War is continuation of politics by other means.

                                                                        -Clausewitz

US-Israeli efforts to build a new middle-east have succeeded, but in the sense that its authors would not have dreamt of or liked. From the rubble of incessant Israeli bombings of Lebanon is born the demise of the assiduously cultivated myth of invincibility of Israeli Army. Arabs have learnt a new lesson that the Zionist state can be thwarted. The shame since 1948 has seen the glimmer of hope. The war waged by US-Israeli rulers has weakened Israel and strengthened Hizbullah, who fought well, really well, to ground the advance of the most powerful Army in the middle-east. However, the conspiracies of the imperialists, particularly US imperialists, have not ceased. They have been transferred from the battlefield to the boardrooms of United Nations, to secure for their protege what it could not secure through armed aggression.

Israel's Terroristic War

Israeli attack on Lebanon has set new records of cruelty and insensitivity to human lives and suffering. Israel set out to demolish the entire infrastructure of Lebanon. Airports, seaports, bridges, roads, nay anything moving was targeted. 130 bridges were demolished. The whole country was paralyzed. Nothing was spared not even hospitals, schools, old age homes. Industries, offices, fields and crops, all economic activities were attacked. Civilian activities and areas were special targets. 15,000 housing units have been destroyed.

Since July 12, 2006 i.e. start of the Israeli attack, nearly 1600 people mostly civilians were killed, half of them children. According to a report 29 families of 6-14 members were reported to have been murdered by Israel in cold blood. More than 6000 were injured or maimed, third of this number are children. The Lebanese civilians who were forced to flee their homes from Southern Lebanon, Beirut-Southern district, Al-Biqaa and Ba’labak numbered a million (1,000,000), nearly one fourth of the total population of Lebanon. The deliberate attack on Qana killing 57 civilians (16 of them children), as well as the bombing of clearly marked ambulances became symbols of the terrorist nature of US-Israeli war. Targeting of civilian areas and facilities was not accidental but actually displayed the real motives of the Zionist Israeli aggressors and their American patrons.

Israeli attack against Lebanon was ostensibly in retaliation of the raid on the border post by Hizbullah in which they had killed three and captured two Israeli soldiers. But in fact it was a Israeli raiding party which had entered Lebanon and was attacked by Hizbullah. After this capture, Hizbullah had placed a proposal before Israeli authorities of exchange of prisoners, an offer which was spurned as Israel had other designs. But it is obvious that it was merely an excuse. Firstly, Hizbullah action was purely a military act while Israel targeted civilian areas and facilities. Secondly, Hizbullah's strength is in South Lebanon while Israel has attacked all areas of Lebanon. Many areas of Lebanon have been totally devastated which had no presence of Hizbullah. Thirdly, Hizbullah and Israel have exchanged prisoners in the past on several occasions. Finally, Deputy Prime Minister and senior leader of the ruling Kadima Party, Mr. Shimon Peres, himself admitted that the attack on Lebanon was planned in advance. According to him it was to be in October 2006.

Hizbullah Resistance Unnerves Israeli Warmongers

Several important aspects of this aggression have emerged which have been widely commented upon. Even the imperialist media has been forced to admit them. According to US-Israeli aggressors this attack was part of their "global war against terrorism". But the fact is that of the 1600 Lebanese killed, overwhelming majority of them were civilians while of the nearly 200 Israeli killed, most were Israeli soldiers. Israeli Army deliberately bombed civilians while Hizbullah concentrated their attacks on military targets. US-Israeli terrorism stands thoroughly exposed before the world.

Another important aspect is the strong resistance put up by Hizbullah against the mighty military machine of Israel. Hizbullah worked out and adopted a strategy of neutralizing formidable air power of Israel. Israeli airforce had played a decisive role in 1967 and 1973 wars, particularly in the first one when it had dealt devastating blows in a few hours. Despite continuous and heavy bombing of Hizbullah areas by Israel, Hizbullah kept on targeting the military targets and towns in northern Israel till the war lasted. Unnerved by the strength of Hizbullah, Israeli leaders blamed military supplies by Syria and Iran for this though the total destruction of sea ports, airports and roads leading to Syria ruled out this possibility. It is significant that due to continuous attacks by Hizbullah, Israel had to evacuate Kiryut Shmona and several other towns. It was the first time since the establishment of Israel in 1948 that the Israelis had to vacate any town. Reports since ceasefire clearly show that people from several border areas had gone away during the conflict.

