Alex Foti on Mon, 13 Apr 2015 17:20:11 +0200 (CEST) |
[Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]
<nettime> perry rhodan's world? |
(nettime lives:) when i was a kid, a nerdy boy gave me to read this coldwar sci-fi series which i have now found out was originally west-german (thought it was brit - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Perry_Rhodan). The hero is an American space major who defends the West against its foes. Can't remember much about the 007-like plot except one thing that got me thinking: in the next future it won't be America vs Russia, but America vs China, with Russia a lesser ally of the latter. Well, it's happening. China and Russia have signed multibillion energy and arms deals to counterbalance the US, whose hegemony over the Pacific and the Middle East is clearly vacillating. The whole multipolar ordeal is consolidating along a more familiar bipolarity - america vs china over asia, america vs russia over eastern europe with the eu somewhat caught in the middle. All the signs from Ukraine to the South China sea escalation point toward a more confrontational relation between America and the two continental quasi-empires. And one thing is certain: no matter who gets elected after Obama, she/he will be more hawkish in foreign policy. Hillary is certainly more pro-israel and martial than the hawaian boy who used to love bob marley;) More seriously, there's a chance that in retrospect we'll regard the US-Iran peace deal as a "Nixon goes to China" moment. Overriding israel's opposition, Obama (and the hitherto lame Kerry) decided to shift the weight of the US on the shia side, away from the traditional support given to sunni petromonarchies, a bit like Nixon and Kissinger decided to give a preference to chinese maoism over russian stalinism to decisively weaken the former as they were losing the Vietnam war. Here the US after losing the middle-eastern wars is giving a preference to Iran's revolutionary islamism over Saudi Arabia's reactionary islamism. Of course the new accord leaves out very messy grey areas (e.g. Yemen and Syria), but puts ISIS' necrosalafism on the defensive, because it's shia militias and Iran's pasdarans who are fighting them on the ground, along with kurdish forces (peshmerga and YPG/YPJ), inflicting serious defeats to the black ghouls of evil. One should nevertheless be wary of manicheism in observing the shia/sunni divide. If there's a clear regional split between the Sheikhs and the Ayatollahs, it's also evident that the sunni Muslim Brotherhood is closer to Iran (and Qatar) than it ever was to alqaeda and isis (which was spawned by the first battle for falluja). However, the shia hezblollahs are fighting on assad's side (supported by iran) supporting the alawite shia minority against the uprising of the sunni majority, which has the sympathy of the Brotherhood in all arab countries. In Yarmouk refugee camp where incredibile atrocities are being committed against Palestinians, hamas has to fight on two fronts, against isis and bashir. The Gulf coalition is showing its true colors by bombing the Houthis: it is a holy alliance, a counterrevolutionary force at work to bury the Arab spring once for all (Sissi and Bahrein are ardent supporters of the military alliance) with the pretext of hitting isis, while in fact it's mostly US planes bombing al-baghadi's private army. For all the coldwar reruns, we live in a world politically shaped by the 1979 persian revolution and the 1978 conversion of china to (state?) capitalism. But while communist ideology is arguably moribund, political islamism has been the dominant ideological opposition to (neo)liberal democracy for three decades. I've long thought islamophobia is today's functional equivalent of antisemitism between the two wars. While the European right is invariably islamophobic (think lepen, lega or pegida), it has also become clear that, in the absence of an anticapitalist ideology that speaks directly to them, the lure of jihadism and the violent refusal of women's rights and other secular values are popular among young european arabs. This should be no cause for hysteria, but it did make me give SOUMISSION a fair-minded reading. Well, I cite it not for its (dubious or not) literary merits, but because it contains a clear geopolitical prediction: the islamization of europe and the political reunification of the Mediterranean, with the european union enlarging itself to embrace the maghreb and the middle east. The house of saud takes over the sorbonne by ensuring its funding, since public education is abolished by the new regime (a beur has been elected for president, supported by hollande and sarkozy vs le pen). I'm a secular catholic (spaghetti atheist) and i certainly hope secularism and human rights will vanquish ignorance, repression and intolerance all over the world, but i'd favor the shias over sunnis anytime - they're more populist, modernist, and inclusive (women's rights are less curtailed in iran in comparison to saudi arabia), not least because they fight on the side of Kobane to liberate Ninive and Mosul. ciao for now, lx # distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission # <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism, # collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets # more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l # archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime@kein.org