mess — as we have seen in relameans paralysed and has an enormous military force at its disposal.
To retrench its positions and be able to respond militarily in a 'localised' fashion to prevent the fall of an ally, the development of a revolutionary upsurge, or the loss of previous positions - that is the axis of imperialist policy today as it seeks to extricate itself from the period of the 'defeat in Vietnam'. The arranging of a preemptive coup last October in El Salvador was an indication of this approach, though in this casę the crisis is far from being resolved.
Carter's response to USSR falls within ramework of this perspective It applies from SALT 2, which the Senate would certainly have rejected, at least in the election period, to the measures to cut down on grain exports. This response is not simply a means of lining up the electors in a presidential year. It is also intended cohesion in the leadership of the imperialist world; this has been clear in relation to the economic blockade of Iran.
It is also a way of preparing the ground for putting this counter-offensive into practice if necessary through a military intervention in America, the Caribbean, or in the Persian Gulf so that the political price to be paid is as low as possible. In this sense there has been a certain change the climate of detente which should not, however, be confused with the suppression of the agreements between the Kremlin and Washington.
The bureaucracy, as history has shown since 1947, can profrom a situation of perialist crisis, • go with the development of the the anti-imperialist struggle of the the masses as a way points and developing the petty-bourgeols lationalist leaderships.
Adherence to the status quo does not mean that any change is ruled out, but rather that it has no intention of overturning the global relationship forces, and so acts ast brake on the rise world revolution. This has its roots in the conserCentral along vative social nature bureaucracy — its methods of of scoring intervention reflect those links which it assures its domination.
Nevertheless, the deep crisis of the imperialist system and the relationship of class forces mean that any imperialist intervention will have important political repercussions and will of in turn become an element prolonging the crisis. defeat of working people in a series of decisive countries in 77370 Called by Socialist Organiser and Socialist Challenge.
the by towards this nuclear war, capitalist Only the system.
Tehran scale. to worse. 4B region. the imperialist world and the colonial countries can allow imperialism to take a decisive step military contronta• sense only guarantee against the threat of the image of barbarism, the struggle of the workers and poor peasants against capitalist and imperialist domination, for the overthrow of the capitalist IN 12-foot high letters outside the United States embassy in poster proclaims: nothing.' It was there before the attempt to rescue the hostages last week. The failure of Carter's military adventure in Iran might seem to confirm that slogan, but the reality is much more complicated.
The American forces may have botched their attempt to free the hostages, but the United States still possesses immense military might. In the short term the effect of the failure in Iran may well be to clip the Americans' wings. But the trend is towards US imperialism adopting a much more assertive military role on a world The threat of war, possibly leading to a clash between the USA and the USSR, is escalating. Tony Benn was absolutely right to warn last week of the danger of the US dragging Britain into a war. It is not difficult to see why.
The successive upsurges in the colonial revolution are threatening the vital interests of both the United States and its imperialist allies. For the US in particular, things seem to be going from bad In Central America vital US strategic, military and economic interests are being threatened not only by the development of the revolution in Nicaragua (see page 12), but also by the escalating revolutionary process in El Salvador and Guatemala Over the past few months relations between the USA and the FSLN-dominated government in Nicaragua have progressively worsened. Not only have the bourgeois ministers been ejected from the Nicaraguan government, but the failure of the US Congress to approve aid to Nicaragua has meant that the govern. ment has signed a trade agreement with the USSR instead.
Cuban road In Washington they are openly talking of Nicaragua taking the Cuban road. Such a development would be disastrous for American imperialism; they cannot necessary, they will have to resort to military foroe io prevere the Americas being cut in 1oo by a see The situati US intereses crea oil. The remoral of the Shat terests, both in terms of the loss of oil and becasse i'e Stal imperialism's cop for the whole region.
The new Islamic regime can only lead to instability in the whok The international strategic mess for imperialism is made a hun dred times worse by the fact that it coincides with a period of grav economic recession. Most economists agree that a new recession, which will probably be more severe than that of 19745, ha already started.
This means that the United States is under sharp pressure to assert its interests militarily, while relations between the capitalist states deteriorate as they wrestle to maintain their share of diminishing world trade.
Much of the war preparation being made by the USA is directed against the USSR. The United States and the other imperialist countries are furiously re-arming sophisticated and expensive nuclear weaponry.
This has the side effect of putting immense pressure on the Soviet economy, because the USSR is forced to respond by extending its defensive systems.
From the ponit of view of working people in Britain and Europe, the re-armament of the USA has an increasingly. dangerous aspect. Much of the new strategic disposition of the USA will be based on the Cruise missile. Since these missiles have a limited range of 1,500 miles, they will nearly all be deployed in Northern Europe, especially Britain. The working class in Europe is being stuck in the front line for Carter's war drive. The result can only be an increase in the number of Soviet missiles pointing at West Europe.
Anti-militarism For the workers' movement in Britain and the rest of West Europe there can be only one response to the events of the past week and the mounting war hysteria of imperialism First, we have to oppose every US military adventure, however much we disagree with the regime in Iran or anywhere else. No intervention by imperialism will make the situation one bit better Secondly, we have to launch a massive campaign against British support for the US war drive. This means complete opposition to the placing of Cruise missiles in Britain. And above all it means a campaign to get Britain out of the major imperialist alliance - NATO.
The only defense available to working people is to disarm its headlong rush catastrophe for us all.
In the late fifties and early sixties, the question of Britain's membership of NATO was a constantly debated issue in the Labour Party and the trade unions. tradition of militant anti-militarism and anti-imperialism.
We need to launch a campaign to commit all the major bodies of the labour movement to oppose Carter's war drive; for the removal of American bases and missiles from Britain; and for Britain to get out of NATO.
"The Americans do it to happen. If workers state and Souch-mes Asia die e of die protics is rey s severe bion so Aste ever more towards war ends in We have to resurrect that Socialist Challenge 1 May 1980
Over the past few weeks Iran has PESHMARGA Kurdish guerillas: resisting the 'soldiers of the Iman line' in Iran
----- pull-quotes -----
tion to the Iranian revolution and the overthrow of Somoza in Nicaragua — but it is by no
Hands off Iran No to Carter's War Drive (directly after London May Day march) US Embassy, Grosvenor Square W.1.