The
Obama regime, in coordination with its allies and proxies, has
re-launched a virulent world-wide campaign to destroy independent
governments, encircle and ultimately, undermine global competitors, and
establish a new US – EU centered world order.
We
will proceed by identifying the recent ‘cycles’ of US empire-building;
the advances and retreats; the methods and strategies; the results and
perspectives. Our main focus is on the imperial dynamics driving the US
toward greater military confrontations, up to and including conditions
which can lead to a world war.
Recent Imperial Cycles
US
empire-building has not been a linear process. The recent decades
provide ample evidence of contradictory experiences. Summarily we can
identify several phases in which empire-building has experienced broad
advances and sharp setbacks – with certain caveats. We are looking at
global processes, in which there are also limited counter-tendencies:
In the midst of large-scale imperial advances, particular regions,
countries or movements successfully resisted or even reversed the
imperial thrust. Secondly, the cyclical nature of empire-building in no
way puts in doubt the imperial character of the state and economy and
its relentless drive to dominate, exploit and accumulate. Thirdly, the
methods and strategy directing each imperial advance differ according to
changes among targeted countries.
Over the past thirty years we can identify three phases in empire-building.
Imperial Advance 1980’s to 2000
In the period roughly from the mid-1980’s to the year 2000, empire-building expanded on a global scale.
(A). Imperial Expansion in the former Communist regions
The
US and EU penetrated and hegemonized Eastern Europe; disintegrated and
pillaged Russia and the USSR; privatized and denationalized hundreds of
billions of dollars worth of public enterprises, mass media outlets and
banks; incorporated military bases throughout Eastern Europe into NATO
and established satellite regimes as willing accomplices in imperial
conquests in Africa, the Middle East and Asia.
(B). Imperial Expansion in Latin America
Beginning from the early
1980’s to the end of the century, empire-building advanced throughout
Latin America under the formula of “free markets and free elections”.
From
Mexico to Argentina, empire-centered, neo-liberal regimes privatized
and denationalized over 5,000 public enterprises and banks, benefiting
US and European multi-nationals. Political leaders lined up with the US
in international forums. Latin American generals responded favorably
to US-centered military operations. Bankers extracted billions in debt
payments and laundered many billions more in illicit money. The
US-centered, continent-wide “North American Free Trade Agreement”
appeared to advance according to schedule.
(C).Imperial Advances in Asia and Africa
Communist
and nationalist regimes shed their leftist and anti-imperialist
policies and opened their societies and economies to capitalist
penetration. In Africa, two key “leftist” countries, Angola and
post-apartheid South Africa adopted “free market policies”.
In
Asia, China and Indo-China moved decisively toward capitalist
development strategies; foreign investment, privatizations and intense
exploitation of labor replaced collectivist egalitarianism and
anti-imperialism. India, and other state-directed capitalist countries,
like South Korea, Taiwan and Japan, liberalized their economies.
Imperial advances were accompanied by greater economic volatility, a
sharpening of the class struggle and an opening of the electoral process
to accommodate competing capitalist factions.
Empire-building expanded under the slogan of “free markets and fair
elections” – markets dominated by giant multi-nationals and elections,
which assured elite successes.
Imperial Retreat and Reverses: 2000-2008
The brutal costs of the advance of empire led to a global
counter-tendency, a wave of anti-neoliberal uprisings and military
resistance to US invasions. Between 2000 – 2008 empire-building was
under siege and in retreat.
Russia and China Challenge the Empire
US empire-building ceased to expand and conquer in two strategic
regions: Russia and Asia. Under the leadership of President Vladimir
Putin, the Russian state was reconstructed; pillage and disintegration
was reversed. The economy was harnessed to domestic development. The
military was integrated into a system of national defense and security.
Russia once again became a major player in regional and international
politics.
