NATO, Monopolies, and the World
“How the Largest Corporations in the USA and Europe Strengthen Their Dominance Through Government Contracts and International Alliances”
State-monopoly capitalism is the union of capitalist monopolies with the capitalist state. The USA is the best example of the merger of the state with monopolies. Already in the 20th century, the US state merged with monopolies and became their obedient steward and expression of their will. In the 21st century, this union has transformed into military-state-monopoly capitalism, where the apparatus of state power is used entirely and completely against the people, in the interests of the monstrous profits of monopoly alliances.
Global monopolists are rubbing their hands over the growth of so-called “military demand,” which gives the economy a one-sided, militaristic character. Such a policy has already laid the cornerstone for a future crisis of global overproduction. While military orders grow by about 20-25% annually, consumer goods find it increasingly difficult to find a market. At the same time, when American workers and their families are dying of cold and hunger, billions of American dollars, the product of American labor, are invested in military loans worldwide. NATO Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg warned, “There are no cost-free options with an aggressive Russia as a neighbor; no risk-free options in war.”
The expansion of the military-industrial complex intensifies the factors generating exceptional instability in the American economy.
Today, there is a feverish consolidation, where small companies and small trusts are being absorbed by major players. The main focus of mergers has shifted from industrial enterprises and corporations to the financial world. In the era of imperialism, financial capital is dominant; this is evident from the fact that banks and financial institutions have taken up new and powerful positions in all leading countries. Control over giant industrial enterprises is centralized in the hands of large industrial corporations, which are, in turn, interconnected by the control of major financial-capitalist groups such as the Morgan or Rockefeller firms.
¾ The impressive concentration of production in the hands of large American industrial enterprises is, in turn, subject to even stronger and more centralized control.
Three families—the DuPonts, Rockefellers, and Mellons—together hold shares amounting to more than 60% of the country’s industry. As a result, they directly or indirectly control 15 of the largest corporations, with a combined capital exceeding $500 billion.
To establish and maintain the dominant positions of financial-capitalist groups within the corporate system as a whole, various methods are employed, including interlocking directorates, holding companies, control exerted by family groups, and other techniques. The high concentration of production and centralization of control essentially determine the role of giant trusts in the economy.
At the head of the entire system of American industrial associations stands the National Association of Manufacturers (NAM). The entire structure is managed by “leaders.” The inner group of this association, which sets the actual tone for all its policies, is the Special Conference Committee, established in 1919 and composed of representatives from the largest monopolies. This committee meets monthly to this day.
Historically, the committee included giants such as Bethlehem Steel, DuPont, General Electric, General Motors, Goodyear, and Standard Oil of New Jersey (now ExxonMobil), among others.
Today, the committee includes companies such as Boeing, Caterpillar Inc., Dow Chemical Company, Honeywell, 3M, IBM, Pfizer, Ford, Procter & Gamble, Siemens USA, and Johnson & Johnson. The National Industrial Council, a branch of NAM, controls the largest business trade associations, encompassing about 80% of all industrial enterprises in the United States.
“Arm yourselves! Arm yourselves! Arm yourselves!”
Another branch of the National Association of Manufacturers is the National Industrial Conference Board, serving as a research and advocacy institute for large capital. It is associated with organizations such as the Air Corps, military intelligence, space reconnaissance, and army and navy artillery commands.
American monopolies have recently increased their control over industry not only in the United States but also in Europe, which they famously assisted through the Marshall Plan.
Due to military hysteria fostered by both the Russian and American governments, monopolies are receiving military state orders — “Arm yourselves! Arm yourselves! Arm yourselves!” — all purportedly for the sake of “peace.”
From 2022 to 2024, 70% of all military contracts were awarded to 100 American companies, many of which are interconnected. For example, General Motors received military contracts totaling $8.5 billion. DuPont was granted funding exceeding $1 billion for the modernization of its old facilities; DuPont itself invested only 5%, with the remaining 95% financed through government programs. Steel trusts also received new equipment amounting to approximately $3 billion.
Corporations that secured military contracts, with the support of the U.S. government, compelled European countries to pay 2% of their GDP and allocate 20% of their annual expenditures for purchasing new primary equipment, including project-based scientific research and engineering development. In 2024, 23 countries collectively invested $430 billion in American corporations under the NATO pact. According to the terms of existing NATO “collective security” contracts, the peoples of alliance countries are obligated to pay €438.1 million solely for personnel and operational expenses to American corporations.
US monopolies zealously guard their private interests, including enterprises in Europe.
Regardless of whether we are talking about the production of aluminum, rubber, steel, or oil, many giant corporations that hold the majority of military contracts do everything possible to prevent the creation of enterprises capable of competing with them.
It is important to remember that military enterprises, even if they are state-owned, are managed and administered by private corporations; these corporations determine their ultimate fate, safeguarding their monopolistic interests.
