Rasti Delizo


In Imperialist Aggression on November 7, 2011 at 10:22 am

US imperialism remains the world's No. 1 Terrorist Leader

Once again the United States and Iran are angrily finger-pointing at each other.  As the world watches in a state of terror, both Washington and Tehran continue to raise their own propaganda and counter-propaganda claims as to who is the world’s leading terrorist state.  But unfortunately for the US, its own government’s statements are now even being critically questioned by some respected think-tankers from within Washington’s elite foreign policy community.

The current flashpoint between the two countries now puts Iran against the crosshairs of the diplomatic sniper scope of US imperialist foreign policy. Although this time the ‘Great Satan’ is not directly linking Tehran to Washington’s past imperialistic propaganda, which normally concentrates on issues and developments concerning Iran’s long-time nuclear program.  For now, the current US-Iran tension point is principally focused on an alleged Iranian plot to assassinate the Saudi Arabian Ambassador to Washington with the use of a bomb.

The same plot supposedly involves other targets. This includes the Israeli Ambassador to Washington and related plans to bomb the Saudi Arabian and Israeli Embassies in Washington D.C., plus the Israeli Embassy in Buenos Aires, Argentina. Therefore, it should not come as a surprise at all to see America’s mainstream bourgeois media largely feasting its spotlights on the latest allegations of the Obama regime.

The main focus here is on the assassination plot to target Saudi Arabia’s Ambassador to the US, Adel Al-Jubeir.  Since he officially represents America’s top Arab ally, this naturally brought out a mixed response from various quarters.  In this case, several well-respected policy analysts specializing in Tehran’s foreign policy and other Iran-related affairs have already come out to seriously criticize and question this assertion.

Surely, we can also question why the Obama White House released this story just now. It is suspiciously one year ahead of his re-election bid which is scheduled in the first week of November 2012, and it especially comes at a time that he is presently experiencing very poor domestic ratings. Obviously, a good foreign policy-related distraction could help him out for now if there is one that is pressing enough for the public to chew on.

The American public has understandably not been too nice toward the black imperialist leader living inside the shadowy corridors of 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue. This is a reflection of the domestic mood as the US capitalist system remains in a crisis mode.  In relation to this, the still growing Occupy Wall Street protest actions across America, which began only three weeks before the Iranian plot broke into the news, have further magnified Obama’s negative public standing.

Clearly his panicky top White House advisers are now in a damage control mode. They are pressed to find a nationally unifying rally point to win back the favor of America’s social majority before their boss’s poll figures slide even more.  And to do this, Obama’s camp needs to engage in a tactical political maneuver.

So now, are we witnessing yet another time-tested political trick by America’s traditional politicians? If so, then the trick is this: ‘If the national leader faces problems inside the country, then try to make problems outside the country (i.e. wars, conflicts, crisis situations, incidents, etc.) in order to create a new national common cause to rally back your people’. And in America this may hold up as there is an old patriotic motto whose reactionary cry is still honored by most:  ‘My country first—right or wrong!’.


By deliberately barking up the wrong tree, international public opinion is generally diverted away from one of the truly clear and present dangers now directly threatening the international situation today. And here we pertain to the primary role of US state-sponsored terrorism and its worldwide plots of targeting other heads of state and governments, and not just mere ambassadors, to achieve Washington’s geostrategic aims.  Therefore, Iran’s assassination plot, even if it is true, greatly pales in comparison to America’s long-infamous state-terrorist character and behavior.

Thus, America’s many past illegal and illegitimate exercises against other states have to be exposed to the world once again.  In taking a clearer look at this murky conduct we should perhaps view US foreign policy with a critically progressive scope. This is because Washington’s state-terrorist actions remain cloaked in legal and diplomatic grandeur. But US diplomacy is dangerously grander in scale than those of any other state’s own individual plots because its outcomes and impacts are far more globally-destructive than those emanating from capitals like Tehran.

Nevertheless, this factual irony and contradiction must not be lost to any of us seeking the truth behind Tehran’s alleged new terror plots.  Yet again, one essential issue here is the reality that the global mass media routinely hides the naked truth from the rest of the world in relation to the question of, ‘who is the main source of international terrorism today?’.  But then of course, American imperialism is always very much happy to encourage this circumstantial ploy as it only reinforces US foreign policy objectives in the long run.

This obvious obfuscation can only happen because the world’s bourgeois-controlled media principally takes its basic guidance on what to report on, and what not to report on, from the US government—that is, mainly through its many controlled, influenced and inter-locking news channels. Once scooped up, the international press instantly transmits such pro-US ‘news facts and analysis’ around the world through its global network of capitalist media platforms and outlets. Thus, the international re-echoing of the US foreign policy-line merely strengthens Washington’s imperialist diplomatic agenda around the world. In the end, this globalized mind-setting process only legitimizes and crystallizes America’s standing before the international community of nations and states, regardless of Washington’s moral and political correctness and, whether its objectives are right or wrong.


The plain and simple historical truth which the American mass media wants to hide behind diplomatic finger pointing is the fact that, the USA is the World’s Number-One Terrorist-State.  This assertion is the historic case no matter how you look at it from any angle or perspective. Certainly, this stark reality should always be vastly emphasized to the world’s audience whenever, and no matter what others say. This becomes highly imperative, especially whenever accusations are made by the US against other reactionary and oppressive states and regimes, which includes Iran under the bloody rule of its terror-inducing ayatollahs.  That is because the White House has always had far more blood on its hands through its globalized policies and actions than from elsewhere.

To put it another way, US imperialism has always been the main global terror center of the world and this hidden truth has been on definite record for over six decades now. During this same period, America regularly acted as the world’s leading state-terrorist actor on the world stage through its consistent foreign policy actions and dealings that only pursued Washington’s imperialist globalization agenda. As a result, this global policy thrust has only caused an enormously massive and uncountable number of human deaths and destruction worldwide. Consequently, these inhumane atrocities were mainly imposed and dictated upon by Washington through its international web of pro-imperialist multilateral institutions, agent-states and their reactionary puppet governments.

Only through a wide-ranging overview of contemporary world history can we see the monstrously damaging effects of this international regime imposed upon humanity by American imperialist capitalism. Such a grotesque panorama can clearly be seen by merely scanning the after-effects of these economically devastating policies, socially destructive measures and environmentally degrading activities forced upon the world through internationally integrated and US-aligned state-policies. Surely speaking, this global situation is further aggravated and made much worse through the numerous wars of aggression, violent regime changes by assassinations, bombings, coups d’ètat, and other deathly blows to humanity and democracy all committed in the name of preserving the ‘American way of life’ and its capitalist system.

To be sure, all of these causes and effects are rationally and politically calculated by Washington and fully geared toward upholding the international capitalist system in its favor. In doing so, US imperialist control and domination over this universally exploitative and oppressive class-based system is maximally assured.  This is now the real historical heritage of US imperialism to the world today. And it must never be covered up and hidden by the Obama White House’s new revelations about any Iranian terrorist plot, no matter how real Tehran’s supposed threat may be.


The US Attorney General Eric Holder and FBI Director Robert Mueller were the ones to unveil this controversial story last October 11.  The latest Iranian conspiracy involves an Iranian-American named Mansour Arbabsiar, from Corpus Christi, Texas, and Ali Gholam Shakhuri, a supposed member of the Qods Force of the Islamic Revolutionary Guards Corps (IRGC).  Both of these people are accused as being part of a wider Iranian plot.

Arbabsiar is accused of approaching a US DEA (Drugs Enforcement Agency) agent in Mexico who was posing as a member of a top Mexican drug cartel.  Arbabsiar, thinking that his DEA contact was the real thing, proposed to the double agent that he arrange for a Mexican hit-man to place a bomb in a favorite restaurant of the Saudi Arabian Ambassador.  Accordingly, the assassin’s services would be paid for by Arbabsiar and Shakhuri using the IRGC’s own funds.  The DEA agent immediately informed the FBI of his contact with Arbabsiar and this eventually resulted in the revelation of this conspiratorial plot.

