October 5 2007
Prospects for Mideast peace continue to brighten, within the limits of the Mideast. Of note is that Bush is saying two things, one of which is "to realize a Korean Peninsula that is free of nuclear weapons."(1) He also noted himself that the deal he signed with Korea in the Six Party talks proves to Iran that the Bush administration can do diplomatic business.
It remains to be seen whether Bush is just saying the right things in a misguided attempt to buy time for U.$. imperialism.(2) MIM and the oppressed nations would like to see the deal get done quickly. Perhaps then the Mideast will see what is possible.
MIM would like to take back something it said earlier, which is that we cannot see Korea handling the nuclear weapons question before reunification. We cannot say we know the thinking of Kim via U.$. imperialism. Matters could be further along than MIM would have guessed, because U.$. imperialism is the principal obstacle to Korean reunification.
Likewise, in the Mideast, the u.$. media does not talk about I$raeli nukes. Yet MIM would say that too much attention goes to Amerikan public opinion, the "Zionist lobby" and such bugaboos. Even if the Amerikan public did care about politics and knew the truth about the Mideast, it is a public of exploiters. It is best to write off that public and work around it.
Sometimes Democrats, Republicans and the left-wing of parasitism say some correct things, but at bottom, they don't get it, international politics that is. Our deluded Trotskyists and crypto-Trotskyists constituting the 90% of the left-wing of parasitism actually believe they are doing more for world revolution than Iran is. They are hopeless white nationalists, and will never know it in their whole lifetimes. Even some of MIM's friends think they can be friends of both MIM and the white nationalists. They swear they are helping both and that there is no difference. The big analytical picture, theory--these are not for Amerikans and probably won't be till after the joint dictatorship of the proletariat of the oppressed nations over imperialism.
The Jacobin internationalists and the proletarian internationalists are few in number, but they have Iran's back. Now "Time Magazine" is saying there is a "grand deal" possible in the Mideast, but no one has leverage over Iran. MIM disagrees, because Iran sees itself as working toward moral ends and it bids for influence through service to the Palestinians and other Arabs. Iran is the term in the equation reflecting U.$. imperialism's decline in influence since Bill Clinton's attempted Mideast peace deal in 2000.
Abbas and Olmert have met several times now that the Mideast "Quartet" process has heated up for an upcoming November meeting in Maryland. One kink in the story is the role of Hamas, the Islamic Palestinian organization that won the last Palestinian election. If Abbas negotiates an agreement he is talking about having a referendum to get Palestinian support. Without Hamas on board, there is a risk of political competition. That is not to mention the possibility of heightened geopolitical conflict beyond Palestine.
Proving MIM's labor aristocracy thesis, the European Union is converging with the U.$. position on Hamas. Even Russian imperialism treats Hamas as if it were something to restrain via imperialist pressure that always boomerangs. Previously, the European Union disagreed with the united $tates over Palestine somewhat, but political events brought pro-Amerikan administrations to power in Germany and France. They had the aid of the "clash of civilizations" ideology useful to I$rael's interest to bring more than just the united $tates to its side. This is perhaps inevitable with the success of the oppressed's struggle in Iraq. When the oppressed gain strategic and tactical position, suddenly we hear that France wants to rejoin NATO.(3)
This is something that Russia cannot ignore. The more the West and oppressed nations go at it, the more the Western imperialists overestimate their position, the more the Western imperialists seem willing to go to economic meltdown mode, the more Russian imperialism will be seen in position to benefit from the turmoil. Right now the Russians may seem to be mostly on the Western side, but as opportunity arises from Western imperialism's systematically chaotic impulses, the Western imperialists will not trust the Russian imperialists.
The distrust of Russia is legitimate, because as a situation heats up, Russia will have to decide who is from their global petty-bourgeois position "responsible for a greater lack of moderation." So for example, Russia makes a show of rushing over to Syria to bolster its air defenses penetrated on September 6.(4) This is a signal to U.$. imperialism to moderate.
A signal in the opposite direction comes from the U.$. Senate, which sent a message to Rice signed by 77 Senators.(5) The House position on politics as exemplified by the FISA stampede(6) is almost labor aristocracy in itself. The Senate position is only a slightly more considered rush to bedlam.
There will come a time when the only way to restrain U.$. imperialism will be revolution in Turkey, Pakistan etc. The Russians see themselves as having an interest in Islamic and U.$. restraint, but one or the other will become decisively more important. If the West goes into economic meltdown with an oil and budget crisis, then all countries and organizations with disproportionately military power will benefit. Those with soft-power will suffer disproportionately. Authoritarian systems have already suffocated their economies and cannot be suffocated more.
Whether they know it or not, the parties serving the labor aristocracy, opposing the EU for instance--are pushing labor aristocracy unity. That means more support for I$rael. Sadly, again, even this simple geopolitical point is beyond 95% of the left-wing of parasitism in the imperialist countries. The oppressed nations should not allow themselves to be confused by left-wing noise. All the talk about Europe being social-democratic or different somehow is just that--talk--as we now see with the joint EU-U.$. position on Hamas,(7) despite Hamas's election victory. There is a united imperialist opposition to democracy for the oppressed.
If it appears that this web page goes "on vacation," no one should
doubt MIM's determination. Through the end of the Bush administration,
MIM will be watching the Mideast, the two-state situation and Iran. If
I$rael takes a petty shopkeeper attitude towards the younger, poorer
and oppressed nations of the Mideast, we will hear about how the peace
deal was not possible with mention of a few killings in Gaza or a few
rockets. At that point, we will return to the general outline of MIM's
position for the joint dictatorship of the proletariat of the
oppressed nations, the one state solution. Probably "Ha'aretz" is not
in charge of I$rael and so there is still a good chance I$rael will let this
opportunity slip by in a settler fog. Even the "Jerusalem Post" sees how
the oppressed can see it this way. Explaining the position of Hezbollah
leader Nasrallah, the "Jerusalem Post" wrote:
"The Hizbullah leader also has words about Israel's September 6 air strike on an unidentified Syrian facility. 'Israel talks about peace but is preparing for war. The purpose of Israel's entry into Syria was to damage Syria's position ahead of the [US-sponsored Middle East parley] in November,' Nasrallah declared.
"'[US President George W.] Bush's plan is war, not peace, as in Iraq and Lebanon,' he added."
2. It might be worth reading http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/10/03/AR2007100302255.html
4. http://blog.wired.com/defense/2007/10/how-israel-spoo.html ;