[Marxism] Iran war drums are rolling again --1

["Fred Feldman" <ffeldman@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

This is the first of two articles on US-Israel diplomacy around Iran. Of the
two, I agree with this one, with its more pessimistic view,  more than the
one to follow by Robert Dreyfuss of the Nation, who tends like a lot of
critical-minded Obama supporters, to be manic depressive about the course of
their favorite. While I believe that differences between the US and Israel
on practical questions are growing, I am not convinced that the pace of
development of the differences and the willingness to express them openly
are developing rapidly enough to prevent Israel from attacking Iran, or to
prevent Washington from coming to Israel's defense militarily if an attack
goes awry. And this guarantee, which is a given right now (after all, Israel
has a right to "defend itself" and what else has Israel done for lo, these
60 years), means that Washington cannot prevent Israel from attacking if it
decides to take the plunge.

This has been prepared by years of attack on the Iranian totalitarian,
seventh-century evil empire, where the people don't have rights like we do
in some cases to medical care and social security. They are instead, we are
told,including by some very leftist "experts," solely and feebly dependent
on the "charity" of mullahs. 

(This is Louis Proyect's classless interpretation of capitalist Iran's
"safety net," which is actually a gain of the revolution which has not been
lost, and which we -- well, not Louis, of course -- should be as ready to
defend as we are of social security and related gains here, They are not
fundamentally different in their class roots in Iran than in the US, even
though the Iranian regime is religious. We should be no more opposed or
indifferent to elements of social security or government-guaranteed medical
care there than here.)

One of the best things in this article is the comment about the role of the
military-industrial complex in the Israel lobby. I have been thinking about
this for some time. The stake of some of these corporations in the Israeli
Defence Forces is not minor, and, under present circumstances, particularly
vital to their survival. It is one of the factors that helps us understand
the power of the Israel Lobby as an American phenomenon, despite the high
stakes and initiative of US imperialism's Israeli settler-colonial
dependency.
Fred Feldman













March 17, 2009

Will He Sell Himself Into His Own Defeat? 
Obama and the Empire 
By BILL and KATHLEEN CHRISTISON 

Various people have asked recently, "What are the implications of the global
economic crisis for US policies in the Middle East, and will Middle East
countries lean more or less toward the US as they suffer their own economic
crises?"  Not simple questions, but here, presented very briefly, are our
first shots at them.

Let's start by discussing what US policies affecting the Middle East may
emerge in coming months.  A preliminary point that is necessary to make is
that present policies inherited from the Bush administration are a mess.
Practically everyone of every nationality who lives in the Middle East --
and elsewhere for that matter -- believes that the economic crises now
moving in on the world were largely caused by the US's own extreme version
of capitalism with its massive emphasis on privatization and on elimination
of regulations that might have provided some protections for ordinary
people.  At the minimum, there are widespread feelings of Shadenfreude over
the pain the US is now suffering, and at a political level there is intense
dislike of the US for policies that are seen, correctly, as arising from US
and Israeli colonialism and empire-building and that are blamed for the
economic woes and inequalities now affecting nations everywhere.

There are two major scenarios of how US Middle East policies may develop in
the next year or so.  Even now, no one knows enough about President Obama to
know which scenario or variation on it might be likely.  Increasingly,
though, it appears that in foreign affairs, he is not going to change very
much.  We hope this is wrong.  At least on the central issue of
Palestine-Israel, Obama made it clear from the start of his campaign, well
before the election, that he will support the right-wing elements of the
Israel lobby led by AIPAC.  But there still is the question of how strong
his support will be.

The first scenario is that Obama will just bumble along, changing as little
as he can get away with from Bush's policies, except for clearing away some
of the roughest edges of Bush policies on torture.  Obama is expanding the
war in Afghanistan and continuing the war in Iraq longer than he said he
would.  Under this scenario, he will try to keep talking as long as possible
over Iran and try to avoid fighting.  He will try to keep supporting a
civilian government in Pakistan, but would not really oppose a return to
military dictatorship in that country, if Pakistan would continue supporting
his Afghanistan and Iran policies.

That's the first scenario.  Although its support for empire and colonialism
makes it an undesirable scenario, at least Obama would be trying to avoid a
major war.

The second, much more militaristic scenario is far worse, possibly involving
more wars, but it describes what Obama's policies in the Middle East may
well turn into as the remaining months of 2009 pass by.  

Right now Obama is faced with domestic economic difficulties greater than he
would have thought, during most of his campaign, could conceivably happen as
rapidly as they did.  But he is also faced with a military-industrial
complex that is now pushing for ever larger military expenditures and more
aggressive foreign policies, among other things as a way to help solve US
economic difficulties.  In addition to this, Obama is faced with the
prospect of an Israeli government under Benjamin Netanyahu that is even more
right-wing than the present one, supported by that portion of the Israel
lobby led by AIPAC.  This part of the lobby is probably the strongest ally
of the military-industrial complex in supporting more wars and more
aggressiveness in US Middle East policies.  Obama showed his support for the
lobby throughout his campaign and, most recently, did nothing to oppose the
lobby's successful trashing of Charles Freeman, a fine candidate for a
senior intelligence position whom the lobby charged with being anti-Israel.
Since a majority of US voters  generally support Israel without thinking
much about it, the disorganized justice and peace movement in the United
States is not very effective in opposing either the military-industrial
complex or the right-wing Israel lobby.  

Obama has by now clearly shown that he does not want to be the American
leader who loses the American empire.  In general, most European
governments, most of the Arab governments, and the Japanese government as
well, will not oppose him.  Public opinion in these countries, in contrast
to the governments, will be somewhat stronger in opposing US policies of
empire, but it is doubtful that the publics in these countries will be able
to accomplish very much.  

So the conclusion that one comes to if this second scenario turns out to be
true is that we are facing a very dangerous period in world history.  There
are indeed forces in both the United States and Israel that want a clash of
civilizations and are definitely not against further wars, and these forces
are powerful.  Obviously, the first nation to be affected by implementation
of this scenario would be Iran.  At this point it is impossible to know
whether Obama will want to, or be able to, prevent these forces from
dominating future US policies throughout the Middle East.


Bill and Kathleen Christison have been writing on the Middle East for
several years and have co-authored a book, forthcoming in June from Pluto
Press, on the Israeli occupation and its impact on Palestinians.  Thirty
years ago, they were analysts for the CIA.  They can be reached at
kb.christison@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
.



________________________________________________
YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message.
Send list submissions to: Marxism@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Set your options at: 
http://lists.econ.utah.edu/mailman/options/marxism/archive%40archives.econ.utah.edu