Hizbullah soldiers gave strong resistance and dealt powerful blows to the Israeli military. During the 34 days war, despite its loud phrases, Israeli military kept on operating within a few miles of the border. Each village and town was strongly contested and became a centre of fierce resistance to Israeli invaders. Israeli invaders were given a bitter and long overdue lesson. Jane’s Defense Weekly and several media sources are reported to have said that more than 150 Israeli soldiers, including 35 Golani elite troopers, had been killed, most of them were targeted in their merkava tanks by Hizbullah’s anti-tank missiles. The reports also indicate that the injured have exceeded 400. Hizbullah also destroyed a naval vessel of Israel by firing missiles. Additionally, more than 100 Merkava tanks, 46 bulldozers and 34 armoured vehicles were destroyed. Pictures of Israeli bulldozers taking back damaged tanks showed what Israeli authorities hid during the war. This time Israeli authorities hid not disclose their losses in men and material, which they seldom did earlier. According to the Israeli soldiers they were not given supplies through planes as Israel feared that they would be shot down by Hizbullah. Hizbullah's resistance against the far superior Israeli Army once again highlighted that in war, men prevail over material.

The fierce resistance put up by Hizbullah fighters and the damage they inflicted on Israeli Army forced the Israeli leadership to repeatedly change the declarations of their war aims. First talking of walking through south Lebanon, they later started to talk of raids near the border. Towards the end of fighting Israeli Cabinet okayed a plan of deeper invasion of Lebanon which was "put on hold to give time to US led diplomatic efforts." Israeli Army had occupied South Lebanon between 1982 to 2000 when it was forced to retreat due to resistance led by Hizbullah. Considering occupation of whole of South Lebanon as unachievable, Israeli Govt. declared disarming of Hizbullah as their minimum acceptable aim. But encountering fierce resistance and with rising number of their soldiers killed and injured they were forced to abandon even their "minimum acceptable goal."

This fierce resistance has jolted the morale of Israeli Army, their war hungry leaders and supporters. It has enthused the people of middle-east countries as it demolished the aura of invincibility of Israeli Army. This question is naturally arising among the people of these countries that when a movement can put up such a fierce resistance why the rulers of resource rich Arab countries are bending over backwards before US-Israel? Certainly the support of pro-US kings, emirs etc. is at the back of Israeli belligerence. A number of Arab rulers had held Hizbullah mainly responsible for the war even as the Israeli planes were pounding the civilian areas. In this situation the resistance by Lebanese under the leadership of Hizbullah is a source of enthusiasm. From the rubble of Israel's war against Lebanon, a new wave of energy is expected to sweep through the countries of middle-east.

What Israel wanted but failed to achieve?

Israel's aggression against Lebanon had two declared war aims, two military and political objectives and a strategic plan behind these which was to further the world strategy of US imperialism to secure its hegemony. The declared war aims were to secure the release of their two captured soldiers and the disarming and demolition of Hizbullah. But there were military and strategic objectives behind the Israel's attack on Lebanon. Israel wanted to occupy the area of south Lebanon upto Litani river (Litani river flows about 35 kms. north of Israel-Lebanon border). South Lebanon has since long been coveted by Zionist Israeli rulers. Litani river is northern boundary of the greater Israel of Zionists. First Israeli Prime Minister David Ben Gurion had clearly spelt this aim while describing the future borders of Israel "To the north the Litani River, the southern border will be pushed into the Sinai, and to the east, the Syrian Desert, including the furthest edge of Transjordan.”

The second political objective was to intensify the conflicts among sections of Lebanese people. By devastating Lebanon, Israel tried not only to achieve destruction of Arab land but to make them fight among themselves on this. Israel had hoped that significant sections of Lebanese will hold Hizbullah responsible for this destruction and Israel backed by US imperialists would be able to impose a capitulationist govt. on Lebanon.

But Israel failed bitterly in achieving its objectives. People of Lebanon are holding Israel fully responsible for this destruction and an unprecedented unity has been seen among people of Lebanon. Nearly 84% of the people of Lebanon supported Hizbullah, its support among Maronite Christians was stated to be about 80%. Even the pro-US govt. of Fouad Siniora was compelled to oppose Israeli attack. On the other hand, Hizbullah's resistance has foiled the military objective of Israel. This too has become a symbol of national pride among Lebanese. Thus Israel has failed to achieve its military and political objectives.

