I  have authored an academic article under the title of "Islamic theory of social change", put in the annex of a Ph.D. thesis deposited at the University of Durham in England back in the year 1986, predicting a world conflagration triggered by the present world financial system. Since then, the thesis matured into a prediction for the exact date when a turning point would happen in the international financial system; the year 2015.

 

The prediction is based on a reading of presently unfolding events in the world under the 'fraudulent' economic leadership of the USA as linked to a 'reading' of the well known Islamic Prophesies of the 'Dajjal', aqua Imposter or Antichrist.

 

The logical deductions sustaining the above prediction, as contextually developed, can be found in the archive of the 'Bewleyupdates' internet discussion list.

 

The following article, although lacking any predicted date for would be change, sustains to a certain extent my original thesis.

 

Youcef Kadri

 Batna on 27/04/2007

 

 

US Dollar Hegemony”
“When Saddam Hussein switched to the euro in late 2000 and converted
Iraq’s
$10 billion reserve fund at the UN to euro, some analysts commented that this
political gesture would have a heavy economic cost. But against all
expectations, he actually made a profit when the euro staged a recovery.
Iran is
another country which in 2002 converted more than half its foreign exchange
reserves to euros. Both
Iraq and Iran being oil-producing countries, the impact
of their shifting currency allegiances would be significant.”
Friday, February 16, 2007

EPW Commentary
March 19, 2005


US Dollar Hegemony - The Soft Underbelly of Empire


http://emre-iseri.blogspot.com/2007/02/epw-commentary-march-19-2005-us-dollar.ht\
ml


The costs of sustaining the US's new 'Empire' will become apparent to its public
only when these costs directly accrue to them. This will happen, as this article
suggests, only when

(i) other nations stop subsidising the US's imperial
adventures by colluding in them and
(ii) the dollar loses its role as the world's reserve currency.

Rohini Hensman, Marinella Correggia

What we intend to argue below is that if the US’s ability to undertake
imperial conquests like that of Iraq depends on its obvious military supremacy,
this in turn is ultimately based on the use of the US dollar as the world’s
reserve currency. It is the dominance of the dollar that underpins US financial
dominance as a whole as well as the apparently limitless spending power that
allows it to keep hundreds of thousands of troops stationed all over the world.

Destroy US dollar hegemony, and ‘Empire’ will collapse.
David Ludden’s article ‘
America’s Invisible Empire’1 sums up the problem of
the world’s most recent empire with remarkable clarity. Constituting itself at a
time when decolonisation was well under way and other empires were
disintegrating,
US imperialism could never openly speak its name. Initially, it
disguised itself as the defender of democracy against communism; when the
Soviet
Union
ceased to exist, the pretext became the ‘war against terror’. National
security and national interest were invoked as the rationale for global
dominance.

Ludden’s description evokes the image of US citizens (and a few others) living
in a ‘Truman Show’ world, a bubble of illusion created by state deception and
media complicity that prevents them from being aware of the reality of empire
although everyone outside can see it only too clearly. It sounds quite credible
that ‘the empire will not be undone until its reality and costs become visible
to Americans’ (Ludden: 4777).

However Ludden’s claim that ‘US taxpayers and voters pay the entire cost of
the
US empire’ (ibid: 4776) is less credible. If that were true, many more
Americans would see their empire and oppose it; the Democrats would have put up
a principled anti-war, anti-occupation candidate at the recent presidential
elections, and the overwhelming majority of the
US electorate would have voted
for her or him. But it is the rest of the world that has been paying for the
US
empire
: that is why it is almost invisible within the US.

As Emmanuel Todd wrote, 2 an imperial economy depends on drawing wealth from
abroad, without any reciprocity. The
US is now more dependent on the rest of the
world than the rest of the world on the
US. This explains their behaviour: not
only their strategic need to get their hands on the world’s resources, but also
their need for hegemony. To counterbalance their economic dependence, they must
keep themselves – at least symbolically – at the centre of the world. They must
demonstrate their ‘omnipotence’: that is why they wage so many wars against
militarily weak enemies. At the same time they must appear as benefactors –
hence their whirlwind tour of the countries devastated by the tsunami disaster
in order to make use of the photo opportunities it provided.

