VIRTUALLY EVERY day for a decade Western television screens have been bombarded by scenes of military conflict in the Middle East and Western Asia. The 1973 Arab-Israeli the Lebanese civil war; the revolution which overthrew the Iran; the long drawn-out saga of the American hostages in Tehran; two Israeli invasions of Lebanon, culminating with the bombing of Beirut; the Iran-Iraq war; over the past year the communal conflict in fighting against the Israelis and Western 'peace forces.
The chronic instability region has one fundamental source: the international imperialism and the United States in particular to keep the region under its control. Imperialism's vital interest in the region can itself be summarised — supplies the geographical position which cannot be ceded to imperialist or pro-Soviet Nothing in Middle East politics can be understood without these considerations.
At the beginning of this century the area was dominated by Britain and France. The Sykes-Picot agreement of 1917 draw an arbitrary down the middle of the area which is now Jordan and Syria, to allocate the area to competing powers. But in line with what happened in many parts of the world, the Second War destroyed British and French domination and replaced with United tutelage.
In 1948 the polities and geography of the area were moulded by the creation of the state of Israel. The Zionist state was created under the auspices of Western imperialism and above all the United States; it has remained the West's crucial strategic ally in the region ever since. But the creation of Israel was rapidly followed phenomenon which has shaped the politics of the Middle East ever since - the rise of Arab nationalism. Coup The officers' coup in Egypt in 1952 brought Nasser to power. The rise of Nasser was lollowed by ine coming to power of the Ba'ath party in lrao, the commencement of the Algerian war of independence against and a host regimes throughout the region.
What did Nasserism represent? Essentially its project was that of trying to reverse the relationship ween the Egyptian ruling class and international imperialism, to the benefit of the former. Nasser based himself on the growing manufacturing sections of the ruling class — at the expense of the traders and landowners. He promoted the idea of Arab unity* to try to create a more unified Arab market. Two decisive medalsons were used in this project -tionalisation of large chunks of the economy and the mobilisation of the masses.
•didn't transition to socialism, however, but rather the use of the state sector to promote industrial development. And the mobilisation of the masses was kept within definite limits - the left was viciously repressed.
Nasser's most dramatic action to benefit the Egyptian rulers at the expense of imperialism tionalisation of the Suer cana owned by a Franco-British company in 1956,- Imperialism's response was the British-French-Israeli invasion, the "Suez crisis. perialists failed to bring Nasser down.
After 1956 he turned more and more to the Soviet Union for arms economic aid. The hugely expansive Aswan dam project was financed by the Soviet Union, not the West.
Despite the real, social gains for the Nasser, the regime gradually went into crisis. Arab nationalism failed to solve the fundamental development problems of the Middle Eastern countries.
military confrontation with Israel. of the region antiforces.
imperialist States' by bet• the namean was the na.
But the imnationalist but limited, masses under 'Six Day economic And it failed in its economically Arab United States the stand out.
more tionalism has perialism, region.
reliance Palestinian Arab through against the par excellence If mean tion. leadership on the Palestinians, «est 10 Lebanon.
Following Nasser's death increasingly steered right ia becoming a faithful ally of United States imperialism. In the early 1970s the different strands of imperialist policy began to unravel. As the wave of Arab nationalism, which had lasted 20 years, began to recede bourgeois reaction conquered in the Arab states. Jordan remained under the control of the Hashemite monar. chy. Saudi Arabia, which under King Su'ad had given aid to Nasser, showed its true feudal colours under King And Sadat's Egypt became firmly esconced in the American's The United States thus constructed a new system of alliances of Arab nationalism in Iraq and Syria and above the The essence of this strategy was to secure good relations with the reactionary as well as Israel. This military economic assistance to the Arab states, as well as bailing out the crisis-ridden Israeli Complicated The overthrow of the Shah of Iran in 1978 further complicated the situation from the point of view of im. perialism. The alliance with the Shah was the linch-pin of its strategy in the Gulf region As a result the s forced to rely on the Saudi regime for the stability of the Gulf area. But the overthrow of the Shah has had another consequence unleashing of a wave of Islamic fundamentalism, the results of which themselves trough. Already a power- beginning to worl ful Shi'ite fundamentalist militia -Amal - has been created in Lebanon. The Syrian regime is threatened by Islamic fundamentalists, and Islamic fundamentalism is even having repercussions in Saudi Arabia.
In the present conflicts in the Mid. de East three fundamental features First, imperialism drawn the conclusion that in this region of chronic instability it can't entirely on its local surrogates. Direct intervention will be more and necessary. Second, Arab nareached a complete dead end and is losing its sway -Islamic fundamentalism could tem porarily fill the vacuum it leaves. And third, the strategy of guerrilla struggle waged by the Palestinians has failed, defeated zionism the alliance of imthe reac tionary Arab states.
Ever since 1967 the Palestinian struggle has been at the forefront of the struggle against imperialism in the But the strategy of the PLO has always been flawed by its • polic! of 'non-interference' in the affairs of Arab states, and its material on the reactionary Arab leaders. It is impossible to defeat imperialism in the Middle East, or to wir self-determination without winning the struggle again. Arab reaction. That means that th revolution must be carried by linking the struggle Zionist state with the struggle of the increasingly powerfu Arab working class — 'interference' in the internal affairs of Arab states Arab, nationalism the Palestinian leadership have failed to put forward an adequate strategy to confront imperialism, that doesn't that the radicalisation of workers and peasants has ended. For the United States and Israel, that is precisely the problem. But if the wave of defeats is to be overcome it means new leaders and new movements to take the place of nationalism, take the struggle in a socialist direc if that doesn't, happen then the revolt of the Arab peoples may well 'go through a long detour of Islamic fundamentalism which will be a step backwards.
The Arab revolution still lacks which will link the figh against the Zionist state and its im perialist backers with the fight again. Arab reaction. Without such a leade ship new defeats are inevitable