British imperialism, the oldest imperialist power, is in the throes of a deep economic and political crisis. Its economic and political interests are threatened by the international banking crisis, the growing inter-imperialist rivalries and the challenge to British imperialism from anti-imperialist movements throughout the world - in particular from the Republican Movement in Ireland and SWAPO and the ANC in Southern Africa. Internally, in these early stages ofthe crisis, it faces the challenge from the most oppressed sections ofthe working class in Britain, black and immigrant workers, particularly the youth. In 1981 the British state faced the most serious political confrontation since the beginning of the crisis. The lead was taken by black youth but it was soon followed by other sections of the oppressed working class, both black and white, and particularly the unemployed. The youth rose up throughout British cities in the spring and summer of 1981 and fought the racist British police on the streets with stones and petrol bombs. The lead of the most oppressed will eventually be followed by other workers as unemployment and cuts in public expenditure threaten to drive millions of families into dire poverty. British imperialism will face a revolutionary challenge from within as new forces of revolution emerge in Britain itself.
BRITISH IMPERIALISM - PARASITIC AND DECAYING CAPITALISM
A myth exists among the privileged strata of the British labour movement. It is a myth that is also peddled by most groups on the 'left' of the Labour Party. Its argument is that the decline of Britain's industrial production shows that Britain is a declining imperialist power or not even an imperialist power at all. Tony Benn has put this view, a view shared both by the Labour Party and the CPGB, most clearly of all:
'Britain has moved from Empire to Colony status. It is a colony in which the IMF decides our monetary policy, the international and multi-national companies decided our industrial policy and the EEC decided our legislative and taxation policies.'Britain which has bulldozed its way through most of the oppressed nations of the world, which still brutalizes the people of its oldest colony Ireland, which is the major backer of the racist South African state and whose imperialist banks are among the most profitable in the world, is called a colony. The reality is quite different - indeed the opposite of what Tony Benn and his 'left' supporters would have us believe.
British imperialism, far from being undermined in the last 10 years, has moved from strength to strength under both Labour and Tory governments. As we have argued earlier, the fall in the rate of profit on industrial capital in the major imperialist countries has led to a rapid rise in the export of capital and an enormously strengthened role for banking capital. Imperialism's stranglehold over the oppressed nations has grown immeasurably as a result ofthese developments. And British imperialism, second only to the United States, has been, through its banking system, the imperialist power gaining a commanding position in this process.
Between 1972 and 1982 the rate of profit on industrial and commercial companies (excluding North Sea Oil) fell from 9.3% to 4% reaching its lowest point of 3.3% in 1981. Manufacturing profitability fell even lower to 2.3% in 1981, rising slightly to 3.3% in 1982. In the same period North Sea Oil profits have grown from an insignificant £50m to a huge £12.6bn - from a negligible proportion of gross profits of industrial and commercial companies to a massive 36.6% of the total. Meanwhile profits from overseas investment have increased from £l.7bn to nearly £llbn - equivalent to an increase from 22% to 32% when compared with then total gross profits made in Britain (including North Sea Oil).
What the figures in Table 10 show is how much British capitalism has
in the last decade grown dependent on the monopoly profits from North Sea Oil and from the export of capital abroad:
Table 10 1972 1977 1982 Rate of profit -- industrial and commercial companies (excl North Sea Oil) 9.3% 6.9% 4.0% Gross trading profits (excl North Sea Oil) - £ million 7,725 16,391 21,794 North Sea Oil profits £ million 50 1,957 12,617 Profits, interest and dividends from overseas investment £ million 1,748 4,032 10,991 The collapse of profitability in British industry has led to a rapid increase in the export of capital abroad each year. In 1972 private investors sent £1.4bn capital abroad. By 1982 this had grown to £l0.8bn. The significance of this development can be seen by comparing these amounts with private investment in British industry.
Table 11 Gross domestic fixed
capital formation £mYear Total private sector Manufacturing Private investment
overseas £m1972 7,100 2,044 1,402 1977 16,143 4,754 2,334 1982 30,375 6,012 10,768 Private investment overseas has grown from a size equal to 20% of total private sector fixed investment in 1972 (69% of fixed investment in manufacturing) to over 35% in 1982 (more than 175% of that in manufacturing).
