A Global Crime Spree — What’s NATO Ever Done?
A Global Crime Spree
What’s NATO Ever Done?
by JOHN LaFORGE
(Source: Counterpunch)
Wondering why anyone would confront NATO’s summit in Chicago this month? A look at some of its more well-known crimes might spark some indignation.
Desecration of corpses, indiscriminate attacks, bombing of allied troops, torture of prisoners and unaccountable drone war are a few of NATO’s outrages in Afghanistan, Pakistan, Libya, Yemen and elsewhere. On March 20, 2012 Pakistani lawmakers demanded an end to all NATO/CIA drone strikes against their territory. As reported in The New York Times, Pakistan’s foreign secretary Jalil Jilani said April 26, 2012, “We consider drones illegal, counter-productive and accordingly, unacceptable.” On May 31 last year, Afghan President Hamid Karzai gave what he called his “last” warning against NATO’s bombing of Afghani homes, saying “If they continue their attacks on our houses … history shows what Afghans do with trespassers and with occupiers.”
While bombing Libya last March, NATO refused to aid a group of 72 migrants adrift in the Mediterranean. Only nine people on board survived. The refusal was condemned as criminal by the Council of Europe, a human rights watchdog.
NATO jets bombed and rocketed a Pakistani military base for two hours Nov. 26, 2011—the Salala Incident— killing 26 Pakistani soldiers and wounding dozens more. NATO refuses to apologize, so the Pakistani regime has kept military supply routes into Afghanistan closed since November.
The British medical journal Lancet reported that the US-led unprovoked 2003 bombing, invasion and military take-over of Iraq—which NATO officially joined in 2004 in a ‘training’ capacity—had resulted in over 665,000 civilian deaths by 2006, and 200,000 in the UN-authorized, 1991 Desert Storm massacre led primarily by the US with several NATO allies.
On April 12, 1999, NATO attacked the railway bridge over the Grdelica Gorge and Juzna Morava River with two laser-guided bombs. At the time, a five-car civilian passenger train was crossing the bridge and was hit by both bombs. Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch accused NATO of violating binding laws that require distinction, discrimination and proportionality.
NATO rocketed the central studio of Radio Televisija Srbije (TRS) in Belgrade, the state-owned broadcasting corporation, on April 23, 1999 during the Kosovo war. Sixteen civilian employees of RTS were killed and 16 wounded when NATO destroyed the building. Amnesty Int’l reported that the building could not be considered military, that NATO had violated the prohibition on attacking civilian objects and had therefore committed a war crime.
Headlines chronicle NATO’s crime spree
“U.S. troops posed with body parts of Afghan bombers.” Los Angeles Times, April 18, 2012
“Drones At Issue…: Raids Disrupt Militants, but Civilian Deaths Stir Outrage.” New York Times, March 18, 2012
“G.I. Kills 16 Afghans, Including 9 Children In Attacks on Homes.” New York Times, March 12, 2012
“NATO Admits Airstrike Killed 8 Young Afghans, but Contends They Were Armed.” New York Times, Feb. 16, 2012
“Informer Misled NATO in Airstrike That Killed 8 Civilians, Afghans Say.” (Seven shepherd boys under 14.) New York Times, Feb. 10, 2012
“Video [of U.S. Marines urinating on dead Taliban fighters] Inflames a Delicate Moment for U.S. in Afghanistan.” New York Times, Jan. 12, 2012
“Commission alleges U.S. detainee abuse.” Minneapolis StarTribune, Jan. 8, 2012
“Six Children Are Killed by NATO Airstrike in Afghanistan.” New York Times, Nov. 25, 2011
“American Soldier Is Convicted of Killing Afghan Civilians for Sport.” New York Times, Nov. 11, 2011
“Pakistan: U.S. Drone Strike Kills Brother of a Taliban Commander.” New York Times, Oct. 28, 2011
“Afghanistan officials ‘systematically tortured’ detainees, UN report says.” Guardian, & BBC Oct. 10; Washington Post, Oct. 11, 2011
“G.I. Killed Afghan Journalist, NATO Says.” New York Times, Sept. 9, 2011
“Cable Implicates Americans in Deaths of Iraqi Civilians.” New York Times, Sept. 2, 2011
“Civilians Die in a Raid by Americans and Iraqis.” New York Times, Aug. 7, 2011
“NATO Strikes Libyan State TV Transmitters.” New York Times, July 31, 2011
