Socialist Sonnet No. 227

Telling Lies

 

Listen! ‘Tell me lies about Vietnam’*

And Suez, Korea, Afghanistan,

Libya, Syria, Iraq, Iran…

War’s the very worst deliberate scam,

Always a gross act of misdirection,

By which the misdirected lend consent

To their leaders’ malevolent intent:

All, of course, for the good of the nation.

What does victory look like? Much the same

As defeat! Inspired by cupidity,

Or even hubristic stupidity.

To the Lords of Misrule it’s still the Great Game.

The news will be encouraging no doubt;

Appear bare-faced, ‘tell me lies about…’*

 

D.A.

*From: 'To Whom It May Concern'

             Adrian Mitchell (1968)                                                                                                                                                 

 

Unhealthy living

 

The ONS recently reported that there had been small increases in life expectancy in the UK since the 2019–21 period. However, it also revealed that in 2022–24 there had been decreases in healthy life expectancy (HLE) since the previous period. 

HLE is the number of years that people can expect to spend in ‘good’ general health. In the more recent period, HLE at birth was 60.7 years for males and 60.9 years for females. The reductions here are 1.8 and 2.5 years, respectively.

So the chances are that at least a fifth of a person’s life will not be spent in decent health, a situation which is deteriorating. That’s life and health under capitalism!

https://www.worldsocialism.org/spgb/

Socialist Sonnet No.226

Spectacular Stories

 

Headlines were about a sex marketeer,

Spiced with possible royal relations,

The media was alive with sensations.

Until the tale changed and it became clear

The Commander in Chief had his eagle eye

On Greenland; cue a sharp change to the script.

How easily sovereignty can be stripped

Away, without a by your leave or why.

But, then on to the next cause, the next plan,

Kidnap an inconvenient head of state.

Yet hardly had he succumbed to his fate

When the world’s focus was moved to Iran.

Not letting news settle on a topic,

Spectacles might make people myopic.

 

D. A.

The bloodbath continues

 The ‘Soaraway Sun’ has a piece about changes of personnel on a BBC television programme.

It’s headlined , ‘the bloodbath continues’. The terms 'firing line’, ’cull’ and 'axed' are used in the piece.

Whilst sympathy for any wage slaves who lose their jobs is not unreasonable,  the not so subliminal language used here is inappropriate when across the world real bloodbaths are taking place. Innocent men, women and children are being slaughtered because of capitalists vampiric pursuit of resources and profits irrespective of at what cost to others.

How many people can you kill?

 

‘We aim to kill 50,000 Russians a month’, Ukraine’s new defence minister has said. This is an almost 50% increase on 2025 when around 35,000 per month were killed. Since the war began there have been around 1.2 million Russians casualties (killed, wounded and missing). Ukrainians have suffered fewer losses – estimates vary from 500,000 to 600,000 casualties. Another 200,000 Ukrainian soldiers are absent without official leave.

In the cold light of day, all this seems pretty unbelievable. But war and the devastation it causes is a constant feature of the capitalist world, where governments are prepared to sacrifice their populations in support of the economic interests of the tiny minority who own or control the vast majority of the wealth.

https://www.worldsocialism.org/spgb/

Socialist Sonnet No. 225

Collateral Damage

 

The primary target has been destroyed,

By a surgical strike designed to leave

Blasted and charred ruins for those who grieve

To pick through, for all who couldn’t avoid

Being reduced to statistics, a body count

On the evening news. Strategy is clear,

It’s the brutal diplomacy of fear,

Leaving far too few remains to amount

To complete human beings. There is concern,

International stock markets are falling,

With speculation, futures are stalling:

How many losses before fortunes turn?

The enemy is easily identified,

Being those barbarians on the other side.

 

D. A.

Iran in the cross hairs

 

Will the attack on Iran by the USA and Israel be another Twelve Day war like in June 2025? Or will it develop into something more devastating to the belligerents and non-belligerents? Is part of the global economy going to suffer serious consequences or will the oil shock likely to occur from the shutting down of prod and transportation likely to initiate the Seventies disruption or worse across a wider scale?