These figures however, significant as they are, are overshadowed by the towering size of British banking activities internationally. Vast sums of money are borrowed abroad by banks based in Britain to lend out at a higher rate of interest to other countries. The sums involved are so enormous that they have made banking and commercial claims the largest component of Britain's private sector external assets.
Table 12 UK external assets - private sector
(£ million)1972 % of total 1982 % of total Private direct investment 7,860 16.1 32,500 8.5 Portfolio investment 9,490 19.4 37,700 9.9 Other direct investment (mainly oil) 2,930 6.0 16,825 4.4 UK banking and commercial claims 28,640 58.5 295,052 77.2 TOTAL 48,920 382,077 [PRIVATE DIRECT INVESTMENT - investment by UK companies in their overseas branches, subsidiaries and associates.
PORTFOLIO INVESTMENT - investment in shares of a company which does not give a controlling interest.]Money lent by financial institutions in Britain (ie banking claims) have increased from 58.5% oftotal private external assets ofBritain in 1972 to over 77% in 1982 (the figure for 1962 was 22%). Besides these figures the accumulated assets from private direct investment abroad - second only to the US in the world - are relatively small. UK banking and commercial claims abroad alone were equivalent in amount to 87% of the gross national product in 1972 and to 167% of it in 1982. Can anyone now doubt the growing strength of British banking, and hence of British imperialism?
Unfortunately, there are those on the British 'left' who do. They are forced to minimise the strength of British imperialism because they refuse to acknowledge that opportunist currents in the British labour movement are sustained and nourished through the super-profits derived from British imperialism's export of capital abroad, and particularly that sent to the oppressed nations. Such organisations inevitably play down the centrality of anti-imperialist struggles in the overall struggle for socialism world-wide. They also carry out most of their political work among the more privileged sections of the working class in the organised Labour and trade union movement seeking alliances with the more radical sectors of the labour aristocracy and its supporters.
The self-proclaimed Revolutionary Communist Party, therefore, denies that UK banking assets abroad can be treated as 'assets' in the real sense at all - unlike for example the assets of an industrial company. Frank Richards goes so far along these lines as to emerge as an apologist for the imperialist banks when he says that the export of banking capital is a sign of British imperialism's weakness. This is a petty-bourgeois notion of capitalism in its imperialist phase. Capitalists are concerned with profits not what their assets look like. The activities of the banks allow them to obtain an increasing share of the profits produced world-wide even though they, themselves, produce no wealth at all. Money which makes money - capital in its most parasitic form. It might not comply with the petty bourgeois vision of capitalism but, in reality, imperialist banks exercise a dominant control over capitalist society and are in the forefront of imperialism's plunder of the oppressed nations. British imperialist banks play a leading role in this process.
In the wake of the world crisis, the record level of bankruptcies in Britain and the growing threat of major defaults on international loans, the profits of the four major British banks were still a staggering £1.5bn in 1982. Although this was a fall of 10% on the record profits of the previous year, these results were achieved in spite of a massive 'bad and doubtful debt provision' of £962m - two and a half times the provision for 1981. Confidence that such high profits would be achieved in the future was shown when all the banks increased the dividends paid to shareholders - Barclays by 20%, Lloyds and NatWest by 15% and Midland by 6%. Bank share prices rose considerably.
Out of the growing world-wide poverty and starvation, the British imperialist banks continue to accumulate vast amounts of wealth. The total assets of these four banks in 1982 were £196bn, an increase of 22% on the previous year.
Table 13 Big Four banks Pre-tax profit
1982-£mBad debt provision
1982-£mTotal assets
end 1982-£bnBarclays 495 318 59.0 NatWest 439 229 54.5 Midland 251 196 48.0 Lloyds 316 219 34.5 TOTAL 1,501 962 196.0 The fifth largest British bank, Standard Chartered Bank, after doubling its bad debt provisions, reported a profit of £242m - a fall of only 7% on the previous year. 32% of its profits came from its stake in the brutal racist South African apartheid regime. The banks are increasingly dependent on their international operations for their income and profits. In the first half of 1983, for example, NatWest overseas operations contributed a half of total company profits. For Barclays in the same period, they contributed over 40%, with nearly 40% of the profits of Barclays International coming from South Africa.
Over the last three years (1980-82) three British banks have been among the top twenty largest banks in the world. More significant is the fact that British banks have in the same period had three banks among the most profitable ten banks in the world. And in 1980 five British banks were among the top ten most profitable banks, with Barclays being the most profitable bank in the world in that year. Can anyone really deny the strength of the British imperialist banks?
