Atlantic war shook the world
Socialist Organiser1980sTranscribed by hand from the printed page.
THE Argentine military was not simply brought down as a result of Thatcher's victory in the South Atlantic war, as Martin Thomas claims in his "personal view" in SO 161. The military regime was in reality disintegrating before Galtieri invaded the Malvinas islands in 1982.
Nor is Martin Thomas's general view of the war valid. He says "just as a defeat for Thatcher's bloodthirsty buccaneering would have massively improved the situation for the British working class, so the defeat of Galtieri's desperate "mini-imperialism" has benefitted the Argentine workers."
The first is very true, the second is not. The South Atlantic war was not a little anachronistic affair between two essentially similar powers — with one simply bigger and more powerful than the other. It was between a major imperialist power and a Third World country dominated economically and politically by imperialism. It was a major world event.
The fact that Britain won strengthened imperialism all over the world. It was a major factor creating the conditions for Reagan to invade Grenada. It has brought the invasion of Nicaragua closer. It has given the green light for increased US intervention in El Salvador, increased imperialist intervention in the Middle East and strengthened the hand of South Africa in Southern Africa.
It cannot therefore be judged on the basis of its conjunctural effects on the British or Argentine working class. Military regimes in Third World countries in Central and Southern America or in Africa are the creatures of imperialism. When imperialism is strengthened, they are strengthened. When imperialism is weakened, they are weakened.
This is not to say that the military are about to take over again in Argentina, but the events must be seen against this background.