History of Dollar Hegemony
The core advantage of the
US economy, the source of its financial dominance,
is the peculiar role of the
US currency. It is because the dollar is the world’s
reserve currency that the
US is able to maintain its twin deficits (fiscal and
trade) and depend on the world’s generosity. It needs a subsidy of at least 1.2
billion dollars per day to keep up its level of spending. Its military
superiority is one reason why it it is unlikely ever to face an embargo, but
more importantly, it can continue to live beyond its means because of US dollar
hegemony. But for long?

The dollar mechanism has been described extensively elsewhere,3 so we will
merely summarise here. The strength of the
US economy after second world war
enabled the US dollar, backed by gold, to become the world’s reserve currency.
When the US abandoned the gold standard in 1971, the dollar remained supreme,
and its position was further boosted in 1974 when the US came to an agreement
with Saudi Arabia that the oil trade would be denominated in dollars.4

Most countries in the world import oil, and it made sense for them to
accumulate dollars in order to guard against oil shocks. Third world countries
had even more reason to hoard dollars so as to protect their fragile economies
and currencies from sudden collapse. With everyone clamouring for dollars, all
the
US had to do was print fiat dollars and other countries would accept them in
payment for their exports. These dollars then flowed back into the
US to be
invested in treasury bonds and similar instruments, offsetting the outflow.

As a reserve currency fulfils world needs in addition to the functions of a
domestic currency, the favoured country can build up debt for a protracted
period on a scale that would wreck any other country’s currency. But this
advantage is a double-edged sword.5 It allowed the US economy to decline
unnoticed, its fiscal and trade deficits to climb steeply: by 2004 the US trade
deficit had reached $503 billion, the current account deficit $413 billion, the
gross national debt around $7 trillion. Globalisation destroyed the
US as a
manufacturing nation; the outsourcing of services means that even this sector is
gradually being shifted out of the US.6 Only its pre-eminence in the global
financial services industry remains intact.7 And this is underpinned by US
dollar hegemony.

As Pierre Lecomte, a French financial analyst and supporter of the campaign
Dette et dollar’ (to reject the dollar as world currency) says, “while the rest
of the world must toil hard to earn dollars which are needed to buy goods
internationally, or to pay off foreign debt, the US just needs to print
dollars”.8 And as Frederic Clairmont wrote in Le Monde Diplomatique (April
2003): “Living on credit is the credo of the foremost power in the world”.

Various campaigns around the world have asked people to ‘boycott Brand
America,’9 but most products with American brand-names are not made in the US.
Therefore refusing to buy such things may reduce royalties to
America, but will
not seriously undermine
US economic power. On the other hand, ‘the longest-lived
and most widely seen American ‘brand’ in the rest of the world is almost
certainly not Coca-Cola nor McDonalds, but rather the US dollar.’10

Taking this into account, the secretariat of the international ‘Boycott Bush
campaign,’ based at the Mother Earth association in Belgium, recently asked
members if they were ready to open another front, ‘to boycott the dollar’. Most
of them have responded ‘yes’.

Dollar hegemony is what concealed the costs of Empire, which were effectively
being paid for by the rest of the world, from US citizens. Other countries were
compelled to accept fiat dollars because they had no choice. It was the world’s
only reserve currency.

Choosing the Euro
Until…the euro came into being. Even then, the choice was only a potential
one, as the euro initially lost value, making it unattractively risky as a
reserve currency. The first non-European countries that made a move in its
direction did so for political rather than economic reasons. When Saddam Hussein
switched to the euro in late 2000 and converted Iraq’s $10 billion reserve fund
at the UN to euro, some analysts commented that this political gesture would
have a heavy economic cost.11 But against all expectations, he actually made a
profit when the euro staged a recovery.12 Iran is another country which in 2002
converted more than half its foreign exchange reserves to euros.13 Both Iraq and
Iran being oil-producing countries, the impact of their shifting currency
allegiances would be significant.

By contrast,
North Korea’s official shift to the euro for trade in December
2002 14 was negligible from the standpoint of the world economy, yet it
signified a trend that
US imperialism had to stop at all costs. Suddenly George
Bush’s diatribe against the ‘Axis of Evil’, which seemed so arbitrary and
laughable at the time, does not appear quite so funny. Add to this picture the
fact that Hugo Chavez – against whom the
US supported a coup in April 2002, and
who continues to be under attack by the Bush regime – has taken a large part of
Venezuela’s oil trade out of the orbit of the US dollar,15 and the economic
compulsions driving
US foreign policy become clearer.

