SV: M-TH: Serbia and the West

[Bob Malecki]

OK George; Here is the long answer to your stuff..

 

George writes..

As I have said before the Balkan war is an inter-capitalist war, not an inter-imperialist war. 

 

bob

George, it is not and inter capital war--but a number of imperialist and capitalist countries in the NATO alliance attacking Yugoslavia and ex deformed workers state that has undergone a capitalist counter revolution. How can you possibly claim that countries like Germany,England, the U.S. , France who are members of the alliance and attacking Serbia anything else then and imperialist attack on Serbia?

 

george

All sides in the war are seeking to maintain or enhance the general conditions for profit maximisation. It is a war over the character of capital accumulation in Serbia and, indirectly, globally. No sides in this war represent the class interests of the working class --neither Serbia, the KLA nor NATO. Thereby no side can be supported by revolutionaries. Revolutionaries must struggle to expose the real nature of all sides in this conflict in the interests of promoting a struggle against the bourgeoisie.

 

bob

All sides certainly might be interested in profit maximisation. However there is a big difference between the imperialist block now attacking Serbia and Serbia the ex-deformed workers state.

 

george

The significant and decisive question is how Western imperialism hopes to serve its class interests by engaging in this military campaign against Serbia. What is at the bottom of the invasion of Serbia?

 

Clearly it is Washington's intention to preserve Russia in a condition whereby it does not pose a threat to the class interests of the bourgeoisie. To achieve this it must ensure that Russia is stabilised and yet contained. It hopes to keep Russia in a condition whereby it constitutes a medium sized capitalist country that serves to maintain capitalist stability in that region. To promote the creation of these conditions it must ensure that the neighbouring countries, most of which were once under Soviet influence, are under Washington's control. In this way Russia is effectively encircled by American satellites and thereby its power  accordingly constrained. This encirclement can then be employed by Washington as leverage to prevent Russia getting "to big for its boots". This potential threat together with Russia's need for Western aid and capital can be deployed to facilitate the evolution of Russia into a well behaved medium sized imperialist dominated capitalist state under the general management of the West --particularly US imperialism.

 

bob

Well this is certainly correct from one point of view. However it is you who does not understand the imperialist nature of the alliance now attacking Serbia. In fact the Germans and French certainly hardly have the same aims as the Americans nor are they interested in the long run if having America play global cop.

In fact the imperialist alliance which on the surface seems to be united in this military effort are hardly united at all. The national bourgeoisies in the imperialist countries are fighting over who will play their kind of imperialist domination strings. It is no longer a question of pro-west but pro American, pro German, pro-French or pro Japan.

 

George

Serbia, then, is the bull in the China shop. Serbia is a hindrance to  these plans. It is refusing to co-operate sufficiently with Western imperialism. It interferes with its plans for Eastern Europe and the Balkans unlike other former members of the Soviet bloc. The West's plans for Eastern Europe are the establishment of a new form of stability based on imperialist social relations. These include the break up of Yugoslavia as a means for further fragmenting and reconstituting Eastern Europe. It all forms part of a grand strategy to completely wrench Eastern Europe from its Stalinist past and accordingly switch it from a Stalinist to an imperialist based stability. While Croatia and Slovenia were prepared to co-operate in this regard Serbia was not so co-operative. The West feared that Belgrade's intransigence would generate further instability spreading right across the Balkans involving Albania, Turkey and even Greece. This would thereby threaten both the West's current strategy and the present conditions of relative capitalist stability in that region. Such a development would lead to the greater destabilisation of this entire region and the unravelling of Washington's regional network of control and influence both in the area and even generally.

 

Bob

Certainly in a sense true. But the imperialist rivalry of just who is going to control what is more and more coming to the surface. It was doing that already in the Bosnian stuff. The imperialists were split on the middle east stuff and Africa. Just as they are now in Serbia. I recently pointed out that we now have two mediators--Carl Bildt-- and--Attisaari which certainly reflects the varying appetites and present tactics bye foremost the imperialist countries in manuvering for position before the next show down.

 

By the way imperialism the highest stage of capitalism is hardly a leftist cliche even through it is used as such by many fake leftists.

