The Red Sea Suffers in the Grip of Global Capitalism

Marxist Theory Monday #006

The Red Sea is home to several countries, including Yemen, Sudan, Eritrea, Djibouti, and Somalia, all of which have been embroiled in long-standing political, economic, and social problems. These countries, with their uniquely significant location at the heart of international trade, have been plagued by poverty, authoritarian regimes, and armed conflicts, leading to chronic insecurity and violence. At the heart of these issues lies the interference and intervention of Western powers, seeking to further their own interests in the region. This week, for Marxist Theory Monday, we will examine the ways in which Western complicity has exacerbated crises in the Red Sea and perpetuated the suffering of the people.

Colonial Legacy and the Creation of Fault Lines

The Red Sea and its surrounding countries have long been subject to Western imperialism, dating back to the 19th century when European powers, primarily Britain and France, began to establish colonies and carve out territories in the region. Marx famously analyzed imperialism as a stage of capitalism, wherein advanced capitalist nations exploit less developed regions for resources and markets, a process vividly illustrated in the scramble for Africa. The division of Africa by European countries through the Berlin Conference of 1884-1885 further solidified this imperialist domination, as it disrespected existing borders and cultures. This arbitrary division resulted in countries like Sudan, Eritrea, and Djibouti being split into different regions, exacerbating existing ethnic, religious, and political divisions.

The artificial creation of countries with no regard for their people's historical, cultural, and social ties led to political instability, as many of these countries were ruled by leaders who had no legitimacy in the eyes of the people, and effectively handicapped local development in favor of unnecessary, manufactured civil strife.

Neocolonialism and Resource Exploitation

Following decolonization and the end of formal colonial rule, Western powers maintained their influence in the region through a neocolonial approach, characterized by open support for local authoritarian regimes, providing military aid, and facilitating coups. All of these methods, of course, offer imperialist powers control over and advantage of regional resources.

One of the most significant resources in the Red Sea region is oil, with Yemen, Sudan, and Djibouti being significant producers. Western oil companies, in collaboration with local governments, have plundered these countries' reserves, contributing to the enrichment of a small elite and exacerbating poverty for the majority of the population. In this context, the extractive approach of Western powers in the Red Sea region exemplifies the inherent contradictions of capitalist imperialism.

Arms Trade and Fueling Conflicts

The Red Sea region has long been mired in armed conflicts, with Yemen being one of the most notable examples. This conflict has been fueled by a combination of external interference and support for local factions, along with regional geopolitical rivalries. Western countries, including the US, UK, and France, are among the main suppliers of arms to countries like Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates, which have been involved in the Yemeni conflict. These arms sales not only perpetuate violence and instability, as well as traumatize the local population. In addition to arms sales, Western countries also provide military training and support to their allies in the region, further deepening their complicity in the violence and devastation.

*I recommend reading Marxist Theory Monday #001, titled “War is an Inevitable Result of Global Capitalism” for a more detailed description of capitalist inclination towards war.

Opposing Genuine Development and Self-Determination

Particularly evident in the case of Eritrea, which won its independence from Ethiopia in 1993 after decades of armed struggle, Western powers have actively opposed genuine development and self-determination in the Red Sea region. However, the country has been subjected to international sanctions and isolation, primarily due to its uncompromising stance on self-reliance and opposition to Western neoliberal policies. Sanctions have severely hindered Eritrea's progress and development, contributing to ongoing economic hardships and political tensions.

The Present and the Future of Naval Security in the Red Sea

Conflict in the Red Sea between US, Israeli, and Houthi forces has been escalating for the better part of a year. This violence can only reasonably be expected to continue. It reflects the willingness and ability of Western powers to use military force to assert and protect their interests in the region. This is likely furthered by the increased militarization of the Indian Ocean, which is almost entirely controlled by the United States which has divided its control between the Pacific and Indian oceans through its oil economy.

The presence of Western naval forces in the Red Sea allows for the continuation of arms sales and support for authoritarian governments, perpetuating the cycle of violence and oppression. As Marx himself noted, "The philosophers have only interpreted the world, in various ways. The point, however, is to change it." It is time for Western powers to stop contributing to the suffering of the people in the Red Sea and instead support genuine development and self-determination.

Thank you & happy Monday,

-the Shultz Report by M. Shultz