Workers League - Behind the US invasion of Somalia - Mehring Books

Asked whether US intervention into an internal situation in
another country worried him, former UN Ambassador Andrew
Young said, "It doesn't bother me at all. One of the things we're going
to have to do in places like Liberia, to some extent in Haiti... we're
going to have to find a way under the auspices of the United Nations
to deal with internal questions.... It is appropriate that we learn what
is possible and what is necessary in Somalia and then we see how that
lesson can be applied with others."
The shameless subservience of the United Nations to the latest
predatory moves of the United States further exposes its reactionary
role. The fiction of the United Nations as a benevolent mediator
between imperialist and oppressed nations has been exploded by the
collapse of Stalinism and the breakup of the postwar imperialist
order.
The turn by American imperialism to military force abroad is
accompanied by the ever more flagrant disregard for the traditional
forms of democratic procedure at home. The White House no longer
makes even a pretense of seeking congressional approval for the
launching of wars which could cost hundreds of millions of dollars
and sacrifice the lives and limbs of thousands of young workers.
Bush announced his plans for troops to Somalia and a week later
the first contingent of 1,800 marines was on its way, without a single
vote taken or so much as a debate in Congress.
Congress and the politicians of both big business parties are, for
their part, more than happy to cede all power to the White House, the
Pentagon and the CIA.
It is no surprise that the lackeys of American capitalism who head
the AFL-CIO and United Auto Workers give their support to the
occupation of Somalia. Their backing for the bloodbath against Iraq
was a pledge that the labor bureaucracy would do its part to subordinate
the working class to the war machine of American imperialism.
The invasion of Somalia is, moreover, the clearest demonstration
of the reactionary character of the incoming Clinton administration.
It shows that there is no essential difference between the Democratic
and Republican parties, both of which are political instruments of
American imperialism.
How can one explain the ability of an administration which
suffered a massive repudiation at the polls to take such drastic action
after the elections, except for the fact that the military intervention
was secretly discussed and agreed to in advance by Clinton and the
Democrats?
9