“Maritime Freedom” – A Keyword of the U.S./NATO Warmongers

A leading representative of the U.S. Navy outlines a militaristic strategy against Russia and China

By Michael Pröbsting, International Secretary of the Revolutionary Communist International Tendency (RCIT), 5 July 2021, www.thecommunists.net

 

In one of our articles about the recent skirmish between a UK warship and Russian forces in the Black Sea, we have drawn attention to James G. Stavridis. He is a retired U.S. Navy admiral and former supreme allied commander of NATO. He is also chair of the board of the Rockefeller Foundation and vice chairman of Global Affairs at the Carlyle Group. He was also considered as a potential vice-presidential running mate by the Hillary Clinton campaign in 2016 and as a possible Secretary of State by President Trump. [1] In short, he is the personification of what President Dwight D. Eisenhower splendid called the “Military-Industrial Complex” and what Marxists call the fusion of the top leadership of the armed state apparatus and monopoly capital.

 

We also pointed out that Admiral Stavridis is an influential military strategist who has published a number of well-known books and papers. His latest book – "2034: A Novel of the Next World War" – describes, in form of a novel, a war between the U.S. and China starting with a confrontation in the South China Sea. [2]

 

A few days ago, Admiral Stavridis published an article at Bloomberg. [3] This is a leading media corporation owned by Michael Bloomberg, one of the richest men of the U.S. with an official net worth of $60.1 billion. In short, Stavridis is someone whose words should be taken seriously as he is a leading representative of America’s ruling class.

 

In his article, the retired Admiral justifies the recent provocative operation of the UK Navy which sent the HMS Defender –one of its most modern warships – very close to the Sevastopol, the main Russian naval base in Crimea. As it later became known from leaked internal memos, Downing Street 10 was fully aware of the explosive nature of this operation, and it was personally approved by Prime Minister Boris Johnson. Reflecting the broader dimension of this operation, the HMS Defender was supported by a US strategic reconnaissance plane which flew nearby. At this point we will not repeat our analysis of this incident and refer our readers to the relevant RCIT documents. [4]

 

It is hardly surprising that one of the leading figures of the U.S. “Military-Industrial Complex” would defend an operation which was carried out by one of its closest allies with the support of the U.S. However, what makes this article noteworthy is the rational it gives for the operation and the strategic implications which the Admiral outlines.

 

A strategy of tensions

 

Stavridis justifies this provocation with the West’s refusal to recognize Russia’s annexation of Crimea and the “well-recognized right of innocent passage for warships under the United Nations Convention of the Law of the Sea, to which Russia, the U.K. and Ukraine are all signatories.” Let us note, in passing, that it reflects the hypocrisy of this statement that the U.S. itself has until now refused to sign this law of the sea treaty!

 

However, what is of interest at this point is not the well-known double standards of imperialism. What is of interest is the Admiral’s statement that the Western imperialist powers plan to launch a series of similar provocations against their Eastern imperialist rivals – Russia and China.

 

This [the Law of the Sea, Ed.] is at the heart of an emerging “great game” at sea — a modern version of the short-of-war gamesmanship between the British and Russian Empires in the 19th century — with authoritarian states disputing warship transits allowed under international law. Indeed, what matters is not the Black Sea setting but the larger principle of freedom of the high seas. I asked several senior naval officers (both U.S. and British) about this incident and similar U.S. actions in the South China Sea around the militarized artificial islands Beijing has built. The consensus was that we are going to see a great deal more such challenges between the Western allies and the growing authoritarian alignment of China and Russia. "

 

Emphasizing the general character of this strategy, the Admiral continues: “The U.K. is also sending a powerful carrier strike group, centered on the 65,000-ton Queen Elizabeth, to the western Pacific. There she will join warships from the U.S., France, Australia and Germany, among others, in participating in such freedom-of-navigation patrols. It is likely that the Quad — an alignment of Australia, India, Japan and the U.S — will consider similar missions. There may also be joint operations by the U.S. and allies around islands claimed by Iran in the Arabian Gulf, and perhaps near islands disputed by Japan and China in the East China Sea. (…) Defending it, in the Black Sea or the South China Sea or anywhere else, is good for the global order.