Although Arbabsiar is now under US government custody, Shakhuri is now suspected by some to be in Iran.  Nevertheless, both of them have already been charged in a New York City court by the Department of Justice.

This latest international situation has certainly grabbed a lot of attention both in America and around the world.  And not the least in Iran, whose leaders have already vehemently denied any such accusations.  Tehran’s immediate retort was a countercharge claiming that Washington deliberately made up such a story in order to divert public attention away from the still-intensifying Occupy Wall Street mass upsurge against America’s capitalist ruling class.

Nevertheless, a few fundamental questions have already been brought out and should urgently be answered because they could still possibly refute Washington’s stance.  Central to these questions is the primary motive for Iran to do so, notwithstanding the Islamic Republic’s long recognized capability to carry out such types of operations far beyond its own borders, and mainly aimed at targeting its own citizens.

Related to these two key elements, in generally analyzing to understand America’s accusations against Iran, is the timing of such a plot.  In this respect, the present global and regional situations, specifically in relation to Iran’s internal and external environments, have to clearly be taken into account.  Of the three basic elements vital to clearly analyzing this international issue and development, perhaps the third one—the timing—is the more crucial factor in providing a potential answer.  But first, let us briefly try to analyze the first two: Iran’s motive and its capability.

The Islamic Republic of Iran (IRI) rose to power in February 1979 after the victorious mass democratic revolution which ousted the much-hated, oppressively brutal and reactionary agent of US imperialism—the Shah of Iran. But before the year was over, however, the new set of rulers very swiftly transformed the initially progressive gains of the democratic revolution into an Islamist-oriented one.  Such a regressive turn only derailed Iran’s progressive march forward. Thus, the Iranian revolution immediately degenerated into an ayatollah-led theocratic state that is much inspired by 12th Century Islamic doctrine rather than 21st Century knowledge and advancements.

From its early days, the IRI was in practice symbolized and defended by the Islamic revolution’s armed vanguard component, the IRGC. Highly known and much feared throughout Iran, especially to its exiled opposition abroad, as the Pasdaran, this well organized, highly trained, fully armed and massively funded institutional arm of the IRI has always been much more politically powerful and religiously influential than Iran’s own regular military forces.  By the time the eight-year-long Iran-Iraq War ended in August 1988, the Pasdaran had by then further strengthened its parallel military capacity to ensure a multi-role air-sea-land capability in defense of the ayatollahs’ subjective views and desires.

Since Iran’s revolution was internally well-protected by the IRGC from any potential political and security threats, Tehran soon developed external aims to advance its own brand of Islamist revolution throughout its regional neighborhood.  This eventually resulted in Iran quickly establishing very firm relations with Syria, Hezbollah and Hamas, among other such regional political forces.  With its new regionally-strategic alliance in place, Iran’s leadership now had to further secure and more permanently ensure a solid foothold around the area before any contra-type forces could dislodge it.

By the late 1990s, the IRI had become the second most powerful state (next to the Zionist State of Israel) in the West Asian region, and the number one regional force within the Persian Gulf area.  Therefore, with its ever growing clout the ayatollahs made sure that they could both protect and project Tehran’s strategic objectives within the region.  Toward this end, the IRI had by then set to commit its own Pasdaran forces for this endeavor. Its central aim was to enhance its regional parity and to outbalance its mainly Arab rivals in the area, some of whom were backed up by ‘the Great Satan’ itself.

Earlier in 1990, the Niru-ye Qods (Jerusalem Force) of the IRGC was created as a result of the Pasdaran’s very successful sabotage operations against Iraq and in Lebanon.   The Qods Force had a very specific task: to develop and operate special forces-type units whose operatives are also highly-trained intelligence officers who are generally deployed abroad under diplomatic cover.  Since then, the Qods Force has been Iran’s elite special operations unit operating in most regions of the world to advance and protect Iran’s external policies.

The QF’s special cadre force is also tasked by Tehran to collect relevant information and data for the IRI while conducting a wider range of covert missions around the world.  In this highly specialized role and with its loyalty to the Islamic revolution unquestioned, the IRGC’s Qods Force has for over two decades now become Iran’s leading overseas assassination and sabotage unit with the key mission of targeting both hard and soft-targets identified as ‘enemies of the IRI’ by the ayatollahs in Tehran.

Working very closely on many occasions with Iran’s Ministry of Intelligence and Security (MOIS) or Vezarat-e Ettela’at va Amniat-e Kheshvar (VEVAK), the Qods Force was from the onset assigned many secret assassination missions abroad. It works in direct collaboration with VEVAK because the latter is Iran’s leading clandestine intelligence unit with an extensive global operations network focused on spying, disinformation and sabotage operations. As a matter of fact, VEVAK, which was established in 1984, long predated the Qods Force in conducting foreign-based assassination and bombing missions to advance the Islamic revolution’s worldwide agenda. And now the two secret organizations became reliable partners in the service of the Islamic Revolution abroad.

A fundamental objective of the IRI’s global agenda is aimed at hunting down and destroying the leadership, organizational and operational infrastructure of Iran’s many anti-regime resistance movements operating inside and outside the country.  Its principal targets are the leading Iranian political dissidents, opposition exiles and other pro-democracy fighters based and operating beyond Iran’s vast and porous borders, particularly in the various countries of Europe and West Asia.  On almost all occasions, the QF/VEVAK hit teams operate under special orders from no less than the IRI’s Supreme Leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei (Imam Ruhollah Khomeini’s direct successor) himself.

Since August 1979, the IRI was able to successfully accomplish its mission to assassinate (and/or capture and later to execute) many of Iran’s declared state enemies.  So far, more than one hundred known Iranian dissidents have already been killed in as many as twenty-two (22) countries across the world.  Iran’s assassination teams have already killed inside countries such as: Afghanistan, Austria, Dubai, France, Germany, India, Iraq, the Netherlands, Norway, Pakistan, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland, Turkey, the United Kingdom, and in the United States itself.

Even here inside the Philippines, at least two recorded Iranian-sponsored assassinations have already occurred resulting in the deaths of two Iranians known to be supporters of Iranian Left organizations.  The first hit was in January 1982 in Manila against a member of the Organization of Iranian People’s Fadaian (Majority) and the last known hit was also in Manila in August 1983 against a member of the People’s Mujahedin Organization of Iran (PMOI). Relatedly, there was also a recorded separate grenade attack against members of the OIPF (Majority) in Manila in January 1982 which resulted in three wounded persons, but no deaths.

Some of those killed so far, were former top officials of the Shah’s dictatorship, a former post-Shah Prime Minister, Shahpour Bakhtiar, a few generals and other former military officers and intelligence officers.  The first ever elected President of the IRI, Abolhassan Bani-Sadr, now living in exile in France, was also a victim of an attempted Tehran-ordered assassination but he managed to survive.  Early last year alone, the top leader of Jundallah, Abdul-malek Rigi, was intercepted and captured by a QF/VEVAK unit while on board an aircraft flying from Dubai to Kyrgyzstan.  After his high profile capture, he was later executed after revealing that he had some initial meetings with NATO (North Atlantic Treaty Organization) representatives in Morocco and also American officials in Pakistan. According to Rigi, these NATO and American contacts requested for a meeting with him after Obama’s election because they wanted Jundallah to launch assassination and bombing operations in Tehran against top IRI officials and which were to be under American direction and supervision.

Aside from these, other Iranian organized terrorist actions were the bombings of Israeli diplomatic and non-diplomatic entities in capitals as far away as Buenos Aires in Argentina in 1992 and 1994.  The hijacking of a Kuwaiti Airways jumbo jet in Bangkok in 1988, the setting up of Qods Force units in Bosnia in 1994, and many more secret operations inside Iraq after the US invasion in 2003, which are just some of the many Iranian foreign operations being stepped up outside Iran.

