[The following editorial, dated May 21, 1982, appeared in the June 1982 issue of Critique Communiste, the monthly magazine of the Revolutionary Communist League (LCR), the French section of the Fourth International. The translation is by Intercontinental Press.]
International crises serve to highlight the policies of governments. The war between the British and Argentines in the South Atlantic is one of those. Since the conflict began, French authorities have sided wholeheartedly with Margaret Thatcher.
The rapidity of the French foreign office's reaction, its firm tone, and its approval of the embargo by the European Economic Community against Buenos Aires have placed our country just behind the United States at the head of the united front of imperialist powers in solidarity with the English crown.
But contrary to its claims, when London sends several thousand men, a large part of its naval air fleet and its nuclear submarines to retake the Malvinas Islands, it is not defending democracy against a bloody and reactionary dictatorship. It is simply trying to safeguard a vestige of its colonial empire, a territory subjugated by military force a century and a half ago, that allows it to control Cape Horn and access to the Antarctic continent.
London also hopes to show other dependent countries, which might be tempted to imitate Argentina's example, that it does not intend to allow great-power control over various regions of the world to be swept away.
FRANÇOIS MITTERRAND
for "international law," since "international law" simply sanctifies borders and sovereignty whose sole legitimacy rests in wars of plunder waged by the imperialist powers not so very long ago.
When we look more closely, however, the French government's attitude is quite consistent. Since the beginning of Mitterrand's seven-year term, the government has also opposed any challenge on the domestic scene to the profits and laws of the capitalist system. It has refused to call for the workers to mobilize against the maneuvers of the right wing and the bosses. It has distributed billions of francs in subsidies to the corporate owners.
This willingness to provide the ruling class with guarantees necessarily has implications in ministers a multitude of islands and archipelagos spread throughout all the oceans. With these possessions, France's maritime domain (nearly 11 million square kilometers) is still the third largest in the world.
If Paris were to adopt an understanding attitude toward the Argentines, or even a indecisive attitude toward the confrontation now taking place, that could create a serious threat for Clipperton Island, Mayotte, Polynesia, Réunion, or even the Antarctic lands France claims.
There was an instructive statement in this regard by J.-F. Hory, the parliamentary representative from the island of Mayotte in the Indian Ocean: "If France had not supported Great Britain, some might have thought that she would not respond militarily to any action that might be taken against the French islands of the Indian or Pacific Oceans."
Is this attitude an anachronism? An attempt by societies in full decay to revert to their past splendors? Certainly not. For the capitalist states, in the present context of economic and energy crises, control of the seas again represents a strategic stake of prime importance.
In fact, the. deep seas contain inestimable reserves of still unexploited oil, nickel, cobalt, copper, and manganese, as well as rare metals, hydrocarbons, proteins, and phosphate. How can we ignore the fact that the multinational corporations - including a number of French corporations - have their eyes on these riches and view them as a source of fabulous profits?
At root, this staunch defense of the overseas" preserves of the French bourgeoisie should not come as a shock to anyone. It is