China’s turn toward capitalism was accompanied by a dynamic state
presence and a direct role in promoting double digit growth for two
decades: China becoming the second largest economy in the world,
displacing the US as the major trading partner in Asia and Latin
America. The US economic empire was in retreat.
Latin America: The End of the Neo-Liberal Empire
Neo-liberalism and US-centered ‘integration’ led to pillage, economic
crises and major popular upheavals, leading to the ascendancy of new
center-left and left regimes. ‘Post neo-liberal’ administrations emerged
in Bolivia, Venezuela, Ecuador, Brazil, Argentina, Central America and
Uruguay. US empire-builders suffered several strategic defeats.
The US effort to secure a continent-wide free trade agreement fell
apart and was replaced by regional integration organizations that
excluded the US and Canada. In its place, Washington signed bi-lateral
agreements with Mexico, Colombia, Chile, Panama and Peru.
Latin America diversified its markets in Asia and Europe: China
replaced the US as its main trading partner. Extractive development
strategies and high commodity prices financed greater social spending
and political independence.
Selective nationalizations,
increased state regulation and debt renegotiations weakened US leverage
over the Latin American economies. Venezuela, under President Hugo
Chavez successfully challenged US hegemony in the Caribbean via regional
organizations. Caribbean economies achieved greater independence and
economic viability through membership in PETROCARIBE, a program through
which they received petrol from Venezuela at subsidized prices. Central
American and Andean countries increased security and trade via the
regional organization, ALBA. Venezuela provided an alternative
development model to the US-centered neo-liberal approach, in which
earnings from the extractive economy financed large-scale social
programs.
From the end of the Clinton Administration to the end of the Bush
Administration, the economic empire was in retreat. The empire lost
Asian and Latin American markets to China. Latin America gained greater
political independence. The Middle East became ‘contested terrain’. A
revised and stronger Russian state opposed further encroachments on its
borders. Military resistance and defeats in Afghanistan, Somalia, Iraq
and Lebanon challenged US dominance.
Imperial Offensive: Obama’s Advances the Empire
The entire period of the Obama regime has been taken up with
reversing the retreat of empire-building. To that end Obama has
developed a primarily military strategy (1) confrontation and encircling
China and Russia, (2) undermining and overthrowing independent
governments in Latin America and re-imposing neo-liberal client regimes,
and (3) launching covert and overt military assaults on independent
regimes everywhere.
The empire-building offensive of the 21st century differs
from that of the previous decade in several crucial ways: Neo-liberal
economic doctrines are discredited and electorates are not so easily
convinced of the beneficence of falling under US hegemony. In other
words, empire-builders cannot rely on diplomacy, elections and free
market propaganda to expand their imperial reach as they did in the
1990’s.
To reverse the retreat and advance 21st century
empire-building, Washington realized it had to rely on force and
violence. The Obama regime allocated billions of dollars to finance
arms for mercenaries, salaries for street fighters and campaign expenses
for electoral clients engaged in destabilization campaigns. Diplomatic
duplicity and broken agreements replaced negotiated settlements – on a
grand scale.
Throughout the Obama period not a single imperial advance was secured
via elections, diplomatic agreements or political negotiations. The
Obama Presidency sought and secured the massification of global spy
network (NSA) and the almost daily murder of political adversaries via
drones and other means. Covert killer operations under the US Special
Forces expanded throughout the world. Obama assumed dictatorial
prerogatives, including the power to order the arbitrary assassination
of U.S. citizens.
The unfolding of the Obama
regime’s global effort to stem the imperial retreat and re-launch
empire-building “pivoted” almost exclusively on military instruments:
armed proxies, aerial assaults, coups and violent putschist power grabs.
Thugs, mobs, Islamist terrorists, Zionist militarists and a medley of
retrograde separatist assassins were the tools of imperial advance. The
choice of imperial proxies varied according to time and political
circumstances.