And now, back to the main question: “Does Iran have such a motive and the capability to assassinate the Saudi Arabian Ambassador to Washington?”.  The answer would be a loud and big “Yes!”.  Yes of course Iran would like to strike down such a figure as Ambassador Al-Jubeiri.  Iran is a country with a predominantly large Shi’a Muslim population and the IRI is today the world’s leading religious-political center advancing a Shi’a-oriented Islamic revolutionary movement.

Its main rival in the Islamic world is Saudi Arabia which is home to the Wahhabi sect of Islam. The latter Islamic sect is far more numerous in number but is already directly being challenged by its Shi’a counterparts in many countries around the West Asian region and within the Arab world itself.  Another historical aspect to this rivalry dynamic is that Iranians are Persians, and not Arabs; and as such, the two have been long-time regional rivals for several centuries now.

In practice, to operationalize their respective faith-based agendas throughout the Islamic Ummah (community), they both need to use their own state apparatuses and national political platforms (the IRI and the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia/KSA). By doing so, they can further reach out to influence and proselytize other Muslims in other countries.  Within the political dimension, Riyadh is Washington’s closest and most strategic Arab state-ally in the region thus far, and this has greatly added to Tehran’s animosity toward both.

The Washington-Riyadh axis stands in sharp contrast to Tehran’s direct opposition to Washington.  The latter capitals severed their bilateral diplomatic relations after November 4, 1979, when Iranian revolutionary forces besieged the former US Embassy and held its diplomatic and consular staff captive for 444 days.  Although they were all released on January 20, 1981, US-Iran relations have only worsened over the past three decades now.

Furthermore, Iran is also very much angry with Ambassador Al-Jubeiri himself. This is because it was earlier revealed in the Wikileaks cables that sometime in 2008, he had informed US State Department senior officials that it would be better for the US to make a pre-emptive strike against Iran’s nuclear facilities deep inside Iranian territory if Washington could undertake such a military plan in the near future. According to Wikileaks, some of the words the Ambassador had used were, “The US must cut off the head of the snake” in reference to the Tehran-based leadership of the IRI.

And given this context, Iran would be quite pleased to see the number one official representative of the Wahhabi-controlled KSA to the Great Satan be slain on US soil without the Americans being able to stop it.  In such a case, Iran would effectively signal to its two main global rivals that Tehran can easily undertake missions to get rid of one of the KSA’s top diplomats and put the burden on the US for not being able to prevent it at all. For sure, an action like this would be a double slap on both the faces of the world’s top power and the world’s top oil producer.

This brief sketch of the reason for being, the capabilities and the motive of the Islamic Republic of Iran should fully be taken into account in relation to the US accusations. Through Pasdaran’s Qods Force, Iran can definitely show that it is highly capable of assassinating a foreign ambassador in another land. However, this should not necessitate a green-light to already accuse the IRI in the present case, just yet.

Furthermore, it must also be pointed out that Iran’s intelligence operations capabilities, while accepted by many as having one of the world’s top spy agencies, is fundamentally and generally of the same type as many of the world’s states for that matter.  In fact, we could definitely and confidently say that more than one-half of the member-states of the United Nations General Assembly also have the same secret intelligence services capabilities as Iran’s Qods Force/VEVAK.  But why does not Washington single out Britain’s MI6, Israel’s MOSSAD, Russia’s SVR, France’s DGSE, or even if you like PNoy’s own NICA?  All of these intelligence services have carried out the same dirty work that the QF/VEVAK has long been carrying out, and many of them are even far more notorious than Iran’s.  Yet still, among all of them combined, the CIA blatantly stands out for being the worst in committing various human rights violations, initiating democracy-destruction activities and overthrowing governments all around the world.

Just go to your nearest bookstore and you can readily find many books about the CIA’s global atrocities, all of which were carried out under orders of the White House since 1953. In August that year, the CIA teamed up with the MI6 and led a coup that ousted Iran’s democratically elected Prime Minister, Mohammad Mossadegh, under the instructions of then US President Dwight Eisenhower.  American imperialism’s primary aim of violently getting rid of another democratic government in Tehran was the strategic lust and greed for Iran’s vast amounts of oil.

Consequently, this was swiftly combined with the American thrust to expand its corporate markets inside and around Iran, while containing the Soviet threat from US military bases on Iranian territory.  Additionally, the US also wanted to create more Zionist (Israel)-friendly regimes in this region and to build a much wider diplomatic base for itself to directly counter Moscow’s then-growing influence.

Thus, the CIA’s successful 1953 covert action in Iran set a model and the stage for US imperialist interventions in more than seventy (recorded and identified so far) such operations worldwide until this very day. And to further keep count, as of this year, Colonel Muammar Khadaffi’s Libya was the latest imperialist target to be struck down successfully. Obama himself proudly declared this deed before the world’s media. That is why we can loudly reiterate once more that, ‘Washington is the main global terror center today’, and not Tehran.


Let us right now briefly scan the current global, regional and national strategic environments shaping and influencing the Iranian state today, specially its ayatollah-centered regime.  These elementary aspects should be looked at in order to better develop a general analysis premised on this central question: ‘What would Iran gain at this time and in the near future if it assassinated the Saudi Arabian Ambassador to Washington today?’.

To build toward an answer, let us first take a look at the current world situation with broad scans.  Economically speaking, capitalism is on the defensive across the major regions of the globe as the 9/15 global capitalist crisis only spawned major economic recessions in the more advanced economies.  Because they failed to rebound, their conditions only worsened as they negatively weighed down on the other weaker economies.  Such was the case in the Eurozone which led to a region-wide series of austerity measures by many of the European Union’s member states (e.g. Portugal, Ireland, Greece, Spain, Italy, France, the United Kingdom, etc.) in order to curb the downturns.

This regional economic situation directly led to mass revolts in these countries, especially by their young unemployed working classes militantly opposed to cutbacks in basic social services.  On many occasions, this social class only became more conscious and radical in their political resistance to the reactionary policies imposed by their own governments to protect their respective bourgeois ruling-classes and their greedy banks and corporations.  This remains the case until today because these capitalist states have yet to find any better longer-term solutions to the general crisis of capitalism.  Such is very much expected due to the rottenness and bankruptcy of the capitalist system of exploitation and oppression, and whose main logic for survival is to further ensure more of the same profiteering by a few at the expense of the many.

As could be expected in the long run, the country which started the whole systemic crash was now finding itself once again at the center of the global capitalist dilemma.  Just this August, the US economy’s normally very high credit ratings were practically de-rated overnight. This quickly sent a mighty political-economic shockwave to all the major capitalist centers of the world and from thereon out, countries such as Brazil and Britain, China and Chile, India and Indonesia, and many more others began to scramble for a way out as international capitalism threatened to suck their societies’ ruling elites down the drain.

And as the world’s capitalist contagion headed for the sewers, the American broad working and middle classes took a direct action by occupying, first Wall Street and then, the rest of their country’s major cities.  This rare American mix of an organized and spontaneous mass upsurge has yet to take a much more unified and clearer revolutionary direction to obviously change the capitalist system.  But for now, however, one thing is very certain—the present generation of young Americans are fed up with their social-economic system of corporate-driven greed that is institutionally backed up by federal government laws and policies all the way to the White House.

This new wave of America’s mass movement, which is symbolically and politically fighting back against all the anti-human evils of Wall Streetist capitalism, has only managed to unleash a far more massive international wave of a progressive mass upsurge.  This worldwide tsunami of newly inspired and more assertive anti-capitalist protest and resistance forces is now arrayed in a broad global united front.  For now, this potentially revolutionary global social-political force is now in the early stages of militantly resisting the basically pro-rich and anti-poor policy measures of world capitalism, especially its state-based ruling-class proxies frantically trying to escape the spectre of world revolution.

