Since early May the Bush administration has dispatched top aides to a number of countries in Europe and Asia promising them coverage under Washington's antimissile shield; initiated probes to expand ties with Japan's armed forces; and encouraged expansion of the NATO military alliance into eastern Europe, a move that would increase the weight of U.S. imperialism on the continent. These moves have bipartisan support in the U.S. Congress, since they have been at the center of Washington's course for some time.

During a visit to Japan, Deputy Secretary of State Richard Armitage urged Tokyo May 8 to develop a military "partnership" with Washington. "As a lot more of U.S. thinking turns toward Asia, I'd like to see a relationship with Japan that is like that of the relationship with Great Britain," stated Armitage.

The deputy secretary is the co-author of a report issued last year that called on Japan to revise its constitution to be able to field a full-fledged army and participate in imperialist military operations abroad. Armitage, when pressed further on what it would take to create an alliance with Japan more like the one Washington has with Britain, "strongly hinted" at the need for such a constitutional change, reported a May 9 article in the New York Times.

Japan's constitution, which was written by U.S. officials during Washington's military occupation after World War II, allows the country to maintain only a "self-defense force." Japan's annual military budget, however, is the fourth largest, behind only the United States, Russia, and France.

While acknowledging the difficulty of placing such a change "on the political agenda," newly elected Japanese prime minister Junichiro Koizumi has repeatedly raised the need for passage of an amendment to the constitution to permit Japan to field its own army.

During the election campaign Koizumi promised drastic measures to pull Japan, the world's second largest economy, out of the recession in which it has been mired for the past decade. Under his campaign motto of "structural reform with no sacred cows," he warned Japanese working people of the need to accept rising unemployment, bankruptcies, and depression-like conditions in order to turn the situation around. Since assuming office, however, he has focused on pressing for changes that would boost Japan's military power, stated his intention to visit a controversial shrine to Japanese war heroes, and backed the use of a nationalist textbook that covers up the role of Japanese imperialism in China, Korea, and elsewhere.

"Hardly a day goes by when Mr. Koizumi does not invoke the need to revise the document [Constitution]," remarked the New York Times. In his inaugural address, Koizumi argued, "If, in seas in our own vicinity, when Japan and the U.S. are conducting exercises, and the American military is attacked, is it really possible for Japan to do nothing?"

Armitage voiced agreement with this. "The lack of consensus on collective self-defense is an obstacle," he stated. "And the lack of an ability to participate in collective self-defense, although they are signatories to a defense treaty, is an obstacle."

Unlike in Europe, where since the end of World War II Washington has been the dominant European power through its role in founding and leading the NATO military alliance, U.S. imperialism is not integrated as the dominant force in any Asian military alliance. The U.S. rulers hope that such a pact with Japan--with Tokyo clearly playing a subordinate role--would strengthen its base of operations for policing the region and more aggressively assert its military power, especially for use against China and north Korea.

In discussions with government officials in Tokyo, the U.S. deputy secretary of state projected Washington's proposed missile shield as simply a weapon intended to counter "rogue or accidental launches," rather than contain strategic rivals.

The Bush administration's missile shield plan, which builds on steps already taken by former president William Clinton, envisions putting in place ship-borne radar and missile firing systems, as well as airborne or space-based lasers. Such a system would for the first time in decades provide the U.S. rulers with a first-strike nuclear capacity. It would enable Washington to use its nuclear forces to threaten countries where capitalism has been overturned, such as China and Russia, as well as others that come into conflict with U.S. imperialism.  
 
Expansion of NATO
In Europe, Washington is offering to use the antimissile system in defense of its imperialist allies, and is backing the expansion of NATO eastward. Both moves would strengthen the position of U.S. imperialism on the continent.

In a letter to a May 10–11 meeting in Slovakia of prime ministers from nine countries in central and eastern Europe that have applied for admission to NATO, Bush wrote that "no part of Europe will be excluded because of history or geography" from the military alliance. The countries are all states where capitalism has been overturned following World War II. Bush urged the officials to continue their "progress in military, political and economic reform," according to the Financial Times.