 

In other words, here we have a leading Western imperialist outlining an aggressive strategy of tensions. U.S. imperialism and their allies in Europe and Asia plan to send their warships to the sea borders of their rivals – in the Black Sea, in the South China Sea, in the Persian Gulf and other areas. Their goal is pretty obvious: these rivals should be forced to accept the domination of the Western imperialists (the “global order” of the “good old days” of absolute U.S. hegemony). If Moscow and Beijing refuse to do so – something which can be taken for granted – these provocations will inevitably result in clashes and eventually major wars.

 

Understanding inner-imperialist rivalry

 

Naturally, there is no reason to have any sympathy for Russia [5] and China [6] which are themselves imperialist Great Powers. They oppress their own people, brutally subjugate national minorities (like the Chechens in Russia [7] or the Muslim Uyghurs in China [8]), wage colonial wars abroad (e.g. Russia’s war in Syria [9]) and try to deny sea rights to their own neighboring states (e.g. Russia against the Ukraine [10], China against all bordering countries in the South China Sea [11]). Furthermore, as we have demonstrated in our works, Chinese imperialism is effectively challenging the long-time dominance of the U.S. in the capitalist world economy. This becomes obvious from China’s strong position among the global top corporations, billionaires, trade, IT technology etc. or its well-known Belt & Road Initiative. [12]

 

The statement of the Admiral confirms – from an imperialist point of view – the long-standing analysis of the RCIT that world politics is increasingly dominated by the dramatic acceleration of the rivalry between the Great Powers and the militarization of foreign policy. We have already outlined in our book “Anti-Imperialism in the Age of Great Power Rivalry” and other works that while there are tensions between all Great Powers, the key axis of the rivalry is between the U.S. (and their allies in Europe and Japan), on one hand, and China and Russia, on the other hand.

 

We repeat that it is urgent for Marxists to understand the nature of such conflicts, i.e. that they represent inter-imperialist conflicts in which all states pursue reactionary goals. None of them – neither the U.S., China, EU, Russia and Japan – represents anything progressive. All are imperialist Great Powers to which socialists must not lend any support. They must rather take a defeatist position on all sides in such conflicts. None is the “lesser evil” for the working class and the oppressed people. The task is rather to utilize such conflicts in order to intensify the class struggle and to ultimately bring down all capitalist ruling classes! [13]

 

 

 



[1] Wikipedia: James G. Stavridis, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_G._Stavridis

[2] Elliot Ackerman and James Stavridis: 2034: A Novel of the Next World War, New York, Penguin Press, 2021

[3] James Stavridis: Russia-U.K. Standoff Shows the New War at Sea Has Gone Global, Bloomberg, 2. Juli 2021, https://www.bloomberg.com/opinion/articles/2021-07-02/black-sea-standoff-shows-russia-china-naval-alliance-is-global?srnd=premium-europe

[4] RCIT: Russia Fires Warning Shots against UK Warship in the Black Sea. Down with Cold Warmongering! No support for any imperialist Great Power – neither UK, US nor Russia! 24 June 2021, https://www.thecommunists.net/worldwide/global/russia-fires-warning-shots-against-uk-warship-in-black-sea/; Michael Pröbsting: “Next Time We Will Bomb the Target”. Shooting incident in Black Sea between UK and Russia shows that capitalism in decay is stumbling towards war, 24 June 2021, https://www.thecommunists.net/worldwide/global/russia-uk-next-time-we-will-bomb-the-target/; Laurence Humphries: Skirmish in Black Sea: Imperialist Patriotism in the UK, 27 June 2021, https://www.thecommunists.net/worldwide/global/imperialist-patriotism-in-uk-on-skirmish-in-black-sea/; Michael Pröbsting: Examples of Pro-Russian Social-Imperialism. British Stalinism and the misnamed “World Socialist Web Site” on the shooting incident in the Black Sea between UK and Russia, 28 June 2021, https://www.thecommunists.net/worldwide/global/examples-of-pro-russian-social-imperialism/