Confronting and Degrading China: Military Encirclement and Economic Exclusion
Faced
with the loss of markets and the challenges of China as a global
competitor, Washington developed two major lines of attack: 1. An
economic strategy designed to deepen the integration of Asian and Latin
America countries in a free trade pact that excludes China (the Trans
Pacific Trade Agreement); and 2. Pentagon-designed military plan
Air-Sea Battle , which targets China’s mainland with a full-scale air
and missile assault if Washington’s current strategy of controlling
China’s commercial maritime lifeline fails (FT, 2/10/14). While an
offensive military strategy is still on the Pentagon’s drawing board,
the Obama regime is building up its maritime armada a few short miles
off China’s coast , expanding its military bases in the Philippines,
Australia and Japan and tightening the noose around China’s strategic
maritime routes for vital imports like oil, gas and raw materials.
The
US is actively promoting an Indo-Japanese military alliance as part of
its strategy of military encirclement of China. Joint military
maneuvers, high-level military coordination and meetings between
Japanese and Indian military officials are seen by the Pentagon as
strategic advances in isolating China and reinforcing the US
stranglehold on China’s maritime routes to the Middle East, Southeast
Asia and beyond. India, according to one of India’s leading weeklies,
is viewed “as a junior partner of the US. The Indian Navy is fast
becoming the chief policeman of the Indian Ocean and the Indian
military’s dependence on the U.S. military-industrial complex is
increasing…” (Economic and Political Weekly (Mumbai), 2/15/14, p. 9.
The US is also escalating its support for violent separatist movements
in China, namely the Tibetans, Uighurs and other Islamists. Obama’s
meeting with the Dali Lama was emblematic of Washington’s efforts to
foment internal unrest.
The
gross political intervention of outgoing U.S. Ambassador Gary Locke in
domestic Chinese politics is an indication that diplomacy is not the
Obama regime’s prime policy instrument when it comes to dealing with
China. Ambassador Locke openly met with Uighur and Tibetan separatists
and publicly disparaged China’s economic success and political system
while openly encouraging opposition politics (FT, 2/28/14, p. 2).
The
Obama regime’s attempt to advance empire in Asia via military
confrontation and trade pacts, which exclude China, has led China to
build-up its military capacity to avoid maritime strangulation. China
answers the US trade threat by advancing its productive capacity,
diversifying its trade relations, increasing its ties with Russia and
deepening its domestic market.
To
date, the Obama regime’s reckless militarization of the Pacific has not
led to an open break in relations with China, but the military road to
advancing empire at China’s expense threatens a global economic
catastrophe or worse, a world war.
Imperial Advance: Isolating, Encircling and Degrading Russia
With the advent of President
Vladimir Putin and the reconstitution of the Russian state and economy,
the U.S. lost a vassal client and source of plundered wealth.
Washington’s empire-builders continued to seek Russian ‘cooperation and
collaboration’ in undermining independent states, isolating China and
pursuing its colonial wars. The Russian state, under Putin and
Medvedev, had sought to accommodate U.S. empire builders via negotiated
agreements, which would enhance Russia’s position in Europe, recognize
Russian strategic borders and acknowledge Russian security concerns.
However, Russian diplomacy secured few and transitory gains while the US
and EU made major gains with Russian complicity and passivity.
The un-stated agenda of
Washington, especially with Obama’s drive to re-launch a new wave of
imperial conquests, was to undermine Russia’s re-emergence as a major
player in world politics. The strategic idea was to isolate Russia,
weaken its growing international presence and return it to the vassal
status of the Yeltsin period, if possible.
From
the US - EU takeover of Eastern Europe , the Balkans and Baltic
states, and their transformation into NATO military bases and capitalist
vassal states in the early 1990’s, to the penetration and pillage of
Russia during the Yeltsin years, the prime purpose of Western policy has
been to establish a unipolar empire under US domination.
