From MIM Notes 95, December 1994

IMPERIALISTS CONTEND IN IRAQ

The Boston Globe has managed to be astutely 
critical of imperialism in its October 17, 1994 
editorial. The only drawback of its analysis of 
imperialism in Iraq is that it only meant to apply 
to French imperialism. 

As President Clinton sent troops to Iraq this 
month, the rightist dominated French executive 
branch of government issued a criticism of 
Clinton. Not usually noted for their pacifism, the 
French rightists said that Clinton's order "was 
not unconnected to [domestic] politics." 

Now the Boston Globe is firing back. "France and 
Russia have been the most overt, the most 
shameless. Their attempts to make Saddam's case 
for him - to save his skin by lifting the U.N. 
sanctions - originate in a long sequence of 
backstage deals and promises. 

"The French oil companies Elf Aquitaine and CFP-
Total have acknowledged more than 40 meetings with 
Saddam's accomplices since the end of the last 
Gulf war. Last June Iraqi oil officials went to 
Paris to sign an agreement for the rebuilding of 
Iraq's Nahr Umar oil field, and later that month 
28 chief executives from French companies such as 
Renault, Citroen, Alcatel-Alsthom and Electricite 
de France visited Baghdad to discuss investments 
in diverse Iraqi enterprises, from automobile 
plants to Saddam's notorious chemical industry.

"For 10 days last April, Saddam conducted a 
murderous offensive against the population of 
southern Iraq. Specialists suspect Saddam's 
cleansing of the Shiite Muslims who live in the 
southern no-fly zone established by the coalition 
allies was a butchery performed to make the region 
safe for the French oil companies. 

"Hence the venomous remark of the French defense 
minister, Francois Leotard - that Clinton sent 
U.S. troops to the region for reasons of domestic 
politics - should be seen as an egregious example 
of the pot calling the kettle black." 

As is usual, we get the most accurate and 
insightful news and analysis from the bourgeoisie 
of our country when it is criticizing the 
bourgeoisie of other countries. Our media and 
politicians don't have the guts or truthfulness to 
explain that the United States leads the world in 
per capita imprisonment, but when it comes to 
criticizing other countries, they can be pretty 
good at it.

Something else that this demonstrates is the 
impossibility of a world government while 
capitalism still prevails. Supposedly, France, 
Russia and the United States are all on the same 
side in Iraq through the U.N. The U.N. acts more 
and more as a proto-world government inspired by 
bourgeois internationalism - the belief in the 
freedom of all peoples to have the opportunity to 
make a profit off each other. While the U.N. acts 
to safeguard capitalism internationally, we can 
see that underneath the imperialists will still 
have contending interests, because the way to make 
the most profit is not to copy your competition, 
but instead to backstab your competition and do 
something different to find your own niche. As 
long as there is capitalism, there will be a 
motive for imperialist contention even in Iraq 
where it might appear to be taboo. For this 
reason, the bourgeois internationalists seeking to 
compete with proletarian internationalists can 
attempt to fool the world with talk of 
international order and peace, but they cannot 
succeed. Only communism can bring peace.