British companies have nearly always financed the great proportion of their investment (60-70%) out of their profits from home and abroad - out of internal funds. At the height of the post-war boom the largest proportion of new outside finance came from money raised by the issue of shares. With the growing crisis of capitalism, the fall in the rate of profit, and the increase of inflation, companies were forced more and more to borrow from the banks. This led to a dramatic increase in British companies' dependence on banks. Between 1967 and 1973 the percentage of bank borrowings in companies' total new outside finance rose from 30% to 70%; between 1973 and 1982 it rose yet again, from 70% to 80%. The proportion of outstanding gross debt of industrial and commercial companies owed to the banks increased from 46% in 1967, 63% in 1973 to 86% in 1982. Today the hold of the banks over even large companies is greater than ever before. Banks can force companies into liquidation by restricting credits if the profit outlook of the firm does not merit further loans. Under capitalism in its imperialist phase the production of material goods is at the mercy of a handful of very powerful banks.
Britain is the major centre of international banking. Most of the important imperialist banks therefore have subsidiaries and branches in Britain. British-owned banks have about a 23% share of the London market with a similar share (22%) of the foreign currency business. Nearly 70% of Sterling lending abroad is conducted by British-owned banks. But, of course, it is the activities of all the imperialist banks in Britain (UK banks) which affect the flows of funds, profits and interest, into and out of the British economy. The growing share of banking profits as a proportion ofthe profits etc from overseas investment show the crucial importance of the imperialist banks based in Britain for the British economy.
Table 14 1972 1982 £m % of (P) £m % of (P) Interest on borrowing and lending in foreign currencies (balance by UK banks) 44 2.5 1,454 13.23 Profits from external lending in Sterling by UK banks 57 3.3 1,148 10.44 Total profits etc from overseas investment (P) 1,748 10,991 From 1972 to 1982 profits etc from the external lending of UK banks increased from nearly 6% of the total profits from overseas investment to a massive 24%. Can anyone really deny the crucial importance of the export of capital by UK banks for British imperialism?
The statistics for external assets of UK banks in the London market exclude the branches and subsidiaries of British-owned banks world-wide. The Bank of England Quarterly Bulletin, however, has published statistics for the external assets of UK registered banks including their foreign subsidiaries and branches, the vast majority of which are British-owned banks, since December 1979. From these figures we get a clearer picture ofthe growth of British-owned banks' external assets and their distribution world-wide. (Table 15)
Table 15 External assets of UK-registered banks
plus branches and subsidiaries world-wide
(US$ million)Dec 1979 % of total Dec 1982 % of total Imperialist bloc
(including offshore banking areas)49,880 48.7 83,979 49.4 Weaker capitalist
nations8,060 7.9 15,147 8.9 South Africa 1,698 1.7 5,234 3.1 Oppressed nations 32,125 31.4 54,595 32.1 Socialist countries 9,821 9.6 9,959 5.9 Other 815 0.8 973 0.6 TOTAL 102,399 169,887 Between 1979 and 1982 the external assets of UK-registered banks grew by 66% to a massive US$169,887 million (£113,258 million) - more than twice the size of the assets from private direct investment abroad in 1982. And these figures exclude UK-registered banks overseas branches and subsidiaries' claims on local residents in local currencies of some US$74,000 million (£49,400 million). Over 30% of assets are in the oppressed nations and more than 50% outside the imperialist bloc.
When it is remembered that oppressed nations pay higher rates of interest on their borrowing than countries in the imperialist bloc and also have to pay enormous fees to the banks for rescheduling their debts, it is clear that the 'profits' from transactions in the oppressed nations will be a major proportion of banks' overseas profits overall. British-owned banks are heavily committed in those major debtor nations so near defaulting on their debts - with outstanding claims on Mexico of US$8,327m and Brazil of US$7,937m. Other oppressed nations with significant debts to British banks are Argentina US$3,347m, South Korea US$3,060m and Venezuela US$3,057m. British-owned banks are also the major supplier of funds to the racist South African state, their outstanding claims increasing threefold over the last three years. Can anyone still deny the importance ofthe assets of British banks overseas and particularly those in the oppressed nations?