[5] The RCIT has published numerous documents about capitalism in Russia and its rise to an imperialist power. See on this e.g. Michael Pröbsting: Russia and China: Neither Capitalist nor Great Powers? A Reply to the PO/CRFI and their Revisionist Whitewashing of Chinese and Russian imperialism, 28 November 2018, https://www.thecommunists.net/theory/russia-and-china-neither-capitalist-nor-great-powers-reply-to-po-crfi/; see also several pamphlets by the same author: The Catastrophic Failure of the Theory of “Catastrophism”. On the Marxist Theory of Capitalist Breakdown and its Misinterpretation by the Partido Obrero (Argentina) and its “Coordinating Committee for the Refoundation of the Fourth International”, 27 May 2018, https://www.thecommunists.net/theory/the-catastrophic-failure-of-the-theory-of-catastrophism/; Lenin’s Theory of Imperialism and the Rise of Russia as a Great Power. On the Understanding and Misunderstanding of Today’s Inter-Imperialist Rivalry in the Light of Lenin’s Theory of Imperialism. Another Reply to Our Critics Who Deny Russia’s Imperialist Character, August 2014, http://www.thecommunists.net/theory/imperialism-theory-and-russia/; Russia as a Great Imperialist Power. The formation of Russian Monopoly Capital and its Empire – A Reply to our Critics, 18 March 2014, in: Revolutionary Communism No. 21, http://www.thecommunists.net/theory/imperialist-russia/. See various other RCIT documents on this issue at a special sub-page on the RCIT’s website: https://www.thecommunists.net/theory/china-russia-as-imperialist-powers/

[6] The RCIT has published numerous documents about capitalism in China. See on this e.g. our above-mentioned book by Michael Pröbsting: Anti-Imperialism in the Age of Great Power Rivalry. See also by the same author an essay published in the second edition of The Palgrave Encyclopedia of Imperialism and Anti-Imperialism (edited by Immanuel Ness and Zak Cope), Palgrave Macmillan, Cham, 2020, https://link.springer.com/referenceworkentry/10.1007%2F978-3-319-91206-6_179-1; China‘s transformation into an imperialist power. A study of the economic, political and military aspects of China as a Great Power (2012), in: Revolutionary Communism No. 4, http://www.thecommunists.net/publications/revcom-number-4; How is it possible that some Marxists still Doubt that China has Become Capitalist? (A Critique of the PTS/FT), An analysis of the capitalist character of China’s State-Owned Enterprises and its political consequences, 18 September 2020, https://www.thecommunists.net/theory/pts-ft-and-chinese-imperialism-2/; Unable to See the Wood for the Trees (PTS/FT and China). Eclectic empiricism and the failure of the PTS/FT to recognize the imperialist character of China, 13 August 2020, https://www.thecommunists.net/theory/pts-ft-and-chinese-imperialism/. See many more RCIT documents at a special sub-page on the RCIT’s website: https://www.thecommunists.net/theory/china-russia-as-imperialist-powers/.

[7] See on this e.g. RCIT: Solidarity with the Liberation Struggle of the Chechen People! Open Letter to the Oppressed Chechen People, February 2018, https://www.thecommunists.net/worldwide/europe/solidarity-with-the-liberation-struggle-of-the-chechen-people/

[8] For the RCIT’s analysis of the oppression of the Uyghurs see e.g. Michael Pröbsting: China: Defend the Muslim Uyghurs against Oppression! 18.10.2018, https://www.thecommunists.net/worldwide/asia/china-defend-the-muslim-uyghurs-against-oppression/; Michael Pröbsting: 37 Signatures Are Worth a Thousand Words. On a letter of 37 states, including Muslim countries, sent to the United Nations defending China's treatment of the Uyghurs in Xinjiang, 16 July 2019, https://www.thecommunists.net/worldwide/asia/37-states-defend-china-s-treatment-of-uyghurs/

[9] The RCIT has published numerous booklets, statements, and articles on the Syrian revolution which are compiled at a sub-page on the RCIT website: https://www.thecommunists.net/worldwide/africa-and-middle-east/collection-of-articles-on-the-syrian-revolution/.

