Billionaires no longer want to play

An eighty one year old Norwegian/ Cypriot living in the United Arab emirates has told us, the Brits, - socialists of course don’t believe in nationalism or artificial borders but since, until we replace capitalism with socialism this is the designated part of the world in which we live – that Britain is kaput, finito, finished. Using a fairy tale christian metaphor he has told us we’ve ‘gone to hell’ and he’s going to pick up his ball and pee off somewhere else.

Apparently he’s peed of with Norway too.

According to the Evening Standard the ‘UK’s ninth richest billionaire, Norwegian-born shipping tycoon John Fredriksen, has said “Britain has gone to hell” and has moved his business out of London in the latest worrying sign of the huge exodus of wealth from the capital.The oil tanker magnate, whose wealth was estimated at around £13.7 billon in this year’s Sunday Times Rich List, is the latest in a series of wealthy foreign-born London residents who are quitting the UK – or at least loosening their links – because of Labour’s scrapping of the non-dom tax regime and their disillusion with Britain’s poor economic prospects .Asked by Norwegian title E24 about his feelings for the UK, Fredriksen said: “It’s starting to remind me more and more of Norway. Britain has gone to hell, like Norway.” The comments came after it emerged he has closed the London headquarters of Seatankers Management, one of his private shipping businesses, which was based on Sloane Square.’

‘In the interview Fredriksen, widely known as JF in the shipping industry, added: “The entire Western world is on its way down.”

“People should get up and work even more, and go to the office instead of having a home office.”’

Friedriksen is not the first billionaire to berate wage slaves for not working hard enough to contribute more to a billionaire’s profits.

‘A number of other wealthy Norwegians have also reportedly left London this year, according to E24. Billionaire Helene Odfjell, 59, the biggest shareholder in Odfjell Drilling emigrated to the UK in 1989 but is now said to be based in Lugano, Switzerland. Another Norwegian shipping billionaire Peter T. Smedvig, 78, reportedly moved to Stavanger in Norway in March having lived in London since 1991.’

The explanation for this flight from the UK appears to lie with the abolition of a system which allowed non-domiciles to avoid having to pay money to the UK state. The more you have the more you want to keep.

‘The centuries old non-dom system that has allowed wealthy foreign-born British residents to shield their overseas assets and income from UK tax ended on April 6 this year. Its abolition has been blamed for an unprecedented exodus of millionaires from the UK. There has been particular anger that foreign assets placed in trusts have lost their exemption from inheritance tax. Advisers Henley & Partners forecast that the UK will lose 16,500 high-net-worth individuals this year, more any other country.’

https://www.standard.co.uk/business/billionaire-shipping-nondom-john-fredriksen-oil-tankers-b1234987.html

SPGB Meeting TONIGHT 27 June 1930 (GMT +1) ZOOM

 

HAVE YOU HEARD THE NEWS? (Zoom)

---

Event Details

• Date: June 27, 2025 7:30 pm – 9:00 pm

---

Discussion of current affairs.

Speaker TBA.

To connect to a Zoom meeting, click https://zoom.us/j/7421974305

The insanity continues

 

The insanity continues but hey twenty thousand jobs not to be sneezed at, right? Plus we bargained the US salesman down and made a saving bro. The cost of a F-35A is anywhere between sixty and eighty million dollars.

‘Using defence as an engine for growth to create jobs across in the UK.’ – using the working class to provide profits for one set of capitalist exploiters whilst creating machines to kill another other working class who are in thrall to a different set of capitalists.

‘The UK will purchase 12 new F-35A fighter jets and join NATO’s dual capable aircraft nuclear mission in a major boost for national security.

The Prime Minister will announce at the NATO summit tomorrow [Wednesday] that the UK intends to buy at least a dozen of the dual capable aircraft, which can carry both nuclear and conventional weapons.

The decision will support 20,000 jobs in the F35 programme in the UK, with 15% of the global supply chain for the jets based in Britain, supporting highly skilled jobs and opportunities for working people and delivering a defence dividend across the country.