The EU and the US proceeded to dismember Yugoslavia into
subservient mini-states. They then bombed Serbia in order to carve off
Kosovo, destroying one of the few independent countries still allied
with Russia. The U.S. then moved on to foment uprisings in Georgia,
Ukraine and Chechnya. They bombed, invaded and later occupied Iraq – a
former Russian ally in the Gulf region.
The driving strategy of US policy was to encircle and reduce Russia
to the status of a weak, marginal power, and to undermine Vladimir
Putin’s efforts to restore Russia’s position as a regional power. In
2008 Washington’s puppet regime in Georgia, tested the mettle of the
Russian state by launching an assault on South Ossetia, killing at least
10 Russian peacekeepers and wounding hundreds (not to mention thousands
of civilians). Then-Russian President Medvedev responded by sending
the Russian armed forces to repel Georgian troops and support the
independence of Abkhazia and South Ossetia.
U.S.
diplomatic agreements with Russia had been asymmetrical – Russia was to
acquiesce in Western expansion in exchange for ‘political acceptance’.
Duplicity trumped open-diplomacy. Despite agreements to the contrary,
U.S. bases and missile installations were established throughout Eastern
Europe, pointing at Russia, under the pretext that they were “really
targeting Iran”. Even as Russia protested that post-Cold War agreements
were breached, the Empire ignored Moscow’s complaints and encirclement
advanced.
In
a further diplomatic disaster, Russia and China signed off on a
U.S.-authored United Nations Security Council agreement to allow NATO to
engage in “humanitarian overflights” in Libya. NATO immediately took
this as the ‘green light’ for attack and converted ‘humanitarian
intervention’ into a devastating aerial bombing campaign that led to the
overthrow of Libya’s legitimate government and the destruction of Libya
as viable, independent North African state. By signing the
‘humanitarian’ UN agreement, Russia and China lost a friendly government
and trading partner in Africa! Even earlier, the Russians had agreed
to allow the US to transport weapons and troops through Russian
Federation territory to support the US invasion of Afghanistan … with no
reciprocal gain (except perhaps an even greater flood of Afghan
heroin).
Russian
diplomats agreed to US (Zionist)-authored UN economic sanctions against
Iran’s non-existent nuclear weapons program … undermining a political
ally and lucrative market. Moscow believed that by backing US sanctions
on Iran and granting transport routes to Afghanistan in late 2001 they
would receive some ‘security guarantees’ from the Americans regarding
the separatist movements in the Caucuses. The U.S. ‘reciprocated’ by
further backing Chechen separatist leaders exiled in the US despite the
on-going terror campaigns against Russian civilians – up to and even
after the Chechen slaughter of hundreds of school children and teachers
in Beslan in 2004….
With
the US under Obama advancing its encirclement of Russia in Eurasia and
its isolation in North Africa and the Middle East, Putin finally decided
to draw a line by backing Russia’s only remaining ally in the Middle
East, Syria. Putin sought to secure a negotiated end to the
Western-Gulf Monarchist-backed mercenary invasion of Damascus. To little
avail: The US and EU increased arms shipments, military trainers and
financing to the 30,000 Islamist mercenaries based in Jordan as they
engaged in cross-border attacks to overthrow the Syrian government.
Washington and Brussels
continued their imperial push toward the Russian heartland by organizing
and financing a violent seizure of power (putsch) in western Ukraine.
The Obama regime financed a coalition of armed neo-Nazi street fighters
and neo-liberal politicos, to the tune of $5 billion dollars, to
overthrow the elected regime. The putschists then moved to end Crimean
autonomy and break long-standing military treaty agreements with
Russia. Under enormous pressure from the autonomous Crimean government
and the vast majority of the population and facing the critical loss of
its naval and military facilities on the Black Sea, Putin, finally,
forcefully moved Russian troops into a defensive mode in Crimea.
The Obama regime launched a
series of aggressive moves against Russia to isolate it and to buttress
it faltering puppet regime in Kiev: economic sanctions and expulsions
were the order of the day … Obama’s seizure of the Ukraine signaled the
start of a ‘new Cold War’. The seizure of the Ukraine was part of
Obama’s grand ongoing strategy of advancing empire.