Military might alone does not seem to be a sufficient basis for sustaining an
empire: economic power is crucial. And for the declining
US economy, US dollar
supremacy is essential for maintaining its economic clout. This is no longer
unchallenged. Before the
Iraq war, one Iranian economist and the Moroccan
magazine, L’Indépendant, suggested that Islamic businessmen and countries should
drop the dollar as their foreign exchange reserve currency, in order to weaken
the
US or at least deter them from their aggressive foreign policy. Given the
deteriorating relations between the
US and the Arab world, quite a few west
Asian oil-exporting countries have begun to increase the proportion of
international settlements made in euros.

Reportedly,
Russia may also follow suit. In 2003, a senior Iranian oil
representative suggested in a speech in
Europe that European oil purchases might
be increasingly traded in euros in future.
China and Russia have hinted that
they may begin to hold more of their foreign currency assets in euros instead of
dollars. An article in China Daily on September 28, 2004 by Jiang Ruiping, the
director of International Economics at the China Foreign Affairs University,
pointed out that China is already losing due to the dollar slide and would lose
even more if it crashes, and recommended moving out of dollars into euros and
possibly also yen, as well as using its dollar reserves to stock up on oil.16

Other countries like South Korea and Taiwan also plan to shift some of their
foreign currency assets out of dollars.17 All this has weakened the US dollar,
but this does not necessarily mean that it will decline to the point where it
ceases to function as world currency. There are contradictory pressures, both
from the
US and from its major creditors. Within the US, there could be hopes
that a weaker dollar would spur exports, but this now seems unlikely, given how
uncompetitive US industry has become.18

More importantly, the US deficits shrink as the dollar declines. Federal
Reserve chairman Alan Greenspan summed up the
US dilemma in November 2004, in a
speech where he seemed to accept the inevitability of the dollar decline in
order to help ease US deficits. This would be a boon to the
US so long as the
dollar retained its role as world currency, but it would inflict enormous losses
on countries that have amassed large quantities of dollar reserves. China and
Japan alone hold about a trillion dollars, and while countries like India (and
smaller economies) may hold much smaller quantities, the devaluation of those
reserves is already hitting them, and would hit them even more if the dollar
crashes.19 These countries could therefore think of selling dollars and moving
their reserves to some other currency, which in turn would jeopardise the status
of the dollar as the world currency.20

An attempt to counteract this is probably what was responsible for rumours in
January 2005 that the Federal Reserve might hike interest rates. For countries
exporting to the
US there is also a dilemma. Japan, for example, bought billions
of dollars in order to hold down the value of the yen and keep its exports
competitive. In the short term, it may benefit from propping up the dollar, even
though it would lose massively if the dollar crashes. Debtor countries would
gain from a dollar slide, since their debt is denominated in dollars; but if
they have foreign exchange reserves in dollars, these would be devalued, and
they would also suffer if they depend on exports to the
US which the US would no
longer be able to afford.

Thus there are also powerful forces resisting the displacement of the dollar
as the world’s reserve currency. This brings us back to the dilemma posed by
David Ludden. The costs of empire will become apparent to the
US public only
when they have to pay those costs, and this will happen only when

(a) other nations stop subsidising its imperial adventures by colluding in
them, and
(b) the dollar loses its role as the world’s reserve currency.

A weakening of the dollar while it retains its role as world currency, which
is what has been happening so far, could actually help
US imperialism by
reducing the value of its fiscal and trade deficits; only when there is a
large-scale shift away from dollar reserves will the rest of the world stop
paying for the
US empire. This may not happen in the near future if it is left
entirely to economic forces, and meanwhile the occupation of Iraq and Palestine
will go on, Iran may be invaded (as Bush has threatened repeatedly), and so on
and so forth.

On the other hand, if currency speculators get into the act and the dollar
goes into free fall, it could pull down the world economy with it! Avoiding
this, too, requires planning and coordination.

Courses of Action
For citizens of the world who are opposed to US imperialism, that suggests
several possible courses of action. The ‘world’s second superpower’, world
public opinion, made a hugely impressive showing prior to the invasion of
Iraq,
yet it failed to stop the invasion itself; stronger action is required. But the
armed struggle taking place in
Iraq is killing and maiming hundreds of thousands
of Iraqis and thousands of Americans, most of them from poor families; surely
this is not desirable. The alternative we propose is non-violent non-cooperation
with the imperial monster. For example:

(1) Putting pressure on all other governments not to participate in the
occupation of Iraq in any way, and/or voting out of power governments which are
colluding in this enterprise and voting in alternatives who promise to pull out
of Iraq. In
Britain, for example, if the Liberal Democrats are willing to make a
commitment to withdraw British troops from
Iraq, all anti-war activists,
including those who would normally vote for Labour or Left parties, should
campaign for them in the forthcoming elections. Similarly with other governments
backing the
US like those in Italy and Japan. This will leave the burden of
running their empire fairly and squarely on the shoulders of the
US
administration.

