|
In
the previous issue of International Strategy, January 2003,
we indulged in a polemic with Perry Anderson's "Force
and Consent" (New Left Review 17, september-october
2002) , arguing that he simply minimized the divergences
between Europe and the US and that he just envisaged the
prospect of a quick victory in Iraq that would easily restore
the unstable balance of the last decade, and in which the
inter-imperialist divergences would become increasingly
absorbed.
Ever since the US invasion, the scenario has been badly
more complicated than Anderson's expectations. Certainly
the US scored an impressing military victory. Nonetheless,
despite this success it hasn't been able to set up a “Pax
Americana”. On the other hand, the lasting of the
economic crisis, its deepening foreign policy neo-imperialist
course and the strong resistance it brought about, mainly
a guerrilla warfare against the occupation forces and the
resurfacing of inter-imperialist divisions as a lasting
fact of international affairs, may be indicating that we
are approaching a new historical stage in which US domination
be strongly challenged.
We devoted the whole first part of this journal to these
issues, called “The world after Iraq”, as the
fate of the new course of US imperialism and the character
of the international situation for the next period is currently
at stake in this Middle East country.
The US launched its invasion on Iraq not as an end in itself,
but rather as a supporting base for deploying its domination
across the region and to redefine the world power balance
in its own benefit and in detriment of its imperialist contenders
and the semicolonial bourgeois classes. They aimed at showing
off an out-of -boundaries might. The onset of guerilla resistance
and the chaos still reigning in Iraq goes strongly against
such a perception. The human and economic costs of the occupation
grow as dozens of dead American soldiers are mounting since
the fall of Saddam's régime. Moreover, several sabotage
acts against the country's infrastructure have been occurring,
especially in pipelines and oil refinement plants (according
to surveys carried out by consultants working in Iraqi territory,
a strong flow of a decade-long investment is required for
reconstructing the oil infrastructure of the country). Against
this background, the recent attacks against the UN headquarters
in Bagdad and the Najaf mosque illustrate the failure of
the US in “pacifying” the country, compels it
to redefine its strategy in order to prevent the situation
from going out of control. Deeply bound to the Iraqi front,
in the regional level, the Bush sponsored "road map"
designed for putting an end to the Palestinian-Israeli conflict
is almost in terminal crisis, thus triggering a new round
of attacks and counterattacks between the Israeli armed
forces and the Palestinian fighters, which has been a constant
feature of the current Intifada since its beginning more
than three years ago.
Beyond conjuncture, from a more strategic point of view
these heavy obstacles in the way of the US attempt at redrawing
the regional political map poses the possibility that its
offensive intervention in this key peripherical area of
the international system may become its contrary. This could
be posed provided the struggle of the genuine Palestinian
national liberation movement strengthens or -more decisively-
the current resistance in Iraq multiplies and broadens its
social base not just in the Sunni areas but in the whole
of the country. If this latter variant developed and the
Anglo-American occupation forces withdrew its positions
in the country's command or, worse, they were forced to
leave Iraq, then the international position of the United
States and, to certain degree, of the imperialist order
as a whole, would seriously deteriorate. This proves that
Washington's gamble in Iraq is not a trifle. Contrary to
Vietnam, where the US military defeat had a tactical character
and was finally absorbed in the framework of the postwar
period world order, the current warmongering gamble of the
White House comes against the background of an entirely
different international context, characterized by the crisis
of that order or even its absence. Thus the importance of
what is at stake in Iraq.
A great deal is also at stake in Latin America, facing the
imperialist pressure and the pro-capitalist forces in Cuba,
the single triumphant socialist revolution in the continent.
As the subsidies from the former USSR were cut in the early
1990s, the reforms of the Castro-ite bureaucracy have been
encouraging social forces that are threatening the fate
of the Cuban revolution. Moreover, for the first time in
decades, the US and the European imperialisms, especially
Spain, are pressing Castro for democratic and economic reforms
that would entail the collapse of the Cuban workers state
if they are ever implemented. A victory for capitalist restoration
in Cuba would be a strong blow against the whole vanguard
and the masses in Latin America. We would be blind if we
didn't see these dangers and we didn't set the task of preparing
ourselves as well as the masses to reject it and to fight
against this prospect. That is why we devote an extensive
dossier in assessing the current Cuban crossroads, in turn
analyzing the genesis of the Cuban revolution in the light
of the theory of permanent revolution.
In the Latin American section we devote two articles in
assessing the first months in office of two of the most
important new governments that look forward to preserving
or restoring the capitalist domination régime in
their respective countries, facing the failure of neoliberal
reforms. We are talking about Lula's government in Brazil
and Kirchner's in Argentina. The former has decided to go
along with neoliberal politics, bringing about important
divisions and convulsions within the very Brazilian bourgeoisie
and in the ranks of the historical social base of the Workers
Party, whose first months in office have meant a quickly
paced unmasking of the reformist and pro-bourgeois character
of this party. The latter one has chosen for some face-value
reforms in the régime, as he looks for gaining time
for dealing with the inherited economic and social problems
of last year's economic catastrophe, seeking for a reinforcement
of its inner supporting base, so as to close the situation
opened up in Argentina during the revolutionary days of
December 2001. Hence, for the weight both countries have
in South America, the fate of these governments and their
deviation policies are essential in order to decide the
course of the whole region.
The last pages of this journal are devoted to the 'Theory
and Culture' section. There we discuss on the book 'Contingency,
Hegemony, Universality. Contemporary dialogues in the left'
which gathers the intellectual exchange among Judith Butler,
Ernesto Laclau and Slavoj Zizek, sparing some reflections
on the important question of subjectivity from a revolutionary
approach. This contribution questions the horizon –modernised
by post-modernism - that the only possible prospect for
social movements is the democratization of the existing
capitalist relationships.
|