The new fast jets will be based at RAF Marham, with the Government expected to procure 138 F35s over the lifetime of the programme. The procurement of 12 F-35A rather than 12 F-35B as part of the next procurement package will deliver a saving of up to 25% per aircraft for the taxpayer. 

The purchase represents the biggest strengthening of the UK’s nuclear posture in a generation. It also reintroduces a nuclear role for the Royal Air Force for the first time since the UK retired its sovereign air-launched nuclear weapons following the end of the Cold War.

The UK will deploy the jets as part of NATO’s nuclear Dual Capable Aircraft mission, strengthening NATO’s nuclear deterrence posture.

Prime Minister Keir Starmer said: “In an era of radical uncertainty we can no longer take peace for granted, which is why my government is investing in our national security, ensuring our Armed Forces have the equipment they need and communities up and down the country reap the benefits from our defence dividend. “Supporting 100 businesses across the country and more than 20,000 jobs, these F35 dual capable aircraft will herald a new era for our world-leading Royal Air Force and deter hostile threats that threaten the UK and our Allies.

“The UK’s commitment to NATO is unquestionable, as is the Alliance’s contribution to keeping the UK safe and secure, but we must all step up to protect the Euro-Atlantic area for generations to come.” 

From Samlesbury to Stevenage, UK based firms such as BAE Systems, Cobham, GE Aviation, Honeywell, Martin Baker, MBDA, QinetiQ, Rolls Royce, Leonardo UK , Ultra Electronics and EDM Limited all play a vital role in the supply of stealth fighter jets.

The Strategic Defence Review recognised that the UK is confronting a new era of threat, including rising nuclear risks. It recommended that the UK further strengthen our commitment to effective deterrence and our partnership with our NATO Allies, building on our unique role as the only European power to pledge our nuclear deterrent to defend our NATO allies.

The DCA mission is a critical part of NATO’s nuclear deterrence, helping to keep people across the alliance safe.

NATO Secretary General Mark Rutte said: “The UK has declared its nuclear deterrent to NATO for many decades, ​and I strongly welcome today’s announcement that the UK will now also join NATO’s nuclear mission and procure the F-35A. “This is yet another robust British contribution to NATO”.

The UK has always supported NATO’s nuclear mission, by providing conventional capabilities and resources such as aircraft and airspace to its annual exercises. 

Defence Secretary John Healey MP said: “The Strategic Defence Review confirmed we face new nuclear risks, with other states increasing, modernising and diversifying their nuclear arsenals. And it recommended a new UK role in our collective defence and deterrence through a NATO-first approach.“This commitment is an embodiment of NATO first, strengthening the alliance while at the same time using defence as an engine for growth to create jobs across in the UK.”

Our commitment to Britain’s nuclear deterrent is absolute, underpinned by our ‘triple-lock’: building four new nuclear submarines in Barrow-in-Furness, in Cumbria; maintaining our continuous at sea nuclear deterrent; and delivering all future upgrades needed.  

This announcement further underlines the UK’s unshakeable commitment to NATO, and the principle of collective defence under Article V. 

The UK remains committed to the goal of a world without nuclear weapons and upholds all our obligations under the NPT.

This announcement follows the SDR’s commitments to deliver up to 12 new conventionally armed, nuclear-powered submarines and £15bn this parliament to deliver the sovereign nuclear warhead programme.’

https://www.gov.uk/government/news/uk-to-purchase-f-35as-and-join-nato-nuclear-mission-as-government-steps-up-national-security-and-delivers-defence-dividend

Against all capitalism’s wars

 

'Israel, the US’s rogue proxy in the Middle East with its own agenda, initiated the current war by attacking Iran with the declared aim of physically preventing it acquiring the nuclear bomb.

According to Netanyahu, Iran’s possession of the nuclear bomb would present an existential threat to the state of Israel. The suggestion is that, if Iran had the bomb, it would use it to annihilate Israel. This is just propaganda as Iran wants the bomb for the same reason as the United States, Russia, Britain, France, China, India and Pakistan have it – as a deterrent against being attacked. If Iran did have the bomb it would be very foolish of it to use it against Israel as Israel itself is a nuclear state.

