The text below is an interview with Jean-Luc Mélenchon, leader of the "France Insoumise" movement, with Tariq Ali, editor-in-chief of the quarterly "New Left Review," on July 11. Al-Akhbar, a leading Lebanese newspaper, is publishing a translation of the most prominent points, given the importance of the article's coverage of international developments, the nature of the US-China tension, and its implications.
⚫ Let's start directly with Gaza. We hope this is the final stage of this Israeli war. The human toll will reach hundreds of thousands of dead, and perhaps approach half a million. No Western country has made a serious attempt to stop it. Last month, Trump ordered the Israelis to sign a ceasefire agreement with Iran, and when Israel violated it, he became furious. To use his immortal phrase: "They don't know what they're doing." But this leads me to ask: Do you think the Americans know what they're doing?
-We must try to understand the logic of these Western countries. It is not enough to say that Trump is crazy or that the Europeans are cowards; they may be, but what they are doing is based on a long-term plan—a plan that failed in the past, but is now being implemented.
This plan is based, first, on reorganizing the entire Middle East to ensure access to oil for the countries of the Global North; and, second, on creating the conditions necessary for a war with China.
The first goal dates back to the Iran-Iraq War, when the United States used Saddam Hussein's regime as a tool to contain the Iranian revolution. After the fall of the Soviet Union, they launched the Gulf War, and Bush Sr. declared a "new world order." From the outset, I viewed this as an attempt to control oil and gas pipelines and protect American energy independence by maintaining prices at a level that ensured the viability of oil extraction through hydraulic fracturing, the technology they employ.
When we understand these basic imperial ambitions, we understand other events more clearly.
For example, what did the United States do in Afghanistan after the 2001 invasion? It blocked an oil pipeline through Iran.
The war against ISIS in Syria was, in many ways, also a war over a pipeline.
This, then, is a largely logical chain. An empire is only truly an empire if it can maintain control over certain resources—and that is precisely what is happening today.
The United States has decided to redraw the map of the Middle East, using Israel as a tool and ally.
They realize that Israel must be rewarded for this role. This has been achieved by politically supporting the "Greater Israel" project, in which the Palestinian population in Gaza and elsewhere is supposed to disappear.
If Europe and the United States had wanted to stop this war, it would have ended within three or four days of Israeli responses after October 7. But it has been going on for more than twenty months, so no one can claim that the Americans don't know what they are doing. What is happening in the region is intentional, planned, and orchestrated in coordination between the United States and Netanyahu.
⚫ You mentioned that the second part of the American plan is to clash with China. Many liberals and center-leftists today see what is happening in the Middle East as horrific, and that the real enemy should be China. But they don't realize that China is actually the real target, because, as you said, if the United States controlled all the region's oil—as it would if Iran fell—it would control the flow of this vital commodity. It could then force Beijing to beg for it, which would help keep it under control. So, while the American strategy in the Middle East may look completely crazy from the outside—and it is, on many levels—it also has a deep logic: it is better to fight China this way, and or even wage a war against it.
-I firmly believe that the day will come when we will have an "Insoumise" government capable of asserting sovereignty over our domestic production and our foreign policy: a government that recognizes that China, while a threat to the imperial system, is not a threat to us. This is what I am fighting for.
If the capitalist system continues to dominate, with neoliberals remaining in power, humanity will be on the road to destruction. The reason is simple: capitalism is a suicidal system that profits from the disasters it creates. Every previous system was forced to stop when it produced too much chaos. But this system isn't like that. If it rains heavily, it sells you an umbrella. If it gets too hot, it sells you ice cream or air conditioning.
As for Germany, that's a different matter. As you know, in France we often say, "Our German friends." Well, the Germans are nobody's friends. They always think only of their own national interests. They break agreements with us all the time. And today, they're ready to invest $46 billion in their war economy because they lost the battle for the auto industry more than fifteen years ago.