On the political level, US imperialism and its main allies are now in an internationally defensive situation.  From Latin America to Europe and from West Asia to East Asia, America is taking a major beating for its past and present policy interventions principally geared to uphold US economic interests in these areas of the world.  Now that the US is being forced out of Iraq after a long and bloody war and with its military forces now caught up in a bloody stalemate in Afghanistan, America’s economic downspin is not helping Washington to maintain its traditionally strong diplomatic clout, which is not yet kaput for now.

Given its present condition, the US is also having problems with its own immediate regional neighbors in Latin America and Cuba.  The still intensifying Left-ward shift by many of this region’s governments and their peoples can only be good for Latin America’s vibrantly strong and progressive mass movements in the long run.  This regional process of Left accumulation of forces can only solidify a Latin American Left counter-pole to any further imperialist adventurism in the region. This will clearly be unfortunate for Washington and its minions within the area who remain dependent on the US for their own elite survival.

Elsewhere, both China and Russia continue to remain geostrategic fetters to America’s imperialist globalization process.  Many US foreign policy initiatives have usually been blocked by Beijing and Moscow in the United Nations Security Council.  For example, in the past decade alone, many UNSC resolutions drafted and pushed by Washington concerning diplomatic issues related to the Korean Peninsula, Palestine, Sudan, and especially Iran, have mostly been blocked by China’s and Russia’s permanent representatives to the UNSC.

And as we now take a scan at Iran’s regional strategic environment, we can see that this year began with the democratic victory of the Tunisian Revolution that ousted its former dictator Zine El Abidine Ben Ali in January.  Tunisia’s democratic revolution immediately sparked off a still rising wave of revolutionary mass upsurges around the Arab world, from North Africa to the Persian Gulf.  With Egypt’s Hosni Mubarak toppled in February and Libya’s Khadaffi overthrown in August (through NATO’s direct intervention), and his subsequent murder two months later, there remain several regimes in the area that are now facing their own possible downfall, particularly in the following Arab countries: Syria, Yemen, Bahrain, Sudan, Jordan, and Saudi Arabia.

Indeed, the year 2011 can already be marked as a historical turning point in world affairs as it ushered in a regional wave of mass democratic revolutions and other revolutionary mass upsurges.  From the Arab Revolutionary Wave to the revolutionary mass upsurge in the Eurozone, and from the Occupy Wall Street movement in the US to the global ‘occupy movements’, the world now seems to be in a semi-spontaneous state of a ‘global revolutionary mass upsurge’.

Obviously, many of these mass democratic uprisings have their own specific and unique reasons for starting and with their own different objectives. Even regional arch-enemies Israel and Iran have already experienced some forms of mass demonstrations in their countries since the year began.  The Israeli masses came out into the streets for mainly economic reasons, while the Iranian masses came out for mainly political reasons. In both Chile and Indonesia, their masses protested several times this year for basic economic demands.  But in Palestine, the masses did so for primarily political objectives aimed at stopping Israel’s illegal occupation of Palestine.

This unprecedented level of militant mass struggles on a worldwide scale which was sparked off by the Arab Revolutionary Wave of 2011 has not yet ended. In fact, we can safely surmise that the ‘global revolutionary mass upsurge’ will continue to intensify beyond the end of this year for as long as the global capitalist crisis and its oppressive reactions systemically remain in effect.

Now, before we take a brief look at Iran’s current national situation, let us also remind ourselves of Iran’s immediate regional threats.  US imperialist forces remain inside Iraq on Iran’s western border and inside Afghanistan on its eastern border.  Even though President Obama earlier announced that American combat troops will generally be pulled out of Iraq by the end of this year, Washington has already stated that several US military units will still remain in place for any future eventuality.

As US military forces are to be drawn out from Iraq, many of these same forces are expected to surge into Afghanistan, on Iran’s eastern flank.  And just as Washington also declared much earlier that its military presence will be reduced by 2014, it has already been revealed that American military forces will continue to operate in Afghanistan up to 2024.  Consequently, the Pentagon also announced a few weeks ago that it would increase American force levels in both Bahrain and Kuwait, while keeping its military presence in Turkey.  In effect, Iran would still be ringed by a steadily increasing imperialist combat presence in all these countries just across its many borders.

Economically, Iran was one of the few countries in the world that was able to maintain a level of growth even after 9/15, and considering that it remains under UN Security Council-based international sanctions related to its nuclear agenda. Iran’s economic framework is basically capitalist and its market economy is of a mixed and transitional type with strong public sector dominance that ensures a centrally planned economic developmental path. Most notably, religious organizations and the IRGC control a substantial part of the Iranian economy through influenced companies, subsidiaries and trusts operating in a wide range of basic industries and under the general guidance of the Supreme Leader of the IRI.

As a major oil producer and exporter, Iran’s revolutionary regime has made sure to maintain state subsidies for its people.  This state policy was forcefully initiated during the early stages of the Iran-Iraq war period and kept up long after the war ended in 1988.  It was only in the middle of this year when the government of President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad decided to begin measures to shift away from this national economic setup. This is aimed at making Iranian capitalism more competitive in the international market arena and to make the country the 12th largest economy by 2015 as hoped by Tehran.

Nevertheless, while high oil prices in recent years enabled Iran to earn over $100 billion in foreign exchange reserves which helped to sustain its self-sufficiency and domestic investment priorities, its economy continued to experience double-digit unemployment and some inflation-related problems. This situation has caused many of its well educated corps of young professionals to seek overseas employment and thus, it is now creating a national brain drain pressure on Iran’s state-identified developmental goals.  Yet all the same, Iran is so far still able to develop and sustain its basic industrial and agricultural sectors while pursuing a relatively strong regional military capacity and combined with a growing nuclear capability.

And in political terms, the IRI’s state leadership is currently experiencing a seemingly internal power play between the camps of its Supreme Leader (Khamenei) and its President (Ahmadinejad).  This present political situation can generally be traced to the aftermath of Iran’s national elections of June 2009, and before that to 1989, when a post-Ayatollah Khomeini constitutional change created the post of President.  President Ahmadinejad is officially under the control of the Supreme Leader but he is already showing signs of further political ambition, of undermining Khamenei and publicly going against his holy boss.

Ahmadinejad only has over a year-and-a-half left before his term ends with no re-election possible in 2014. In recent months, however, Ahmadinejad has been perceived as strengthening his political power base by publicly opposing certain government officials closely identified with Khamenei while building up a set of his own potential candidates for future elections.  This has definitely not gone unnoticed by the Islamic Republic’s Supreme Leader.

In his latest rebuke of the president, the Supreme Leader publicly stated in late October that he may yet abolish the position of President.  This also perhaps reflects Khamenei’s own political standing wherein he feels that the two past presidents (Rafsanjani and Khatami), and now Ahmadinejad, have all used their offices to eventually counter the Supreme Leader of the Islamic Revolution.  And since he is the anointed successor of Imam Khomeini for life, Khamenei is obviously very irritated, and if not angry, with his presidential subordinate for challenging him and thus, questioning his holy-political authority in Iranian society.

From a balanced perspective, between the IRI’s Supreme Leader and his subordinate President, the former is not only legitimately powerful in terms of a religious and constitutional mandate, but more so in political and practical terms.  The Supreme Leader is the overall and supreme commander of all of the Iranian state’s armed institutions and military forces, especially the all-powerful IRGC.  And as the Supreme Leader of the Islamic Revolution, Khamenei also directly appoints into office the heads of the IRI’s civil government and judiciary, including the elected president. Hence, it was Khamenei who publicly supported an embattled Ahmadinejad after the 2009 electoral tumult and thus, officially recognizing the latter as Iran’s newly-elected President to the furious chagrin of millions of Iranians who hoped for some real change in their country.