The real reason for the war – and why the United States and the West are behind Israel – is to maintain the balance of power in the Middle East. In relations between capitalist states ‘might is right’ and Iran’s possession of nuclear weapons would increase its ‘might’ and so shift the balance in its favour. It’s this that the Western states, who currently dominate the area because it is the source of much of the oil and gas they need to power their production, wish to prevent, ideally by diplomacy but Israel has forced their hand.

Who controls the oil, and the trade routes and pipelines to get it out, has been at stake in all the many wars in the Middle East since the end of the last World War. On the surface the issue appears to be the existence of the state of Israel, established in 1948 as a ‘Jewish homeland’ on land that been the home for generations of non-Jews. This, in itself, was bound to create resentment but it might have worked had not the United States decided to build up Israel’s military might as its proxy on the ground in the region to defend its economic interests there.

Which capitalist states – the West or Iran – control the economic resources of the region is of no concern to the workers living there. The civilians on both sides are being killed and wounded and buildings and useful infrastructure destroyed for an issue that is only of capitalist concern.

As Socialists we place on record our abhorrence at this latest manifestation of capitalist barbarism. The interest of workers in both Israel and Iran is to join with workers everywhere to bring an end to the war- prone capitalist system and replace it with a world socialist commonwealth where the Earth’s natural and industrial resources will be commonly owned by all humanity.'

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

Dulce bellum inexpertis

 

On Sunday 22 June 1941 Germany launched operation Barbarossa (named after the Holy Roman Emperor Frederick Barbarossa, ‘red beard’) and invaded Soviet Russia

Joseph Stalin, General Secretary of the ‘Communist’ Party and Premier (from 1941) of Soviet Russia’ did not believe, despite many Intelligence warnings that Germany would invade. It’s said he may have placed too much faith (pun intended, the USSR was nominally atheist) in the Molotov-Ribbentrop ten year non- aggression pact signed in August 1939.which also delineated specific spheres of influence.

On 1 September 1939 Germany invaded Poland. On 17 September 1939 Soviet Russia invaded eastern Poland.

On Sunday 22 June 1941 Germany launched operation Barbarossa (named after the Holy Roman Emperor Frederick Barbarossa, ‘red beard’) and invaded Soviet Russia.

Beware deception in war.

If it worked once there’s no reason it shouldn’t work again/ The play-book used back in 2003 to justify the invasion of Iraq was that Iraq had ‘Weapons of Mass Destruction.’ This was untrue but the efforts put into persuading the American and Western populations that WMD would be used against them is now replayed with the untruth that Iran is building nuclear weapons.

Iran is a signatory to the Non-Proliferation Treaty (Israel is not) In 2015 Iran signed the The Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA), also known as the Iran nuclear deal, is an agreement to limit the Iranian nuclear program in return for sanctions relief and other provisions.1 The agreement was finalised in Vienna on 14 July 2015, between Iran and the P5+1 (the five permanent members of the United Nations Security Council (UNSC)—China, France, Russia, the U.K., U.S.—plus Germany) together with the European Union. Negotiations centred around sanctions relief and restrictions on Iran's nuclear facilities, including the Arak IR-40 reactor, Bushehr Nuclear Power Plant, Gachin Uranium Mine, Fordow Fuel Enrichment Plant, Isfahan Uranium Conversion Plant, Natanz Uranium Enrichment Plant, and the Parchin Military Research complex.. The United States withdrew from the pact in 2018, imposing sanctions under its maximum pressure campaign.1 The sanctions applied to all countries and companies doing business with Iran and cut it off from the international financial system, rendering the nuclear deal's economic provisions null. The JCPOA formed part of U.N. Security Council Resolution 2231.The Security Council (S.C.) enacted it on 20 July 2015 and adopted it on 18 October. It took effect on 16 January 2016 (Adoption Day). JCPOA was to remain in effect for eight years or until receipt by the S.C. of an IAEA report stating that IAEA had reached the Broader Conclusion that all nuclear material in Iran remained in peaceful activities, and terminated ten years from Adoption Day. On 12 October 2017, U.S. President Donald Trump announced that the U.S. would not make the certification provided for under U.S. domestic law, but stopped short of terminating the deal.’