Western Powers Swing into Action

Seeing the failure of Israel on military front and growing solidarity of Lebanese people, western imperialist powers, which had been deliberate silent spectators of systematic destruction of Lebanon by Israel, swung into action. USA and France prepared a joint draft for the Security Council which gave everything to Israel that it had hoped to achieve but had failed to achieve through war. In this draft, what to talk of war crimes of Israeli aggressors, there was no mention of their withdrawal from Lebanon. On the other hand, disarming of Hizbullah was targeted. The draft also planned for deployment of forces from western imperialist countries supporting Israel, so South Lebanon was to be controlled by western powers on behalf of Israel. Obviously, Israel warmly welcomed the draft while Lebanon and other Arab countries strongly protested against it. A delegation of Arab League went to the meeting of Security Council to place their views against this one-sided draft.

Opposition of Arab countries brought the differences among imperialist powers to the fore. Russia declared that it will oppose any resolution which does not have the approval of Lebanon. France, which had co-authored the first draft, took the position of accommodating the demands of Arab countries to some extent and in the name of conflict, started manoeuvring to get its forces stationed in Lebanon. US, which had stonewalled all attempts for UN intervention earlier, now sought to steer the world body to serve the interests of Zionist aggressors. US has used veto 32 times over the past two and a half decade on resolutions regarding Israel, more than all the veto used by other veto wielding powers over this period. While Blair's UK Govt. toed the US-Israel line, the other veto wielding power, China, was conspicuous for maintaining silence throughout the aggression except to protest against the killing of a Chinese who was part of the four member UN patrol which was deliberately targeted and killed by Israeli Army. Chinese attitude must have come as a surprise to those who are bent upon treating China as a socialist country. Anyhow the attempt to involve UN having opposed it earlier, was due to mounting world wide concern at the destruction worught by Israel, but more significantly it was also the admission of failure of Israeli aggression.

In fact the disputes that Lebanon and Hizbullah have with Israel relate to Lebanese prisoners held by Israel and occupation of Lebanese territory of Shebaa Farms by Israel. On both the questions the position of Lebanon is just and that of Israeli aggressors wrong.

The unanimously adopted Security Council resolution (No. 1701), falls short of what is expected of the world body. There is no mention of the war crimes by the Israeli aggressors. Yet the issues of Lebanon do find their mention in the resolution. On the prisoners' release the resolution says "Mindful of the sensitivity of the issue of prisoners and encouraging the efforts aimed at urgently settling the issue of the Lebanese prisoners detained in Israel;" and on Lebanese territory occupied by Israel, the resolution comments, "Taking due note of the proposals made in the seven-point plan regarding the Shebaa farms area" referring to the seven point plan of Lebanon Govt. The resolution further requests UN Secretary General to report within 30 days on the proposals "for delineation of the international borders of Lebanon, especially in those areas where the border is disputed or uncertain, including by dealing with the Shebaa farms area." The resolution also mentions the withdrawal of Israeli Army from Lebanon "bearing in mind its (Lebanon Govt.'s) request in this plan for an immediate withdrawal of the Israeli forces from southern Lebanon; Determined to act for this withdrawal to happen at the earliest".

On the issue of disarming of Hizbullah, so much insisted upon by Israel and its US patrons, the resolution has made no direct reference only mentioning "there will be no weapons without the consent of the government of Lebanon and no authority other than that of the government of Lebanon" and "security arrangements to prevent the resumption of hostilities, including the establishment between the Blue Line and the Litani river of an area free of any armed personnel, assets and weapons other than those of the government of Lebanon and of UNIFIL as authorised in paragraph 11, deployed in this area". The resolution also mentions Taif accords, UN resolutions and Lebanon cabinet's decision for not allowing any armed group without the authority of Govt. of Lebanon. Noting Lebanon Govt.'s decision to deploy 15,000 army south of Litani river, Security Council resolution provides for deployment of a maximum of 15,000 UNIFIL personnel in the area. Even earlier UN peace keeping forces were deployed in this area. The emphasis in the resolution is on extending authority of Govt. of Lebanon and UN forces to act to facilitate the process. US demand to mandate the UN forces to disarm Hizbullah does not find direct mention in the resolution.