“NATO admits raid probably killed nine in Tripoli.” St. Paul Pioneer Press, June 20, 2011
“U.S. Expands Its Drone War to Take On Somali Militants.” New York Times, July 2, 2011
“NATO airstrike blamed in 14 civilian deaths.” St. Paul Pioneer Press, May 30, 2011
“Libya Effort Is Called Violation of War Act.” New York Times, May 26, 2011
“Raid on Wrong House Kills Afghan Girl, 12.” New York Times, May 12, 2011
“Yemen: 2 Killed in Missile Strike.” Associated Press, May 5, 2011
“NATO Accused of Going Too Far With Libya Strikes.” New York Times, May 2, 2011
“Disposal of Bin Laden’s remains violated Islamic principles, clerics say.” Associated Press, May 2, 2011
“Photos of atrocities seen as threat to Afghan relations.” St. Paul Pioneer Press, March 22, 2011
“Missiles Kill 26 in Pakistan” (“most of them civilians”) New York Times, March 18, 2011
“Afgans Say NATO Troops Killed 8 Civilians in Raid.” New York Times, Aug. 24, 2010
“A dozen or more” Afghan civilians were killed during a nighttime raid August 5, 2010 in eastern Afghanistan, NATO’s officers said. Chicago Tribune, Aug. 6, 2010
“Afghans Say Attack Killed 52 Civilians; NATO Differs.” New York Times, July 27, 2010
In June 2008, NATO bombers attacked a Pakistani paramilitary force called the Frontier Corps killing 11 of its soldiers. New York Times, Nov. 27, 2011
“Afghans Die in Bombing, As Toll Rises for Civilians.” New York Times, May 3, 2010
John LaForge works for Nukewatch, a nuclear watchdog and anti-war group in Wisconsin and edits its Quarterly.
Syria arms ship impounded, crew held for questioning
[The West toppled the Gaddafi regime over the past year in order to extend their power in Africa and the Middle East, in order to plunder Libya's resources, and restructure Libya's economy along neoliberal lines. The regime in Libya is dependent on the West. It shows its loyalty by exporting pro-Western regime change, especially in Syria. Recently, a shipment of arms from Western-backed Libya was intercepted. This violates the terms of the Syrian peace process. Despite its claims, the West does not care for peace in Syria. It only cares about extending its power by toppling the regime. -NP]
Syria arms ship impounded, crew held for questioning
(Source: The Daily Star)
BEIRUT: Military Prosecutor Judge Saqr Saqr ordered Saturday that the 11-member crew of the Syria-bound weapons ship “Lutfallah II” be held for questioning, sources close to the matter said.
The sources told The Daily Star that the Sierra Leonean-flagged ship was carrying light, medium and heavy weaponry.
Saqr requested that the military police question the suspects and find out at which port the arms were loaded and to whom they were to be delivered.
In a statement released Saturday, the Lebanese army confirmed the confiscation of weapons on board the ship.
“The army intercepted Friday off the northern coast the Sierra Leonean-flagged commercial vessel “Lutfallah II”; the army and relevant authorities inspected the vessel and confiscated three containers with a large quantity of assorted arms as well as heavy, medium and light ammunition.”
The statement added that the eleven detained crew members are of various Arab and foreign nationalities.
President Michel Sleiman praised the army Saturday for seizing the ship, saying the measure is part of preserving civil peace and a translation into action of the Lebanese state’s decision to prevent the country from becoming an arena of conflict for others or a conduit for settling accounts.
According to his press office, Sleiman also stressed the importance of keeping the army and security forces alert to ward off risks that might incite strife, disturb stability, or adversely affect Lebanon’s relationship with its neighbors.
Lutfallah II, headed for Syria, was impounded by Lebanese authorities and transported to the Lebanese Navy base in Beirut port Saturday, after having been intercepted in Lebanese waters Friday and forced to dock at Salaata port.
The ship had left Libya for the Egyptian port of Alexandria and was on its way to Syria when it entered Lebanese waters.
The Lebanese Navy intercepted the vessel and directed it to Salaata in the north, whereupon an inspection of its cargo was carried out and weapons were discovered.
