Condemn Cameron and his Middle East Interventionist Tour
Workers' Weekly Internet Edition
The British government continues to act in the interests of the monopolies and against the interests of the people of North Africa and the Middle East. Prime Minister David Cameron notably visited Egypt last week with a retinue of arms dealers.
On Tuesday, Cameron delivered a major speech on Britain’s relationship with the Middle East to the National Assembly in Kuwait. The Prime Minister attempted to set out the case for a new British foreign policy and political and economic reforms in the wake of the uprisings that are sweeping through the region. However, media commentators have already pointed out that accompanying Cameron on this trip, which has also included talks with the military regime in Egypt and the government of Qatar, are senior representatives of the eight largest British arms manufacturers, including BAE Systems, QinetiQ and Rolls Royce. It is also reported that this week the Ministry of Defence is leading a delegation of over one hundred British arms manufacturers, the largest ever, to the International Defence Exhibition and Conference in Abu Dhabi, which is aimed at governments in the Middle East and North Africa. Rather than the government making any radical departure from previous policy, the evidence suggests on the contrary that it is business as usual but in the changing conditions that now exist in the region.
Despite the Prime Minister’s hypocritical words about the British government’s not wishing to dictate what kind of political system should exist in any country, it is clear that the current circumstances are viewed as “a precious moment of opportunity”, to fashion anew the Middle East and North Africa, based on the “universal values” of Anglo-American imperialism. In this context, the government is trying to position itself as the best friend of the people of the region, the greatest defender of “democracy”, the supporter of political and economic reforms. It was in this sense that Cameron attempted to distance himself from previous governments, which he argued had supported “highly controlling regimes” in the interests of stability and self-interest. Now, he argued, “our interests lie in upholding our values,” and so “freedom and the rule of law are what best guarantee human progress and economic success”. The British government now finds that political and economic reforms are the best guarantee of the preservation of the economic and geo-political interests of the big monopolies and the means to maintain the disempowerment of the people of this region.
David Cameron’s vision for North Africa and the Middle East also includes continuing to thrust the so-called two-state solution on the long-suffering Palestinian people and denying them their right to self-determination. It also means continuing to attempt to establish an alliance against Iran. Most of all he championed the allegedly universal values of neo-liberal globalisation. These he claimed were also the values of all those who are actually struggling for empowerment and more people-centred economies in Egypt, Tunisia and elsewhere. In fact, it is as a result of neo-liberal globalisation and its political requirements that uprisings are occurring throughout the region.
But the Prime Minister’s hypocrisy knew no bounds. His pious words that “violence is not the answer to people’s legitimate aspirations. Using force cannot resolve grievances, only multiply and deepen them,” were clearly only meant to apply in certain circumstances. It was clearly not meant to apply to the invasion and continuing occupation of Afghanistan, nor to the sales of weapons of mass destruction by the accompanying arms manufacturers, nor to the state’s violence against British students demanding education as a right.
The main concern of the government is to continue to act in the interests of the big monopolies and to demand that the regimes of North Africa and the Middle East act in those interests too. The new emphasis is on maintaining the status quo by reform, and Cameron promised financial and other assistance both from Britain and from the EU in an attempt to nullify the demands for genuine political and economic changes which are mounting throughout the region. The Prime Minister saw no contradiction between his political mission with its demands for reform rather than repression and his economic mission as the agent of the major arms manufacturers. His dual role and visit, so closely following that made by the Foreign Secretary, clearly highlights the nature of the British government’s aims and continual interference in the region.