[10] See on this e.g. RCIT: Military Escalation between Russia and Ukraine at the Kerch Strait. Down with the Reactionary Warmongering on Both Sides! 28 November 2018, https://www.thecommunists.net/worldwide/europe/military-escalation-between-russia-and-ukraine-at-the-kerch-strait/; Petr Sedov (RCIT Russia): On the Donbass Uprising in Spring 2014. A necessary correction of our assessment of the early phase of the “anti-fascist” Uprising in the Eastern Ukraine, July 2019, https://www.thecommunists.net/theory/reconsidering-the-donbass-uprising-in-spring-2014/; Michael Pröbsting: The Uprising in East Ukraine and Russian Imperialism. An Analysis of Recent Developments in the Ukrainian Civil War and their Consequences for Revolutionary Tactics, 22 October 2014, https://www.thecommunists.net/theory/ukraine-and-russian-imperialism/

[11] See on this e.g. Michael Pröbsting: No to chauvinist war-mongering by Japanese and Chinese imperialism! Chinese and Japanese workers: Your main enemy is at home! Stop the conflict on the Senkaku/Diaoyu-islands in the East China Sea! 23.9.2012, https://www.thecommunists.net/worldwide/asia/no-war-between-china-and-japan/

[12] We have dealt with these issues extensively in our works which are compiled at the sub-page: https://www.thecommunists.net/theory/china-russia-as-imperialist-powers/. See e.g. Michael Pröbsting: China is Definitely the Place where You Want to Be (If You are a Billionaire). Following the Latest Report of the Hurun Global Rich List, 8.3.2021, https://www.thecommunists.net/worldwide/asia/china-is-definitely-the-place-where-you-want-to-be-if-you-are-a-billionaire/; by the same author: China passes the US on Global Business Ranking for the first time. New data on global corporations reflects China’s rise as an imperialist Great Power, 23 July 2019, https://www.thecommunists.net/worldwide/asia/china-another-so-called-success-of-the-stalinist-capitalist-regime/

[13] For our programmatic approach on inner-imperialist conflicts see e.g. RCIT: Theses on Revolutionary Defeatism in Imperialist States, 8 September 2018, https://www.thecommunists.net/theory/theses-on-revolutionary-defeatism-in-imperialist-states/; see also chapters XVI to XX in the above-mentioned book by Michael Pröbsting: Anti-Imperialism in the Age of Great Power Rivalry.

 

“Libertad marítima”, palabra clave de los belicistas de EE.UU. y OTAN

Por Michael Pröbsting, Secretario Internacional de la Corriente Comunista Revolucionaria Internacional, CCRI, 5 de julio de 2021, www.thecommunists.net

 

En uno de nuestros artículos sobre la reciente escaramuza entre un buque de guerra del Reino Unido y las fuerzas rusas en el Mar Negro, hemos llamado la atención sobre James G. Stavridis. Es un almirante retirado de la Marina de los EE. UU. y ex comandante supremo aliado de la OTAN. También es presidente de la junta de la Fundación Rockefeller y vicepresidente de Asuntos Globales en Carlyle Group. 

 

En su momento fue considerado como un potencial compañero de fórmula para vicepresidente por Hillary Clinton en 2016 y como un posible secretario de Estado por el presidente Trump. [1] En resumen, es la personificación de lo que el espléndido presidente Dwight D. Eisenhower llamó el “Complejo Militar-Industrial” y lo que los marxistas llaman la fusión de la máxima dirección del aparato estatal armado y el capital monopolista.