The
Ukraine power grab signaled the biggest geo-political challenge to the
continued existence of the Russian state. Obama seeks to extend and
deepen the imperial sweep across Europe to the Caucuses: the violent
regime coup and subsequent defense of the puppet regime in Kiev are key
elements in undermining a key adversary– Russia.
After
pretending to ‘partner’ with Russia, while slicing off Russian allies
in the Balkans and Mid-East over the previous decades, Obama made his
most audacious and reckless move. Casting off all pretexts of peaceful
co-existence and mutual accommodation, the Obama regime broke a
power-sharing agreement with Russia over Ukrainian governance and backed
the neo-Nazi putsch.
The Obama regime assumed that having secured Russia’s earlier
acquiescence in the face of advancing US imperial power in Afghanistan,
Iraq, Libya and the Gulf region, Washington’s empire-builders made the
fateful decision to test Russia in its most strategic geopolitical
region, one directly affecting the Russian people and its most strategic
military assets. Russia reacted in the only language understood in
Washington and Brussels: with a major military mobilization. Obama’s
advance of ‘empire-building via salami tactics’ and duplicitous
diplomacy was nearing an end.
Advancing Empire in the Middle East and Latin America
The imperial advance of the 1990’s came to an end by the middle of
the first decade of the new millennium. Defeats in Afghanistan,
withdrawal from Iraq, the demise of puppet regimes in Egypt and Tunisia,
election losses in the Ukraine and the defeat and demise of pro-U.S.
neo-liberal regimes in Latin America were exacerbated by a deepening
economic crisis in the imperial centers of Europe and Wall Street.
Obama had few economic and
political options to advance the empire. Yet his regime was determined
to end the retreat and advance the empire; he resorted to tactics and
strategies more akin to 19th century colonial and 20th century totalitarian regimes.
The methods were violent-
militarism was the policy pivot. But at a time of domestic imperial
exhaustion, new military tactics replaced large-scale ground force
invasions. Proxy-armed mercenaries took center stage in overthrowing
regimes targeted by the US. Political and ideological affinities were
subsumed under the generic euphemism of “rebels”. The mass media
alternated between pressuring for greater military escalation and
endorsing the existing level of imperial warfare. The entire political
spectrum in Europe and the US shifted rightward – even as the majority
of the electorate rejected new military engagements, especially ground
wars.
Obama escalated troops in
Afghanistan, launched an air war that overthrew President Gadhafi and
turned the Libya into a broken, failed state. Proxy wars became the new
strategy to advance imperial empire-building. Syria was targeted –
tens of thousands of Islamist extremists were recruited and funded by
imperial regimes and despotic Gulf monarchies. Millions of refugees
fled, tens of thousands were killed
In
Latin America, Obama backed the military coup in Honduras overthrowing
the elected Liberal government of President Manuel Zelaya, he recognized
a congressional coup ousting the elected center-left government in
Paraguay while refusing to recognize the election victory of President
Maduro in Venezuela. In the face of Maduro’s win in Venezuela,
Washington backed several months of mob street violence in an attempt to
destabilize the country.
In
the Ukraine, Egypt, Venezuela and Thailand, ‘the street’ replaced
elections. Obama’s strategic imperial goals have focused on the
re-conquest and pillage of Russia and its return to the vassal status of
the Boris Yeltsin years, Latin America’s return to the neo-liberal
regimes of 1990’s and China to the submissiveness of the 1980’s. The
imperial strategy has been ‘to conquer from within’ setting the stage
for domination from the outside.
Advancing Empire: Israel and the Middle East Detour
One of the great historical paradoxes of the U.S. imperial retreat of the 21st
century has been the role played by influence of Israel and its Zionist
Fifth Column embedded within the U.S. political power structure.