From an Iranian perspective there are now at least three other crucial and pressing factors which I am sure Tehran has already calculated beforehand.  These three issues, which are not new at all, but which have very recently been widely reported on in the international press, can also buttress why the Islamic Republic of Iran would not pursue any assassination operation in Washington at this time.  For the killing of the Saudi Arabian Ambassador would only point to Iran at a very untimely and negative conjuncture; and this would definitely not be in the IRI’s international favor.

The three crucial factors that have again made global headline news are: a) Revelations that the Zionist State of Israel is now planning to make a pre-emptive military strike against Iran’s nuclear facilities; b) Reiterations made by two former US government officials during a recent Congressional hearing to have top IRGC commanders assassinated; and c) Publication of a new report by the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) concerning updates on Iran’s nuclear program this November.

Concerning the first issue, a former director of Mossad, Meir Dagan, once again repeated his earlier warnings that Israel’s Prime Minister, Benjamin Netanyahu and Defense Minister, Ehud Barak (a former Prime Minister), are pressuring the Israeli Cabinet to already make a firm decision to militarily strike Iran’s nuclear facilities in Natanz and Bushehr, among other key targets inside Iran.  This is very alarming because Israel already has a past record of attacking Iraq’s Osirak nuclear reactor plant in 1981 and Syria’s al-Kibar nuclear facility in 2007.  And almost certainly, any Zionist military strike on Iran will instantly unleash a far-reaching and more devastating regional war with global repercussions.  In fact, Tehran has already stated several times before that any such attack by Tel Aviv against the former will automatically trigger a more destructive and bloody retaliation against both Israel and the US, including their close allies around the world.

Concerning the second issue, a former US Army general (Jack Keane) and a former CIA officer (Reuel Marc Gerecht) gave tell-tale testimonies during a hearing of the US House of Representatives’ Committee on Homeland Security late last month.  Both of them, who are well respected analysts inside the US foreign policy community, called for the US government to initiate an assassination program against top commanders of the Pasdaran. As a matter of fact, these two previous American government officials already made the same proposition in public several years ago and which were also picked up by the media.

In direct response to this matter, Major General Hassan Firouzabadi, the Chairman of Joint Chiefs of Staff of Iran’s armed forces, swiftly stated that “Iran will respond in kind to any killings of IRGC commanders” by American forces.  Likewise, Iran also issued a recent statement saying that it has written proof of past US terrorist plans and operations around the world, and that Tehran would soon present such documents to the UN Secretary General himself as proof of further American-initiated terrorist activities and plots.  In support of this assertion, Iran’s permanent mission to the UN initially submitted a letter to Ban Ki-moon denying any assassination plot while maintaining that, “the IRI regards US actions as a threat to peace and security in the world.”

And concerning the third issue, it is common international knowledge that the IAEA is scheduled to present to the UNSC by this November its official status report on Iran’s nuclear program.  As is the usual case, Iran does not expect the latest IAEA report to be generally positive nor in Tehran’s favor.  In fact, Iran’s top leadership is already bracing itself for any negative international fallout from such a report, which is also expected by many analysts to provide yet the latest basis for heightened sanctions and penalties against the IRI, short of a declared war. Iran’s Foreign Minister, Ali Akhbar Salehi, has already stated that Iran expects the upcoming IAEA report to be fabricated as its contents are politically motivated, especially under Western guidance.

So, given all these elements, we can now safely surmise that Iran would have already seriously taken all these into strong account by now.  Surely, any state with a serious foreign policy framework and agenda, like Iran, will fundamentally have to consider all global, regional and national trends, developments, threats, opportunities, and inputs before planning and pursuing any external action(s).

Similarly, it would also be safe to assess that the leadership of the Islamic Republic of Iran would not be stupid enough to shoot itself in the foot with the mere assassination of an ambassador of a regional rival who just happens to piss off Iran for now.  But still, this does not mean that Tehran will not make a hit on the ambassador and others in the future, especially when the timing and conditions are in the IRI’s tactical favor.

Having presented a brief analysis above, it now becomes very clear and almost certain that the Islamic Republic of Iran has no plans to assassinate Riyadh’s ambassador in Washington at this time, contrary to American assertions. Iran may have the capability and motive but this is definitely not the time for any such operation by Tehran.  This is because Iran needs to attract and develop further international support and solidarity from around the world to ensure that it does not become politically isolated should it come under a direct military attack by a joint Imperialist-Zionist axis of state-terrorists.  Tehran has already assessed this as a high possibility with a strong probability coming from the US-Israel axis of terror and given their steady racheting up of anti-Iran statements and posturing. Hence, Iran cannot be blamed for concluding such a future scenario as the past actions of both Washington and Tel Aviv within Iran’s immediate neighborhood has plainly confirmed to all that Washington and not Tehran is the main global terror center.  RTD

Published in Ang MASA (November 7, 2011).


ESCALATING AMERICA’S ‘GLOBAL WAR OF TERROR’: US Imperialism’s Legacy to the World a Decade After 9/11

In Imperialist Aggression on October 5, 2011 at 12:34 pm

Anti-imperialist resistance fighters continue to battle-damage American occupation troops in Iraq and Afghanistan

The international situation today has sharply become far more destructive and dangerous after more than ten years since September 11, 2001.  In direct reaction to the terrorist attacks deep inside the economic and political centers of the American homeland on that fateful Tuesday, then US President George W.(ar) Bush unleashed what he called a ‘Global War on Terror’, or ‘GWOT’.

Since the past decade, this White House-labeled GWOT has only revealed itself to be but a bare-naked policy of globalized militarist aggression by America. It swiftly became a primary foreign policy thrust of US imperialism to advance its own strategic agenda for world hegemony in the 21st Century.

Washington’s principal global aim since 1945 has always been to maintain and strengthen its overall control and domination of the international system in all its aspects—economic, political, military, social-cultural, and scientific-technological.  As the world’s leading imperialist power, the US constantly seeks to ensure that its domestic economic infrastructure is always able to sustain its productive capacities, provide for its citizens and of course, to secure super-profits for its capitalist ruling-class.

It does this through its economic-political influence inside a wide range of international institutions (i.e. the United Nations system, the World Bank, International Monetary Fund, World Trade Organization, the North Atlantic Treaty Organization, etc.). Specifically, US imperialism’s main pillars worldwide are a host of regionally placed puppet-states (e.g. the Philippine capitalist state) that incessantly and unquestioningly carry out whatever Washington orders them to do.  As such, these agent-states persistently provide America with natural resources, open markets and military access.

And in return, America never forgets to reciprocate with its own favors. Thus, Washington frequently supports these pro-imperialist agent-governments with political-military backing for the latter’s exploitative, oppressive and repressive state policies against their own peoples. State-terrorism works both ways.

But on the other hand, however, if any state, organization and/or individual around the world dare to chart an independent path from the American hegemonic project, then US imperialism is always ready and willing to steady the killing of any such ‘terrorist enemy of democracy’.  This is a major fundamental focus of the GWOT.


Almost immediately after 9/11, US imperialism struck Afghanistan to topple the Taliban regime and its Osama bin Laden-led Al Qaeda terrorist network operating from inside that West Asian country.  On October 7, 2001, barely less than a month after the OBL-led attacks against the US, American troops fully invaded Afghanistan. However, this invasion was planned months prior to 9/11, with the support of mujahedeen guerillas of the anti-Taliban Northern Alliance together with several surrounding countries. Deliberately or otherwise, the 9/11 attacks were undertaken around the same period of the invasion planning.

The US was able to quickly overthrow the Taliban and to install a new puppet regime in Kabul under Washington’s agent Hamid Karzai.  And then almost a decade later, in early May this year, a joint CIA-SEAL Team-Six covert unit finally assassinated OBL in Pakistan without informing its own GWOT allies in Islamabad.  Until now, however, US troops still remain on the ground inside Afghanistan fighting the Taliban forces that have long ago shifted to guerilla warfare, while CIA-controlled drones have already expanded its battlefronts into many parts of Pakistan.