Held to prepare for a summit this November in Prague on NATO expansion, the meeting included government officials from Albania, Bulgaria, Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, Macedonia, Romania, Slovakia, and Slovenia. In addition the Croatian government sent a representative to promote their interest in applying for NATO membership.

A statement released by the eight prime ministers and two deputy premiers in attendance at the conference said, "A new Europe will remain unfinished without our active contribution."

Moscow reacted to the Slovakia summit in a statement that called NATO expansion "a grave mistake." The Russian government has made clear that they would consider NATO expansion to the Baltic republics of Estonia, Latvia, and Lithuania, which border Russia, a hostile act. NATO in 1999 admitted three new members--the Czech Republic, Hungary, and Poland.

In a column entitled "Expanding NATO's Reach," John O'Sullivan, an editor-at-large for the right-wing National Review, argued for taking into NATO membership many of these new applicants as the way to "keep America in Europe as the leader of the alliance indefinitely."

He wrote, "East Europeans are more wary of Russia than are France and Germany; they are less hostile toward Bush's plans for missile defense, and they share London's view that any separate European defense force should be subordinate to NATO rather than wholly independent."

O'Sullivan adds, "What is worrying is that increasingly the West Europeans would like NATO to pull up the drawbridge and keep eastern Europe out of the military club as well as the economic one--or admit two new members at most."  
 
Conflict over European gov't plan
While Washington seeks to reinforce its power in Europe through its domination of an expanded NATO, tensions are rising among the imperialist powers there in response to proposals put forward by German chancellor Schröder that aim to bolster German weight in Europe by creating a more centralized European Union (EU) government.

The EU, which currently comprises 15 nations mostly from western Europe, was formed to allow a freer flow of capital, commodities, and labor across national borders and, through the creation of a common currency, ease the expansion of trade with Eastern Europe. While France and Germany vie for the leading role in the organization, Germany by far has the biggest economy of any EU member. Moves to expand EU membership to countries in eastern Europe have been stalled.

Seeking to assert the leading role for the German ruling class, Schröder's plan calls for replacing the council of ministers and creating a second chamber of the European parliament to represent the federation of European states.

"One cannot reduce European governments--as expressions of the nation--to a mere second chamber as a senate to the European parliament," stated Pierre Moscovici, France's minister for Europe, in opposing the German chancellor's proposals. He said Schröder was pushing integration at the expense of "inter-governmental" relations. This "goes far perhaps in a rather German sense, that is very federalist," states Moscovici, "I don't think this is in the mainstream of European thinking."

The Financial Times noted, "Few EU politicians have endorsed the German proposals. Britain, France and the Scandinavian nations in particular fear the creation of a federal European 'superstate,' based on a German model."

A leading Conservative member of Britain's parliament, Peter Tapsell, described Schröder's proposals for the European Union as a "Germanic master plan" similar to Adolf Hitler's. Tapsell added that he would never support adoption of the Euro currency. He said that a single currency was once proposed by the Nazi Reichsbank "as a means of perpetuating German dominance in Europe after Germany won the war." The governing Labour Party denounced Tapsell's remarks as "odious."

A U.S. delegation led by Deputy Defense Secretary Paul Wolfowitz that visited several countries in Europe to explain Washington's plans to proceed with developing this antimissile weapon "found an increasingly receptive audience," stated the Wall Street Journal. Following talks with the U.S. delegation, a spokesman for Russia's foreign affairs ministry said that Moscow has not been persuaded of the need to scrap the 1972 Antiballistic Missile treaty, which is an essential part of Washington's proposal.

"Moscow's message," wrote the New York Times, "included a new warning from military leaders that 'Russia possesses the technical, intellectual and technological potential' to respond to a unilateral American deployment of missile defenses."

Meanwhile, U.S. defense secretary Donald Rumsfeld announced May 8 new plans to coordinate Washington's military operations in space under the Air Force. He also said that a four-star Air Force general will be placed in charge of this post and will serve as the Pentagon's chief advocate for space programs. These moves will mean even larger increases in military spending, over and above the expansion carried out by the Clinton administration.  
 
 
Front page (for this issue) | Home | Text-version home