Washington’s wars and sanctions in the Middle East have been largely at
the behest of influential ‘Israel Firsters’ in the White House,
Pentagon, Treasury and National Security Council and Congress.
It was largely because the US was engaged in wars in Iraq and
Afghanistan that Washington “neglected” China’s growing economic
prowess. By concentrating on ‘wars for Israel’ in the Middle East, the
U.S. has not been in a position to challenge the rise of nationalism and
populism in Latin America. Protracted ‘wars for Israel’ have exhausted
the US economy and the American public’s enthusiasm for new ground wars
elsewhere.
Zionist ideologues, dubbed “neo-conservatives”, were instrumental in
shaping the global militarist approach to empire-building and
marginalizing the market-driven empire building, favored by the
multi-nationals and giant extractive industry.
Obama’s
attempt to halt the retreat of empire caused by Zionist militarism has
not borne fruit: His effort to co-opt Zionists and pressure Israel to
stop fomenting new wars in the Middle East is a failure. His ‘pivot to
Asia’ has turned into a strategy of brute military encirclement of
China. His overtures to Iran have been stymied by the Zionist power bloc
in Congress and the imposition of Israeli-dictated terms of
negotiations. The entire “advance of the empire-building project”,
which was to define the Obama legacy, has been weakened by the enormous
cost of heeding the advice and directives of the Israel-loyalists within
his Administration. Israel, one of the most brutal colonial powers,
has paradoxically and unintentionally played a major role in undermining
Obama’s efforts to reverse the decline of empire and advance the U.S.
diplomatic and economic dimensions of empire-building
Results and Perspectives: Advancing Empire in the Post Neo-Liberal Period
Obama’s reckless effort to advance empire in the second decade of the 21st century is far more dangerous than his predecessors in the late 20th
century. Russia has recovered. It is not the disintegrating state
that Bush and Clinton dismembered and pillaged. China is no longer a
rising market economy so eager to trade with the US while overlooking
American incursions into Chinese territorial waters. Today China is a
major economic power, wielding economic leverage in the form of $3
Trillion in U.S. Treasury notes. China no longer tolerates U.S.
interference in its domestic politics- it is willing to crack down on
U.S.-backed ethnic separatists and terrorists.
Latin America, including Venezuela, have developed autonomous
regional organizations, diversified their markets to Asia and
established a powerful post-neoliberal consensus. Venezuela has turned
its military, once the favorite instrument of US-engineered coups, into a
bulwark of the existing democratic order.
The electoral road to US empire-building has been closed or requires
tight imperial “supervision” to secure “favorable outcomes”.
Washington’s new policy of choice is violence: enlisting mob action,
mercenary extremists, Islamists and Uighur terrorists, neo-Nazis and the
riff raff of the world in its service.
The balance sheet of six years of “advancing empire” under Obama is
in doubt. The violent overthrow of President Gadhafi did not lead to a
stable client regime: the utter destruction and chaos in Libya has
undercut the imperial presence. Syria is under attack but by
anti-Western Islamist fanatics. The defeat of Assad will not ‘advance
empire’ as much as it will expand radical Islamist (including Al Qaeda)
power.
The
Ukraine puppet regime of neo-liberals and neo-Nazis is literally
bankrupt, riven with internal conflicts and facing profound regional
divisions. Russia is threatened, but their leaders have taken decisive
military action to defend their Crimean allies and strategic military
bases.
Obama has provoked and
threatened adversaries but has not secured much in terms of valuable
allies or clients. His effort to replicate the imperial advances of the
1990’s has failed because the relationships of power between Europe and
Russia, Japan and China, and Venezuela and Colombia have changed.
Proxies, predator drones and the US Special Forces are not able to
reverse the retreat. The economic crisis has cut too deep; the domestic
exhaustion with empire is too pervasive. The cost of sustaining Israel
is too high. Advancing empire in these circumstances is a dangerous
game: it risks a larger nuclear war to overcome adversity and retreat.