(2) Refusing to use the US dollar except within the
US itself. Even if this is
done on an individual basis, it will have the effect of undermining the role of
the dollar as the world currency. Other economic actors, like the international
fair trade movement, should also shift to other currencies for their
international trade: the movement is increasing, and it would be an important
gesture symbolically. Both academics and activists should stop using dollar
equivalents to measure incomes in third world countries, etc; for the moment,
the euro can be used as a standard. Mass action of this sort played a major role
in ending British rule in
India and thus the British empire. Employed on a much
wider scale, it can help to undermine the
US empire.

(3) Putting pressure on governments in third world countries to shift foreign
currency assets out of dollars, and to create regional currencies to strengthen
regional commercial and economic ties. This would not only be a gesture of
solidarity to the beleaguered peoples of Iraq, Palestine and others oppressed by
the US empire, but would also make good economic sense. The dollar is sliding,
and developing countries which hold all or most of their foreign exchange
reserves in dollars are losing money as it loses value. If it crashes, their
reserves could be wiped out.

(4) Putting pressure on governments in oil-producing countries not to denominate
their oil trade in US dollars. This does not necessarily involve a wholesale
shift to the euro. Venezuela has concluded several barter deals with other Latin
American countries including Cuba, giving them oil in exchange for goods and
services,21 and this is a pattern other oil-producing countries could consider.
For example, tens of thousands of migrant workers from south and south-east
Asia
work in Gulf countries; if their remittances in dinars, dirhams, etc, can be
used directly for oil imports, all parties would benefit. Barter deals which do
not involve oil could also be concluded between developing countries.

(5) Changing world trading patterns. If the dollar sinks drastically with world
trade unchanged, many countries which now rely on exports to the
US will be
affected adversely by its inability to import their goods with a weakened
dollar. A reorientation of trade away from the
US would therefore be necessary.
For example, plans to constitute SAFTA as a regional bloc free of tariff and
immigration barriers should be pursued at greater speed, and trade with other
countries
promoted at the same time. The European Union and MERCOSUR in
Latin
America
provide examples that others could emulate. China and Japan, the biggest
creditors of the
US, suffer most from the decline of the dollar, and would have
to work out alternative trade patterns to safeguard their economies.

(6) Campaigning nationally and internationally for policies of employment
creation, protection of workers’ rights, shorter working hours, enforced payment
of minimum wages that are adequate to support a decent standard of living, and
so on. This will redirect resources from hugely wasteful military expenditures
into social consumption (nutrition, health, education, etc) and expand mass
markets, especially in third world countries but even in
Japan, Europe and North
America
.

(7) In addition to these economic measures, ending US imperialism would require
pressing for the development and implementation of international humanitarian
law, international law and multilateral treaties (such as the Geneva
Conventions, Rome Treaty of the International Criminal Court, Chemical Weapons
Convention, Biological Weapons Convention, Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty, Land
Mine Treaty, ILO Core Conventions, CEDAW and the Kyoto Protocol), and the
strengthening and democratisation of multilateral institutions (like the UN, ILO
and WTO).

A recent example of such action was the open letter by eminent South Africans
(including former president Nelson Mandela and Archbishop Desmond Tutu)
protesting against US attempts to oust Kofi Annan, which says, ‘Those who call
for his resignation betray the objectivity his position as secretary-general
demands, and regard the United Nations as a mouthpiece to extol and exonerate
the politics of the US, right or wrong.’22 Also important are actions ‘trying’
the US for violations of international law, as in the world tribunal on Iraq
which is being carried out in various countries by hundreds of movements. Of
course the effectiveness of international law and multilateral institutions is
seriously undermined by
US non-participation and sabotage, yet if other
countries persist in working for global democracy, the
US will come under
greater pressure to comply.

Even if all possible adjustments are made, there is no doubt that the decline
and fall of the dollar as world currency will cause pain, both within and
outside the
US. But the alternative is incomparably worse. The world order
cannot much longer survive having a heavily armed rogue state on the rampage in
violation of all international law and multilateral treaties. The world economy
cannot afford to depend on the currency of a bankrupt nation with a colossal
military budget. And the earth itself is put at risk by a country which devours
massive quantities of fossil fuels and spews out greenhouse gases at a
catastrophic rate.