 

George

The West, then, is not as such anti-Milosevic. It is prepared to support Milosevic, and has in the past supported him in moderation. What is being sought is his co-operation with Washington in the restoration of stability on a capitalist basis which necessarily entails imperialist domination. But the contradictions of capitalism hinder such an arrangement. Milosevic may wish to be a willing satellite of Washington. However the specific conjuncture of events in Serbia, and the region as a whole, hinders such an easy accommodation. To preserve his power base he is unable to co-operate because of the particular domestic state of affairs that obtain together with the form by which he has established his power base. In short capitalism in Serbia. under present conditions, can only be preserved and developed by the kind of policies pursued by Milosevic. To serve Serbian bourgeois interests Milosevic is essentially obliged, given the character of his power base, to act as he has. In this way there is a contradictory relation between capitalism in the form of imperialism and, in a sense, indigenous capitalist interests.

 

Bob.

"The West" George? Get your head out of the cold war which gave "the west" a number of years of "unity" to fight communism. The destruction of the Soviet Union through capitalist counter-revolution change the balance of forces in favor of a new imperialist war.  And just about everything going on since 90-91 has been in the context of growing inter-imperialist rivalry throughout the world.

 

The above by the way is correct. However you do not understand why Milosevich elected bourgeois nationalism as the road to travel to carve up the former Yugoslavia. It is definitely connected to the utterly false line of building "socialism" in one country and extremely logical for the ex Stalinists to elect this path as it differs only in production relations. The problem however is that in this area--a part of the world where you have numerous groups of peoples occupying the same bit of territory and leaderships that have turned to bourgeois nationalism to carve it up. Well this is quite utopian because there ain't nothing progressive about any of this stuff because the only solution to the national question under the present system is what we are seeing today.

 

Naturally the imperialist powers having this powder keg in Europe which led to the first World War are acting in the same way they did before. The Germans are supporting the German solution to the problem, the Americans with B-52s there solution and the French chiming in with their solution. But none of the imperialist powers have a common solution because imperialism is based on the national bourgeoisie of its *own* country and hardly imperialism as its been mis-interpeted by the left and the new left...

 

George..

Milosevic seeks to preserve his existence by purportedly seeking to establish an independent capitalist Serbia. It is this purported programme that is, in general, the basis for his support. Such a programme requires a militant Serbian nationalism. However the contradiction is that it is impossible for an independent capitalist nation state to be established and consolidated in the epoch of imperialism except as a form of exceptionalism.

 

Bob

 

Yes! But so are the other peoples in the region. The Bosnians, the Kroats which also require a militant suicidal nationalism which the various imperialist powers have noticed and adapted their tactics too. However above and beyond the bombing they are deeply devided on who is gonna get what..

 

As far as and independant capitalist state not being able to establish itself. Well a number of them have certainly come into being since the downfall of the Soviet Union. Almost the entire east europe including the Baltic states and the numerous ex republics in the Soviet Union. Just as it was entirely possible to creat deformed workers states in the imperialist epoch, the pendle can certainly swing the other way.But it can not solve the crisis of imperialism only increase its instability. Sooner or later these countries will have to cjose sides when the various imperialist countries face it off in order to achirve world domination.

 

George

 

In that sense, then, Belgrade is engaged in what purports to be the realisation of an idealist Utopia --an unrealisable dream. Consequently Milosevic appears to be taking the Serbian masses and bourgeois elements down  a cul-de-sac. However appearances contradict reality --Milosevic does not promote the politics of idealism. The course and outcome of the Bosnian war is evidence of this. At the end of the day he cannot win any genuine struggle for substantive national independence entailing independent capitalist development. Just as socialism in one country is not possible neither is capitalism in one Serbia possible. Milosevic is merely fooling the masses in and out of Serbia in the interests of sustaining his regime in power by ultimately serving imperialist interests. Milosevic appears to be anti-imperialist while being essentially pro-imperialist. In the end, if he is not toppled, he will have to further compromise with imperialism and accept a Serbian capitalism that  is dominated by imperialism. Indeed, in many ways, the attack by NATO on Serbia may precipitate domestic conditions which will allow Milosevic to further compromise with imperialism and thereby establish a framework for co-operation between Serbia and imperialism. The current Balkan conflict may eliminate some of the conditions or elements within Serbia that have been preventing the Milosevic regime from co-operating in the way that Washington requires.

 

Bob

In the long run this is correct. Nor can the croats or the Bosnians. But they certainly can play a key role in getting the imperialist powers into a war with each other as they did in 1914.. Otherwise Georg is mistakenly calling imperialism something it is not. This super state (Kautskyite in conception) of a united world imperialist structure whivh is the *real* utopia.