On June 13^th Israel carried out a terrorist attack on Iran including the decapitation of high ranking military officers, scientists and the Iranian chief negotiator with America.

The sixth round of negotiations between Iran and America were due to take place on Sunday 15^th June.

‘On June 22, the United States launched terrorist attacks on civilian nuclear facilities in Iran. President Donald Trump, who appears to be channelling French king Louis Fourteenth

L'État, c'est moi, t he state is me, immediately claiming the adoration of his ‘subjects’’ said that Irani’s key nuclear enrichment facilities had been "completely and totally obliterated" and urging Iran to pursue peace. The strikes were carried out using B-2 stealth bombers equipped with "bunker-buster" bombs, specifically the GBU-57 Massive Ordnance Penetrator (MOP), which are designed to penetrate deeply buried targets like the Fordow facility, located nearly 300 feet beneath a mountain.’

When can we expect Trump to state, Après moi le déluge ?

‘Fordow: This uranium enrichment facility was the primary target of the U.S. strikes due to its fortified position and its role in Iran's nuclear program. Six bunker-buster bombs were reportedly dropped on Fordow, aiming to destroy its capacity to enrich uranium to near-weapons-grade levels (up to 83.7%).

Natanz: Another major uranium enrichment site, Natanz had previously been struck by Israel earlier in the week. The U.S. reportedly used 30 Tomahawk missiles against this facility.

Isfahan: This site, which plays a role in Iran’s nuclear program, was also targeted in the U.S. strikes.’

King Trump recently dismissed the judgement of his Director of National Intelligence, Tulsi Gabbard’s assessment of all of the US’s Intelligence agencies that Iran was not producing nuclear weapons by responding, I don’t care what she thinks.

He also said, after the Israel attack, and Iran’s response, that he would wait for two weeks before making a decision as to whether the US would become involved by ordering the terrorist attack by the US a few days only after making this comment.

The terrorist attack of 13^th June by the genocidal state of Israel was designed to get the US involved as Israel is not capable of defeating Iran by itself.

The excuse that it was all about preventing Iran from developing nuclear weapons was always an excuse and designed to justify to the gullible the justification for the actions which have occurred.

Iran has stated for many years that it had no intention of ever developing nuclear weapons and that its nuclear program was solely for civilian and medical use.

Article 4 of the NPT states that, ‘Nothing in this Treaty shall be interpreted as affecting the inalienable right of all the Parties to the Treaty to develop research, production and use of nuclear energy for peaceful purposes without discrimination and in conformity with Articles I and II of this Treaty.’

The aim of both Israel and the US have always been about bringing about regime change in Iran which would lead to a compliant vassal of the US and the Western powers in the region allowing them to exploit its resources to their own benefit. Same old capitalism in action.

Iran shares a long land border with Russia and ex Soviet states. The ‘fall’ of Iran would help facilitate economic and military attacks upon Russia, It would prevent the Russian North-South Corridor from running through Iran.

‘The Russia North-South Corridor, also known as the International North–South Transport Corridor (INSTC), is a multi-modal transportation network connecting India, Iran, Azerbaijan, Russia, Central Asia, and Europe. It aims to enhance trade connectivity between major cities such as Mumbai, Moscow, Tehran, Baku, Bandar Abbas, Astrakhan, and Bandar Anzali. The corridor primarily involves moving freight from India, Iran, Azerbaijan, and the Russian Federation via ship, rail, and road.

The main advantages of the North-South Corridor over other routes include reducing distances by half or more and lowering the cost of container transportation compared to sea routes. The corridor is designed to reduce the transit time for goods travelling between Moscow and Mumbai by up to 40%, compared to the traditional Suez Canal route.

Russia and Iran are collaborating on this project, which is part of the broader INSTC, aimed at linking the Russian port of Astrakhan with the Iranian ports of Bandar Abbas and Chabahar. This multi-modal corridor combines rail, road, and sea transport to facilitate the seamless movement of goods between Russia, Iran, and beyond.

The development of the North-South Corridor is crucial for both countries, as it provides an alternative to traditional trade routes that are more vulnerable to economic sanctions. The corridor includes seaports on the Persian Gulf and in the Caspian region, as well as road and rail routes.’