And even while American troops were still pursuing Taliban-AQ forces and hunting down OBL in the rugged mountains of Tora Bora near the Afghanistan-Pakistan border area, Bush’s militarist cabinet was already beginning to outline their preparations for a future US invasion of Iraq. Saddam Hussein, who clearly had nothing to do with 9/11, even though he may have harbored a lingering anger against Bush’s own father (who led an American-organized coalition against Iraq in January 1991 when he was then still the US president), instantly became demonized by Washington.  Lies and maneuvers were now aimed at Baghdad to ensure gaining both American and global public support once the invasion date was set.

In the meantime, the US was able to secure an operational zone for its special forces in the Southern Philippines in January 2002. Once again, with the collusion of the past Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo regime, American troops were able to re-enter sovereign Philippine territory in violation of our country’s own constitution. Under the operational codename ‘Operation Enduring Freedom-Philippines’, American special forces comprising the Joint Special Operations Task Force-Philippines (JSOTF-P) soon opened up a ‘new front against international terrorism’ in the Bangsamoro homeland.  In so doing, the imperialist forces immediately initiated their own low-intensity covert war against the Abu Sayyaf Group and Jemaah Islamiyah terrorists ostensibly to help the Philippine Government fight local terrorist groups linked to Al Qaeda.  Supposedly, this was GMA’s small contribution to Bush’s GWOT.

By the time US imperialist forces invaded Iraq on March 19-20, 2003, Bush was able to forge a ‘coalition of the killing’, which also included the Philippines.  This new phase of the GWOT was now backed up by many countries whose governments also passed new anti-terrorism laws for their respective states. Strikingly, they were all similarly patterned after the USA Patriot Act which was passed by the US Congress just a month after 9/11.  This anti-terror law was eventually criticized by the United Nations as an anti-democratic instrument and full of provisions that substantially violate human rights.

And so, ten years after the twin towers of the World Trade Center and the Pentagon were attacked, an ominous pattern has now emerged.  Bush’s GWOT is now largely characterized by the following component parts: a) rally worldwide public opinion behind Washington and against international terrorism and even anti-imperialist states and movements (“You are either with us or against us”); b) build the so-called ‘coalition of the willing’ (which is in truth the ‘coalition of the killing’) from among agent-states and their reactionary armies; c) push for national-level laws similar to the USA Patriot Act to stifle a wide range of internal dissent; d) arrange for US military access in many countries of the world as part of the imperialist pre-positioning on a global-scale; e) conduct secret rendition activities of terrorist suspects through the use of torture by allied security and intelligence services; and f) launch and intensify a wide range of US-initiated low-intensity conflict through a mix of clandestine operations and covert actions as part of Washington’s new doctrine called ‘black reconnaissance’ against international terrorism.

To put this into full context, the post-9/11 global strategy is all centrally geared to support America’s neoliberal globalization process aimed at opening up national and regional markets worldwide.  The imperialist agenda is to ensure the free flow of capitalist goods, services and finance capital all throughout the international system.  By achieving this and maintaining its stranglehold, US imperialism maximizes its hegemonic control and dominance over critical and vital natural resources needed to keep the American economic system alive, especially oil and other potential energy sources.

Given all this, we should by now accurately and specifically re-tag ‘GWOT’ as standing for ‘global war of terror’, and not, therefore, to be misguided nor mistaken as a ‘global war on terror’ as Bush always claims. This must be made clear because, ever since it was launched in retaliation for 9/11, the GWOT’s overall impact was to terrorize the world’s countries and their governments into submission. And it certainly and definitely imposed US state-terrorism against the rest of the world.  Hence, it only managed to successfully terrorize and scare a great majority of the world’s citizenry into supporting America’s hidden global agenda.


By the time Barack Obama was sworn into the White House on January 20, 2009, he immediately made an about-face from his earlier stated position against Bush’s invasion of Iraq. Previously, during his 2008 presidential campaign, Obama swore to end the war in Iraq and to reposition forces for a new surge into Afghanistan.  This position only revealed Obama as just another imperialist jingoist who is ready to step up American militarist intervention worldwide for as long as it suits Washingon’s narrow strategic interests.

Since then, US foreign policy has continued to aggressively march along a Bush-Obama Axis of Terror-line. Along this track, US imperialism remains strongly entrenched within the same GWOT framework as it was earlier postulated out by Bush and his Project for the New American Century militarist strategists.  The PNAC think-tankers were the original conceptualizers and planners behind the GWOT.

Recently, however, US imperialism under the Obama White House has continued to ratchet up its aggressive tone towards Iran, North Korea, China, and Venezuela, while confronting the Arab revolutionary upsurge.  In fact, with the emergence of the Arab revolutionary mass uprisings beginning in Tunisia last December, the White House consistently took on a vague and contradictory position, from the Arab Maghreb region to the Levant and into the Persian Gulf area.  It did so in order to maintain America’s oil access and security presence throughout the Arab world regardless of who comes to power.

As the world enters the second decade of the 21st Century with its many complexities and dynamics, US imperialism is also adjusting accordingly—but always never losing sight of its hegemonic objectives.  For now, America’s global strategy in this current period seems to be focused on the following external concerns to Washington: a) rebounding from the post-September 15, 2008 global capitalist crisis, which has recently worsened due to the Euro-zone debt dilemmas and America’s own credit-ratings fallout last August; b) confronting China’s fast-rising power in the Asian region while remaining engaged with Beijing in this part of the world; c) figuring a way out of the North Korean nuclear impasse and Pyongyang’s uncertain (in)stability; d) watching the Iranian situation as the strongest regional power in West Asia today, and with US troops stationed just across its borders (in Iraq, Afghanistan and Turkey); e) remaining in a defensive posture in the Western Hemisphere due to the very solid Bolivarian revolutionary alliance in this region, with Cuba-Venezuela-Bolivia-Ecuador being the central core of this anti-imperialist alliance; and f) studying the potential long-term impact of the still growing BRICS (Brazil-Russia-India-China-South Africa) five-nation political organization of leading emergent economies which is now a new global counter-pole to Washington.

Nevertheless, the current international system is still very much dominated by the directional dynamics of US imperialism even as America faces certain limitations at this point.  While this situational development may continue for the next few years in relation to the external conditions identified above, American foreign and security policy will always critically strive to sustain its leading military position in world affairs in order to remain a global leader on the world stage. And it will do this by using the 9/11 case as the key basis for keeping its GWOT framework intact and as the centerpiece of this foreign policy strategy. Hence, the Bush-Obama Axis of Terror-line will be extended in the years to come as it aims to further advance and attain its implicit imperialist objectives.


To stay ahead of its many global rivals and enemies, US imperialism will definitely have to outmaneuver all of them at both the regional and international levels.  To be effective in carrying this out, America would have to view the global strategic environment as one vast and enormous warzone where it must engage its enemies in a series of continuous and even simultaneous battles.

During the Cold War period, when Washington warred against Moscow and the Soviet Bloc, it primarily employed a wide range of clandestine, covert and secret warfare strategies and tactics in conjunction with limited open warfare. And so guided by its past, US imperialism in the years ahead can now be expected to employ some similar form of a globalized warfare against the current set of resolutely committed anti-imperialist forces, from Islamists to revolutionary socialists (with many in between).

To be sure about it, a new American strategic doctrine is already being tested and pursued. Termed as ‘black reconnaissance’, it is not absolutely new, but it has relatively been redesigned to effectively engage the post-9/11 global warzone. Although it was conceptualized much earlier, the current phase of US-led black reconnaissance operations recently came about a few years after 9/11, particularly around the time before Bush’s re-election campaign in late 2004.  This was when the Pentagon, under then Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld, was given control over secret commando teams and other special operations units to conduct covert operations against suspected terrorist targets in various regions of the world.

