Jim D. writes:
Sabri:> I happen to side with those who claim that irrespective of
Republicrats or Demopublicans in power the US will try to further its
hegemony.<
I agree, but the strategies are different. The Dems want cooperation
with other core (imperialist) powers, whereas the GOPs under Dubya's
lead want to do it alone.
This is the kind of intra-ruling class conflict which undermines
conspiracy theory.
To elaborate on Jim's point:
It isn't even so much that the US political parties have an underlying
committment to one foreign policy technique or another (e.g. multi or
uni-laterism). It is that these two parties each have stronger or weaker
links with different factions of capital (with some overlap); these
different factions are engaged in different types of business outside the
US, and thus have different foreign policy "needs". Yes, all of them
intend to take advantage of an incredibly unprecedented international
balance of power -- but for each of them that translates to somewhat
different goals (often overlapping, sometimes contradictory, sometimes
simply separate).
For example, for US companies engaged in petroleum-mineral extraction or
rely on cheap foreign labor the goals may be to 'roll back the sixties' in
the 3rd world (and equivalent policies in Eastern Europe) - e.g. get back
private control of the oilfields (to U.S. firms and at a cheap price) or
reduce the incipient "welfare" measures (and taxation) that emerged in the
middle-income countries. Obviously this translates to tough measures
towards 3rd world govts (particularly a certain type of state) and to
enforcing hierarchical discipline, rather than partnership, with other
large countries (like France, Germany, Japan or even China, Brazil and
India) that may try to offer competing bids.
On the other hand, the US financial "community" *may* have different
interests for example:
- financiers rely on stabile, predictable environments and the US Banks,
and so don't like risky disruptions;
- some U.S. Banks make lots of money from the nationalized oil wealth
(while some big US oil companies bypass the Banks).
- most big U.S. banks make a lot more money out of Europe and Japan than
from the 3rd world. At this time, the U.S. banks can not control these
major foreign banking markets (although they have dreams) and so they want
these middle powers to be thinking of partnership, rather than seething
about harsh U.S. discipline over other battles.
One can make similar points about a third group: U.S. exporters of their
intellectual property and higher technology commodities: they are often
concerned about friendly access and a healthy foreign economy (along with
IP protectionism and technological dominance).
Of course all these U.S. interests share a dream: compliant foreign
governments, open non-competative markets, etc. Sometimes and in some
areas moving towards this dream would bring them together. But you can see
how policy goals often conflict.
Paul
