When the Egyptian economist, Samīr Amīn, talks of armed Libyan uprisings, he claims that the aim of the American, European and Japanese armed forces’ intervention was neither for the “protection of civilians”, neither “democracy”, but the control of oil and the purchase of a huge military post in the country.
Furthermore, when he writes in the Arabic language, Amīn cites an expression of Mao, who claims that capitalism had nothing to offer the people of the three continents (Asia, Africa and Latin America) and that the south represents the cyclonic zone – that is the zone where the uprisings took place. Talking about this, the author claims that the “Arab uprising” isn’t the only example, but it is the latest expression of an instability which is typical of this “cyclonic area”.
A first wave of “revolutions” swept away some Asian dictatorships (Philippines and Indonesia) and some African opportunities were created by imperialism and by local reactionary coalitions. The author highlighted that the USA and Europe succeeded to stop popular movements which were huge for the demonstrations that they provoked. In the same way these two imperialist powers want to do again in the Arab world what they did in those countries: change everything in order that nothing changes. Amīn claims that in the Philippines and in Indonesia, the USA, the EU and Japan, act to maintain the “essential”, thereby creating neo-liberal governments who are favourable to foreign policy.
The author states that uprisings are potential bearers of revolutionary achievements and they are expectable nearly everywhere in the three continents, which are now more than ever cyclonic zones. It disproves sugary speeches about “eternal capitalism”, usually connected with stability, peace and democratic progress. In order to obtain revolutionary achievements these uprisings will have to create positive inner convergences, on the other hand they will have to defeat the USA, Europe and Japan’s interventions (even military’s ones), since no one can allow these countries to do a military intervention in the southern countries’ domestic affairs. This is true even if the pretext is apparently justifiable with humanitarian intervention. Nowadays the main idea is to institute an “international law” whereby they can intervene in case of a violation of people’s fundamental rights. According to Amīn there aren’t the right conditions to go ahead in this direction. The “International Community” doesn’t exist because it can be summarized by the United States’ ambassador, followed automatically by his European colleagues.
The author rhetorically asks himself if it is necessary to remember the long list of these wicked criminal interventions and their results (for example Iraq), or to remember the principle of “double standards” that characterises them (let’s think about disowned rights of Palestinians and about the unconditional support to Israel or to the several dictatorships in Africa).
He finishes by saying that the “spring” of uprisings by the Arab people coincides with the “autumn of capitalism” – that is the decline of the monopolies of capitalism which are generalized and globalised. According to Amīn these movements start when suburban countries regain independence in order to transform the world and so it is about anti-imperialist movements that are therefore partially against capitalism. The decline of capitalism can open the way to socialism or, alternatively, to widespread barbarity. The United States Army and their subordinate NATO allies’ project to rein military control over the planet demonstrates the decline of democracy in imperialist countries. The rejection of democracy in the southern countries where uprisings take place (which takes the form of religious “fundamentalist” illusions) work together for this unfavourable perspective. According to the author, the fight for democratization becomes crucial in this moment. This is when the prospect of people’s future emancipation stands out against that of widespread barbarity.