While the resolution takes no measures against death and destruction wrecked by Israel on Lebanon, it does take into account the concerns of Lebanese people and hence met with approval from Lebanon Govt. and Hizbullah. For this all credit goes to fighting spirit of Hizbullah and unity of people of Lebanon against Israeli aggression. However, with Israel and US imperialists having no regard for UN, the ceasefire resolution is only a stop-gap arrangement, it is unlikely to ensure cessation of hostilities in the long run as Israel come under pressure from chauvinist warmongerers at home for failure to secure their war objectives.

Lebanon : Repeated Victim of Israeli Aggression

Lebanon is situated north of Israel on the eastern side of southern Mediterranean. For many millennia it has been a centre of world trade. Phoenicians and other people inhabiting the area had a big role in world trade. With the rise and fall of different empires, this area had been part of different empires. In the beginning of 20th century French colonialists carved out Lebanon from Syria. Almost at the same time, Birtish colonialists had carved out Kuwait from Iraq. This was also the period when the world Zionist conference was organized under the patronage of colonial powers, particularly Britain, which declared its aim of establishing a state for Jews in the land of Palestine. In the backdrop of these developments at the turn of last century, was the discovery of oil reserves in the middle-east. The two big contemporary colonial powers, Britain and France, which were engaged in conflict over colonies world wide, collaborated with each other in grabbing this area from Khalifa, Britain taking the major part. Since then this area has been an area of control and contention among imperialist powers.

Lebanon with a population of nearly 4 million people, has been strategically very important. Of its population 95% are Arabs, nearly 59% Muslims, 39% Christians and rest followers of other faiths. These figures are very old and their updating a very sensitive issue. Among Muslims, both Shi'is and Sunnis are in good number. Taif Accords at the end of civil war, fixed the number of representatives of each section in the Parliament and provided for President from Maronite Christians, Prime Minister from Sunnis and Speaker of the Parliament from Shi'is. Hizbullah which has representation in the Parliament and is partner in the Govt. represents mainly Shi'is. In recent times its influence has expanded.

Surprise was expressed in certain western circles on Israeli attack on Lebanon as the present Govt. of Lebanon is pro-US. After the assassination of former Prime Minister Rafiq Harriri, US and other western powers forced Syria to withdraw its forces from Lebanon. The Israeli attack gives weight to the allegations that the assassination of Rafiq Harriri was carried out by Israeli agents as Israel was planning to invade Lebanon weakened after Syria's withdrawal.

Israel's attack on Lebanon is no isolated attack. Israel has been attacking Palestinians in Gaza and West Bank over last several years, using tanks and armoured vehicles, helicopter gunships and planes to target civilians in the Palestinian areas. Israel and its patrons have refused to accept the Hamas Govt. elected by Palestinians. During the attack on Lebanon Israel has been continuing its attacks on civilian areas, residential buildings, civilian facilities which hardly attracted any attention in this period. In Gaza a grave humanitarian crisis has developed due to attacks by Israel Army in which innocent children, old and sick are being killed. Even the Secretary General of UNO, Kofi Annan, has accepted this and called for immediate action. Israel's attack on Lebanon and Palestinians are part of the same chain. Oslo accords lie in tatters, except for some die hard believers like Palestinian President and some compliant Arab leaders.

Israel Adopts Aggressive "Peace for Peace" Policy

The aggressive designs of Israeli leaders are part of a thought out plan which involves giving up of "Land for Peace" policy which envisaged exchanging of the Arab territories annexed by Israel in 1967 to secure peace agreements with Arab neighbours. Not that Israeli leaders were at any time sincere about it. That policy had been adopted after the inconclusive Arab-Israel Yom Kippur War (1973) in the backdrop of intensifying contention for world hegemony between the then two superpowers. Israel sought to engage individual Arab countries into peace accords in exchange for the land which was under its illegal occupation in contravention of the UN resolutions. With the change in the world scenario with only one superpower left, Israel and their US mentors sought to dump the policy and embark on more aggressive strategy to dominate the oil rich middle-East.