These black reconnaissance operations do not have to be reported to Congress at all, nor to the regional American military commanders spread across the globe. This enables the Pentagon to run the operations outside normal government channels and free from any legal restrictions presently imposed on the CIA. Under current law, all CIA covert activities overseas must have a Presidential authorization and reported to the Senate and House intelligence committees.

In fact, Wikileaks recently released cables that emanated from the US Embassy in Manila and which were sent to Washington around the 2005-06 period revealing such black reconnaissance-type activities on Philippine soil. According to these cables, JSOTF-P elements conducted psychological warfare operations in the Southern Philippines without top officials of the Philippine government (and much less the general public) knowing about them, especially the operational details.

Likewise, many recently posted Wikileaks cables also show that the US conducted a series of worldwide secret operations.  From East Asia to West Asia, from Africa to Latin America, including some parts of Europe, various covert anti-terrorism operations were carried out without many concerned governments ever knowing about them.  Perhaps the sharpest case in point was the May 2, 2011 black reconnaissance mission which assassinated Osama bin Laden in Abbottabad, Pakistan. This secret operation very much angered the Pakistani government because the US violated their sovereignty and also, because Washington never briefed Islamabad about it even hours prior to the raid.

Many of these black reconnaissance operations have now been publicly revealed to have been carried out after 9/11, especially after Bush’s re-election in November 2004. This practically shows that such black missions are now much an integral part of a neo-Cold War strategy, much like the earlier Cold War strategy of ‘containment’ (aimed at containing the former Soviet Union’s global activities and expansion).

This new form of a post-9/11 global warfare strategy is what we could generally call a ‘Global Black War’. This may be an appropriate term since this type of war is very much hidden from the public’s view and primarily fought out secretly in the dark shadows of the worldwide warzone. And surely, the black reconnaissance after-battle reports will never become known nor publicized, unless by accident or by calculated design.

In the meantime, US imperialism is already escalating its black reconnaissance missions across the world to strike fear and terror among both its enemies and temporary friends.  As we enter the second decade after 9/11, America’s Global Black War, which is in dark reality a true ‘global war of terror’, is by now preparing to attack new targets.  And if reports from Washington’s intelligence community are to be believed, such a future target is Iran.

Surely, I can now expect and imagine that these hated imperialist black warriors are already operating inside Iran today. And as you read this, they are right now probably collecting intelligence, recruiting new agents, accumulating logistics, conducting psychological-warfare operations and, of course, identifying human and physical targets for future assassinations, renditions, sabotage and bombings.  This is US imperialism’s legacy of 9/11 to the world. RTD

Published in Ang Masa (October 2011)

OCCUPY WALL STREET NOW!: A New Salvo to Fight and Destroy US Imperialist Capitalism from Within

In Worldwide Revolution on October 3, 2011 at 12:10 pm

Sanlakas activists execute a 'lightning blockade' of a Manila street before President Noynoy Aquino's State of the National Address 2011

A new generation of progressive militancy within the American mass movement has just been born.  Its ultimate aim is no less than the political destruction of the financial base of US imperialist capitalism and its globalized system of exploitation and oppression imposed throughout the world.  Toward this objective, the movement’s very first tactical operation was launched on September 17, 2011 in New York City.

The initial collective action that was taken was the mass occupation of Wall Street—the heartland and command center of American capitalism. This tactical form of political struggle generally reflects the still intensifying revolutionary mass upsurges across the globe today. From the Arab Revolutionary Spring to the militant mass struggles against austerity measures in the debt crisis-plagued Eurozone, and from the heightening revolutionary mass struggles to empower the poor in Latin America to direct popular actions elsewhere in Asia, the American masses are now also on the move.

With their mass occupation of Wall Street, and across other cities of America, young fed-up and angry Americans are now adding their militant actions and progressive calls to the ever mounting internationalist solidarity movement against the greedy and heartless capitalist-rulers. Their increasing social force is only adding more weight to the international balance of forces which aim to finally break and smash US capitalism’s role and control over the imperialist system.

At present, the ‘Occupy Wall Street Movement’, which is leading the assault to change the anti-majority economic-social system which only benefits a few rich American families, is a broad-based movement of mainly working class masses.  They are mostly young people without jobs and who are very furious and outraged at the fact that their own futures are already devoid of any economic security.  They are quite consciously aware of their social-economic conditions in life and frustrated that the ‘good ole American capitalist way of life’ can no longer provide them with, nor assure them of, a much better, secure and well-off life ahead.

They now realize that their own generation of young Americans is no different at all from their similarly aged brothers and sisters across the Atlantic and the Pacific oceans, and even south of the Rio Grande, now fighting to change the capitalist system in their respective countries and regions.  That is why today they have finally reached the same conclusion that most, if not all, of the problems of the world today—economically, socially, politically and culturally—can all be systemically traced to the fundamental contradictions imposed by the global capitalist system itself.

And their collective self realization is that US imperialism has long been the major cause behind a great many of the world’s problems since it became the leading imperialist power after 1945. Whether they are economic crises, political-security conflicts, social injustice cases, including structural ills and problems due to class struggles at the national level, the triggering factors can usually be tracked back to Washington and its foreign policy agenda.And even now, the global leaks and spillover effects from the US imperialist maneuvers are presently piling up and clearly becoming dangerous to all. From America’s fully dictated neoliberal globalization schemes, to its wars of aggression in Afghanistan and Iraq and elsewhere, and even to the globally hazardous effects of Washington’s policy framework on climate change, the US is clearly viewed and acknowledged as the leading international perpetrator of the world’s many evils, in collusion with its various puppet agent-states.

That is why today’s militant mass upsurge in America has brought out tens of thousands of people onto the streets.  After Wall Street, thousands of homeless, jobless and hopeless young Americans have now collectively decided to stop their passive sufferings by initiating direct popular actions in many cities across the country.  This can already be seen in the West Coast (Seattle, San Francisco, Los Angeles, etc.) to the East Coast (New York, Boston, Tampa, etc.) and in between (Chicago, Albuquerque, etc.).  The American oppressed masses are now reclaiming their once lost rights.

In fact, the mass arrests of more than seven-hundred people blocking the Brooklyn Bridge in New York on October 1 is further proof of the mass movement’s increasing participation and growing radicalization and readiness to struggle for their inherent social-economic rights. On the other hand, the recent arrests and violent attacks by the police can only attest to the rising fear now struck into the minds and hearts of America’s ruling class.

Thus, this emergent specter of terror starting to haunt the American ruling elite must be understood in its proper context.  These developments now make it very important and urgent for all of us to clearly understand the dynamics of the imperialist globalization process today and the social havoc it has long unleashed on a global scale. This is because it is already the international working class forces, especially the world’s exploited and oppressed masses, who have now become the frontline defenders forced to resist this imperialist capitalist onslaught from inside our respective national states.


For almost fifteen years now, beginning with the Asian financial crisis of mid-1997 which was triggered by the collapse of the Thai baht, this neoliberal contagion swiftly leapt across major regional economies to structurally affect the international economic system. This was the case when it quickly struck the Brazilian and Russian economies by 1998-99.  Almost soon afterward, it was immediately followed by the Dot-com bubble burst by late 2000 and early 2001, and this came just a few months prior to the 9/11 terrorist strike on America which only accelerated the dropping of the US stock market.

By the middle part of the past decade, the 2007 US housing bubble also blew up and further damaged what was still left of the US economic fabric that had just been torn apart at the start of the 21st Century. Its damaging effects negatively swept over into the prime centers of American economic power and only caused even more problems for the American ruling, middle and working classes.

Unsurprisingly, Bush and his imperialist advisers used this political-economic dilemma as a justification to reboot the American national outlook. To pump-prime the economy back into its normal capitalist profit-seeking cycle, Bush needed a key justification in order to boost US public spending. This was vitally needed to hopefully fire-up the American public’s confidence towards increasing a much higher level of private spending so as to get back US capitalism’s normally aggressive pace.