How is Iran likely to further respond following the American attempt to destroy civilian nuclear facilities? It could continue to rain missiles down on Israel only. It could target American military assets in the region of West Asia. It could target oil production facilities within the region or block the Straits of Hormuz and bring about a serious economic collapse across the whole world.

At this point in time it is not possible to say if any of these options will occur or perhaps something else not yet foreseen. It can be said that, barring nuclear bombs being dropped on Iran by the US it will not comply with Trump’s call for total surrender.

How long this particular conflict, and the other major conflicts in the world are continuing too, will carry on remains to be seen. It is one though which has the possibility of doing serious dangerous damage to the whole world. We can agree that a regime change is called for – a regime change that abolishes capitalism and replaces it with socialism. How much longer are we all going to allow capitalism to exploit us and to put our lives at risk in their mad pursuit of resources, profit, power and domination?

Dulce bellum inexpertis - War is sweet to those who have never experienced it.

SPGB Meeting TONIGHT 20 June 1930 (GMT + 1) ZOOM

 

THE BIRTH AND DEATH OF LANGUAGE (ZOOM)

---

Event Details

• Date: June 20, 2025 7:30 pm – 9:00 pm

---

Languages become endangered and can even die out when they are not passed on to new generations. In other circumstances new languages (pidgins and creoles) can emerge. In these cases the lives of speakers have generally been disrupted in various ways. We will look at how and why such developments occur, and the implications this can have for the people involved. See a 2005 article on this here.

Speaker: Paul Bennett

To connect to a Zoom meeting, click https://zoom.us/j/7421974305

SPGB Summer School sign up

 The latest date to make a booking for Summer School will be 18th July.

For information about the event, go to:

www.worldsocialism.org/spgb/summer-school-2025/

Waterloo

 

Waterloo, what does the word conjure up? To fans of popular music it could be both the 1974 Eurovision Song Contest winner that set the Swedish group Abba on the road to fame and fortune. Or it could be The Kinks 1967 song Waterloo Sunset where Terry meets Julie at Waterloo Station every Friday night. The assumption that the two were based upon Terrence Stamp and Julie Christie both well known actors has been debunked. A trainspotter might have a soft spot for the London Waterloo Station opened in 1848.

The Station was opened 33 years after the battle of Waterloo, 18^th June 1815, when the Seventh Coalition defeated the army of Napoleon Bonaparte. For military buffs and wargamers this represents a classical military encounter that can be replayed again and again.

Waterloo, what does the word conjure up for socialists? This extract from the Socialist Standard of June 1909 in an article repudiating the Great Men of history theory.

‘A favourite subject in debating societies is: what would be the present condition of England if Napoleon had won the battle of Waterloo, or Europe if William the Norman had lost the battle of Hastings, or of European civilisation if the Greeks had been beaten at Salames? These questions carry us into the heart of the question of genius and its effect upon social and economic conditions. Carlyle, of course, would answer: without the existence of these mighty men the history of the world must have taken different channels, their influence was incalculable. The Socialist, however, will say: it mattered little to the mass of the people, the working class, whether Napoleon won or was soundly thrashed at Waterloo. National boundaries to-day might be slightly or greatly different, but it is probable that the application of steam power to manufacture would have been the same, and this application caused a revolution more radical and permanent than any ever made by a mighty warrior. Napoleon was beaten at Waterloo, and we are surrounded by social and economic inequality and injustice. Had he won we should still be living in a capitalist state—and one need not say more than this. For the working class that great battle did not mean a higher or a lower standard of living, but, as was usual with all such conflicts, it implied: which nation shall be the paramount buccaneer? For is not capitalism making uniform the lives of the working class in all countries? As Hervé has so well put it, “There is at present no country so superior to any other that its working class should get themselves killed in its defence.”’

https://socialiststandardmyspace.blogspot.com/2018/06/the-great-man-fallacy-1909.html

Gustave Herve’s comment is even more apposite today when both countries and individuals consider themselves to be ‘great’. The delusion of these entities equals that of Malvolia. Unfortunately, such delusions carry horrible consequences of all of us who are based firmly in reality.