In 1996 the then Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu had commissioned a study group called "Study Group on a New Israeli Strategy toward 2000" consisting of many who were close to US Administration, termed as neoconservatives or simply "neocons". 'The Institute for Advanced Strategic and Political Studies’ which included Richard Perle, James Colbert, Charles Fairbanks, Douglas Feith, Robert Loewenberg, David Wurmser, and Meyrav Wurmser, created Israel’s strategy paper titled: “A Clean Break: A New Strategy for Securing the Realm.” It outlined a blueprint for redrawing the map of the Middle East and eliminating rivals to Israeli power. The paper enunciates abandoning the "Land for Peace" policy thus: "Displaying moral ambivalence between the effort to build a Jewish state and the desire to annihilate it by trading “land for peace” will not secure “peace now.” .... Only the unconditional acceptance by Arabs of our rights, especially in their territorial dimension, “peace for peace,” is a solid basis for the future."

Most of the attention has been focused on the parts of the paper which presage the attacks on Iraq, Lebanon and Syria; including this ominous passage: “Securing the Northern Border: Syria challenges Israel on Lebanese soil. An effective approach, and one with which America can sympathize, would be if Israel seized the strategic initiative along its northern borders by engaging Hizbullah, Syria, and Iran, as the principlal agents of aggression in Lebanon, including by: paralleling Syria’s behaviour by establishing the precedent that Syria is not immune to attacks emanating from Lebanon by Israeli proxy forces, striking Syrian military targets in Lebanon, and should that prove to be insufficient, string at select targets in Syria proper.”  Further the report advocates a thoroughly aggressive approach in tune with US policy: "This implies clean break from the slogan, “comprehensive peace” to a traditional concept of strategy based on balance of power.  .... Change the nature of its relations with the Palestinians, including upholding the right of hot pursuit".

Since coming to power of Bush, Israel is implementing "Peace for Peace Policy" which means that Israel should launch such devastating attacks against its neighbours and particularly Palestinians that they come begging for peace. In the present policy there is no need for vacating the annexed land (Let the UN resolutions go to hell, any way the patron US will take care of that). Sharon-Olmert plan for unilaterally redrawing the map of Israel is part of this strategy. Here too, the part of the plan which envisaged withdrawal from select areas has run into rough weather.

Israel has been and continues to be the imperialist outpost in the oil rich middle-east. Israel has been the main pillar of the US strategy in the middle-east supported by pro-US kings, shahs, emirs and rulers of these countries. US supports and finances Israel and all its aggressive military actions. According to an article "the Israel Lobby" by John Mearsheimer (Professor of Political Science and the co-director of the Programme on International Security Policy at the University of Chicago) and Stephen Walt (Belfer Professor of International Relations and Academic Dean of Harvard University) : "Israel receives about $3 billion in direct assistance each year, roughly one-fifth of the foreign aid budget of USA, and worth about $500 a year for every Israeli. .... Other recipients get their money in quarterly instalments, but Israel receives its entire appropriation at the beginning of each fiscal year and can thus earn interest on it. Most recipients of aid given for military purposes are required to spend all of it in the US, but Israel is allowed to use roughly 25 per cent of its allocation to subsidise its own defence industry. It is the only recipient that does not have to account for how the aid is spent .... such as building settlements on the West Bank. Moreover, the US has provided Israel with nearly $3 billion to develop weapons systems, and given it access to such top-drawer weaponry as Blackhawk helicopters and F-16 jets. Finally, the US gives Israel access to intelligence it denies to its NATO allies and has turned a blind eye to Israel’s acquisition of nuclear weapons."

US Imperialism's Designs of Securing World Hegemony : Control over Oil

            Freedom for ourselves and freedom for our sons

            And, failing freedom, war.

                                                - Rudyard Kipling

It is needless to state that Israel has attacked Lebanon with full support, patronage and encouragement of US imperialists. In fact it is part of global strategy of US imperialism to secure its world hegemony. While US secretary of State Condoleeza Rice called the attack as "birth pangs" of "new middle-east", US representative at UN, Bolton, stonewalled all attempts for UN intervention in the initial period. Bush himself is on record on how he viewed the attacks thanks to a mike left operational when he had a pep talk with his crony, Blair, during G-8 summit.  Before and during the war, US supplied Israel with sophisticated armaments and utilized British ports for the purpose. US Govt. rejected all appeals of ceasefire, fully justified Israeli attack and held that the only issue was of disarming of Hizbullah. US Govt. fully supported Israeli attack militarily, politically and diplomatically.

