sealed the reality of a true multilateral geopolitical arena."

IMPACT ON U.S. WARS

These blows to U.S. power weaken, but far from end,

U.S. capacity to invade, occupy and make war on other countries.

The latest crisis almost certainly takes the

possibility of a military strike against Iran off the

table, at least for the duration of the Bush

presidency. Washington is being blamed worldwide for

jeopardizing the whole global economy. Even

conservatives lack any confidence in the Bush White

House. So this President is in no position to start a

war that everyone knows would throw the oil-based world

economy into a whole new level of crisis.

Regarding Iraq, Washington's new troubles have hardened

the stance of Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki regarding

a timetable for U.S. withdrawal and Iraqi jurisdiction

over U.S. troops' actions. Anti-occupation sentiment

among Iraqis is stronger than ever. Iran's capacity to

influence events in Iraq has risen. Washington's is

steadily declining. So is the U.S. capacity to re-

escalate with additional troops. It will still require

great pressure (no matter who wins the election) to get

the U.S. totally out, much less hold Washington to

account for all the horrors it has inflicted on Iraqi

society. But Neocon bluster notwithstanding, the main

drama centers around how far the U.S. can be forced to

retreat, not whether any of its original strategic

goals (pro-Western government in Baghdad as part of a

"new Middle East) will be met.

Washington is also more out on a limb than ever in

Afghanistan. That war is being lost. Each civilian

death in a U.S. bombing is turning the population ever

more against foreign occupiers. The U.S. is

responding by expanding the war in a futile attempt at

victory, which in this case means military raids into Pakistan.

The result is weekly reports of armed clashes between

U.S. and Pakistani troops. There is nothing but

disaster at the end of this road. And with the U.S.

stymied in regard to Iran and Iraq, the whole

enterprise now makes little strategic sense even from

an imperial point of view. A few voices in the policy-

making elite are beginning to cautiously call for a

change of course here. After the melodrama now pre-

occupying Washington ends, such voices are likely to

grow even louder.

Regarding Israel-Palestine, no one even pretends any

more that Bush's goal of a peace agreement by the end

of 2008 has a ghost of a chance. New Israeli

settlement building plus the uptick in Jewish settler

terrorism (see "Radical Settlers Take on Israel," New

York Times Sept. 26) make any possible deal less

likely than ever. U.S. policy is still hostage to the

give-Israel-a-blank-check mantra of the Israel lobby

and Christian right (among others).

So even a U.S. administration forced to retrench and

make some serious compromises regarding Iraq, Iran,

Afghanistan and Pakistan will be extremely difficult to

budge on Israel-Palestine. Even here though, anti-

occupation voices such as Jimmy Carter's are being

raised on the edges of mainstream politics. And now

lame-duck Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert admits

himself that Israel must withdraw from the West Bank

and East Jerusalem if there is to be any hope of peace

(New York Times Sept. 29). Such statements provide

openings for the grassroots Palestine solidarity

movement to reach an expanded audience with its anti-

colonial, anti-racist, self-determination message.

DANGER FROM THE NEOCONS & RACIST, RIGHT WING POPULISM

The far right is not reconciled to the new balance of

world power. An alignment of the most militarist wing

of the ruling elite and true believers from the

Christian right insist that victory everywhere can be

won - if only the "soft-on-our-enemies-appeasers" get

out of the way and "America's full power" is unleashed.

The McCain-Palin is today's political expression of

this position. Conservative blogger Andrew Sullivan

lays out the reality (Sept. 22) more bluntly than most

left-of-center pundits are willing to do:

"It's very important for people to realize that the

McCain-Palin ticket is explicitly running on war

against Iran. It isn't a matter of if but when. For

McCain, it is a matter of fighting wars to win, instead

of accepting any limits on American power. For Palin,

it is a matter of theological destiny."

What's especially dangerous is that this attitude

toward war is tucked into a larger set of beliefs

characterizing a re-energized, racist, right-wing

populism. The threat is visible in the populist

right's response to the financial crisis: in their

view, the culprits are "eastern elites" who devote

themselves to "coddling Blacks and immigrants" while

ignoring the difficulties - and disrespecting the

values - of "hard-working white ordinary Americans."

(Tales about Jewish bankers running the country are in

the mix too, though these are kept in the background

lest they disrupt the cozy alliance between the

Christian right and many hard Zionist Jews.)

Sarah Palin is emerging as the know-nothing public

point person for this dangerous trend. And this

current won't go away even if they are beaten this year

in the electoral arena. On the contrary, if a Black

man occupies the White House it is likely to get all

the more strident in its appeals to jingoism and

racism, doing all it can to make military confrontation

with the entire Muslim and Arab world (and Russia too)

a litmus test of any political figure's patriotism and

"real American-ness." Especially in the hard economic

times ahead, no one should under-estimate the appeal of

such demagogy to significant layers of the white population.

A DIFFERENT DIRECTION

These dangers noted, at present the stronger tide seems

to be flowing in a different direction. The majority

of the country is sick of the Iraq war, inclined toward

some kind of more equitable response to the financial

crisis, and hungry for a change from eight years of

Bushism (and in many cases 25 years of conservative

dominance). A new generation is jumping into politics

with its majority having a different sensibility than

their elders on issues of global warming, war and

peace, race and sexuality.

For the popular majority, the electoral arena has

become a key site of battle against the far right. But

not the only one. In response to the financial crisis,

as in response to Washington's wars, opposition voices

- including broad coalition efforts - are taking to the

streets as well as the electoral campaign.

There were nationwide anti-bailout actions Sept. 25;

called by TrueMajority, USAction and UFPJ; also note

the statement by a broad array of trade union and

community leaders at: http://www.commondreams.org/newswire/2008/09/24-19

It remains to be seen if this progressive motion can

cohere into a grassroots movement capable of holding

every politician's feet to the fire and driving the

country in the direction of peace, equality and

justice. Future historians are likely to see the last

few years as a turning-point, when the U.S. empire

peaked and went into decline. But what will come after

is still up for grabs.

[You can sign-on to War Times/Tiempo de Guerras e-mail Announcement List (2-4 messages per month, including our 'Month in Review' column), at http://www.war-times.org. War Times/Tiempo de Guerras

is a fiscally sponsored project of the Center for Third World Organizing. Donations are tax-deductible; you can donate on-line at http://www.war-times.org or send a check to War Times/Tiempo de Guerras, c/o P.O. Box 99096, Emeryville, CA 94662.]

_____________________________________________

Portside aims to provide material of interest

to people on the left that will help them to

interpret the world and to change it.

Submit via email: moderator@portside.org

Submit via the Web: portside.org/submit

Frequently asked questions: portside.org/faq

Subscribe: portside.org/subscribe

Unsubscribe: portside.org/unsubscribe

Account assistance: portside.org/contact

Search the archives: portside.org/archive

No comments: