Corporations Serve the State: Sanction Policies and the Zionist Power Structure (James Petras)
Mar. 22, 2011 (Information Clearing House) -- One of the key distinctions between a capitalist and a non-capitalist (socialist, feudal, absolutist state) economy is the separation of state and private enterprise. In a capitalist state, economic enterprises are supposed to operate according to market principles, seeking to maximize profits and expand market shares. The state is supposed to act on behalf of capitalist enterprises, ensuring their protection and furthering their pursuit of profits and markets.
Recent history of foreign relations provides ample evidence that the reverse is true: private corporations, especially banks, have been converted into adjuncts of the U.S. state, serving as transmission belts of U.S. military policy, by sacrificing markets, profits and opportunities for future economic growth, another important reason for keeping U.S. multinational corporations out of a country. Moreover, the state both in the United States and Europe have seized billions in private investment funds and dispossessed their owners, in the process scuttling major financial transactions adversely affecting the biggest Western financial houses.
The dispossession of private capitalists and the harnessing of private firms to state policy have grown in scope and depth over the current decade, revealing the growing subordination of private capitalism to a militarist imperialist state. Sacrificing private profits and free markets to the edicts of state officials has been implemented via state coercion and severe sanctions against any transgressors.
How and why the world’s biggest propagandist of “free enterprise” and de-regulated capitalism has successfully converted major international financial and industrial enterprises into tools of foreign policy at enormous costs to their bottom line is yet an untold story. Given the enormity of the historical change in the relation between state and market, the shift in power has enormous consequences for peace, prosperity and freedom.
How the State Dominates “the Market”: The Historical Context
Beginning in the 1990s under President Clinton and escalating under Bush and Obama, the U.S. imperial state imposed economic sanctions first in Iraq and later on Iran and more recently on Libya. In effect the state dictated to its petroleum multi-nationals and biggest banks that they should sacrifice lucrative investment opportunities, ongoing profits and markets to serve imperial state interests. Billions of dollars were lost during the 1990s, in the face of Iraq sanctions, forcing many U.S. oil companies to engage clandestine “third party” intermediaries, to secure a reduced share of the petrol market. The imperial state imposed severe penalties -- fines, jailings and exclusion from the U.S. market -- to any of the CEOs and private corporations that did not abide by the sanctions. Clearly the state was in command; the corporate ruling class became the executive committee of the imperial state.
The sanctions policy applied to the Middle East under Clinton was only the beginning; it was deepened and vastly expanded under Presidents Bush and Obama, especially after 2004.
The Levey Levy: How American Zionists Freeze Financial Profits
In 2004 a little noticed administrative add-on in the U.S. Treasury Department took place that has had world historic significance: AIPAC (American Israel Public Affairs Committee) pressured Treasury to create the position of “Undersecretary for Terrorism and Financial Intelligence.” Equally important, under strong pressure from AIPAC, a zealous Zionist of immense energy, Stuart Levey, was appointed to head the new agency.
Levey used all the administrative mechanisms in the Treasury, from threats of penalties, fines and ostracism, to friendly and hostile persuasion, to line up U.S. federal and state public and private pension funds to sacrifice lucrative investments in targeted countries, most of whom, lo and behold, were adversaries of Israeli occupation of Palestine.
Even as Levey was imposing state constraints over the operations of private investors in the United States, he organized his entire staff to police the financial world abroad. Levey and his Zionist allies in the so-called “Israel lobby” called on their Congressional cronies to approve sanction policies which not only affected U.S. banks, manufacturers and construction companies but which penalized any European, Asian and Middle Eastern bank that had economic dealings with Iran and other countries on his list (Cuba, North Korea among others).
Levey extended the sanctions to cover firms and investors with even indirect economic ties to the United States: his secret financial police located funds that passed from one private bank to another which had tangential links to U.S. banks, and Levey applied and secured hundreds of millions of dollars in fines against Swiss, Chinese (Macao) English and other banks. Effectively the U.S. imperial state via its Undersecretary of Treasury, harnessed the entire world’s financial system to serve U.S. and Israeli foreign policy. Levey is explicit about his role in creating a state within a state. “The U.S. Treasury is the only Treasury in the world with a fully functioning intelligence office.” He might have added that the U.S. Treasury is the only Treasury in the world that sacrifices the economic interests of its private investors and those of its allies in pursuit of the interests of a foreign power (Israel).
The Levey regime, by leveraging ties with private U.S. financial institutions and access to U.S. markets, effectively controls the financial transactions and market operations of European, Asian and Middle Eastern private enterprises.
What appears as merely a relatively minor administrative post in Treasury has, in fact, created an administrative empire that has effectively converted private international banking and manufacturing corporations into instruments of U.S. and Israeli policy.
In office Levey engineered the seizure of billions of dollars of overseas assets of private and public funds of adversaries. One of his last moves before leaving office (March 2011) was to seize $32 billion in Libyan funds using the pretext that the non-U.S. bank to which the funds were entrusted invested in U.S. Treasury notes.
Levey has clearly defined the new relation between private capital (the market) and the State: “Governments around the world (sic) see the power of these types of measures and the relevance of the private sector to the overall [imperial] effort and that is something that has changed in the last four or five years.” (my emphasis) 1
The “measures” that Levey refers to are the state sanctions and the coercion and penalties applied to the private sector to ensure their conformity with imperial and Israeli military interests at the expense of profits and markets.
