A BOOK REVIEW ON the American empire project

DILEMMAS OF DOMINATION: the unmaking of the American empire

By Walden Bello

Reviewed by

Itsna Syahadatud Dinurriyah1

INTRODUCTION
The book of Dilemmas of Domination: The Unmaking of the American
Empire was written by Walden Bello, a Filipino who graduated from the second
greatest university in America, Princeton University. He was a professor of
sociology at University of the Philippines. He is a famous critic of the current
model of economic globalization, combining the roles of intellectual and activist.
He has made a major contribution to the international case against corporate-
driven globalization.
In this book, it is so clear how he sees the idea, the application and the
impact of globalization introduced by America to the third world countries in
different point of view. He did not care what people think about him but he had
his own idea in reviewing what the ‘major’ countries did to the third world
countries and how they got the ‘revenge’ and the turning point. His critical
thinking made him been sent to jail. He was arrested and jailed by the US
authorities in 1978 for leading the non-violent takeover of the Philippine consulate
in San Francisco. He was released three weeks later after a hunger strike to
publicize human rights abuses in his home country.
This book was written in 2005, when the President of USA was George
Walker Bush. In 2005, Bush got the second period of his leadership after he
defeated Al Gore. Even though the policy that Bush made in the early of his
presidency was not exactly the same like what Bill Clinton did, but I think there
were parts of it which was the impact of the Clinton’s policy. So some parts of this
book also talked about Clinton’s policy even George Bush Sr’s.

1 A student of American Studies, Gadjah Mada University, Indonesia

1
 This book is focused on the interrelated dilemmas of imperial economics
and imperial politics. Bello wrote there are three crises threaten the empire, they
are: a crisis of overproduction, a crisis of overextension, and a crisis of
legitimacy.
The crisis of overproduction happened when US transnational corporation
functions as the agents for capital accumulation and production. This condition
created four other crisis, they are the contradiction between the increased
consumption of natural resources and the production of waste and finite ecological
space, the more intense conflict between the minority in command of productive
and financial assets and a majority with the little control over these, the widening
gap between the growing productive potential of the system and the capacity of
the consumers to purchase its output, and the global financial speculation as
overproduction, overcapacity, and over accumulation.
Meanwhile overextension will show an international system marked by
anarchy, states are driven to maintain or extend their strategic reach. In this case,
US as one of wealthy nations tend to develop a grand strategy, or a fundamental
approach toward the world. The drive to extend the state’s strategic reach may run
up against the resources available for achieving its ambitions.
The crisis of legitimacy happened when the subordinate classes disbelieve
to the dominant elites. In western capitalist societies, the enhancement of
individual freedom and economic mobility through the operation of the market
and democratic representative serves as the ideological cornerstone of legitimacy.
So America as country which brings democratic idea to any countries in the world
to broaden its ‘kindness’ will get the effect of it since the ‘subordinate’ counties
may criticize it when they found the inappropriate practice in it.

THE REVIEW
Reading this book is like reading a history of world politics and economy.
This book gives the readers much information what happened to the world beyond
the surface. It is not only talking about America and how it did its way of
imperialism to certain countries but it is also telling us how America tried to make
all countries around the world depend on this immigrant country in the name of

2
democratization and globalization. I am also as Indonesian finally understand
what happened in Jakarta when I and my college friends, a decade ago, went on
strike on the street. Finally I understand that making Suharto gave up from the
presidency was not enough since we also had to think about the impact of the
policy he has taken. Then, finally also I understand why Indonesian economy
must go to surgery room for recovery and took a long ‘comma’ before its
consciousness.
In this book, Bello tells us a lot about American policy since America was
under the president of George Walker Bush. No wonder since this book written in
2005. Even though what had Bush done in the first period in his presidency
(2000-2004) was not satisfied many people, I mean his own country domestically
and internationally, but Americans could not do much to choose the other
candidate ( Al Gore) since what had Bush done internationally had to be
solved/finished. Of course what I mean is American invasion to Iraq. It was not
the only one but it is the most important one.
America was too naïve by applying pre-emptive action to Iraq in the name
of terrorism. By its rhetoric, America said that Saddam Hussein protected Osama
bin Laden in this country. Everybody around the world know well, what is the
relationship between Osama bin Laden and Saddam Hussein? When finally
America could not prove it, the policy to invade this Middle East country was still
done because of the reason of mass destruction weapon hidden by the President of
Iraq. Again, could America prove it? What for Saddam Hussein hide the weapon?
Without that weapon Iraq was successful in invading Kuwait a decade ago. But
that is America, it is never wrong or at least never confess its mistake or even sin.
So, I do agree with what Bello said in his book that America did it for its
economic better that it politics. America did not only need to use its domestic
weapon product but the important thing is how to get the oil. The invasion in
which no countries in world could prevent or protest it made America entered and
bombarded Iraq seemed legally. And then after that, everybody knew that this
highly pride country went mess and nothing could be covered politically. America
was successful open any political secret of this country. That was the end of
Saddam Hussein regime. And finally with a big smile America could sovereign

3
this country even though in smooth way. No leadership over taking but hundreds
of American soldiers is there, in the name of keeping Iraq peace. Who made the
war?
In this case, America really shows its super power. An overstretched
military was the most obvious symbol of imperial overextension. Besides the
reason of oil, the invasion to Iraq, actually, was to satisfy the need “for the
revenge against terrorism for the losses of September 11”. This tragedy really
made America embarrassed. Two important buildings such as World Trade Center
and Pentagon were successfully destructed by Al Qaeda. It was the first time
America attacked inside of the country and so obvious. Even though there was no
relationship between Al Qaeda and Iraq, but America did not have any idea to
what country it should express its anger, then, let Iraq became the victim! At least,
this country and its citizens are strong enough to face America. Thus, I am
thinking that America needs balance sparring partner to show its sovereignty.
The third chapter of this book talks about the crisis of overproduction and
over capacity underlying the stagnation that has overtaken most of the central
capitalist economies. The real barrier of capitalist production is capital itself…that
was Karl Marx said. America also had the problem that at the time happened to all
other central capitalist economies. The historic dilemma consists of certain salient
features:
• Speculative finance has replaced industrial and manufacturing activity as
the primary source of profitability.
• China has entered the world market and plays role in aggravating the crisis
of ever production. Before this China was known as isolated country.
• The recession in the central economies and the phenomenon of anemic,
jobless growth in US suggest that the global economy is at the tail of the
fifty year wave of capitalist expansion and decline. So, every capitalist
country must realize that its economy stability is only for fifty year, then it
must ready with the decline.
Finance capital emerged as the dynamo of both the US and the global
economies. In one hand, financial institutions represent the chief source of
corporate funding because the power grow while the leverage of manufacturing

4
and other industrial corporation correspondingly diminished. But in the other
hand, financial transactions and speculative activity become the chief source of
profit. