by James Petras from Global Research. The subtitle, "Rising and Declining Economic Powers: The Sino-US Conflict Deepens" much more accurately describes the contents of this article.
The author presents a very large conceptual framework that requires a good knowledge of history, especially of the capitalist period, to fully appreciate. Within this context, his framework is a kind of theory of empire development and decay. He uses historical examples to illustrate how empires have pursued different strategies when they decline and the effects of such strategies. He argues that the US, which he sees in decline, is pursuing a very self-destructive strategy of military aggression, use of client states, subversion, and propaganda to maintain its empire.
I think that it needs to be stated clearly that he is addressing modern empires driven by the dynamics of capitalism. These include those ruled over by the Soviet Union as well as Great Britain, France, Germany, Japan, the US, and the emerging power of China. Capitalism at its core is designed to promote the hoarding of wealth and power by a few at the expense of the many. Thus, to be conceptually clear, it is necessary to see the Soviet Union as a bureaucratic, state form of capitalism.
Except for China, the others are modeled after the British that were led by competing capitalists. China is more like a hybrid of the Soviet type and the classic Western type in that it is a state supervised economy of capitalists. Hence, it is clear to me that we would always be plagued by wars between nations and between classes of people as long as this destructive system lasts even if the threats of climate change and resource depletion were not entering the scene.
Although I believe that his analysis offers some excellent insights that go a long way toward explaining current events and I highly recommend the article, his conclusions are weakened by the fact that environmental factors of climate change and resource depletion are missing from his analysis. Such factors will impinge powerfully upon the continued economic growth of all capitalist countries and will have catastrophic effects upon many life forms on the earth if the capitalist system is allowed to continue.
Finally, his essay is a bit marred by typographical and other errors. The one that caused me the most confusion was his inconsistent use of the abbreviation, "EIP"--established imperial powers, which morphed for a while into "EIS"--apparently referring to established imperial states, and then back to EIP.