The owner of the ship is a Syrian identified as Mohammad Khafaja and its Lebanese agent is Ahmad Bernard. Khafaja and Bernard have been arrested, as has the customs agent tasked with unloading the ship’s contents — listed as engine oil.
The ship was transported Saturday to Beirut port accompanied by three Navy vessels. There is no confirmation on whether the ship intended to dock in Lebanon.
Syrian authorities have repeatedly charged that weapons are being smuggled from Lebanon into Syria to assist rebels seeking the ouster of President Bashar Assad.
CNN manufactures ‘news’ in Syria
Awhile back, CNN was caught with its pants down. CNN’s “on the scene source Danny” in Syria was caught staging events. CNN’s source and camera operator can be seen ordering gunfire and explosions in an area that is otherwise quiet. They are also heard discussing the script, which is clearly false. The Syrian government has stated that Western media is propaganda. There is certainly violence by both sides in the Syrian conflict, but this shows the class nature of the media.
This isn’t new. During the first Gulf War, similar cases of staged events were uncovered:
“Charles Jaco was the CNN reporter famous for covering the 1990 Persian Gulf War.
The first part of this video shows the stage set he was on, and he was clowning around with fellow CNN staff. The Saudi Arabian “hotel” in the background were fake palm trees and a blue wall in a studio. This clip was leaked by CNN staff.
The second part of this video was a live CNN satellite feed recorded onto VHS showing the final cut. Charles Jaco was wearing a different jacket, but he had the same act. The acting was terrible as Charles Jaco wore a gas mask, and his fellow correspondent Carl Rochelle wore a helmet. The sirens and missile sound effects are part of the stage set. The camera never pans out or shows the sky.”
Other media has also created fake videos:
US says “Assad must go,” increases aid to the opposition.. Social imperialists agree
US says “Assad must go,” increases aid to the opposition.. Social imperialists agree
(new-power.org)
At the recent so-called “Friends of Syria Conference,” US and other foreign powers decided to increase their support for the Syrian opposition. “Assad must go,” said Hillary Clinton:
“Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton said that, despite a newly-brokered cease fire agreement with Syrian President Bashar al Assad, his days as president are numbered as his forces continue the bloody clash with Syrian opposition groups.
“We think Assad must go,” Clinton told ABC today after attending the one-day Friends of the Syrian People conference in Istanbul. “The sooner the better for everyone concerned.”
But she added that the process must be multi-pronged.The UN-Arab League peace plan and cease fire negotiated last week by envoy Kofi Annan is a good beginning, she said, but Assad has yet to stop the violence.
“There has to be a timeline,” Clinton said regarding the diplomatic process. “It can’t go on indefinitely.”
Representatives of more than 60 countries attending the conference pledged financial assistance to the Syrian Free Army, the main opposition group, in an effort to encourage further defections from Assad’s forces.
Clinton said the United States has agreed to pledge an additional $12 million for a total of $25 million in aid and to provide communications equipment to help the Syrian Free Army organize.
She met with the Syrian National Congress today to discuss how to document evidence of the atrocities for future investigations or trials in international criminal courts. A sanctions working group was also created to target those who are helping Assad.While some Arab countries have urged western nations to arm Syrian rebels, Clinton said the United States is trying to balance its support of opposition groups without raising expectations that can’t be met.
“We do have a stake in what happens in Syria, we just have to be thoughtful about how we pursue our role,” she told ABC…”
Echoing Clinton, many in the so-called “left” are supporting the imperialist attack against the Syrian people:
“In recent weeks, Egypt’s misnamed Revolutionary Socialists (RS) have stepped up their campaign in support of imperialist war plans against Syria. Since the beginning of March, the RS have published a series of articles denouncing the regime of Syrian president Bashar Al-Assad and criticising the imperialist powers for not launching a military intervention against Syria.
The RS are further attacking China for being complicit in killings in Syria. According to media reports, student members of the RS expelled a representative of the Chinese embassy from a seminar at the University in Alexandria on March 10. They attacked the Chinese representative for his country’s support for the Syrian regime, holding up banners reading: “Your country endorses the killing of our Syrian brothers”. A picture of the incident has since then been prominently placed on the RS’s web site.
China along with Russia vetoed a United Nations Security Council resolution last month that was meant to prepare a Western-backed intervention against Syria.