 

También señalamos que el almirante Stavridis es un influyente estratega militar que ha publicado varios libros y artículos muy conocidos. Su último libro, "2034: Una novela de la próxima guerra mundial", describe, en ese formato literario, una guerra entre Estados Unidos y China que comienza con un enfrentamiento en el Mar de China Meridional. [2] Hace unos días, el almirante Stavridis publicó un artículo en Bloomberg. [3] 

 

Esta es una corporación de medios líder propiedad de Michael Bloomberg, uno de los hombres más ricos de los Estados Unidos con un patrimonio neto oficial de $ 60.1 mil millones. En resumen, Stavridis es alguien cuyas palabras deben tomarse en serio, ya que es un destacado representante de la clase dominante de Estados Unidos.  

 

En su artículo, el almirante retirado justifica la reciente y provocadora operación de la Armada británica que envió al HMS Defender –uno de sus buques de guerra más modernos– muy cerca de Sebastopol, la principal base naval rusa en Crimea. Como se supo más tarde por los memorandos internos filtrados, Downing Street 10 era plenamente consciente de la naturaleza explosiva de esta operación y fue aprobada personalmente por el primer ministro Boris Johnson. 

 

Como reflejo de la dimensión más amplia de esta operación, el HMS Defender fue apoyado por un avión de reconocimiento estratégico estadounidense que voló cerca. En este punto, no repetiremos nuestro análisis de este incidente y remitiremos a nuestros lectores a los documentos relevantes del RCIT. [4]  

 

No es de extrañar que una de las principales figuras del “Complejo Militar-Industrial” estadounidense defendiera una operación que fue llevada a cabo por uno de sus aliados más cercanos con el apoyo de Estados Unidos. Sin embargo, lo que hace que este artículo sea digno de mención es la racionalidad da para la operación y las implicaciones estratégicas que perfila el Almirante.

 

Una estrategia de tensiones 

 

Stavridis justifica esta provocación con la negativa de Occidente a reconocer la anexión de Crimea por parte de Rusia y el “bien reconocido derecho de paso inocente para los buques de guerra en virtud de la Convención de las Naciones Unidas sobre el Derecho del Mar, de la que Rusia, Reino Unido y Ucrania son signatarios. " ¡Notemos, de pasada, que refleja la hipocresía de esta declaración que los propios Estados Unidos hasta ahora se han negado a firmar este tratado de la ley del mar! 

 

Sin embargo, lo que interesa en este momento no es el conocido doble rasero del imperialismo. Lo que interesa es la declaración del Almirante de que las potencias imperialistas occidentales planean lanzar una serie de provocaciones similares contra sus rivales imperialistas orientales: Rusia y China.  

 

"Esto [la Ley del Mar, Ed.] Está en el corazón de un" gran juego "emergente en el mar, una versión moderna del juego de guerra entre los imperios británico y ruso en el siglo XIX, con autoritarismo Estados que disputan los tránsitos de buques de guerra permitidos por el derecho internacional. De hecho, lo que importa no es el entorno del Mar Negro, sino el principio más amplio de libertad en alta mar. 

 

Pregunté a varios oficiales navales de alto nivel (tanto estadounidenses como británicos) sobre este incidente y acciones similares de Estados Unidos en el Mar de China Meridional alrededor de las islas artificiales militarizadas que Beijing ha construido. El consenso fue que veremos muchos más desafíos de este tipo entre los aliados occidentales y la creciente alineación autoritaria de China y Rusia. "

 

Haciendo hincapié en el carácter general de esta estrategia, el Almirante continúa: “El Reino Unido también está enviando un poderoso grupo de ataque de portaaviones, centrado en el Queen Elizabeth de 65.000 toneladas, al Pacífico occidental. Allí se unirá a buques de guerra de los EE. UU., Francia, Australia y Alemania, entre otros, para participar en tales patrullas de libertad de navegación. 