On April 20, 2024, after 6 months of disputes and negotiations between the government and major monopolies fulfilling military contracts, American congressmen approved the allocation of “aid” to Ukraine totaling $61 billion. The main point of contention in the dispute was the price of metals, rubber, steel, and other raw materials for defense plants. Typically, raw materials for defense industries are purchased at the highest cost. Finished products such as bullets, shells, tanks, aircraft, drones, etc., are then sold to the government at inflated prices.
Distribution of the US “aid package to Ukraine”:
– $23 billion for replenishing American weapon reserves,
– $11 billion for financing current US military operations worldwide (yes, including worldwide, but at Ukraine’s expense! Thus, the debt is placed on the Ukrainian people, while military operations span the entire globe),
– $11 billion for US military operations in Europe (presumably upcoming),
– $14 billion for purchasing weapons and defense products,
– $7.85 billion provided as a loan to “support” Ukraine’s economy (this amount will go towards paying interest on existing loans… Oh, how caring! $7.85 billion are provided to Ukraine to “support” its economy, of course, so it can pay interest on existing loans. It seems debt care is ensured better than economic support).
Today, the North Atlantic Alliance (NATO) binds Europe’s economy to the warlike ambitions of American corporations.
American monopolies utilize England and European countries, primarily Eastern Europe. In the South, they rely on Turkey and Greece, and in the East, on Japan, which the United States has turned into its outpost in the Far East. The Arctic also receives significant attention: the US actively invests billions of dollars in Greenland and Iceland, restoring military bases and training troops for operations in Arctic conditions.
Signing the North Atlantic Pact on April 4, 1949 in Washington marked the culmination of the Anglo-American bloc’s policy in forming a military alliance for war against the USSR.
England, notably Churchill, had declared the necessity of such a bloc in his speech at Fulton in the USA in 1946.
For England and the USA, these imperialist countries, war is a means of escaping crises, as a tool for plundering and enslaving other nations. Playing the role of junior partners and chief masters of American imperialism, the English politicians would like to dream of changing the balance of power within the Anglo-American bloc in their favour at the expense of the USA in the course of a military conflict with today’s pseudo-self-powerful Russia. The North Atlantic bloc binds England’s economy to the warlike ambitions of American corporations and their serving administrations and officials. It threatens the English people with national catastrophe.
The working class of England recognizes that the Atlantic Pact has never been, and is not today, a peace pact—it is a war pact. Members of the Alliance emphasize this in their speeches calling for war. American monopolies use England and European countries, primarily Eastern Europe, for this purpose. In the South, they rely on Turkey and Greece; in the East, American capital leans on the Zaibatsu and monarchic circles of Japan, which the USA openly transformed into its outpost in the Far East. Finally, American monopolies closely attend to the Arctic. The close connection between US and Canadian military activities is well known, particularly in Alaska and the Arctic. The USA actively invests billions of dollars in Greenland, restoring military aviation bases there. In Iceland and the far North, troops are constantly trained for operations in extreme Arctic conditions, developing equipment specifically adapted for use at very low temperatures—a topic receiving serious attention from NATO. Moral-political preparation of the rear area is one of the main elements in preparing for future wars. American business circles cannot ignore this; they are seriously concerned about the political situation in European countries, whose territories they view as crucial for a new world war. Europe, under America’s control, will carry out all of Wall Street’s orders. Viewing Europe as its “advanced fortification,” American imperialists place at the head of European governments those who will obediently pay interest on American loans and fulfill all directives of American militarism. If you want to stay in power—pay the money. Each European country is assigned its own specific role by American strategists. England, first and foremost, is used for basing the striking forces of American strategic aviation. Several squadrons of American heavy bombers are already based on British islands, with the personnel of these squadrons often rotated to maintain larger flight crews. A series of American aviation bases (Iceland, Greenland, Newfoundland, etc.) form an “air bridge” between America and Europe. American war instigators—this handful of shameless billionaires drowning in mud and luxury—make no secret that these bases are intended for aggressive actions against the pseudo-autocracy in Russia, hated by the all, while also threatening nations with bold atomic war threats from Russia. Military cooperation between England and America is not limited to providing English territory for American aviation; we should also recall the functioning of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Committee of the USA, Canada, and England. England and America exchange military-technical experience, tactical guidance, and intelligence data. They operate jointly, practically worldwide, although this does not exclude competition between the intelligence agencies of England and America. The role of the US base in Southern Europe is designated for Italy. The right-wing, fascist operatives in Italy obediently execute the commands of American militarism. Italian territory, especially Sicily, is completely at the disposal of American generals. Italian military and generals themselves are nothing independent or interesting. As for North Africa, American aviation bases are scattered across the continent.