The principal responsibility for the bloodshed in Syria lies with the US and its allies, not with the Assad regime. By calling for foreign intervention in Syria, the RS are exposing themselves as tools of imperialism, willing to endorse the type of imperialist intervention that devastated Libya, causing 50,000 deaths and installing a far-right Islamist regime in Tripoli…”
The article continues:
“Opposing social revolution at home, they support imperialist aggression abroad. In propaganda articles, they uncritically present Western-backed armed groups as “revolutionaries” and in some cases criticise the imperialist powers for being too hesitant to launch wars of aggression, while uncritically presenting unverified accounts of civilian casualties due to Syrian government intervention.
The RS recently published a piece by Yusef Khalil and the ISO’s Lee Sustar titled “Will Syria’s regime crush the revolution?” The article was first published in English on the ISO’s web site on March 5 and a few days later in Arabic on the RS web site. This article falsifies the events in Syria, gets caught in its own contradictions, and ultimately critiques imperialism from the right, for not being aggressive enough in launching war with Syria…”
More:
“It regards its campaign against Syria as part of a general strategy of confrontation with Iran to control the oil-rich and strategically vital Middle East. This strategy is ultimately bound up with broader plans in Washington to maintain the US’s global hegemony, and in particular to use US military strength to combat the increasing economic influence of China. Manifestly, the RS support these measures…”
Organizations like the ISO and RS represent forces loyal to imperialism and the First World. Lenin called such organizations social imperialist. They claim to be socialist, but in reality, they support imperialism. There are all kinds of forces calling themselves communist and socialist in the world. Scientific communists, Leading Lights, look beneath the surface. Being a communist today means understanding the balance of forces in the world scientifically, it means understanding the principal contradiction, it means understanding global class analysis.
Sources
http://news.yahoo.com/secretary-clinton-says-syrian-president-assad-must-163814047.html
http://www.wsws.org/articles/2012/mar2012/rssy-m26.shtml
Western and Gulf states admit funding anti-Assad forces
Western and Gulf states admit funding anti-Assad forces
(new-power.org)
A coalition of the Western imperialist powers and the Gulf states are engaged in a war against the Syrian and Iranian regimes. The Western imperialists have no interest in democracy in Syria or anywhere else. Their Gulf state allies, like Saudi Arabia, are the most anti-democratic in the region, some of the most patriarchal regimes in the world, restricting even the most basic human rights to women. The Assad regime is highly problematic, but the fall of the regime will increase imperialist hegemony in the region and set the stage for an imperialist war against Iran. Those so-called “leftists” who are cheerleading the destruction of the Assad from the belly of the beast only undermine the anti-interventionist, anti-war, anti-militarist movements. They have aligned with imperialism against Syria, just as they did so in Libya, just as they also do so against Iran. They are what Lenin referred to as “social imperialists.” They are socialist only in name; they are really agents of imperialism.
Mainstream media reports:
“An international coalition said Sunday that it will provide funding and communications equipment to Syrian rebels and opposition activists, reflecting a shift toward military options that might oust Syrian President Bashar Assad after a year of failed diplomacy aimed at stopping his crackdown on dissent.
Participants at a meeting on Syria, held in Istanbul, said Saudi Arabia and other Gulf countries are creating a multimillion-dollar fund to pay members of the rebel Free Syrian Army and soldiers who defect from the regime and join opposition ranks. One delegate described the fund as a “pot of gold” to undermine Assad’s army.
In addition, U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton said the United States is providing communications equipment to help opposition members in Syria organize, remain in contact with the outside world and evade regime attacks.
“We are discussing with our international partners how best to expand this support,” Clinton said.
The large-scale plan by Gulf countries to help Syria’s badly overmatched rebels offers a solution to the international divide over whether to arm the rebels or support them through only non-lethal or humanitarian means. It also reflects frustration with appeals to Assad to stop his crackdown on dissent, as well as hopes of forcing his ouster by shifting the military balance on the ground.
Conference participants confirmed the Gulf plan on condition of anonymity because details were still being worked out. It was unclear how the fund would be set up and monitored, or how the money, allegedly earmarked for salaries, would be guaranteed. A participant said the fund would involve millions of dollars every month.
The Saudis and other Arab Gulf states have proposed giving weapons to the rebels, while the U.S. and other allies, including Turkey, have balked out of fear of fueling an all-out civil war. Washington hasn’t taken any public position on the fund, but it appears that it has given tacit support to its Arab allies.