 

Against this interpetation of George's I uphold the Leninist conception of imperialism being the highest stage of capitalism. Based on its own national interests against other imperialist powers with their *own* national interests.

 

George

In the final analysis it is no problem for Milosevic to collaborate with imperialism. He merely seeks a form of imperialist stability that includes him.  No better force than Stalinism exists to settle with imperialism --its record proves this.

 

Bob

Sure George! Wishful thinking coming from you who fundamentally is using cold war rhetoric to uphold a Kautskyite version of super imperialism which hardly exists.

 

George

So all this talk about imperialism attacking a sovereign state and the right to national self-determination is mere ideology disguising what is basically a matter of advancing bourgeois interests in one specific form or another. At the end of the day it is the working masses that suffer the reactionaries --Milosevic, the KLA and NATO.

 

Bob

No it is not! All the talk about this fake imperialist alliance attacking Serbia is true. And a defeat for NATO would be a defeat for imperialism. Communist take sides when Serbia being attacked by NATO on the surface for so called human rights--but underneath the scramble for position in the next round of imperialist war saying a defat for NATO is a defeat for imperialism. This we do without giving one bit of political support to the Miloseviches of the world whether they be Serbian nationalists, Croatian nationalists or Bosnian nationalists.

 

The national question which by the way we already in the 70ties called for the self determination of the Kosovars has now become subordinate to the present order of things where a highly synical and dis-united number of imperialist powers have for different reasons and different interests attacked this country .

 

This is why the left is completely crazy when they try to take up the national rights of the Kosovars. In fact this is nothing else then a left cover to increase nationalist tensions elsewhere and objectively they are supporting the strategy that varying different imperialist powers are using to try and gain control of the regions. And it ain't just the former Yugoslavia. We have seen the scramble going on in the southern cone of Africa and the jockeying in the middle east by the various imperialist interests.

 

You have to prove that the major imperialist powers no longer derive their imperialist power through their *own* national bourgeoisie and now someway we have crossed the rubicon to a united imperialist bourgeoisie of the world which was Kautsky's version..

 

George

The conviction that, if the NATO bombing of Serbia goes wrong, imperialism can be defeated under present circumstances is a gross miscomprehension among the radical left community. Even if the NATO invasion is not going according to plan it does not at all follow that imperialism can , is being or has been necessarily defeated. Whatever way the cookie crumbles imperialism in one form or another must come out on top. The only scenario in which it cannot is when the working class topples capitalism to replace it with communist relations. The latter case is not remotely possible under present conditions. The silly glee experienced among much of the conventional radical left each time something goes wrong for NATO in its air attack on Serbia is an expression, if anything, of the weakness of the radical left and its substitution of the spectator politics of the boxing ring for the politics of revolution.

 

Bob..

 

To believe that imperialism can be defeated at this time is certainly a utopia. But communists fight to defeat imperialism at home. Thus a defeat of imperialism at home is a gain for the masses of the world who certainly would not like to wind up like the Serbs are at present. This scenario by the way could very well be spread to South Asia but with the exception that it would be Japan who would be the great leader to fight the inhumane barbarians that might develop in the wake of the Asian Tigers going off the edge.

 

Finally you are terribly confused when you say; "imperialism in one form or another must come out on top".

This signifies that you understand that there are more then one imperialism which is the Leninist conception.

And who comes out on top will hardly be decided in the ex-Yugoslavia. This is only the beginning of a new attempt to redevided the world after the Yalta agreements which to say the least are dead!

 

Now the question which you must answer George is not what the confused left is doing. I certainly agree that the left is very confused. But are we faced with a new stage in history along the Kautskyite version or does Lenin's thesis on imperialism still hold sway?

 

George

Revolutionaries must express their opposition to Milosevic, the KLA and NATO exposing the common capitalist class interests that they serve. What is required is a federation of Balkan communities based on communism.

 

Revolutionaries must be for the defat of their *own* bourgeoisie. However at present communists do take sides when the guns come out and that is why we defend Serbia against imperialist attack. Naturally realizing that only workers revolution can really defeat imperialism.

 

Warm regards

Bob Malecki

 

P.S. The line on the side is Outlook in Windows 98. I like the Eudora program but it crashes in Win 98. And I have no way of understanding how to get rid of the line that appears to have replaced the ">" sign in replies to letters.