In France, American imperialism pays great attention to the ports on the Atlantic coast, which are being prepared today to receive American troops and materials. Under pressure from the USA and England, the reorganization and expansion of French aviation forces are taking place, with DuPont and other corporations striving to make France completely dependent on the USA.
American monopolies find it advantageous to militarize France and involve it in a war in the Caucasus to avoid revolution in France, while simultaneously equipping the French army with the latest types of weapons (aircraft, tanks, jet devices, radar installations, and the like). The Benelux countries (Belgium, the Netherlands, and Luxembourg) are assigned the role of the left flank of the future front on the European continent. England, France, and the Benelux countries are united not only by the NATO alliance but also by the “Western Union.” Speaking of the importance of individual European countries within the framework of US strategic plans, one cannot remain silent about Spain. Spain represents a stronghold for the USA: air communication between America and Europe is carried out via the shortest route through the Azores and Spain; Spain has several important ports and naval bases; significant air forces can operate from Spanish territory; the Spanish stronghold is protected by the Pyrenees.
Contradictions within NATO are a source of the alliance’s weakness.
Some European politicians see Russia as an ally with whom they can agree to jointly exploit other nations, while others are willing to shed blood for the interests of Wall Street. American imperialism widely uses NATO member countries for subversive activities in Eastern Europe, organizing intelligence centers and spy schools, and creating military formations participating in the war in Ukraine.
The main sources of NATO’s weakness are the contradictions within it. The more participants, the more contradictions. Some European politicians, especially the right-wing (fascists), see pseudo-autocratic Russia as an ally with whom they can agree to jointly exploit the peoples of both Russia and Europe. Others wish to shed blood for the interests of Wall Street to please the wealthy scoundrels.
The marauders of American imperialism widely use NATO member countries as a base for their subversive activities in Eastern European countries: Finland, the Baltics, Poland, Romania. Here, American intelligence has organized a number of intelligence centers and spy schools. To recruit their agents, NATO military intelligence uses fascist elements from the time of Nazi Germany, engages the liberal opposition, and creates separate military formations participating in the theater of military operations in Ukraine, such as the “Russian Volunteer Corps” of former State Duma deputy Ilya Ponomarev. The burden of military expenditures is one of the reasons for the sharp gap between the level of production and the standard of living of the population both in America and in Europe, especially in France. On the one hand, we have a potential increase in industrial production compared to 2015, a satisfactory harvest in 2023, and investments in France – “gifts and benefactions” from American billionaires; on the other hand, we see an increase in poverty and destitution of the French people, and the chaotic state of French financiers and bourgeoisie. This is explained by the fact that American conglomerates simply intend to shift the costs associated with the future war onto the shoulders of the workers, a war that will be conducted in the interests and under the leadership of American masters—corporations. This preparation has already cost French workers and also the French bourgeoisie 413 billion euros in expenditures for 2024-2030. This is the reason for the difficulties of the French, this is the answer to the questions posed by honest people who do not fully understand the essence of the problem. Thus, militarists devour the fruits of the hard work of European workers. It is obvious that European governments will not be able to bear all the defense expenditures on the scale required by US imperialists for long, and therefore will turn to their American masters for loans. For their part, US monopolies, interested in the further expansion of military production, are pushing for a program of military supplies to NATO countries. American billionaires are the wealthiest and are in the safest geographical position. They profit more than anyone else. They have made every country, even the richest, their tributary. They have plundered hundreds of billions of dollars from the collapse of the Soviet Union, trillions from the subjugation of Europe and the Middle East. And on every dollar, there are traces of filth: filthy secret agreements between England and its “allies,” between Germany and its vassals, agreements on dividing the plundered spoils, agreements on “assisting” each other in oppressing workers and persecuting internationalists. On every dollar—a clump of dirt from the “profitable” military supplies that enriched the wealthy in every country and impoverished the poor. On every dollar are traces of blood—from the sea of blood spilled in Iraq, Syria, Libya, former Yugoslavia, Ukraine, Gaza. Millions killed and millions maimed in the great, noble, liberating sacred struggle over who will get more loot—the American or Russian robber. Millions of lives are crippled in the struggle over who will lead the domination of the oppressed peoples: English or German exploiters. If American robbers broke the record for the brutality of their military massacres, then the English broke the record not only for the amount of gold they plundered but also for the sophistication of their disgusting hypocrisy.