The salaries would aim to entice reluctant servicemen in Assad’s military to break ranks and join the insurgency. With Syria’s economy in a spiral, the Syrian opposition and U.S. and Arab officials hope soldiers will desert in large numbers and accelerate the downfall of the Assad regime.
At the meeting in Istanbul, delegates from dozens of countries also sought to increase pressure on Assad by pushing for tighter sanctions and increased diplomatic pressure, while urging the opposition to offer a democratic alternative to his regime.
Yet the show of solidarity at the “Friends of the Syrian People” conference was marred by the absence of China, Russia and Iran — key supporters of Assad who disagree with Western and Arab allies over how to stop the bloodshed. A peace plan by U.N.-Arab League envoy Kofi Annan has so far failed to take hold amid fresh reports of deadly violence.
“The Syrian regime should not be allowed at any cost to manipulate this plan to gain time,” Turkish Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan said in an opening address.
Erdogan also indicated military options might have to be considered, if Syria does not cooperate with Annan’s plan and the U.N. Security Council fails to unite in opposition to Assad. He referred to the vetoes of U.N. censure of Assad by Russia and China, which fear the measures could lead to foreign military intervention.
“If the U.N. Security Council fails once again to bring about its historic responsibility, there will be no other choice than to support the Syrian people’s right to self-defense,” Erdogan said.
Clinton also expressed skepticism that the Syrian government would observe Annan’s plans, which call for an immediate cease-fire and a Syrian-led negotiation process.
“Nearly a week has gone by, and we have to conclude that the regime is adding to its long list of broken promises,” Clinton said. “The world must judge Assad by what he does, not by what he says. And we cannot sit back and wait any longer.”
Clinton urged unity behind a plan that includes more sanctions, humanitarian aid, support for the opposition and the promise of justice one day for regime figures involved in atrocities.
Burhan Ghalioun, leader of the opposition Syrian National Council, called for the strengthening of Syrian rebel forces as well as “security corridors” inside Syria, a reference to internationally protected zones on Syrian territory that would allow the delivery of aid to civilians. However, the nations meeting in Istanbul have so far failed to agree on such an intervention, which could involve the risky deployment of foreign security forces.
“No one should allow this regime to feel at ease or to feel stronger by giving them a longer maneuvering area,” he said, reflecting fears that Assad would try to use the Annan plan to prolong his tenure. “It’s enough that the international community has flirted with the regime in Syria. Something has to change.”
In a statement, the Syrian National Council said weapons supplies to the opposition were not “our preferred option” because of the risk they could escalate the killing of civilians, but it appealed for technical equipment to help rebels coordinate.
“For these supplies to be sent, neighboring countries need to allow for the transfer via their sea ports and across borders,” the council said.
The one-day meeting followed an inaugural forum in Tunisia in February. Since then, Syrian opposition figures have tried to convince international sponsors that they can overcome their differences and shape the future of a country whose autocratic regime has long denied the free exchange of ideas.
Syria blasted the conference, calling it part of an international conspiracy to kill Syrians and weaken the country.
A front-page editorial in the official Al-Baath newspaper called it a “regional and international scramble to search for ways to kill more Syrians, sabotage their society and state, and move toward the broad objective of weakening Syria.”
In Istanbul, police used tear gas and batons to disperse a group of about 40 Assad supporters who tried to approach the conference building. Many held portraits of the Syrian leader. One man waved Chinese and Russian flags.”
Source: http://news.yahoo.com/syria-conference-gulf-countries-fund-rebels-123236191.html
Hands off Syria!
Hands off Syria!
(new-power.org)
Syria is under attack by the imperialists and their agents. The Arab spring, which started out as a popular movement against comprador regimes that sell out to the imperialists, has been transformed and co-opted in many places by the imperialists themselves. The imperialists, especially the US and NATO, have sought to use the Arab spring to create color revolutions in places like Libya, Syria, and, eventually, Iran. At the same time, Gulf Arab states, like Saudi Arabia and Qatar, are seeking to spread their own hegemony in the region, often though the support and financing of Sunni Jihadi groups, in order to challenge Iran. The Zionists in Israel also seek to weaken Syria because to do so weakens Hamas, Hezbollah, and the Iranian regime. Turkey, a Western ally, also seeks to extend its influence. Here are points to consider.