Toward this end, and as part of a comprehensively long-term plan to maintain US imperialism’s global hegemony, Bush swiftly imposed a ‘Global War of Terror’ whose primary aim was to terrorize the world’s governments and citizenry and especially, the progressive mass movement into submission.  While its immediate and urgently stated agenda was to attack and kill terrorists of all stripes, including US-labeled anti-imperialist states and organizations (i.e. Cuba, Venezuela, the revolutionary socialist movement, etc.), the longer term agenda was to ensure that most countries of the world, especially from the global South that are very much dependent on US-controlled and/or influenced financial aid and loan packages, would increasingly submit to Washington’s imperial dictates.

This meant that these countries and their respective governments had to ultimately open up their internal markets to more free-trade and for them to strengthen their neoliberal direction and thrusts.  This situation clearly doomed these peripheral economies into becoming more subservient to a much stronger hegemonic domination by America.  As such, it was only inevitable that these governments became ensnared into adopting neoliberal economic policy schemes such as privatization, liberalization, deregulation and contractualization (or the flexible adjustment of the general workforce) and which, only harmed them furthermore.

On top of Washington’s obligatory arrangement for its puppet-states, their own national governments would now also have to ensure the free flow of natural resources, especially oil and other potential energy sources, back into the American home-base.  And to secure this stepped up bilateral ploy in favor of US imperialism, American military forces and bases were likewise inserted and pre-positioned inside some countries, such as the Philippines, South Korea, Japan, Pakistan, etc. to ensure a stronger compliance by their puppet governments to keep up the one-sided relationship with Washington.

By the time Wall Street crashed on 9/15 (September 15, 2008), the world’s economy was already more than a decade past the Asian financial crisis and in shambles.  But this new crisis instantly turned the global economic system into a downward spin and thus marked a historic watershed date in contemporary international affairs. This was because the previous Thai economic crash only clearly sharpened the internal contradictions of global capitalism in the long run, especially the crisis of overproduction in the advanced economies of the global North.

During this period (1998-2001), the North’s products were unable to be effectively absorbed by the relatively dried up markets of the South due to the latter’s basically low buying capacities.  This subsequent period eventually caused even much greater damage to the international capitalist system.  And by the end of 2001, it only worsened when Bush forcefully pushed his global war of terror onto the world stage thus, further disrupting international markets.

The fallout of this was reflected through a combination of false economic hopes, a still sluggish economic upturn and, yet another set of super-profits-seeking derivatives which ultimately brought us into the 9/15 Wall Street crash. But now, rather than urgently saving the social-economic standing of the general public, or in other words, saving the majority from the global economic tsunami, US imperialism in blitzkrieg speed chose to save the elite banks and the tiny minority of super-greedy bosses instead.  Ultimately, this bank bailout approach set the trend for the Eurozone fiasco and its aftermath.

By the time the weaker economies of the European Union got swamped by the sovereign debt fallout in 2009-2011, particularly in Portugal, Ireland, Greece and Spain (PIGS), the EU also decided to rescue the bankers and their banks first.  When they later decided to start saving their own ordinary masses next, the bourgeois ruling-class regimes imposed harsh life-threatening conditionalities on their respective societies.  They did this by pulling out the critical and decades-old social welfare programs (i.e. pensions, medical care, educational subsidies, housing programs, etc.) even as the prices of basic goods and commodities went up, while salaries of those still employed were frozen (or even reduced).  This was the infamous round of imposed austerity measures which only greatly impacted upon the already jobless poor who comprise the majority.

By mid-2010 and into this year, many countries in and around Europe, including Italy, France, Belgium, Iceland, the United Kingdom, Switzerland, and Cyprus witnessed an eruption of mass social indignations and corresponding protest actions.  These were primarily initiated through large-scale militant mass actions and other forms of protest rallies against the austerity measures of their governments; and combined with urgent demands to stop the austerity cuts, bring back the social programs and to punish the greedy elite capitalists and their banks since the latter are to be blamed for the debt crisis in the first place. Oftentimes during these militant mass actions, the progressive masses would likewise demand for the overthrow of the current reactionary governments themselves. Thus far, however, no European government has yet fallen unlike those of Tunisia, Libya and Egypt, and to a certain degree, those of Jordan and Yemen.


The newly stirring American progressive mass movement, which is now highlighted by the militant mass occupation of Wall Street and elsewhere, is both highly symbolic and a defining moment in US political history.  Regardless of its character and capacity at this point in time should not become the central issue. Any unnecessary debates here could only serve to undermine a still developing social-political force for genuine systemic change. Only the further development of the American class struggle will help to clearly define its direction, together with other revolutionary-conscious political forces engaging the new movement.

Likewise, as the American class struggle develops and sharpens some more, and if the balance of the working class forces accumulates and shifts in favor of the progressive Left, then America’s laboring masses may yet become more agitated and radicalized.  If this happens to a significant layer of the new movement, then a turn to more militant mass actions could also eventually spark a cross-over of this layer into the revolutionary socialist camp.

Yet still, the objective conditions dialectically posed by the global (external) and national (internal) pressures upon America will also determine the pace of working class struggle and its capacity to expand its political influence beyond those on the streets today.  This will eventually be critical to winning more and newly-radicalizing forces into a revolutionary socialist project later on.

But for now, the Occupy Wall Street Movement, and its still growing like-minded forces across the US, has now become a political symbol and an independent progressive counter-pole as it rallies around its cause more Americans disillusioned with the American Dream. This is because it represents the independent and collective will of a growing section of the American people who are now willing to openly defy their own well-established, and if not, an almost sacred American national value: the capitalist free-enterprise market system.

Furthermore, the launching of the new mass movement through the occupation tactics on Wall Street has only opened up a new page in the history books of contemporary US political struggles, specifically in terms of the American anti-imperialist movement.  In doing so, the latter has only breathed a little more hope and life into the global anti-US imperialist movement, and particularly among the revolutionary socialist forces worldwide.

This is because the Occupy Wall Street Movement and other such oriented forces that may yet arise in the near future are also reinforcing and augmenting the world anti-imperialist united front.  Just like in the late 1960s and early 1970s, at the height of the worldwide front opposed to the US imperialist war against North Vietnam, the American anti-war movement also greatly played a major role in undermining the US public’s support for the Johnson-Nixon imperialist agenda against Hanoi.

The timeliness of this emergent militant mass movement is also a very crucial factor in our overall revolutionary struggle for genuine systemic change, especially in the fight against US imperialism.  This is so, because an internally homegrown anti-imperialist capitalist force that directly challenges the legitimacy of US foreign policy around the world, while also fighting to undermine Washington’s capitalist agenda and interests from within the belly of the American beast itself, instantly relieves pressures from other revolutionary battlefronts such as, Cuba, Venezuela, Bolivia, and Ecuador, for example.  On the other hand, it also has the potential to stop and, if not, to delay any potential imperialist strike against other anti-imperialist states like Iran, or even Syria, that could erupt into yet another global conflagration affecting millions of people the world over.

Lastly, revolutionary Left forces in the Philippines and the rest of the world, should also actively contribute our collective share and effort to the world revolutionary struggle against imperialist capitalism. We should always raise and sustain the intensity of our national mass struggles aimed at resisting and combating all forms of the US imperialist globalization offensive, particularly within the countries of the imperialist periphery.

 And as we progressively advance our movement’s revolutionary mass struggles forward, we should never forget to constantly educate-organize-mobilize the broad working class masses and all the other exploited and oppressed social layers present in the Philippines today. Only in doing so can we eventually defeat the reactionary and bourgeois-elite ruling-class in the Philippines and then cut-open its umbilical connection to US imperialism.  If we can successfully carry out our revolutionary socialist mission here, then we shall therefore, also be able to reinforce the internationalist and revolutionary proletarian struggles to finally defeat imperialist capitalism once and for all. RTD

Published in Ang Masa (October 3, 2011)