Socialist Outlook : SO/10 - Summer 2006

Editorial

Assault on Lebanon

The Editors

In response to an alleged ‘terrorist plot to bomb aircraft flying to the US’ on August 10, Heathrow was effectively closed down and other British airports disrupted: impeccable timing from the point of view of imperialism. It was a major, if temporary, diversion from Israel’s faltering and politically disastrous criminal assault on Lebanon. Israel, the main US client state in the region, was poised to launch a renewed offensive, bringing its occupation force in Lebanon up to 30,000 troops. Meanwhile the United Nations was close to producing a resolution calling for a cease-fire. The ‘terrorist plot’ also reinforced the message about the ‘war on terrorism’, at a time when Israel was losing the political battle, thus shoring up Bush and Blair’s failing Middle East policy and allowing US spokespersons to falsely link Hezbollah with al Qaeda.

With Iraq on the verge of civil war - balkanisation of Iraq was always the second option for the US if the construction of a united client state proved impossible - Israel, US Imperialism’s proxy, was failing to defeat Hezbollah in Lebanon. This represents a further setback for US attempts to contain and weaken the growing Iranian influence in the region. For the British government the ‘terrorist plot’ had the added purpose of diverting attention from its hugely unpopular support for US policy and its surrogate Israel. Blair’s refusal to call for an immediate ceasefire will feed the anger of a deeply cynical British population – tired of Blair’s unquestioning support for US foreign policies.

Military technology versus people’s war

The US war machine is heavily reliant on battlefield tanks, guided bombs, missiles and pilotless drones, but politically is unable to sustain heavy troop losses and cannot control Iraq. Its agent Israel cannot defeat Hezbollah for similar reasons. This has bolstered the courage of the diverse nationalist and anti-imperialist forces in the region, including Iran and Syria. Far from providing an object lesson in the inviolability of US military might, these adventures have done the opposite – proving once again that, just like in Vietnam, one of the biggest and most sophisticated military machines in the world cannot permanently defeat those fighting for their national liberation.

The anti-imperialist fight may be carried out in ways, and under a banner, socialists would not choose, but a defeat for US (and British) imperialism is nonetheless a victory for the working class internationally. While we have important differences with Hezbollah, on tactics and on bigger questions of programme and strategy, we stand shoulder to shoulder with them against the Israeli offensive and in opposition to the support given to that offensive by both the US and Britain. Hezbollah is waging a legitimate national resistance struggle that should be fully supported by socialists everywhere.

Civil war may be on the agenda in Iraq, fostered in part by the American divide and rule policy, but in Lebanon Israel’s aggression has instead so far united the country behind Hezbollah. Far from dividing the Lebanon, their resistance is uniting all the sections of the population against Israel’s murderous aggression. And across the Arab world the mass of the population see Hezbollah as the saviour of the people.

It now falls to Hezbollah to try and unite the anti-imperialist resistance across the sectarian divide in the region. To unite with Hamas in Palestine would be a first step: to overcome the divisions in Iraq, the second, more difficult one. Whether they are up to the task is open to question – but the scale of their achievement against the murderous assault by Israel has put them in a political position to make this a possibility.

August 10 plot in Britain

Whether the August 10 ‘plot’ was real or not, the timing of its exposure was certainly orchestrated. This served several interests. The reminder of the possibility of terrorist outrage diverted attention from Israel’s terrorism, after a very large anti-war demonstration in London just a few days earlier. With the help of a mostly compliant media it made completely spurious links between al Qaeda and Hezbollah. It was also another step in normalising the sight of armed police on the streets and in airports, and the stricter rules on hand luggage tests the British population’s tolerance for ‘whatever is necessary’ to defeat the terrorists. And how lucky that the new terrorist legislation gives the police the right to question terror suspects for up to 28 days.

But it is not so easy for the government. There is widespread scepticism – and not just in the Muslim communities – of police operations following so-called ‘intelligence’, especially after the botched raid in Forest Gate, and the shooting a year ago of Jean Charles de Menezes: these on the back of Blair’s ‘dodgy dossier’ and the failure to find weapons of mass destruction in Iraq after the invasion. As Craig Murray said in his Guardian article about the alleged terrorist plot: ‘Be sceptical; be very sceptical.’

It is obvious to all that oil lies at the heart of Bush’s need to control the Middle East. It is also obvious that every new move in the region by imperialism increases the possibility of terrorist attacks in the US and Britain. Not that many support these – but supporting and understanding are two different things, however much the government would like to conflate them. And many agree with Muslim spokespeople that imperialism’s foreign policies are stoking up hatred and building fundamentalist responses.

New energy – not oil

At a time when people are increasingly worried about the need to control carbon emissions, the murder of innocent women, men and children (to say nothing of the terrible pollution of war, for example the huge oil slick along Lebanon’s coast) to maintain control over raw materials like oil, seems an ever more barbarous project. Some of the billions of dollars wasted on war could have been better spent on researching new forms of energy. Why are they not developing new forms of transport that will not pollute the environment? Why are they not supplying solar panels to all who want them?

In Britain there is deep-seated anger that the Blair government no longer represents the people who elected it. Not only because of its neo-liberal economic policies - privatisation of the NHS, of education - which are bad enough, but especially the hitching of a failing British imperialism to the Texan oilman who seems capable of doing absolutely anything, including triggering widespread wars.

The successful August anti-war demonstration in London is testimony to the depth of disgust people feel towards the Bush/Blair bandwagon. The planned march at the New Labour conference in Manchester on September 23 will be a good opportunity to further express the depth of anger in the country.

back to top