Now, the Anglo-French and American bourgeois press, in millions of copies, spreads lies and slander about Russia, hypocritically justifying their upcoming predatory campaign against the Russian people. They mix the Russian people with the pseudo-autocracy, which the people themselves hate, and falsely declare that they will protect the Russian people from their own government. To refute this vile and base lie, one does not need to waste many words: it is enough to point to a few public facts that the Russian government has secret agreements with America on the use of weapons in certain areas. It is enough to point out how the Russian government has the closest relationship with Saudi Arabia, the vassal of Rockefeller and Morgan. It is enough to point out how the Russian bourgeoisie and the new nobility make contracts with Anglo-Chinese companies for the supply of raw materials at a low price. It is hard to imagine more disgusting hypocrisy than that with which the Anglo-French and American bourgeoisie, profiting from the slaughter of peoples, have extended the Ukrainian war for three whole years and hide from the people the shameful secret criminal agreements between Russian, English, American, Chinese, French capitalists.
“Historical activity is not the Nevsky Prospect sidewalk,” said the great Russian revolutionary Chernyshevsky. Anyone who “permits” the working-class revolution only “on the condition” that it proceeds easily and smoothly, that there is immediate unified action of the proletariat of different countries, that a guarantee against defeats is given in advance, that the road of revolution is wide, free, and straight, that at times, on the way to victory, there will be no need to bear the heaviest sacrifices, sit in a besieged fortress, or navigate the narrowest, impassable, winding, and dangerous mountain paths, – that person is not a revolutionary, but a dreamer, that person has not freed themselves from the pedantry of the petty-bourgeois intelligentsia, and in practice will constantly slide into the camp of the counter-revolutionary bourgeoisie, like the French leftists, the English Labour Party, and the monarchist communists of Russia.
When the bourgeois press, or government representatives, begin to speak about revolutions, especially social revolutions, they immediately recall the Great October Revolution of 1917, remembering it in a reproachful, condemning tone, accusing workers and peasants of destroying the bourgeois government, “ruining” industry, and causing unemployment and hunger. From the mouths of the bourgeois press, government representatives, and bourgeois lackeys, accusations pour forth like a cornucopia against the revolution. Workers and peasants are labeled as marginalized, and the revolution as a marginal madness. How hypocritical these accusations are! They accuse the revolution of “destruction” and “terror,” when it is the imperialist, aggressive, and greedy war that is to blame for all these miseries. The revolution is a consequence, not a cause! A revolution born of war cannot but go through incredible hardships and sufferings inherited from the many years of ruinous, obscurantist massacre of peoples.
Who are these accusers? – Lackeys of capitalists, or representatives of capital themselves – those very monopolistic circles, circles of the wealthy, the so-called new capitalist aristocracy, who have destroyed not only the weak countries in which their “democracy” was established through years of imperialist wars but have also destroyed almost all of European culture, brought Europe to barbarism, savagery, rampant corruption, and hunger (with their protectionism). These people are dragging Europe into even greater destruction. Their goal is a poor, compliant Europe, with remnants of culture, ruins, and people savaged by war.
How hypocritical are these accusations of revolution from those who welcomed and continue to welcome imperialist wars today, agreeing and pushing more and more the chariot of war. Every banker and industrialist, every shareholder of a corporation roars about war, urging nations onto the path of war, every representative of corporations and banks holding the highest state office, ever more loudly and boldly propagates the only path – the path of war, as salvation from the “common enemy” threatening their “sovereignty,” their “democracy,” their “homeland.” Representatives of capital intend to unleash imperialist wars in the name of expanding capital’s application. They shout about war but remain silent about the capitalist system’s economy crumbling like a house of cards, and China is no exception.
They shout about an external enemy but are preparing to fight an internal one. These imperialist wars bring nothing but huge profits for the bourgeoisie and capitalists, and huge debts, hunger, and poverty for the masses. It goes without saying that soon, in the very near future, when all this excitement fades against the backdrop of the “2024 election year,” when the masses, all segments of the population from paupers to the petty bourgeoisie (engineers, small and medium-level employees, professors, doctors, etc.), face unemployment and hunger, then representatives of capital will turn their muskets toward subduing the people. Then representatives of capital and the bourgeoisie will shout and fiercely intimidate the masses with the horrors of revolution, insisting that revolution is not needed, in every way deterring the masses from their rightly chosen path. Representatives of capital, this class of monopolistic capital that has taken the form of a new aristocracy, do not need a revolution; they need scared, cheap labor masses, starving for jobs; they (the bourgeoisie), this class of capitalists, only needed a revolution and the working masses in the fight against feudalism!
The masses are already today restricted in their rights: state programs of any even superpower are built so that “what is available to the rich is inaccessible to the poor,” and rich Chinese people are becoming more cautious about flaunting their wealth.
Today, governments of states under applause offer the masses a long, exhausting path of war – the slaughter of nations – which will leave behind ruin and suffering, hunger, and poverty.
The main question now arising before the masses, the direct victims of the future war, is “What should I fight for?” – “for the interests and dictatorship of bankers and corporations, or for the overthrow of (their) bourgeoisie and the establishment of the dictatorship of the working class?!”
Author of the Article
Alex Ashley