If the US later associated itself with ceasefire attempts it was due to failure of Israeli Army to secure 'victory' and effect of continued destruction of Lebanon on people of Arab countries. It is significant that even the puppet governments of Kuwait and Iraq had to protest against the attack. Baghdad and Kuwait witnessed some of the biggest demonstrations where Israel and US were denounced.

US efforts to cast a "new middle-east" is part of its strategy of world hegemonism. Monopolizing the oil-rich middle-east is an important part of it. Controlling the energy resources of the world has been an important aim of the ongoing "global war against terrorism". By controlling the middle-east oil, US imperialism is not only trying to secure cheap oil for its people and industries. US alone uses 25% of the total oil supplies in the world, most of it through imports. But the US is seeking to control the access of other competitors to the oil. In fact rise in the prices of petroleum products is more than compensated by the rising profits of the US oil companies. In the year 2005 the profits of five oil companies combined (American: ExxonMobil, Chevron, and Conoco, British: Shell and British Petroleum) were 111 billion dollars.

As observed in the Political Resolution of CPI(ML)-New Democracy "It wishes to control all areas monopolizing important sources of energy- oil and natural gas. While it fought in Balkans for control over Black Sea, it is fighting in Afghanistan for control over Caspian oil and oil routes. It is fighting in Iraq for its rich oil resources and increasing control over Persian Gulf. Control over middle east, main producer and supplier of oil in the world, is very important for its global strategy. It wishes to extend its hegemony over third world countries through its military presence in all corners of the world. Thus US wants to create an environment where its economic rivals will not be able to stand upto it. Its war is as much against its imperialist rivals as it is against the poor third world countries which are its victims."

How crucial is the control over middle-east for controlling oil supplies and oil reserves is seen from the fact that of the proven oil reserves in the world 60% are in middle east countries. Four countries of the region- Saudi Arabia, Iran, Iraq and Kuwait have over half of the proven oil reserves of the world. In next 15 years the North American and Asia Pacific oil reserves will be depleted thus putting further pressure on oil from middle-east. But according to experts, increasing oil production is not easy. Each oil field has an optimum production rate. If one tries to go beyond that rate and tries to sustain high production rate, one damages the oil field thereby substantially reducing the amount of recoverable oil. Regarding new oil discoveries, according to Energy Information Administration’s (EIA) analysis of the long term world oil supply we can expect to discover only 10% more oil in the future. The Association for the Study of Peak Oil and Gas (ASPO), Foundation of Economic Sustainability (FEASTA) and others see an alarming trend in the future oil discovery and production. Inspite of pumping more money and utilizing better technology there has been downward trend in new oil discoveries. In March 2005, HIS Energy (an international oil consultancy firm) did a comprehensive analysis of the world oil supply and demand and reached the following conclusion: that even if one includes Natural Gas production and all other liquid fuels in our total available supplies, there will be a shortage any time from 2011 to 2020. One can easily understand the importance of controlling middle-east, particularly oil rich Gulf countries, in the US strategy of world hegemony.

It was for controlling oil that US invaded Iraq. All talk of WMD and links with Al Qaeda were mere humbug only to hoodwink the gullible US public opinion any way fed on the staple diet of American Century and Pax Americana. All the excuses have been proved to be false and yet America is pumping in more troops to control Iraq. Whatever it may say about short duration of its stay, US imperialists are planning long term occupation of Iraq. It is the desire to control the Iranian oil and natural gas which is at the heart of US plans of aggression against Iran. In this campaign, Iranian nuclear programme is being made an excuse just as WMD were made in case of Iraq. Iran has the second largest oil reserves and is also second in natural gas resources in the world. If the US can control Iran, then its control over middle-east oil will be complete. Iran can do nothing to allay the fears of US and its collaborators, for they are after the natural resources of Iran. If nothing works, then there is the always available, convenient and malleable tool of "promoting democracy".

Israel's attack on Lebanon was aimed against US targets in the area-Syria and Iran. By disarming Hizbullah and forcing Syria to capitulate, it aimed at isolating Iran. Seymour Hersch has called it a dry run for attack on Iran. Understanding US strategy, Iranian rulers announced that they would consider attack on Syria as attack on their own country. Besides isolating Iran, US Admn. is targeting Syria for stabilizing its colonial rule over Iraq and also for controlling Syrian plains for taking Iraqi oil through Syria and thus creating a new channel for transporting oil.