The Visible Hand of the State
Levey and his Zionist colleagues have ensured that his “state within a State” will continue beyond his tenure in office. He was succeeded by David Cohen, his former law firm partner and promoter of the very same Israeli interests. Levey/Cohen have institutionalized and set in stone the mechanisms to further imperial state control over market operations. Cohen’s appointment ensures the continuation of the Zionist dynasty in the “State within the State.”
The biggest economic losers in the state centered “sanction” policies pursued by Treasury (read Levey/Cohen) have been the international banks, petroleum and gas companies and pension funds. The banks have lost access to investment funds and lucrative management fees; the petroleum companies have lost profits and access to oil fields. The military-industrial complex has lost arms sales. The agro-exporters have lost markets in food deficit oil producers. Who have been the “winners” -- certainly not the Generals who are engaging in a third costly war when the sanctioners decided to escalate to the "military option," once their sanctions policies failed to result in the overthrow of the Libyan regime.
On the surface the main "winners" of sanction policies are their advocates in the White House, Congress, Treasury, the leaders of the two major parties and the ideologues and Islamaphobes in the mass media. And, of course, the biggest winners of them all are Israel and their Zionist power configuration embedded in the key agencies of Treasury, the key committees in Congress, and their colleagues in the most influential Middle East posts in the State Department (James Steinberg, Mark Grossman, Dennis Ross, Jeffrey Feltman) and Treasury (Cohen).
If one asks the logical question: Why doesn’t Big Banking or Big Petroleum make a fight over policies prejudicing their economic interests and subjecting them to the harsh oversight of Levey/Cohen investigators in Treasury?, the most reasonable assumption is that they are not willing to engage in a knock-down fight with three potent adversaries: the politically influential Zionists in the government who design, implement and enforce sanctions; their counterparts in the prestigious mass media who support their policies; and the 300,000 active members of the 52 major American Jewish organizations who threaten to organize boycott campaigns. An implausible assumption is that the bankers and oil majors have become altruistic and patriotic and are willing to sacrifice billion-dollar deals to serve our “national security” as defined by Levey/Cohen and their cohorts in AIPAC. When we speak of U.S. "sanction policies" or when we read of European bankers "following Washington's lead," let’s be clear about what “state” within the United States we are talking about and which agencies in Washington are ensuring that European banks follow “our” lead.
While we might not shed tears about an intrusive government curtailing the profit-making of Big Oil and Big Banks, or interfering with free market operations, let us not forget that “the state within the state” that dictates economic policy is not accountable to our citizens; moreover, if it dictates foreign economic policy to the multi-nationals, surely it has no scruples in doing the same to ordinary Americans. Next on the AIPAC/Levey/Cohen agenda is a “request” by Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu for an additional $20 billion dollars in “aid” to ensure Israel’s protection from the pro-democracy movements sweeping the Arab world and to finance a new batch of settlements in the West Bank.
Israel needs U.S. aid like American taxpayers need a hole in their pockets. According to the latest study of billionaires published in the Mar. 20, 2011 of Forbes, Israel has more billionaires per capita than any country in the world.
- Financial Times, Mar. 10, 2011, pg. 5
James Petras, a former Professor of Sociology at Binghamton University, New York, owns a 50-year membership in the class struggle, is an adviser to the landless and jobless in Brazil and Argentina, and is co-author of Globalization Unmasked (Zed Books). Petras’ most recent book is Zionism, Militarism and the Decline of US Power (Clarity Press, 2008). He can be reached at:
- CreatedWednesday, March 23, 2011
- Last modifiedWednesday, November 06, 2013
World Desk Activities
cpj.org/2020/09/guide-to-legal-rights-in-the-u-s/
pressfreedomtracker.us/submit-incident/
drive.google.com/file/d/17XyVCVOTq59bvTEG_RZAQMgrF…
www.icfj.org/news/new-icfj-knight-fellows-work-sup…
U.S.Justice Department: "Radical Right vs. Radical Left: Terrorist Theory and Threat"
www.ojp.gov/ncjrs/virtual-library/abstracts/radica….
Airlight is friends with Vishal Patel
ijnet.org/en/story/tips-building-networks-reach-au…
trustingnews.org/how-trustworthy-is-your-newsroom-…
Latest Stories
Electronic Frontier Foundation
The Intercept
- How much money did the NYPD waste quashing student protests? We tallied it up. May 07, 2024
- After Raids, NYPD Denied Student Protesters Water and Food in Jail May 06, 2024
- They Exposed an Israeli Spyware Firm. Now the Company Is Badgering Them in Court. May 06, 2024
- In No Labels Call, Josh Gottheimer, Mike Lawler, and University Trustees Agree: FBI Should Investigate Campus Protests May 04, 2024
VTDigger
- Final Reading: Lawmakers send safe injection site pilot legislation to Gov. Phil Scott May 07, 2024
- 3 of the session’s largest climate bills face opposition from Phil Scott administration May 07, 2024
- A coffee product’s ‘active ingredient’ leads to guilty plea in fraud case May 07, 2024
- In compromise, budget panel agrees to new limits on motel housing program May 07, 2024