In its continuing aggression against the peoples of Iraq, the USA is only following the imperialist dictum "Eat or be eaten". That war is a virtual inevitability – is not just the opinion of those whose information is limited to the bourgeois press, but is also the opinion of policy-makers. Richard Perle, Chairman of the Defence Advisory Board said to the NYT that war was inevitable – if only to ‘save face’ of the President: "The failure to take on Saddam after what the President said would produce such a collapse of confidence in the president that he would set back the war on terrorism";
Cited Rivers Pitt W: "War on Iraq – What Team Bush Doesn’t Want you To Know"; Context books, New York 2002; p.8 (www.ww_on_iraq.com). If this analysis was true in August 2002, it is even more so now in January 2003 since:     It looks increasingly inevitable that the question is not "Whether"?  But "When"?
    It is necessary to ask why is war virtually inevitable? We suggest that for those who retain some degree of skepticism about the USA and UN "honour", the following is convincing.
    The short answer to the question is two-fold:
    The declining power of the USA economy; and
    the strategic importance of the geographical arena of the Middle East.
    The link between these two factors is of course, oil.     Over the last 2 years several chickens have come home to roost in the American economy. Firstly, the collapse of the markets - the greatest "bubble" ever - has led to three successive falls in as many years in the international exchanges such as the Financial Times Stock Exchange (FTSE) or the Dow Jones etc. "Cumulative losses of the FTSE World Index since the start of the 2002 after the bursting of the technology media and telecoms bubble, total 43%";
(31.12.2002 Financial Times, London UK, p.1).     This was the worst 3-year period since the Great Depression years – when in 1929-31 world markets fell 58.5%. These figures that have so depressed the capitalist profits are world wide. This had long been predicted. At the end of 1996, Federal reserve Chairman Alan Greenspan had already: "Famously questioned whether ‘irrational exuberance’ was inflating share values";
Wall St Journal 31.12.2002-1.1.2003; p.M1) .     In addition the value of the US dollar has begun to slide dramatically. We pointed out in 1993, that the US $ was ‘set high’ by US imperialists in order to ‘recruit’ the world’s money reserves (See  Alliance 3). However, with the systemic problems of the US economy, the dollar has been falling since the mid-90’s, with a corresponding "investor flight" from the US dollar.     Even in its "own backyard" of South America, the USA has faced recent challenges to its hegemony has been a minor set-back. As the bourgeois nationalists - in Ecuador (Lucio Gutierrez), Venezuela (Hugo Chavez), Brazil (Luis Ignacio Lula da Silva), lead challenges to the USA, they have not only are rattled the OPEC sword, but also have obstructed a Free Trade Agreement for the "Americas". For example Lula's "price" is dropping of trade barriers against citrus fruits and juices (WSJ "Latin Issues Put Bush on Tightrope"; By Michael M. Phillips; p. A3; WSJ 31.12.2002-1.1.2003). However the American Sugar Alliance and the Florida Citrus Mutual (representing some 11,5000 citrus growers in Florida alone) are hardly likely to easily allow this. So in South America, the USA has some current difficulties.
    Even more so, must the USA now urgently suppress other areas of drift away from its hegemony. The Middle East is the Gateway to another large market and raw resources region. It has already been the focus for European interests in the past. The USA cannot afford it slip from under its thumb as well.     If the USA cannot in effect control the money markets as well as they did (see the falling $); nor can they effectively control world industrial production (witness the need to erect Steel Tariff barriers in 2002); - then as much as it can, it will try to control a key raw material – Oil.
    Oil is still the major lubricant that keeps industrial wheels spinning. In the last decade the USA has launched 4 major wars to ensure its’ domination over this raw material: 1991 Desert Storm, 1993 Desert Storm pt 2; 1998 Kosova; 2002 Afghanistan. Naturally all these wars had camouflaged motives, the most recent being the "War Against Terror". In various articles we have shown the underlying links to oil. The two parts of Desert Storm are self-evident. The links of the Kosovan war and the Afghanistan war are via the new oil pipelines from Central Asia across to the Balkans.
      Why have we used the term "virtually inevitable" – rather than "inevitable"? Because there are two major unknowns. Firstly there is the inter-imperialist rivalry between Europe and the USA. Of the three largest power-brokers in the EU – apart from the toadyism of Blair’s government in Britain, the governments of both France and Germany are quite unwilling to allow the USA total sway. To what extent they will be able to stop the drive to total Middle Eastern domination of the USA – remains unclear.

    The second factor of importance is the ability of the progressives and the representatives of the working class and toilers of the world to counter the barrage of imperialist propaganda sprayed over the world. To this end a United Front of all progressives MUST be formed. There are indications that this is happening. When in 2002 we put out a general alert asking for a Marxist-Leninist United Front – it led to little response. But the class and peoples are in reality ahead of the small sects and groupings. This is evidenced by such movements as in autumn Florence 2002. But – it remains the case that without a determined Marxist-Leninist vanguard, these movements will inevitably lead – at best – short term solutions only. In the interim, we believe Marxist-Leninists should participate actively in the current anti-imperialist movements.