Iraqi National War Forces Changes in US Policy

In fact, Israel's attack on Lebanon should also be seen in the context of some changes in US approach forced by heroic national war of resistance waged by people of Iraq. At the time of invasion of Iraq US had sidelined other imperialist powers who were not agreeable to its plans, while restraining Israel from intervening so as not to infuriate people of compliant Arab states. The unilateralism practised by US imperialists and their overt drive to monopolize oil resources, has also forced other imperialist powers to respond to this situation.

People of Iraq are posing a strong challenge to US colonial rulers. The national war has engulfed every area. US-UK imperialists are trying to aid, abet and fan Shi'i-Sunni conflict in order to stabilize their control over Iraq. UK rulers are past masters in this game. But what is going on in Iraq is a war of Iraqi people against US-UK imperialists and their collaborators. UK and US officials are talking of looming civil war in Iraq only to draw attention away from their horrendous crimes against people of that country. People in Govt. of Iraq (puppet govt.) uniforms are seen killing innocents and planting bombs. One would recall that Iraqi authorities had arrested two British intelligence officers who were planting bombs. British forces attacked an Iraqi prison and freed these two servicemen. British tried to hush up the affair which showed how much the occupation forces are involved in the game of fomenting sectarian violence which may bail them out. It is widely believed that it is the occupation forces and their Iraqi collaborators in police uniforms who kill innocents and plant bombs at religious sites and then take lead in inflaming passions. Iraqi people are seeing through their conspiracy and it is seen in the intensification of the national war against US-UK occupation forces and their agents.

US imperialists have got embroiled into a quagmire from which they are not able to and cannot extricate themselves. They have lifted a stone to drop it on their own feet. The heavy toll in death and injuries has eroded the domestic support for the war even as the whole middle-east seethes with anger against US imperialism. US imperialists are unable to commit more soldiers for continuing their unending so-called war against terrorism. It can be seen in their encouraging and supporting Israeli aggression against Hizbullah.

US imperialists have also tried to mend fences with other western imperialist powers, alienated in Iraq invasion. Special efforts have been made to bring France around. French imperialists themselves are also eager to join in the loot and plunder of third world countries, particularly in oil rich region. Offensive operations against forces waging war against colonial occupation of their country in Afghanistan have been handed over to NATO with European powers contributing major chunk. Afghanistan too has witnessed intensification of national war inflicting casualties on the imperialist occupation forces. US Govt. permitted French peace keepers in Haiti, breaching their infamous Monroe doctrine. In its offensive against Iran, US has allowed EU-3 (France, Germany and Britain) to remain in the foreground on nuclear issue.

Bush Admn. is also trying to enlist Indian rulers in their "global war against terror". Going against the popular opinion and anti-colonial traditions of Indian people, the present Indian Govt. is aligning ever more closely with US imperialism. Strategic and military partnership, cooperation in nuclear field, the cooperation between India and US is increasing. To be in good books of US imperialists, Prime Minister Manmohan Singh has termed Iran as an inimical force and his Govt. has set itself against Iran-Pakistan-India gas pipeline. Bush Admn. sees in India a counterweight to China and a helping hand in middle-east. They particularly eye to use the Indian people as cannon fodder in their war game of securing world hegemony, learning from their British predecessors. The process in already on with India contributing to security operations in Afghanistan and also sending Indians in the name of employment by companies to Iraq. Indian ruling classes and their political parties are basically united on this approach though those in opposition do raise the issue of surrender before US imperialism only to hoodwink the people.

Another important development after the Iraq invasion has been rise of Shanghai Cooperation Council which brings together Russia, China and other Central Asian republics. Russia and China have increased their military budgets and conducted one of the largest military exercises. Shanghai Cooperation Council is emerging a counterweight to US imperialism. US Defense Secretary Rumsfield did not hide his annoyance at Iranian President being invited to SCC summit.

While First Iraq War led to the emergence of unipolar world, the Second Iraq War has led to its decline giving fillip to process of multi-polarity i.e. more than one imperialist powers or groups contending for share in resources and market of the world.

Middle-East is surely in turmoil. But much to the chagrin of US imperialists, the region is becoming a new front of struggle against US imperialism and its hegemonism. The new middle-east may be born but the midwife may not like the child so begotten.