Fourth International Publications

The International’s English-language periodicals: World Outlook, Inprecor and their companions, 1958–1994

What Britain's Retreat from Asia Means for Washington

World Outlook Vol. 6, No. 3, 26 January 1968 · pp 48-50 · 733 words

Britain and Ireland United States Japan and Korea Vietnam and Indochina

he O R L D Support the L

e Litvi

U E- L QO O K and Larisa Danie/ ii

Vol.6 No.

’ 3 January 26, 1968

_ LPM-1183 |

A HIGH FIDELITY RECORDING |

Bad

Eart

‘ :

NRI RENE AND HIS ORCHESTRA

WITH HE

@RCA Printed In USA |

The Not So Bad Eartha -- See page 57

50¢

a ORTD Support th

rt the Litvi

U T L O O K and Larisa Danie/ Appeal

Vol.6 No.

NO? January 26, 1968

A HIGH - DELITY RECORDING |

Bad

Eart

s <

NRL RENE AND HIS ORCHESTRA

WITH HE

GRA Printed In USA. Y

The Not So Bad Eartha -- See page 57

50¢

WHAT BRITAIN'S RETREAT FROM ASIA MEANS FOR WASHINGTON

The cutbacks in military expenditures announced by Prime Minister Harold Wilson in his January 16 speech to the House of Commons will, it is generally recognized, finish off Britain's traditional role as the principal imperialist policeman in Asia. After the budget retrenchments, which include closing the bases in Singapore and the Persian Gulf by 1971, the only British forces beyond the Mediterranean will be the garrisons in Hong Kong plus a few small and scattered colonial possessions.

This definitive withdrawal from east of Suez is the final act in a historic shift of world power, beginning with World War I, whereby the declining imperialist countries of Europe have had to cede supremacy in that area to the Yankee colossus. Since World War II, under the combined pressures of the colonial revolution and their own weaknesses, the French, Dutch and Portuguese have in turn pulled out, or been driven out, of the Asian continent. Meanwhile, the United States has sought to move in. Now Britain's impending departure concludes Europe's share in the military patrol of the Far East.

Wilson's decision has a logical consequence for Washington. The prize of Japan's defeat in World War II was the definitive conversion of the Pacific into an "American lake." Since then the State Department and the global strategists in the Pentagon have made far-flung arrangements to insure the dominance of U.S. military might all the way from the Indian subcontinent to Japan. The construction of a ring of costly army, naval and air bases, the CENTO and SEATO alliances, treaties with Japan, the Korean and Vietnam interventions are all parts of this pattern.

Washington is now called upon to fill the "vacuum" left by the accelerated British withdrawal; and there is no reason to suppose that it will not take whatever measures are required to reinforce its positions in the Indian Ocean and the Pacific. In addition, those bourgeois

governments in the East which rely upon

U.S. military power for their protection

and even survival will be urging Ameri-

can officials to step up its commitments.

Although Washington will be re-

sponsive to such requests, the enlarge-

ment of its role as the imperialist

superpower from Suez to Japan creates

certain difficulties. There are limits

to the burdens even the richest and

mightiest country can take on.

The United States is already feel-

ing the pinch of its operations in South-

east Asia in various ways. In order to

put 525,000 men into Vietnam, it has had

to strain its available trained forces.

The increased expenditures for the inter-

vention there has so seriously unsettled

its international accounts that President

Johnson has just had to propose unpopular

moves to ease the balance-of-payments

problen.

Most important of all, the escala-

tion of the war and the stubborn deter-

mination to hang on in Vietnam at all

costs has generated an unprecedented and

continually growing domestic opposition

to the administration and its foreign

policy which bodes ill for both the Demo-

cratic party and the capitalist rulers.

The expansion of its commitments

in Asia flowing from Britain's cutbacks

will therefore impose extra burdens on

Washington which it cannot so easily

afford. The risk of becoming overtaxed

and overextended keeps growing.

This long-term impact of Britain's

retrenchment on the imperialist titan

gives greater relevance and urgency to

the audacious strategy advised by Che

Guevara in his last message. "The cre-

ation of a second or third Vietnam,"

which can serve to disperse, divide and

weaken the striking power of the Ameri-

can military machine, can both facili-

tate victory for the freedom struggles

of the colonial peoples and provoke

further anti-imperialist repercussions

inside the United States.

← Behind Barrientos' Double-Talk About Exchanging Debray · Bolivian Regiment Rebels Against Barrientos →

Something wrong on this page?