Enlarging nuclear arsenals

 The extracts below are from the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute Yearbook 2025

‘World’s nuclear arsenals being enlarged and upgraded ‘

'Nearly all of the nine nuclear-armed states—the United States, Russia, the United Kingdom, France, China, India, Pakistan, the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea (North Korea) and Israel—continued intensive nuclear modernisation programmes in 2024, upgrading existing weapons and adding newer versions.

Of the total global inventory of an estimated 12 241 warheads in January 2025, about 9614 were in military stockpiles for potential use An estimated 3912 of those warheads were deployed with missiles and aircraft and the rest were in central storage. Around 2100 of the deployed warheads were kept in a state of high operational alert on ballistic missiles. Nearly all of these warheads belonged to Russia or the USA, but China may now keep some warheads on missiles during peacetime. 

Since the end of the cold war, the gradual dismantlement of retired warheads by Russia and the USA has normally outstripped the deployment of new warheads, resulting in an overall year-on-year decrease in the global inventory of nuclear weapons. This trend is likely to be reversed in the coming years, as the pace of dismantlement is slowing, while the deployment of new nuclear weapons is accelerating. 

‘The era of reductions in the number of nuclear weapons in the world, which had lasted since the end of the cold war, is coming to an end,’ said Hans M. Kristensen, Associate Senior Fellow with SIPRI’s Weapons of Mass Destruction Programme and Director of the Nuclear Information Project at the Federation of American Scientists (FAS). ‘Instead, we see a clear trend of growing nuclear arsenals, sharpened nuclear rhetoric and the abandonment of arms control agreements.’

Russia and the USA together possess around 90 per cent of all nuclear weapons. The sizes of their respective military stockpiles (i.e. useable warheads) seem to have stayed relatively stable in 2024 but both states are implementing extensive modernisation programmes that could increase the size and diversity of their arsenals in the future. If no new agreement is reached to cap their stockpiles, the number of warheads they deploy on strategic missiles seems likely to increase after the bilateral 2010 Treaty on Measures for the Further Reduction and Limitation of Strategic Offensive Arms (New START) expires in February 2026.

The USA’s comprehensive nuclear modernisation programme is progressing but in 2024 faced planning and funding challenges that could delay and significantly increase the cost of the new strategic arsenal. Moreover, the addition of new non-strategic nuclear weapons to the US arsenal will place further stress on the modernisation programme. 

Russia’s nuclear modernisation programme is also facing challenges that in 2024 included a test failure and the further delay of the new Sarmat intercontinental ballistic missile (ICBM) and slower than expected upgrades of other systems. Furthermore, an increase in Russia’s non-strategic nuclear warheads predicted by the USA in 2020 has so far not materialised.

Israel—which does not publicly acknowledge possessing nuclear weapons—is also believed to be modernising its nuclear arsenal. In 2024 it conducted a test of a missile propulsion system that could be related to its Jericho family of nuclear-capable ballistic missiles. Israel also appears to be upgrading its plutonium production reactor site at Dimona.

SIPRI Director Dan Smith warns about the challenges facing nuclear arms control and the prospects of a new nuclear arms race. Smith observes that ‘bilateral nuclear arms control between Russia and the USA entered crisis some years ago and is now almost over’. While New START—the last remaining nuclear arms control treaty limiting Russian and US strategic nuclear forces—remains in force until early 2026, there are no signs of negotiations to renew or replace it, or that either side wants to do so. US President Donald J. Trump insisted during his first term and has now repeated that any future deal should also include limits on China’s nuclear arsenal—something that would add a new layer of complexity to already difficult negotiations.

Smith also issues a stark warning about the risks of a new nuclear arms race: ‘The signs are that a new arms race is gearing up that carries much more risk and uncertainty than the last one.’ The rapid development and application of an array of technologies—for example in the fields of artificial intelligence (AI), cyber capabilities, space assets, missile defence and quantum—are radically redefining nuclear capabilities, deterrence and defence, and thus creating potential sources of instability. Advances in missile defence and the oceanic deployment of quantum technology could ultimately have an impact on the vulnerability of key elements of states’ nuclear arsenals. 