1. Several forces are coming together to undermine the Assad regime in Syria. The Western imperialists seek to undermine the regime as part of its war against growing Iranian power in the region. The Assad regime is part of a regional alliance that includes the Islamic Republic of Iran and Hezbollah in Lebanon. When the United States pulls out of Iraq, pro-Iranian forces hope to fill the vacuum and seek to solidify the alliance with the Islamic Republic of Iran with Iraq. Thus Iranian influence will increase. At the moment, many are biding their time in Iraq.
2. The Gulf states, especially Saudi Arabia and Qatar, are financing the anti-Assad forces in Syria. The Sunni Gulf states fear the emerging power of Iran, which they seek to stop in Iraq. In addition, it would not be surprising if Qatar is putting boots on the ground against Assad as it did against Gaddafi in Libya. While they are close allies with the West, the Gulf states are willing and able to use the Sunni-Islamist forces that the West keeps at arms length.
3. The Assad regime is a secular one. However, many of the top officials of the regime come from the Alawi, a religious and cultural minority that has suffered terrible oppression in the past. The Alawi were some of the poorest and most discriminated in the region. One of the reasons that the Syrian regime has a greater degree of religious tolerance than other regimes in the region is due to the Alawi origins of the Assad family. Hafez al-Assad, after taking power, removed the provision of the Syrian constitution that only allowed Sunnis to occupy the office of President. The Alawi will not willingly give up their position in society to become lower caste again. This means they will fight tooth-and-nail to keep power. This means that those seeking to take power from them may end up resorting to ethnic terror. There is much potential for Syria to descend into a bloodbath.
4. The Zionists in Israel also seek to weaken Syria because to do so increases their hold on Palestine and increases their power in the region. In Palestine, Hamas, a Sunni organization, has maintained close ties with both the Iranian regime and Gulf states. Because of the ethnic and religious nature of the conflict in Syria, Hamas is in a tough spot. As of now, they have said the conflict in Syria is an internal matter to be resolved by Syrians, but have not come out publicly to back Assad. Hamas has backers in the Gulf states that are coming more and more into conflict with the Iranian state and Iranian-state-aligned forces. In addition, Hamas is religiously and culturally closer to those who oppose Assad. The conflict in Syria will undermine Hamas in Palestine. The West benefits greatly by placing Hamas in such a difficult situation. This is one reason that the Zionists in Israel are moving to destabilize Syria. In addition, a weakened Syria means a weakened Hezbollah in Lebanon. Also, Israel has an interest in isolating and toppling Iran.
5. The Russian state has a longstanding commitment to the Assad regime. The Assad regime had been an ally of the Soviet Union in its revisionist days. Unlike with Libya, at present, the Russian state is seeking to actively block the West from taking down the Assad regime. The Russian state is moving to impede Western efforts to undermine Syria diplomatically and in the UN. Also, the Russian state recently stated it would honor its arms deals with the Syrian regime. The Russian regime is pushing for a peaceful resolution that keeps Assad in power, rather than throwing the regime to the Western wolves. At the same time, if push comes to shove, or if the West cuts the Russian state a deal, it is very possible that the Russian state will cut its losses and abandon its ally. We should not expect the Russian state to go to war with the West over Syria. As broader efforts by the West unfold to isolate the Iranian state, the Iranian state will try to turn to the Russian state too.
6. Despite the left rhetoric or anti-imperialist Jihadi rhetoric of the anti-Assad forces, the reality is that, at this moment, such forces are playing into the hands of the West’s efforts to gain control of the region and the West’s aim of eventually toppling the Iranian regime. The Assad regime, for all its flaws, should be defended against Western intervention.
Hands off Syria! Hands off Iran! No war! No sanctions! No intervention of any kind against Syria and Iran! Uphold the Broad United Front! Hold the Red Flag High!
Uphold the united front from attacks by fake leftists
Uphold the united front from attacks by fake leftists
by cherokeetears
(new-power.org)
There are those who say that it is acceptable to support imperialism on some occasions. This opportunism has plagued revolutionary politics since their inception. From the anarchists of Marx, to the social-imperialists of Lenin, and through the capitalist roaders of Mao’s China, every revolutionary period has had its opportunism. The Left has been infected by the liberalism and idealism of identity politics, and too often it has succumb to the pressure of this idealism. Individuals have embraced imperialism for their own prejudices, they aligned against national liberation in places like Libya and Afghanistan. They have set themselves up as shills for so-called “progressive imperialism.” They enable oppression from the shores of their imperial homelands. This is the case today with the US assault in the Middle East.