It is too soon to ascertain exactly what is happening although it does appear that Iran has targeted  several Arab states. The  propaganda and disinformation machinery on lots of sides is already being put fully into action so the dust of war will need to clear before it becomes apparent who has ‘won’ or ‘lost’ in this insane destruction of human lives and of infrastructure. 

Opinion polls in various states tend to show that the majority of populations are against further wars of any kind but the opinions of the majority count for nothing when 'those in charge' are pursuing actions to appropriate resources which will mean profit and more profit.

The human lives already lost and which will be lost and shattered are less than nothing in the considerations of those perpetuating this wholly illegal criminal act by two rogue states upon another. But this doesn’t mean that one has to cheer on or choose one particular side over the other. Hegemony is the name of the game in capitalism and whatever the outcome of this new war it will continue to be the cause of some new attempt by some state or other in the future to appropriate resources for the benefit of its capitalist class.

The below is from the Socialist Standard January 2008

Preparations for a US attack on Iran are well advanced. American planes probe the country's air defences. Commandos infiltrate Iran on sabotage and reconnaissance missions. A new military base is built close to the Iraq/Iran border at Badrah. The Fifth Fleet patrols in the Gulf and along Iran's southern coast.

Political preparations also continue. Accusations against Iran are elaborated and repeated ad nauseam. Pressure is exerted (with variable success) on other countries to assist in the war plans. Aid and encouragement are given to separatists in ethnic-minority areas of Iran: Arab Khuzestan in the southwest, "southern Azerbaijan" in the northwest. Resolutions are pushed through at the U.N. Security Council and in the US Congress to create a "legal" justification for aggression.

Why are the dominant capitalist interests in the US so bent on war with Iran? The war propaganda provides a highly distorted and incomplete picture of the real reasons.


"War against terror" – Stage 3?
An attack on Iran will be sold as the next stage, after Afghanistan and Iraq, of the "war against terror." What does this mean?

As with the attack on Iraq, the claim may be made, explicitly or implicitly, that the Iranian regime is connected in some way with Al-Qaeda. This time round the claim would be even more deceptive, as Iranian leaders denounced 9/11 and helped the US depose the Taliban in Afghanistan. The terrorism charge is also based on the real Iranian support of Hizbollah in Lebanon and Hamas in Palestine. This, however, means enlarging the meaning of "terrorist" to cover any armed movement that opposes the regional interests of the US and its allies. Finally, the US Congress has passed a resolution – supported, incidentally, by leading Democratic presidential contender Senator Hilary Clinton – declaring Iran's Revolutionary Guards (an elite section of its armed forces) a terrorist organization. This justifies military action against them as part of the "war against terror." 


Another "disarmament war"?
Above all, the Bush administration claims that Iran is very close to acquiring nuclear weapons and that a nuclear-armed Iran would be an unprecedented threat to world peace. The same claim was used to justify the attack on Iraq. No nuclear weapons capability was discovered after the invasion, but the claim had served its purpose. Iran is enriching uranium for a civilian nuclear power program under IAEA supervision, but there is no evidence that its leaders seek nuclear weapons and it will not be in a position to produce them for several (perhaps ten) years. This is a consensus view of specialists not only at the IAEA but also at the CIA and Pentagon.

Nevertheless, Iran is a rising power with ambitions of exerting influence in a region crowded with nuclear powers (Israel, Pakistan, India, Russia and China, not to mention the US nuclear presence). As such it is very likely to acquire nuclear weapons at some point. It might be willing to barter the nuclear weapons option for international recognition of its status as a regional power, but that is precisely what the US and its allies are unwilling to grant. 

While the risk of accident or miscalculation does increase with the number of nuclear powers, there is no serious reason to suppose that Iran would be more dangerous than any other state with nuclear weapons. All nuclear states are prepared to resort to nuclear weapons under certain circumstances.