US imperialism would not be able to pursue its destructive policies without the
unlimited supply of blank cheques extended to it by the rest of the world, so it
is the responsibility of the rest of the world to withdraw that source of
funding. The beast has to be killed by attacking it at the point where it is
most vulnerable. Meanwhile, if enough people in the US work to ensure that the
next elections (2008) install a president and representatives who undertake to
abandon the pursuit of empire and instead seek to reintegrate the US into the
international community as a law-abiding, fiscally-responsible, non-polluting
member, the result will be a far safer and more stable global order, world
economy and environment.

email: rohinihensman@...

Notes

1 David Ludden, ‘
America’s Invisible Empire,’ Economic and Political Weekly, Vol
XXXIX, No 44, Mumbai,
October 30, 2004, pp 4776-77.

2 Emmanuel Todd, Dopo l’impero – la dissoluzione dell’impero americano, Marco
Tropea editore (Italian translation, 2003).


3 William Clarke in particular makes an impressive case, with a great deal of
evidence, in his web-based essay ‘Revisited: The Real Reasons for the Upcoming
War with
Iraq: A Macroeconomic and Geostrategic Analysis of the Unspoken Truth’
(www.ratical.org/ratville/CAH/RriraqWar.html January 2004), which is a revised
version, with addenda, of his original essay of January 2003. Many of the
references in this article are taken from him. See also Henry C K Liu, ‘US
Dollar Hegemony Has Got to Go,’ Asia Times,
April 11, 2002 and Rohini Hensman,
‘A Strategy to Stop the War, Economic and Political Weekly,
April 19, 2003.

4 David E Spiro, The Hidden Hand of American Hegemony: Petrodollar Recycling
and International Markets,
Cornell University Press, 1999.

5 Paul Craig Roberts, ‘The Coming Currency Shock,’ Counterpunch,
November 16,
2004
, www.counterpunch.org/roberts11162004.ht ml.

6 Paul Craig Roberts, op cit.

7
Lawrence G Franko, ‘US Competitiveness in the Global Financial Services
Industry,’ www.financialforum.umb.edu/documents/Franko per cent, 20 Fin per
cent, 20 Svcs per cent, 20 Global per cent 20 Comp.pdf, October 2004.

8 Pierre Lecomte, Comment sortir du piège américain? (ed), F X de Guibert,
Paris 2003.

9 Such campaigns are coordinated by the network ‘Boycott Bush’, www.
boycottbush.org

10
Lawrence G Franko, op cit.

11 See for example Charles Recknagel, ‘
Iraq: Baghdad Moves to Euro,’ Radio
Free Europe,
November 1, 2000.

12 Faisal Islam, ‘
Iraq Nets Handsome Profit by Dumping Dollar for Euro,’ The
Observer,
February 16, 2003.

13 ‘Forex Fund Shifting to Euro’,
Iran Financial News, August 25, 2002.

14 Caroline Gluck, ‘
North Korea Embraces the Euro,’ BBC News, December 1,
2002
.

15 William Clark, op cit.

16 Gary North, ‘Asian Doubts Regarding the Dollar’,
www.LewRockwell.com/north/north308.html,
October 1, 2004.

17 Phillip Day and Hae Won Choi, ‘Asian Central Banks Consider Alternatives to
Big Dollar Holdings’, Wall Street Journal,
February 5, 2004.

18 Roberto Panizza, ‘Movimenti Internazionali di Capitali dal Rinascimento ai
Nostri Giorni’, in Gli spazi della globalizzazione, edited by F M Parenti,
Diabasis, Reggio Emilia, 2004.

19 See, for example, Ila Patnaik, ‘Day of the Declining Dollar – How should
India Be Responding to This Trend?’, The Indian Express,
December 18, 2004.

20 Mike Dolan, ‘Dollar Fall Will Come at a Price for All,’ Reuters,
November
21, 2004
www.reuters.com/news Article.html? type = top News and Story ID =
6876686

21 Hazel Henderson, ‘Beyond Bush’s Unilateralism: Another Bipolar World or a
New Era of Win-Win?’ InterPress Service, June 2002.

22 M P Muttiah, ‘US Backs Out on Annan’, Sunday Observer,
Colombo, December
12, 2004
, p 9.