Mao Zedong saw the principal contradiction as between imperialism and oppressed nations. The main enemy on the world’s stage was imperialism. There can be no liberation without the defeat of imperialism. The struggle against imperialism is the struggle that unlocks the possibility of other social liberation. In this way, the struggle against imperialism is the most important one today. The so-called “left”in the First World has often exhibit a liberal naïveté that supports imperialism when the imperialists present their projects in the liberal and activist language of the “left.” It will yield when the imperialists present themselves as champions of idealistic and unscientific ideas such as bourgeoisie “democracy” or when the imperialists present themselves as supporting Third World peoples against totalitarian dictators or when the imperialists present themselves as the saving Third World women from Islam. The illusion of progressive imperialism is just that, an illusion born of successful propaganda by the imperialist themselves. This propaganda allows opportunists on the so-called “left” in the First World to support the export of imperialism with a liberal, democratic face. Such opportunism is idealistic and unscientific. It assumes that imperialism brings “democracy” and “freedom” when in fact it only brings exploitation and oppression. The institutions placed in countries by the imperialists are rarely better, and are often worse, than the institutions that imperialists condemn. Imperialism is not a better option, it yields nothing but open markets for capitalism. When the US’s pocketbook is threatened, when its hegemony in the world market is threatened, it acts: economic sabotage, destabilization, sanctions, bombs, invasions. The imperialists intervene “on behalf of the people,” but the reality is that these interventions only provide instability and violence against people.
When facing the threat of the invading Japanese forces, the Communist Party of China (CCP) allied with the reactionary Guomindang (GMD) in order to defeat the imperialist aggressors. The GMD was made of of several elements ranging from the nationalist bourgeoisie, feudalists, to compradors. The GMD had waged war against the CCPfor decades. The GMD had tried to annihilate the CCP. The long march, led by Mao, was begun as a breakout by the CCP from an anniliation campaign by the GMD. However, there was a bigger enemy than the GMD. The Japanese invaded and occupied China. If the Communists had continued fighting the GMD, both groups would have more easily been defeated by the Japanese. It was by upholding the Broad United Front Against Imperialism that the CCP won support of the masses. The CCP took up the national banner against the Japanese. This not only won them the support of the masses. This also won more progressive elements within the GMD to their cause. We must learn from history.
Imperialism cannot be justified in any aspect. Bourgeois so-called feminists try to justify imperialism by appealing to “women’s rights.” They try to justify imperialist aggression against Iraq and Afghanistan. Women’s rights have not significantly improved under the pro-US governments. Any improvement in women’s rights on the ground is coupled by religious, ethnic, and sectarian violence. Social programs in many cases have been destroyed, people have been forced into exile for fear of persecution on religious, ethnic, or political grounds. Resources are taken from the people by multinational corporations. This is not better than the current regime. Iraq is being destroyed by religious violence, and Sunni-Shia infighting is killing innocent civilians every day. This was not an issue under the previous government. Afghanistan is involved in a brutal tribal war, one in which there are still remnants of Taliban supporters, along with other tribes and ethnicities, all fighting one another. Imperialism has not made life better in these areas by any means. In addition, when the imperialists cannot put in a boot-licking, pro-Western moderate, they often cut a deal with those who are the most socially conservative. The imperialists are about power, not about human rights.
In light of recent events, attention has turned towards the tensions between the imperialists and Middle Eastern and African countries, most recently Libya and Syria. The US is setting the stage for a confrontation with Iran also. If imperialist aggression occurs with Iran in any aspect, the imperial so-called “left” will remain divided on the issue. Some — Leading Lights, anti-imperialists, and others — will oppose the attacks against the Third World. Many others — Democrats, opportunists, revisionists, and other First Worldists — will support the imperialists in the name progress. A “left” that supports imperialism is an enemy of the Third World masses and the revolution. They are social-imperialists. They may claim to be socialist, communist, anarchist, democratic, or progressive, but they line up with the imperialists. They do not understand the balance of social forces in the world. They do not correctly answer Mao’s famous question “Who are our enemies? Who are our friends?” Not only does their opportunism and idealism lead them to their incorrect position, but their privilege as First World peoples also leads them to align against the Third World. They desire more for themselves. They are consumers. They have a class interest in supporting a system that provides them with a relatively comfortable life.