The Socialist Workers Party, in an article called 'Modern Imperialism' in Socialist Worker 28 April 1979, not only denies the importance of the export of capital to the oppressed nations but also the importance of a labour aristocracy whose existence is based on the super-profits of imperialism.
'In fact neither the export of capital nor the "superprofits" of imperialism play the role they once did...It is arguable that there has been no net capital export at all (to the Third World) for long periods in the recent past...Export of capital plays a vital role in modern capitalism but it is overwhelmingly export from one developed country to another. Its economic significance is entirely different...It cannot account for the "corruption" of "labour aristocracies"...by the crumbs of superprofits.'Not only does the SWP choose to ignore the increasingly dominant role of banking capital over the last 10 years but the very essence of imperialism is denied.
The importance of profits from overseas investment for the strength of the British economy has already been demonstrated. So has the crucial role ofthe imperialist banks and the export of banking capital to the oppressed nations. Recently published statistics on British direct foreign investment overseas conclusively demonstrate the overwhelming importance for British imperialism of the super-profits from overseas direct investment in the oppressed nations compared to profits from foreign direct investment overall.
Table 16 Shares of overseas
direct investment 1981 and earningsInvestment
(£m)% of
totalProfits
(£m)% of
totalEEC 805.8 15.8 446.5 12.4 Other Western Europe 138.3 2.7 193.9 5.4 North America 2,590.5 50.8 996.0 27.6 Other developed
countries395.9 7.8 375.9 10.4 South Africa 305.8 6.0 467.5 13.0 Oppressed nations:- Africa 243.9 4.8 266.1 7.4 Asia 281.2 5.5 462.5 12.8 Caribbean, South
America, Central America318.2 6.2 368.4 10.2 Other 24.0 0.5 28.7 0.8 In examining the distribution of foreign direct investment abroad it is also crucial to examine the distribution of the profits made from those investments. Whereas only 23% of foreign direct investment went to the oppressed nations and South Africa over 44% of earnings came from those areas. On the other hand 77% of foreign direct investment went to the imperialist bloc and other capitalist nations but only 56% of earnings came from those areas. Can anyone really deny the significance of the export of capital to the oppressed nations or the existence of the super-profits of British imperialism as the material basis for privileged strata of the working class in Britain?
Finally yet another indicator of the parasitical character of British imperialism is Britain's 'invisible earnings' - 'earnings from the provision of services to people living abroad'. These include not only the profits etc ofoverseas investment discussed earlier (about a third of these earnings) but also income from activities of the City of London, insurance and other financial services, transport and shipping, royalties and consultancy earnings from overseas, and so on. Invisible earnings account for over a third of Britain's total foreign earnings (including those from exports). In 1982 they were £31,724 million. In 1981 net private sector invisibles contributed more than £6.5bn to the balance of payments. In 1982 the figure had increased to over £7bn. More than half of this net balance came from earnings of the City of London. Britain's net invisible earnings are second only to those of the United States.
Britain is a creditor nation: its net assets in 1982 added up to £42.46bn, an increase of £11bn on the previous year, equivalent to about £2,000 per working person. As the wealth from North Sea Oil begins to dry up so British capitalism will be forced to depend more and more on the profits from its investments abroad, particularly those from its parasitic banks. A greater and greater amount of super-profits will have to be squeezed out from the oppressed peoples of the world to maintain the economic stability of imperialist Britain. British imperialism is indeed a parasitic and decaying capitalism.
In that lies its vulnerability. For as the oppressed peoples fight back and threaten the economic and political interests of British imperialism, as the wealth from North Sea Oil decreases, the British ruling class will be forced to dramatically reduce the living standards of major sections ofthe British working class. The conditions that have nourished and sustained privileged strata of the working class over the last 30 years in Britain will no longer exist. The domination of opportunist currents over the working class in Britain will begin to be undermined as new forces of revolution begin to emerge.
BRITISH IMPERIALISM: WAR WITHOUT END
For British imperialism the Second World War never ended. Since 1945 Britain has been engaged in continuous overt and covert warfare against oppressed peoples. According to official statistics, in 38 of these 39 years British soldiers were killed on active service overseas. It is not known how many hundreds of thousands of oppressed people have been murdered in this 40 year war. Throughout this period, the counter-revolutionary terror of British imperialism has continued unaffected by whether the Tory or Labour Party is in power.
