|
|
|
|
|
|
|
As the world stews in the latest U.$.-created crisis over Iran with the threat of $100 a barrel oil prices created by words or maybe a few Iranian missiles hitting a few tankers, there are other signs that 2006 may be the turning point for u.$. empire--coming even sooner than this writer would have thought.
Perhaps it is no accident that Iran taps an irrational spot for Amerikans. In the Carter administration, Iranian rebels chose the next U.$. president with the "October Surprise," that guaranteed the united $tates would fail in bringing home the hostages till after Reagan won the election. Now it seems that with Iran fully mobilized and going tit-for-tat with the United $tates, all other actors seem "out of control" to u.$. imperialists. Already in a tough spot, Bush put himself in a tougher one, while hoping for a crisis that would bring him more patriotic glories and support for more futile wars.
The world economy is preparing a massive dump of the u.$. dollar. Billionaire speculator Warren Buffett recently announced it yet again. Part of that is on account of oil, but more importantly because industry and oil are both going toward China.
The Russian media is now calling Cheney's May 4th speech in Lithuania, the first salvo of a "new Cold War." There are now 3250 articles on Google about "new Cold War"; although there are 35,200 on "gas prices."
Behind the contention with Russian imperialism are Cheney's efforts to keep eastern Europe in the U.$. sphere of influence, despite Russian imperialism's growing role in the whole European energy sector. Cheney has said all the right things about "freedom" according to the New York Times, but even the New York Times said that "freedom" does not apply much in the united $tates anymore. It's difficult to be throwing stones at Putin by any Christian standard. Responding immediately, Bush admitted to wanting to close Gitmo, but laid blame on the Supreme Court.(1)
Connected to that again is gas and oil as Russia and China seek a different stance on oil-supplier Iran than the united $tates. And what can we make of Moscow's ponying up with $10 million for Abbas at the PLO to make up for lost u.$. and EU aid.
Iran has bought advanced weaponry from Russia, but also Pakistan has announced that it will pursue its own interests via Iran and that means it will say nothing about Iran's nuclear enrichment program while it takes gas from Iran. Much more important are signs that Russia can flex its muscle from Eastern Europe to England when it comes to supplying natural gas. If Russia does not flex muscle, there is always Iran, Venezuela etc.
Meanwhile, u.$. diplomats are scurrying to tell China not to call itself a model for Latin America. The u.$. imperialists like dominating Latin America through elections bought and paid for by the united $tates.(2)
These are all geopolitical pressures made more acute by the u.$. presence in Iraq and Afghanistan. An unjust U.$. invasion of Iran opposed on a proper internationalist basis would become a near perfect basis for and scenario of the spread of revolution internationally.
Against this, one could imagine that the imperialists are going to attempt to correct course soon. MIM has predicted that some imperialist outlets will calm down considerably if the Democrats take back the House or House and Senate in November.
In the executive branch, the CIA looks out of the picture, practically abolished by bourgeois careerist standards. (Bush, go ahead, abolish it.) The media says the CIA is less than 10% of the budget for intelligence and all the functional "line authority" boxes point to the Defense Department or Negroponte, the new tsar of intelligence. (Is that because the media does not count the ownership of revenue from drug and arms running businesses of the CIA?) On the other hand, we are witnessing a furious intra-CIA faction fight involving retribution against those who have stepped on CIA toes. Bush lackey Director Goss just left after papers rumored he had no control of career officers.
So neatly encapsulating the furor recently was a CIA analyst heckling Rumsfeld. The Bush administration is not known for making speeches anywhere that demonstrators could appear, so the heckling looks canned. The CIA will claim some posture of independence from the Bush administration for its own interests going beyond the Bush administration. Career officials assert an identity that helps the CIA increase its clout or credibility in the world and thus within u.$. imperialism. "Oh, we're not like those other intelligence officers (in the Department of Defense, NSA etc.)" is a tactic that allows a hydra-headed demon to cull more sources and exchange with more political factions. The idea of a united intelligence agency is probably only a bourgeois dream, given pluralism's habit in territorialist capitalism.
The other background to this staged event was the publishing in European imperialist news sources of the unvarnished truth that the CIA conducted thousands of snatch, grab and fly operations in Europe since 2001 (and probably before that MIM would add). The imperialist news agencies said openly that this fact now known for certainty has already damaged inter-intelligence agency cooperation.(3)
Staging of the heckling incident would have one purpose--to salvage the reputation of career officers and agencies at the expense of officials that everyone knows are gone or about to leave in 2008 at the latest. Rumsfeld's replies to McGovern stressed how Colin Powell spent weeks at CIA. The point is that Powell is gone from the administration. Soon Rumsfeld will be too. Then CIA can point to this incident, the departure of Goss and the budget situation to say that it was never on board with Bush and all those actions so damaging to intelligence ties and u.$. credibility globally.
Even a conservative web page said that there was a choice to "allow" the heckling by a so-called former CIA analyst.(4) Another conservative criticism nonetheless quoted one of the hecklers, "You lied about everything the CIA told you was lies!."(5) This sounds like some pretty serious professional payback by people trying to protect the reputation of the CIA beyond the Bush administration.
Sorry, conservatives, you know too that Bush officials do not go somewhere they expect to be heckled, unless its an international meeting they cannot control. If CBS and NBC are covering the heckler, that's a pretty good indication he or his backers are in line for the next job of CIA Director after Bush is gone. Revolutionaries believing that CBS and NBC are suddenly proletarian news outlets deserve no credibility.
MIM has no sympathy for the CIA patriots. They do not oppose the war in principle. They just want to do a better job in making wars and coups. Whether the tsar contributed more to the Russian Revolution or Lenin did is an open question. MIM is quite sure that Bush has done more to mobilize the international proletariat against him than any organization inside u.$. borders has. The left-wing of parasitism should keep it that way instead of helping out liberals trying to make imperialism smarter than it is.
In any case, u.$. imperialism will no doubt try "to correct course." November elections may placate public opinion; CIA may be given its gonads back. Nonetheless, the currency crunch, EU conflicts, the Palestine crisis and oil/gas conflicts may foreshadow the end of u.$. imperialism's superpower days sooner than we would have thought.
Notes:
1. http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/4983314.stm
2. The highly exaggerated account of the anti-China lobby can be seen
here: http://www.ocala.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20060422/OPINION/204220351/1030/OPINION01
3. http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/4974386.stm
4. http://www.theconservativevoice.com/article/14375.html
5. http://newsbusters.org/node/5229