 

Es probable que el Quad, una alineación de Australia, India, Japón y Estados Unidos, considere misiones similares. También puede haber operaciones conjuntas de Estados Unidos y sus aliados alrededor de islas reclamadas por Irán en el Golfo Arábigo, y quizás cerca de islas disputadas por Japón y China en el Mar de China Oriental. (…) Defenderlo, en el Mar Negro o en el Mar de China Meridional o en cualquier otro lugar, es bueno para el orden mundial ”.  

 

En otras palabras, aquí tenemos a un importante imperialista occidental que esboza una estrategia agresiva de tensiones. El imperialismo estadounidense y sus aliados en Europa y Asia planean enviar sus buques de guerra a las fronteras marítimas de sus rivales: en el Mar Negro, en el Mar de China Meridional, en el Golfo Pérsico y otras áreas. 

 

Su objetivo es bastante obvio: estos rivales deberían verse obligados a aceptar la dominación de los imperialistas occidentales (el "orden global" de los "buenos viejos tiempos" de hegemonía absoluta de Estados Unidos). Si Moscú y Pekín se niegan a hacerlo, algo que puede darse por sentado, estas provocaciones resultarán inevitablemente en enfrentamientos y, finalmente, en grandes guerras.  

 

Comprender la rivalidad interior imperialista  

 

Naturalmente, no hay razón para sentir simpatía por Rusia [5] y China [6], que son a su vez grandes potencias imperialistas. Oprimen a su propio pueblo, subyugan brutalmente a las minorías nacionales (como los chechenos en Rusia [7] o los musulmanes uigures en China [8]), libran guerras coloniales en el extranjero (por ejemplo, la guerra de Rusia en Siria [9]) y tratan de negar los derechos marítimos a sus propios estados vecinos (por ejemplo, Rusia contra Ucrania [10], China contra todos los países limítrofes en el Mar de China Meridional [11]). 

 

Además, como hemos demostrado en nuestros trabajos, el imperialismo chino está desafiando efectivamente el dominio desde hace mucho tiempo de Estados Unidos en la economía mundial capitalista. Esto se vuelve obvio a partir de la sólida posición de China entre las principales corporaciones, multimillonarios, comercio, tecnología de TI, etc., o su conocida Iniciativa Belt & Road. [12]

 

La declaración del Almirante confirma, desde un punto de vista imperialista, el análisis de larga data de la RCIT de que la política mundial está cada vez más dominada por la dramática aceleración de la rivalidad entre las grandes potencias y la militarización de la política exterior. Ya hemos esbozado en nuestro libro “Antiimperialismo en la era de la rivalidad de las grandes potencias” y otros trabajos que si bien existen tensiones entre todas las grandes potencias, el eje clave de la rivalidad es entre los EE. UU. ), por un lado, y China y Rusia, por otro.

 

Repetimos que es urgente que los marxistas comprendan la naturaleza de tales conflictos, es decir, que representan conflictos inter-imperialistas en los que todos los estados persiguen objetivos reaccionarios. Ninguno de ellos, ni Estados Unidos, China, UE, Rusia y Japón, representa algo progresista. Todas son grandes potencias imperialistas a las que los socialistas no deben prestar ningún apoyo. 

 

Más bien, deben adoptar una posición derrotista en todos los bandos en estos conflictos. Ninguno es el "mal menor" para la clase trabajadora y el pueblo oprimido. ¡La tarea es más bien utilizar tales conflictos para intensificar la lucha de clases y finalmente derrocar a todas las clases dominantes capitalistas! [13]

 

Leer citas de referencia en https://www.thecommunists.net/worldwide/global/maritime-freedom-a-keyword-of-the-u-s-nato-warmongers/

 

 

 

“항행의 자유” ㅡ 미국/나토 전쟁몰이꾼들의 키워드

서방 제국주의 대표 전략가 스타브리디스가 제시하는 · 겨냥 군사주의 전략

 

