Main Index | Europe Index

The Americans decided unilaterally for strikes on Iraq and without waiting launched a massive bombing. There are evidently two value systems and two policies in the 'new international order' which is no more and no less than a new American imperialism. Reference to the personal difficulties of President Clinton, linked to 'inappropriate' sexual activities, is a useful way of explaining things as it draws attention to the mediocrity of the politicians but it also acts as a media palliative which covers up the underlying reality: the American empire is being built without opposition and in its own way since the fall of the Soviet empire.

CHOOSING TARGETS

'Let there be no mistake, there is no country on the planet which is beyond our reach' was the statement from the Atlantic Commander in Chief for the US in 1997. He need not worry. Nobody has had any doubts about this since the Gulf War of 1991.

But he might have added: without asking for the opinion or agreement of any third party and above all without reference to the UN. Those hundreds of missiles that have been launched over the past few months against Iraq have sent this message home to the Middle East and to American allies. What is at stake, as always, is the supply of oil to America at the lowest price and it is important for America to maintain pressure in this part of the world and to dissuade the oil producers from raising prices or in other words to use oil as an economic weapon as they did in 1973. But the Iraqi target also carries a message further abroad, notably for US allies and competitors: we are the masters, we alone choose the targets and any military intervention must carry our seal of approval.

For the US military strikes against Iraq also provide an opportunity to test their new military hardware and new strategies. Scarcely had they returned from their 'Desert Storm' operation than the strategists at the Pentagon overthrew the strategic concepts of the US and came up with a new doctrine: the Revolution in Military Affairs. This revolution has four aspects. Firstly, the US has (officially) renounced the idea of winning a nuclear war. On the other hand they are preparing themselves to be able to carry out two 'regional' campaigns equivalent to the Gulf War. Then they have decided to prioritise the notion of an information war. This refers not only to military intelligence but also to media control. Media manipulation is not new but with CNN it has broken new ground and the Gulf War has proved exemplary in this case. The latest strikes against Iraq has been the latest opportunity to ensure that all the media and concerned western politicians toe the line. It has worked out fine. Finally, the strategists have realised that domestic opinion wants to see victories on their TV sets but with no real deaths and with the heroes coming home at the end of the show. Hence the new concept of 'zero death' (Americans of course)

INTERVENING IN KOSOVO?

Resolution 1199 of the UN Security Council has, since September 1998, called for a cease fire in Kosovo and the withdrawal of Serbian troops. Despite this, NATO, although goaded by the Europeans, has done a U turn after having blustered and threatened to exact compliance with this resolution by force. However, there would be no difficulty in launching strikes against Serbia in the way there was with Iraq. A naval presence is permanently available in the Mediterranean and the Americans have NATO bases in Turkey and Italy.

Nor are there any ideological constraints: the Serbian president is just as big a baddie as his Iraqi equivalent. This turn around has revealed to the Europeans, so proud of their little Euro, that when it comes to more serious business it is the Big Brother who calls the shots.

The Americans have rubbed Europe's noses into the fact that they are unable to intervene even on their own doorstep. However, NATO troops will probably intervene in Kosovo in the end, in the form of ground troops. There are good grounds to believe that, as in Bosnia, it will be France which will provide most of the military and that the Americans will pay the bills. Indeed, when the risk of casualties and deaths are high, it is the Empires allies who provide the troops. The French rank and file will therefore have to bear the brunt of it all (the US really doesn't care) so that this regional conflict doesn't spill over into the wider Mediterranean area.

The US is at war. They are neither defending nor enlarging their territory. Instead we are speaking on an economic and commercial war. Nothing must prevent the free circulation of capital and goods so that American multinationals can maximise profits. 'What is good for our businesses is good for the country', claims Al Gore, the vice-president, showing very clearly, that all the attributes of power, especially military, are at capital's service. In order to install a planetary order the Americans need partners and they prefer to convince rather than conquer. But they are happy to make clear that if needs be, they will use the most brutal force. Intimidating the enemy and gaining the acquiescence of partners are the keys to American policy.

In this context and with different end games the crises in Kosovo and Iraq show that the US intends to remain the only super-power in the 21st Century.

FG
Translated from Le Monde Libertaire 10th February 1999

EMAIL COMMUNITAS