However, even the Germans learned a harsh lesson from the United States. They ended up relying on Gazprom for their energy. Mr. Schröder went to work for this company and got a good deal with the Russians. Then the Americans came and said, "Stop," and Nord Stream was destroyed. You see, the empire strikes down anyone who disobeys its orders.
⚫ What do you think the world will be like at the end of this century?
- The only thing we can know for sure is that humanity will either have to find a way to unite to confront climate change, or it will collapse. There will always be people who survive storms, droughts, and floods. But technicians will not be able to hold society together as a whole. In France, we have some of the best technicians in the world, but they are foolish enough to think that things will remain as they are.
They are planning to build new nuclear plants as part of their climate strategy, but nuclear plants cannot operate without cooling, and cooling requires cold water, which is becoming increasingly scarce.
We've already started shutting down some stations because temperatures have become excessive.
This is just one example, but there are dozens of other cases where political decisions are made as if the world will remain as it is.
As materialists, we must approach political action within the confines of an ecosystem threatened with collapse. Unless we start from this premise, our arguments are worthless.
We can also look at the issue from a geopolitical perspective. Today, 90% of global trade is carried out by sea. But this is not necessarily the easiest way to transport goods. Several studies have already shown that rail transport is safer, faster, and often cheaper. We can therefore imagine that as the climate deteriorates, the Chinese will begin to explore alternative routes for exporting their products. The Beijing-Berlin route will be essential in connecting them to Europe; remember, China previously chose Germany as the final destination of one of the Silk Roads. The other major route passes through Tehran and enters Europe from the south. China will have a global advantage in developing these new trade channels because it is the dominant power in terms of technical efficiency—a crucial feature of “traditional” capitalism.
The United States, however, no longer possesses that technical capability. The Americans are unable even to maintain the International Space Station orbiting Earth, while the Chinese replace their space station crew every six months. The Americans can barely send anything into space, while the Chinese finally landed a robot on the dark side of the moon.
“Westerners”—and I put the word in quotation marks because I don’t like it; I don’t consider myself a “Westerner”—are too self-absorbed to acknowledge this imbalance.
In short, if the capitalist system continues to dominate, with neoliberals remaining in power, humanity will be on the road to destruction. The reason is simple: capitalism is a suicidal system that benefits from the disasters it creates. Every previous system was forced to stop when it produced too much chaos. But this system isn't like that. If it rains heavily, it sells you an umbrella. If it gets too hot, it sells you ice cream or air conditioning.
In the coming decades, collectivist systems will demonstrate that collectivism offers a more satisfying perspective for human beings than liberal competitiveness. On a very personal level, I would venture a prediction: I believe that before the end of this century—and perhaps even sooner—the United States of America will cease to exist.
Why? Because it's not a real nation, but a country at war with all its neighbors since its founding. Samuel Huntington described it as an intrinsically unstable structure and predicted that Spanish would become its dominant language. Today, about half of the population of the United States speaks Spanish at home, and this group is predominantly Catholic, unlike the Enlightenment Protestants who founded the country. These linguistic and cultural dynamics are crucial. People are deeply attached to their mother tongue—the language in which a mother sings to her child and says "I love you" to a partner.
In California—a state that was taken from Mexico in 1822 and has the sixth-largest economy in the world by GDP—Spanish is now more widely spoken than English.
Therefore, it's no surprise that the California independence campaign is gaining momentum, and a referendum may even be held next year. I don't know if it will succeed, but it's remarkable that a key state in the global superpower is actively considering secession. And we're bound to see more of this in the future. The country's prevailing ideology—"each for itself"—will not be able to maintain its unity.
A very realistic and factual analysis, describing what is the position of the Western world in general and the US in particular, I received it originally by email and translated to Arabic , from its original French version, the present format and the English translation are mine and Google's, again and always to the benefit and better understanding of my good readers.
As always, all my thanks to all.
No comments:
Post a Comment