Arab Spring and Imperialism

[The “Arab (and North Africa) Spring” enters its second year, where in country after country the complex interplay of domestic people’s movements, regional alliances, and imperialists (of both the crisis-driven old variety, and newbies making new global assertions)–are hellbent on asserting very elusive controls.  Such would-be controllers continue to be frustrated, and while this provides openings for revolutionary people to seize the time, their organizational, political, and military tools have been lacking–so far.  Time will tell how this will play out.  Deepankar Basu, writing in Sanhati, takes on the challenge of clarifying the different contradictions and forces at play. — Frontlines ed.]

————————————————————-

February 20, 2012

by Deepankar Basu, Sanhati

The unprecedented wave of mass movements that started in Tunisia in December 2010 and quickly spread to Egypt, Libya, Bahrain, Syria, and Yemen, with smaller scale demonstrations in Lebanon, Mauritania, and Saudi Arabia has the potential to completely change (a) the socio-economic dynamics within the Arab world, and (b) the relationship of the Arab world to imperialism. To understand the dynamics and implications of the unfolding movements, it seems useful to abstract from the details of the movements in particular countries and take a broad brush view of matters. Moreover, to construct a broad brush view it seems important to disentangle two aspects of (or basic contradictions driving) the situation, not only in Syria that is the current focus of world attention but the Arab world in general.

The first, and primary, aspect is that all these movements, often taking the form of mass uprisings, are movements for democratization of their respective societies, a movement against decades-old authoritarian and brutal regimes backed by imperialism. In most cases, over the last two decades, these regimes saw a convergence between authoritarianism and neoliberalism. One way of stating this is to say, using an old-fashioned terminology, that the primary contradiction that is driving these movements in the contradiction between authoritarian (often neoliberal) regimes and the broad masses of the people in these countries.

The second, and to my mind secondary, aspect is the reality/possibility of imperialist intervention. Using the old-fashioned terminology once again, one could say that the secondary contradiction that is maturing in these events, that is driving these movements, is the contradiction between imperialism and the broad masses of the people.

Note that both contradictions are basic, in the sense that they are both active in the current situation; the current conjuncture is shaped by an interplay between them. But between the two it is also important to distinguish the primary from the secondary. What is the rationale for characterizing the contradiction between the broad masses and authoritarianism as the primary contradiction? The rationale is the following observation: each of these movements, without any exception, started as movements for democratization and against neoliberal authoritarian regimes; each of these movements retain that thrust. Hence, it seems very likely that what is being expressed through these movements is the maturing of the contradiction of these neoliberal authoritarian regimes and the popular classes. If at any point there is direct military invasion of a country by imperialist powers with the intention of turning the country into a colony, then the second contradiction, i.e., the contradiction between imperialism and the broad masses, would become the primary contradiction. Continue reading

Call from the Philippines to Advance Mass Movements and People’s War

Editorial, Ang Bayan, September 21, 2010

Mobilize the people in their millions to advance the Philippine revolution!

Current conditions are exceedingly favorable to arouse, organize and mobilize the Filipino people in their millions to tread the path of militant struggle and revolutionary war. The key requirement for the further advance of people’s war towards the stage of strategic stalemate in the next five years is the creation of an extensive mass movement nationwide.

Social conditions continue to deteriorate under the Aquino regime. The people are severely impoverished and gravely suffer in the face of massive unemployment, slave wages, intense feudal and semifeudal oppression, skyrocketing prices and transport fares, a growing tax burden, widespread corruption and scarce social services.

The intensity of the crisis has caused the hollowness of the US-Aquino regime’s braggadocio to be rapidly exposed. Its pretensions of being an agent of change have quickly faded. Aquino has been in office for less than a hundred days, but disillusionment already abounds among many of those who supported or believed in him.

The US-Aquino regime is merely perpetuating imperialist economic polices (especially the furtherance of denationalization and privatization). Its handling of Hacienda Luisita provides a striking example of how land reform has been relegated to the sidelines. Factional strife, incompetence, corruption and in the latest incident, the involvement of a number of key officials in the illegal jueteng numbers game have all very quickly reared their ugly heads. The intervention of foreign troops continues to be allowed. Human rights violations, terrorism and intense psywar go on without letup with the extension of Oplan Bantay Laya even as a new operational plan to suppress the people’s resistance is in the works.

We must arouse, organize and mobilize the people in their numbers to enable them to defend and advance their interests in the face of the worsening crisis under the current rotten government and system. The Party’s mobilization of millions of people in a broad mass movement is the single, most important political requisite in advancing the people’s war. Continue reading