"Nuclear non-proliferation" started as an international agreement to confine nuclear weapons to the members of a small exclusive club. It has now come to mean "disarmament wars" to deny nuclear weapons status selectively to regimes considered hostile to US interests (listen to an interview with Jonathan Schell on www.therealnews.com). The US seeks to prevent Iran from going nuclear because it would shift the balance of power in the Middle East, making American nuclear capabilities less intimidating and depriving Israel of its regional nuclear monopoly.


Oil and gas, dollars and euros
While the US does want to prevent Iran from eventually acquiring nuclear weapons, this does not explain the urgency of the preparations for war. The key factor is control over resources, in particular oil and natural gas. The US seeks to restore and maintain control over the hydrocarbon resources of the Middle East, a region that contains 55 percent of the world's oil and 40 percent of its gas.

The occupation of Iraq marks an important step toward this goal. The petroleum law that the US is imposing on Iraq will give foreign companies direct control of its oilfields through "production sharing agreements". Iran, which alone accounts for 10 percent of world oil and 16 percent of world gas, is the main remaining obstacle to regional domination.

Control over oil has various aspects. One is control over price – gaining the leverage to ensure the continued flow of cheap oil to the American economy. Another is control over who buys the oil. The country that buys the most oil from Iran is now China, a situation that upsets those in the US who view China as a major rival and future adversary. Arguably, however, the most important issue is which currency is used to price and sell oil.

As the position of the dollar in relation to other currencies weakens, the dollar is ceasing to function as the world's main reserve currency. Countries are shifting their foreign exchange reserves away from dollar assets toward assets denominated in other currencies, especially the euro. Dollar assets now constitute only 20 percent of Iran's reserves. 

Similarly, oil producers increasingly prefer not to receive dollars for their oil. In late 2006 China began paying for Iranian oil in euros, while in September 2007 Japan's Nippon Oil agreed to pay for Iranian oil in yen. Continuation of this trend will flood the US economy with petrodollars, fuelling inflation and further weakening the dollar. It is feared that the result will be a deep recession. 

Occupying oil-producing countries may seem like an obvious way to buck the trend, although the effect is bound to be temporary. In 2000 Iraq began selling oil for euros; subsequently it converted its reserves to euros. Since the US invasion it has gone back to using dollars. This may be an important motive for attacking Iran too.


The shifting geopolitical map
The collapse of the Soviet Union enabled the US to establish a temporary global geopolitical predominance, though at the cost of enormous military expenditure that exceeds that of all other countries combined. Like the dominant position of the dollar, this cannot last very much longer in view of the progressive economic decline of the US.

The geopolitical map of the world has begun to shift, and Iran occupies a central place in this process. The framework of a potential anti-U.S. axis exists in the shape of the Shanghai Cooperation Organization, which brings together Russia, China and post-Soviet Central Asia. American strategists fear further consolidation and militarization of the SCO and its expansion to draw in other major Asian states and, first of all, Iran, which already has close ties with both Russia and China. (India, though for the time being firmly aligned with the US, may follow.) So here too attacking Iran may be seen as a way of averting a threat to US predominance.

Senseless wars
There is a certain logic to the motives that drove the US to war in Iraq and may drive it to war with Iran. Nevertheless, these wars make no sense even in capitalist terms (let alone from the working class and human point of view). It is not just that costs are likely to exceed benefits, as was the case in Vietnam, for instance. They are senseless because under current world conditions the goal of securing long-term US predominance is unattainable. At most, the loss of economic and geopolitical primacy may be deferred for a few years, but it will be all the more precipitous when it does come.

The faction of the American capitalist class currently in power refuses to recognize this reality. Even their "mainstream" opponents in the "Democratic" Party are rather reluctant to do so. Admittedly, the top brass do not want another quagmire. Perhaps their resistance will save the day.

Stefan

https://socialiststandardmyspace.blogspot.com/2008/01/iran-in-crosshairs.html