The Guardian • Issue #2099


  • The Guardian
  • Issue #2099

The engine of US foreign policy has been fuelled not by a devotion to any kind of morality, but by the necessity to serve other imperatives: to make the world safe for US corporations; to enhance the financial statements of defence contractors at home who have contributed generously to members of Congress; to prevent the rise of any society that might serve as a successful example of an alternative to the capitalist model; to extend political and economic hegemony over as wide an area as possible, as befits a “great power.”

The United States has carried out serious interventions into more than 70 nations since World War II. In the coming weeks Dingo will begin each Bytes with one of these targets of US imperialism.

First up China 1945-49: The US intervened in the civil war between the revolutionaries and counter revolutionary forces, taking the side of Chiang Kai-shek against the Communists, even though the latter had been an ally of the US in the recently concluded WW2. The US used defeated Japanese soldiers to fight for its side. The revolutionary forces prevailed and Chiang Kai-shek fled to Taiwan in 1949.

Who rules Australia? In 2014 mining magnate Andrew Forrest’s “Creating Parity” report, a recipe for wiping out Native Title, clearing outback Indigenous communities off their land, private sector control of their lives and assimilation, was handed to the then Abbott Coalition government. It is a simplistic, paternalistic, racist strategy for the dispossession and further disempowerment of Indigenous Australians, produced by a mining magnate and his head office team for the sole benefit of mining corporations.

Prior to Forrest there was mining magnate Lang Hancock – father of billionaire Gina Reinhart – who, when asked about Indigenous affairs, proposed a sterilisation program so that, in his words “they die out.” That’s who rules.

PARASITE(S) OF THE WEEK: are the various war-mongering think-tanks painting China as the enemy. Their strategic buzz at various forums this month all focused on what they call the “frightening discussion”: how civilians and industry will be mobilised when the big one starts. Here’s former Home Affairs head Michael Pezzullo: “In war the most important question is whether the nation at large has the structures, capabilities, and above all, the mindset and national will that are required to fight and keep fighting, and to absorb, recover, endure, and prevail.” This comes out of the scenario of China attacking and invading Australia. Pezzullo called for the government to prepare a “war book” in preparation for invasion, a plan covering crucial infrastructure and key industries such as transport, energy, communications, and construction; the allocation and rationing and stockpiling of food, water, fuel, and pharmaceuticals; evacuating and sheltering population centres.

One think-tank, the US Studies Centre, said the government “should begin speaking openly about how civil society could be mobilised in time of conflict.” Former Defence Department deputy secretary Peter Jennings called for more involvement of the private sector to “contribute to military requirements,” saying there should be talks between the government and private sector to “start a public debate about mobilisation.”

The Guardian can also be viewed/downloaded in PDF format. View More