미하엘 프뢰브스팅, 혁명적 공산주의인터내셔널 동맹 (RCIT) 국제서기, 2021 7 5, www.thecommunists.net

Download
KOR trans of Maritime Freedom.pdf
Adobe Acrobat Document 111.3 KB

우리는 최근 영국 군함과 러시아군의 흑해 교전에 관한 기사 하나에서 미군 최고위 지휘관 출신 전략가 제임스 스타브리디스에 대해 주목할 것을 요청한 있다. 스타브리디스는 퇴역 해군 제독이고 나토군 총사령관이다. 그는 현재 록펠러 재단의 이사장이자 칼라일 그룹의 부회장을 맡고 있다. 2016 힐러리 클린턴 선거캠프에 의해 부통령 러닝메이트로 물망에 오르기도 했고, 트럼프 대통령 후보 시절에는 국무장관 하마평에 오르내리기도 했다.[1] 간단히 말해, 스타브리디스는 군산복합체 화신이다. (참고로, 무력 국가기구의 최고 지도부와 독점자본의 융합을 군산복합체라는 그럴싸한 말로 처음 명명한 것은 대통령 재임 당시의 아이젠하워였다.)

 

우리는 스타브리디스가 널리 읽힌 책과 논문을 다수 발표한 영향력 있는 군사 전략가임을 지적한 있다. 그의 최근 저서 <<2034: 소설 다음 세계대전>> 남중국해에서의 대결로 시작하는 · 전쟁을 소설 형식으로 묘사하고 있다.[2]

 

며칠 스타브리디스의 글이 미국 독점자본 대변지 블룸버그 통신에 실렸는데[[3], 기사에서 그는 최근 영국 해군의 도발적인 작전 (최신식 초대형 구축함 HMS 디펜더를 크림반도의 주요 러시아 해군기지 세바스톨에 매우 가까이 진입시켜 러시아 해군의 경고사격을 유발한 작전) 정당화한다. 작전은 이후 내부 비망록 유출로 내막이 알려지게 되었는데, 영국 정부는 작전의 폭발성을 충분히 알고 있었고, 보리스 존슨 총리가 작전을 직접 승인했다고 한다. 작전의 맥락이 단지 영국 일국에 한정된 것이 아님을 말해주는 , HMS 디펜더 구축함이 인근 상공을 비행하는 미군 전략정찰기의 엄호 지원을 받았다는 것이다. 여기서 우리는 사건에 대한 분석을 반복하지 않을 것이며 독자들에게 관련 RCIT 문서들을 참조할 것을 권한다.[4]

 

미국 군산복합체 지도급 인사 명이 미국의 가장 긴밀한 동맹군 하나에 의해 미군의 엄호 지원을 받고 수행된 작전을 옹호하는 것은 그리 특별한 일은 아니다. 하지만 그의 기사는 아주 특별한 내용이 담겨 있는데, 그것은 작전을 정당화하기 위해 전략가가 제시하고 있는 논리적 근거와 전략적 함의다.

 

 

 

긴장고조 전략

 

스타브리디스는, 러시아의 크림반도 병합을 서방은 인정하지 않는다는 것으로, 그리고 러시아, 영국, 우크라이나 모두가 서명한 유엔해양법 협약 따라 군함에 대한 무해(無害)항행권이 널리 인정받고 있다는 것으로 이번 도발을 정당화한다. 나온 김에 지적해두자면, 미국 자신이 지금까지 해양법에 서명하기를 거부해온 장본인이다. 정당화 논리의 위선을 보여주는 대목이다.

 

그러나 이미 알려져 있는 제국주의의 이중 잣대는 여기서 우리의 관심사가 아니다. 관심사는 서방 제국주의 열강들이 제국주의 경쟁상대 러시아와 중국을 겨냥해 일련의 비슷한 도발을 감행하려고 계획하고 있다는 진술이다.

