< < < Date > > > | < < < Thread > > >

Serbia and the West

by George Pennefather

16 May 1999 10:42 UTC


Hi
 
As I have said before the Balkan war is an inter-capitalist war, not an inter-imperialist war. 
 
All sides in the war are seeking to maintain or enhance the general conditions for profit maximisation. It is a war over the character of capital accumulation in Serbia and, indirectly, globally. No sides in this war represent the class interests of the working class --neither Serbia, the KLA nor NATO. Thereby no side can be supported by revolutionaries. Revolutionaries must struggle to expose the real nature of all sides in this conflict in the interests of promoting a struggle against the bourgeoisie.
 
The significant and decisive question is how Western imperialism hopes to serve its class interests by engaging in this military campaign against Serbia. What is at the bottom of the invasion of Serbia?
 
Clearly it is Washington's intention to preserve Russia in a condition whereby it does not pose a threat to the class interests of the bourgeoisie. To achieve this it must ensure that Russia is stabilised and yet contained. It hopes to keep Russia in a condition whereby it constitutes a medium sized capitalist country that serves to maintain capitalist stability in that region. To promote the creation of these conditions it must ensure that the neighbouring countries, most of which were once under Soviet influence, are under Washington's control. In this way Russia is effectively encircled by American satellites and thereby its power  accordingly constrained. This encirclement can then be employed by Washington as leverage to prevent Russia getting "to big for its boots". This potential threat together with Russia's need for Western aid and capital can be deployed to facilitate the evolution of Russia into a well behaved medium sized imperialist dominated capitalist state under the general management of the West --particularly US imperialism.
 
Serbia, then, is the bull in the China shop. Serbia is a hindrance to  these plans. It is refusing to co-operate sufficiently with Western imperialism. It interferes with its plans for Eastern Europe and the Balkans unlike other former members of the Soviet bloc. The West's plans for Eastern Europe are the establishment of a new form of stability based on imperialist social relations. These include the break up of Yugoslavia as a means for further fragmenting and reconstituting Eastern Europe. It all forms part of a grand strategy to completely wrench Eastern Europe from its Stalinist past and accordingly switch it from a Stalinist to an imperialist based stability. While Croatia and Slovenia were prepared to co-operate in this regard Serbia was not so co-operative. The West feared that Belgrade's intransigence would generate further instability spreading right across the Balkans involving Albania, Turkey and even Greece. This would thereby threaten both the West's current strategy and the present conditions of relative capitalist stability in that region. Such a development would lead to the greater destabilisation of this entire region and the unravelling of Washington's regional network of control and influence both in the area and even generally.
 
The West, then, is not as such anti-Milosevic. It is prepared to support Milosevic, and has in the past supported him in moderation. What is being sought is his co-operation with Washington in the restoration of stability on a capitalist basis which necessarily entails imperialist domination. But the contradictions of capitalism hinder such an arrangement. Milosevic may wish to be a willing satellite of Washington. However the specific conjuncture of events in Serbia, and the region as a whole, hinders such an easy accommodation. To preserve his power base he is unable to co-operate because of the particular domestic state of affairs that obtain together with the form by which he has established his power base. In short capitalism in Serbia. under present conditions, can only be preserved and developed by the kind of policies pursued by Milosevic. To serve Serbian bourgeois interests Milosevic is essentially obliged, given the character of his power base, to act as he has. In this way there is a contradictory relation between capitalism in the form of imperialism and, in a sense, indigenous capitalist interests.
 
Milosevic seeks to preserve his existence by purportedly seeking to establish an independent capitalist Serbia. It is this purported programme that is, in general, the basis for his support. Such a programme requires a militant Serbian nationalism. However the contradiction is that it is impossible for an independent capitalist nation state to be established and consolidated in the epoch of imperialism except as a form of exceptionalism.
 
In that sense, then, Belgrade is engaged in what purports to be the realisation of an idealist Utopia --an unrealisable dream. Consequently Milosevic appears to be taking the Serbian masses and bourgeois elements down  a cul-de-sac. However appearances contradict reality --Milosevic does not promote the politics of idealism. The course and outcome of the Bosnian war is evidence of this. At the end of the day he cannot win any genuine struggle for substantive national independence entailing independent capitalist development. Just as socialism in one country is not possible neither is capitalism in one Serbia possible. Milosevic is merely fooling the masses in and out of Serbia in the interests of sustaining his regime in power by ultimately serving imperialist interests. Milosevic appears to be anti-imperialist while being essentially pro-imperialist. In the end, if he is not toppled, he will have to further compromise with imperialism and accept a Serbian capitalism that  is dominated by imperialism. Indeed, in many ways, the attack by NATO on Serbia may precipitate domestic conditions which will allow Milosevic to further compromise with imperialism and thereby establish a framework for co-operation between Serbia and imperialism. The current Balkan conflict may eliminate some of the conditions or elements within Serbia that have been preventing the Milosevic regime from co-operating in the way that Washington requires.
 
In the final analysis it is no problem for Milosevic to collaborate with imperialism. He merely seeks a form of imperialist stability that includes him.  No better force than Stalinism exists to settle with imperialism --its record proves this.
 
So all this talk about imperialism attacking a sovereign state and the right to national self-determination is mere ideology disguising what is basically a matter of advancing bourgeois interests in one specific form or another. At the end of the day it is the working masses that suffer the reactionaries --Milosevic, the KLA and NATO.
 
The conviction that, if the NATO bombing of Serbia goes wrong, imperialism can be defeated under present circumstances is a gross miscomprehension among the radical left community. Even if the NATO invasion is not going according to plan it does not at all follow that imperialism can , is being or has been necessarily defeated. Whatever way the cookie crumbles imperialism in one form or another must come out on top. The only scenario in which it cannot is when the working class topples capitalism to replace it with communist relations. The latter case is not remotely possible under present conditions. The silly glee experienced among much of the conventional radical left each time something goes wrong for NATO in its air attack on Serbia is an expression, if anything, of the weakness of the radical left and its substitution of the spectator politics of the boxing ring for the politics of revolution.
 
Revolutionaries must express their opposition to Milosevic, the KLA and NATO exposing the common capitalist class interests that they serve. What is required is a federation of Balkan communities based on communism.
 
Warm regards
George Pennefather

< < < Date > > > | < < < Thread > > > | Home