British terror has been unleashed all over the world since 1945:
Greece, Vietnam, Palestine, India, Malaysia, Borneo, Aden, Cyprus, Suez, Indonesia, Oman, Kenya, Korea, British Cameroons, Brunei, British Guiana, Malvinas/Falklands and, of course, Ireland. At the end of 1983 British troops were in Lebanon. British troops have been used systematically to crush any struggle for liberation from imperialism. British imperialist money, weaponry and manpower have been devoted to propping up murderous reactionary regimes and crushing resistance to such regimes. The British ruling class know that their wealth and power depend on imperialist exploitation and oppression. Therefore, they seek to drown in blood any movement of oppressed peoples for freedom. Two examples from the post-war period - Greece and Kenya - confirm these points.
GREECE By the end of 1944, even before the war had ended, British troops were fighting the communist and revolutionary ELAS movement. Ernest Bevin, Labour Party Minister of Labour, justified this intervention saying, 'the British Empire cannot abandon its position in the Mediterranean'. By the end of the war the communists and revolutionaries controlled large areas of Greece and were heading for Athens. By 1946 40,000 British troops were engaged in fighting the communists and revolutionaries on the one hand and giving military and financial support to the Greek fascists on the other. During the 1946 elections in Greece, British troops helped intern revolutionary leaders. In 1947 Britain handed over the task of counter-revolutionary terror to the USA. In the subsequent civil war 11,000 villages were destroyed and 50,000 people killed.
KENYA From 1952-57 British imperialism showed to what lengths of bloody violence it will go to crush a liberation movement. In its war against the Mau Mau Land and Freedom Army, British imperialism murdered, tortured and imprisoned hundreds of thousands of Kenyan freedom fighters. By October 1953 Kenya was one vast prison camp: over 138,000 had been arrested. Over 70,000 were held in 39 concentration camps. By 1954 over 350 POWs had been murdered. In the course of the war more than 30,000 people were murdered, 1,065 judicially murdered and 100,000 uprooted. It was this vast machinery of death and devastation which allowed Britain to defeat the Mau Mau and install a reactionary neo-colonial regime in Kenya. British imperialism today is the main backer of this regime.
These examples from the period 1945-57 are no different in essence from the latter-day wars fought by British imperialism. Since 1969, in Ireland, tens of thousands of troops and police have been deployed to crush the Irish struggle for national liberation. From the cold blooded shooting dead of 14 civilians on Bloody Sunday 1972 to the calculated murder of 10 hunger strikers in 1981, British imperialism has shown that it will kill, kill and kill again to maintain its grip on Ireland. Some 2,500 lives have been sacrificed on the altar of British imperialist rule in Ireland in the last 14 years. In the latest bloody adventure - the Malvinas/Falklands war of 1982 - thousands were killed and wounded in a matter of months.
MALVINAS/FALKLANDS Following the Argentine occupation of the Malvinas/Falklands in April 1982, the Thatcher government with the wholehearted support of the Labour Party and TUC, launched the largest British task force ever assembled since the Second World War. Using the most modern and murderous technology of terror Britain bombed and slaughtered its way to the re-occupation of the Malvinas/Falklands. The two most infamous incidents fully expose the blood lust of British imperialism. In the recapture of Goose Green systematic shelling and cluster-bombing meant Argentine casualties of 250 as against British casualties of 17. The murderous attack on the General Belgrano - outside the British-declared exclusion zone - led to 368 Argentine dead. At a time of accelerating misery and want in Britain, billions of pounds were spent to assert the domination of British imperialism. The Malvinas/Falklands war was designed to show that any threat to British imperialist interests would be met with terror.
Apart from countless direct military interventions, British imperialism has also given wholehearted support to fascist and reactionary regimes. Today it is the principal supporter of the racist apartheid South African regime; it gives consistent military and financial aid to the fascist junta in Chile; it is a firm ally with US imperialism's support for the fascist regimes in Central and Latin America; it continues to support the Zionist Israeli regime which it created. All over the world British imperialism stands for robbery, poverty, murder, terror and war.
