consequences of U.S. warmaking

Mark Jones markjones011 at tiscali.co.uk
Tue Feb 4 02:56:13 MST 2003


At 03/02/2003 15:42, Michael Keaney wrote:
>We have to face the fact that there is no such thing (as yet) as a
>pan-European imperialist rival to the US, whatever paranoid delusions people
>like Rumsfeld and Wolfowitz may have. The only (and hardly insignificant)
>way in which "Europe", as imperialist, punches its weight is in the arena of
>trade, and the US is presently assembling a giddying array of bilateral
>trade deals in order to circumvent the one arena in which Europe's weight is
>most effective -- the WTO. Meanwhile the WTO is drowning in a sea of
>paperwork and low morale, as evidenced by an on-going work-to-rule among its
>staff.

I agree completely. Among the many benefits the Bush regime has *already*
reaped from its Middle East adventurism has been to expose the complete
hollowness of EU geopolitical daydreaming. The Schengen zone, the eurozone,
now the Rhineland 4--all have been touted as fomring the core of a new euro
superstate. It canot happen, and even the allegedly most keen sponsors
(France, Germany) are opposed to it. The French for historical reasons and
because of the legacy of gaullism do not want to submerge French
sovereignty in what would inevitably be  German-centric federal state; the
Germans ditto--in their case their own history really is a nightmare
pressing on their brains. Germany is in a horrible position; like Weimar in
the 1920s it has a rudderless, populist, opportunist social-democrat
government that is incapable of responding to the deepening deflationary
social crisis (and profits crisis) which now threatens the political
legitimacy of the German state as well as its govt. This is because the
only meaningful policy response would be rearmament, militarism, and a new
German realpolitik in European affairs which might theoretically
be  capable of 'solving' the problems of how to incorporate the new
('Atlanticist') East European candidate-members, the problems of finding a
'common' foreign policy, the problems of a 'common' defence industry. army,
strategy, the problems of creating a powerful authoritarian state-- etc
etc--by the simple imposition of German diktat enforced on lesser European
states at bayonet-point and all under the suzerainty of German finance and
industrial capital--yes, this is the only viable policy, but it's been
tried before by Hitler and cannot be tried again short of a cataclysmic
social and economic crisis worse even than 1931-1933. Well, we may yet get
there. But in the meantime, the EU is indeed mercilessly exposed by the
Bushies as the land of whinging soc-dem whimps, as 'Old Europe' covered in
shadows, infested with gjosts of the past which cannot be exorcised. As for
the role of Britain, it's perfectly clear that another great Bush
achievment has been to tear away Britain from the euro, so there will be no
euro referendum, and UK Ltd will remain firmly anchored to the dollar and
USA Inc. Another devastating kick in the goulis for euro-enthusiasts. This
also leaves open the fate of Russia for whom, now more than ever, the
gateway to Europe and its invaluable, hungry energy markets, is to be found
not in Berlin but in Washington. So Bush can already celebrate two smashing
geostrategic victories without even firing a shot, and there will be  more
to come.

Mark



~~~~~~~
PLEASE clip all extraneous text before replying to a message.



More information about the Marxism mailing list