The most deliberate opportunists will qualify their support, as they did with Afghanistan, Iraq, and Libya, stating that they “don’t support the imperialist support, but they support the movement of the people.” The reality is that they do not support the people. The media portrays these civil wars as one-sided, they portray US invasions as domestically popular, but this is not the case. Few support the invasion of their country by an occupying force. To do so is consider treason by most. Civil wars are civil wars because they are struggles between antagonistic groups. No coup d’etat, no civil war, no dissenting action is unchallenged or undisputed. Libya was a civil war. Tribal and religious opportunists took advantage of opportunities presented to them. They manipulated Libyan people to fight the government, the people did not act unanimously to destroy their governments, this was done for them. The Libyan regime was only defeated with massive support from the US, NATO bombs, MI6 and CIA operations, etc. Even other Arab states put troops on the ground in what amounted to a de facto invasion to oust Gaddafi. This imperialist act was cheered by the opportunist and movementarian so-called “left” in the US.
The same will be true of the actions in Syria and Iran. US aggression in Syria and Iran will face support from the corporate media. The media will portray one-sided views of unanimous support for imperialist aggression, and many self proclaimed “leftists” will support the imperialists. Be warned: these opportunists are effectively supporting imperialism and denying self-determination of peoples. They are serving up the people and resources of the Third World to the imperial butchers. Those who align with imperialism are lackeys. They are idealists. They are liberals. They do not uphold Marxism, they uphold liberalism. Their approach is not scientific. It will not bring socialism. Only by acknowledging the enemy of imperialism, will we be able to end imperialism. Embracing science will bring socialism, not idealism and liberalism.
Oppose US intervention in the Middle East. Fight against imperialism and its lackeys. Syria and Iran are the next targets in the imperialist’s crosshairs. We must not support imperialism against Syria and Iran, we must oppose imperialist aggression and uphold Leading Light Communism. Revolution is the only solution, imperialism will only delay the revolution.
Increased EU sanctions against Syria; evidence of more imperialism
 |
| Protesters in Seattle being dealt with “peaceably” |
Increased EU sanctions against Syria; evidence of more imperialism by Cherokeetears
Despite the fact that the EU has been dealing malevolently with protests in the last year and a half, they nevertheless have no problem applying a double standard to the Syrian government’s response to protests. It’s easy to condemn the suppression of protestors without acknowledging the domestic protest violence that the EU has been continually dealing with. Protests in Greece, Portugal, and France over the last year have met incredible amounts of police suppression, yet when Syria acts the same way, sanctions are imposed.
Syria’s Ba’ath Party is simply coming under attack by First World imperialism, just like Afghanistan, Iraq, Venezuela, Egypt, and Libya before. Imperialists are continuing to fight for the “freedom of speech” that they deny their own citizens. It’s easy for the EU to forget the three deaths from the Greek Protests1, the 65 deaths from the fire that the state so incompetently failed to prevent in 20072 and the authorities’ reaction to the protests that followed. It’s easy for the EU to forget the repression of protests in Portugal, Spain, and France; it’s easy for the First World to forget the 1999 WTO suppression of protests in Seattle. The First World forgets a lot when it’s telling others what to do.
 |
| Police Brutality in Barcelona |
It is important to distinguish that these protests are First World protests working for nothing more than a larger piece of the pie and “austerity reform,” but the EU’s actions are hypocritical nonetheless. The deaths of protesters this week is nothing compared to the deaths that occur at the hands of imperialism every day. NATO has been responsible for the deaths of 700 civilians in Libya so far in the Civil War backed by imperialism.3 UN sanctions in the past have been the cause of the deaths of 500,000 Iraqi children. 4 Yes, imperialist backed protestors have died in the wake of violent protests in Syria, but how many deaths have been the result of imperialism? How many deaths have been the result of First World parasitism? How many deaths have been the result of capitalism? Many more.
The EU needs to learn to choose their words and actions wisely, since they have had to eat them in the past, and will have to eat them in the future.
Recent Comments