 

"국제법상 허용되고 있는 군함 통항을 분쟁 대상으로 삼고 있는 권위주의 국가들과 맞붙는 새로운 해상 "그레이트 게임" 19세기에 대영제국과 러시아제국 중앙아시아를 둘러싼 각축전의 현대판 중심에 이것 [해양법 - 인용자] 있다. 실로 중요한 것은 흑해 문제가 아니라 공해(公海)자유라는 원칙이다. 나는 작전 작전과 유사한, 중국이 건설한 군사 인공 주변 남중국해에서의 미국의 작전행동에 대해 해군 고위 장성 (· 양측의 장성) 사람에게 물어보았다. 우리는 서방 동맹국들 간에 그러한 도전과제가 훨씬 많아지고 중국과 러시아 권위주의적 동맹이 강화되어 것이라는 공감대를 이뤘다."

 

스타브리디스는 전략의 총괄적 성격을 강조하면서 이렇게 말한다. “영국은 65 톤급 최신예 항공모함 엘리자베스 호를 중심으로 막강한 항모타격단(CSG) 서태평양에 보내고 있다. 거기서 퀸엘리자베스 호는 미국, 프랑스, 호주, 독일 등의 군함과 함께, 무엇보다도 이러한 항행 자유 순찰에 참여할 것이다. 호주, 인도, 일본, 그리고 미국의 동맹체인 쿼드도 유사한 임무를 고려할 것으로 보인다. 이란이 영유권을 주장하는 걸프 섬들 주변에서도 미국과 동맹국들의 공동작전이 있을 것이다. 그리고 아마도 일본과 중국 동중국해 분쟁 섬들 인근에서도 같은 공동작전이 있을 있다... 흑해에서든 남중국해에서든, 어디서든 그것을 방어하는 것이 세계질서에 좋다.”

 

달리 말하자면, 여기서 우리는 지도급 서방 제국주의자가 공격적인 긴장고조 전략을 브리핑하는 것을 보고 있는 것이다. 제국주의와 유럽 아시아의 동맹국들은 라이벌 국가들의 해상 경계선 흑해, 남중국해, 페르시아만 전함을 보낼 계획이다. 그들의 목표는 아주 명백하다. ‘ 라이벌들이 서방 제국주의자들의 지배 (미국 절대 패권의 "좋았던 옛날" "글로벌 질서") 받아들이지 않을 없도록 강제돼야 한다.’ 모스크바와 베이징이 거부한다면 도발적인 작전들은 불가피하게 군사 충돌과, 나아가 마침내는 본격 전쟁으로 결과할 것이다.

 

 

 

갈등의 본질은 제국주의 패권경쟁이다

 

당연히 자신 제국주의 강대국인 러시아[5] 중국[6] 동정할 이유가 없다. 그들은 자국민을 억압하고, 민족 소수자 (러시아의 체첸 [7]이나 중국의 무슬림 위구르 [8] 같은) 예속, 지배하며, 국외에서 식민전쟁을 벌이며 (시리아에서 러시아의 전쟁[9] 같은), 주변국에 대한 해상권을 거부하려 한다. (예를 들어 러시아가 우크라이나에 대해[10], 중국이 남중국해의 모든 접경국에 대해[11]). 게다가 우리가 여러 문서를 통해 줄곧 보여주었듯이, 중국 제국주의는 자본주의 세계경제에서 미국의 오랜 지배에 효과적으로 도전하고 있다. 이는 글로벌 상위 기업, 억만장자, 무역, 첨단기술 등에서나, 또는 일대일로 사업 같은 거대 헤게모니 프로젝트에서 중국의 강력한 지위를 명백해진다.[12]

 

스타브리디스의 언명은 세계정치가 점점 강대국 패권쟁투 가속화와 대외정책 군사화에 의해 지배되고 있다는 RCIT 오랜 분석을 확인시켜 제국주의적 관점에서 준다. 이미 우리는 우리의 <<강대국 패권쟁투 시대에 반제국주의>> 밖의 문서들에서 모든 강대국들 간에 긴장이 존재하지만 패권경쟁의 핵심 축은 미국 ( 동맹 유럽· 일본) 중국·러시아 사이에 있음을 밝힌 있다.

 

우리는 이러한