Furthermore, as AI and other technologies speed up decision making in crises, there is a higher risk of a nuclear conflict breaking out as a result of miscommunication, misunderstanding or technical accident.'

https://www.sipri.org/media/press-release/2025/nuclear-risks-grow-new-arms-race-looms-new-sipri-yearbook-out-now

Socialist Sonnet No. 196

Trading Blows

 

Market traders in war are grim reapers

Of the spoils, snatching the ground from under

The feet of those living there, torn asunder

By rhetoric, and leaders who’re keepers

Of their nations’ destiny. People, who

Have far more in common than what divides,

Acquiesce to being on opposing sides

By accepting that their just war is true.

Logic and reason having been displaced,

The bombed-out impotently sit and curse,

Wishing those named enemies receive worse:

So does human potential go to waste.

That’s how it must be forever and all,

Until people choose life and take control.

 

D. A.

World Socialist Radio

 World Socialist Radio

The Socialist Party of Great Britain

Official podcast of The Socialist Party of Great Britain. We have one single aim: the establishment of a society in which all... more

Listen now on

Episodes

The End and the Means

A description of the broad features of socialism, a society of free and democratic co-operation. Excerpt of a longer article... more

09 Jun 2025 · 1 minute

 www.worldsocialistradio.com

Yet another (Middle East) war for oil

Israel, the US’s rogue proxy in the Middle East with its own agenda, initiated the current war by attacking Iran with the declared aim of physically preventing it acquiring the nuclear bomb.

According to Netanyahu, Iran’s possession of the nuclear bomb would presents an existential threat to the state of Israel. The suggestion is that, if Iran had the bomb, it would use it annihilate Israel. This is just propaganda as Iran wants the bomb for the same reason as the United States, Britain, France, China, India and Pakistan have it — as a deterrent against being attacked. If Iran did have the bomb it would be very foolish of it to use against Israel as Israel itself is a nuclear state.

The real reason for the war — and why the United States, Britain and the others are behind Israel in practice — is to maintain the current the balance of power in the Middle East. In relations between capitalist states ‘might is right’ and Iran’s possession of nuclear weapons would increase its ‘might’ and so shift the balance in its favour. It’s this that the Western states, who currently dominate the area because it is ’s the source of much of the oil and gas they need to power their production, wish to prevent, ideally by diplomacy but Israel has forced their hand. 

To maintain their own domination of the Middle East is why the Western powers are so concerned that Iran should not have nuclear weapons. 

That’s why, then, the Israel-Iran war can legitimately be described as another war for oil. Who controls the oil, and the trade routes and pipelines to get it out, has been the stake in all the many wars in the Middle East since the end of the last World War. On the surface the issue appears to be the existence of the state of Israel, established in 1948 as a ‘Jewish homeland’ on land that been the home for generations of non-Jews. This, in itself, was bound to create resentment but it might have worked had not the United States decided to build up Israel’s military might as its proxy on the ground in the region to defend its economic interests there.  

The rulers of Iran may invoke religion as why they don’t want a Jewish state to control Jerusalem but they are well aware of the economic issues at stake. Here is what Ayatollah Khaomeinei declared on 4 October last year:

‘The insistence of the United States and its allies on ensuring the security of the usurping regime serves as a cover for their murderous policy of transforming the [Zionist] regime into a tool to seize all the resources of this region and use it [this regime] in major global conflicts. Their policy is to transform this regime into a portal for exporting energy from West Asia to the West and importing Western goods and technologies to the region, to ensure the survival of the usurping regime and the dependence of the entire region on them.’  (https://french.khamenei.ir/news/14495 translated from French).

Which capitalist states controls the economic resources of the region is of no concern to the workers and other ordinary people living there. The civilians on both sides are being killed and wounded and buildings and useful infrastructure destroyed, as happens in all wars, for an issue that is only of capitalist concern. As socialists, we once again place on record our abhorrence of capitalist war and assert that it is in the interest of workers in both Israel and Iran is to join with workers everywhere in to bring to an end the war-prone capitalist system.