Ever since the creation of the first socialist state in Russia 1917, British imperialism has attempted - by military economic and propaganda means - to undermine and destroy socialist countries. Britain was a leading force in the imperialist invasion of revolutionary Russia. In the period leading up to the Second World War British imperialism rejected repeated Soviet proposals for common action against fascism, hoping that Nazi Germany would destroy the Soviet Union. Since the end of that war British imperialism has played a full part, alongside US imperialism, in economic and propaganda warfare against the Soviet Union and all other socialist countries. It sent British troops into Korea to attack North Korea and prop up the reactionary South Korean regime. Material economic and propaganda support for reactionary anti-socialist forces in Afghanistan and Poland, as well as the hypocritical outcry about the South Korean airliner incident are only the latest examples.
British imperialism will use any means at any costs to defend its power and its profits. When Margaret Thatcher boasted of her willingness to 'push the button' she spoke in the authentic tones of British imperialism which would risk the destruction of humanity itself in order to defend its system of plunder and slaughter.
BRITISH IMPERIALISM PREPARES FOR GLOBAL WAR
British imperialism's single-minded hatred of socialism has led it to support the basing of US imperialism's cruise missiles at Greenham Common.
The deployment of cruise missiles is a major step towards war with the socialist countries, a war that cannot avoid becoming a world war. Before this deployment rough parity existed in so-called eurostrategic nuclear weapons. Deployment of cruise and Pershing 2 missiles is upsetting that balance, making a successful first strike against the USSR feasible. Whatever the Soviet Union does to try and ensure her security, international peace in Europe will become even more fragile.
The negotiations conducted by the imperialists at Geneva were a clear fraud. Every Soviet attempt to propose a reasonable, mutually acceptable compromise was rejected out of hand. The so-called 'zero-option', whereby the Soviet Union has to scrap all its missiles while the British and French missiles remain, together with hundreds of nuclear-capable aircraft, is sheer propaganda, a reasonable sounding veneer on imperialist escalation. The US was determined that the talks would fail, throwing the blame onto the Soviet Union. Reagan, Thatcher & co are dragging Britain down the path which leads to imperialist world war.
Despite their newly-discovered, vote-catching enthusiasm for nuclear disarmament, the Labour Party is just as guilty as the Tories in planning the cruise deployment. They prepared the way for cruise, and when the Tories announced the NATO cruise plans in the winter of 1979-80, welcomed them. It was only with the growth of the peace movement, that Labour took up opposition to cruise.
'it is not the horrors of war that are the hardest to endure... but the horrors of the treachery shown by the leaders of present-day socialism' (Lenin Collected Works Vol 21 p20)Not satisfied with encouraging a nuclear Third World War, British imperialism is also strengthening its arsenal for smaller wars. The government has embarked on a build-up of the British war machine, the biggest increase since the Korean war. This year military spending will be some £15,900m, the largest public expenditure programme - after the social security sops thrown to the millions of unemployed and poor. As the White Paper explains:
'Despite economic problems we have increased defence spending every year since taking .office. On the basis of average market exchange rates defence spending by the United Kingdom was higher in 1982 in absolute terms than any other major European ally; it was also higher per capita and as a proportion of GDP.'Britain now spends more on NATO, as a share of GNP, than any other member, not excluding the USA.
This military spending has an enormous impact in militarising Britain, quite apart from the wars and aggression carried out by the imperialists. The Ministry of Defence employs some 680,000 people - troops and civilians. Reserve troops are another 273,000. On top of this some 580,000 are employed directly or indirectly on contracts for the Ministry of Defence - 1 in 25 of the working population. A further 140,000 are employed in producing arms exports. In all 1.3 million people are currently employed by the British war machine. 10% of all young men are recruited into the armed forces.
ARMS EXPORTS
Britain is the third largest imperialist arms supplier, after the USA and France. Its arms exports are high and rising - fast. These exports go to more than 80 countries. Some 80% of the sales are to oppressed nations ruled by repressive puppet regimes, where the equipment is used to attack national liberation movements and to threaten those countries which strive to free themselves from the grip of imperialism. Some 4,000 military personnel from oppressed nations are being trained in Britain,
Table 17 Government
Sales
£mPrivate
Sales
£m1974-75 147 320 1975-76 159 370 1976-77 184 415 1977-78 235 565 1978-79 285 785 1979-80 230 955 1980-81 256 1345 1981-82 408 1540 1982-83 450 1950 1983-84 (target) n/a 2400 These facts show how British imperialism is centrally involved in propping up imperialism's puppets through military aid and sales.
| Back to CONTENTS | Go to PART FOUR |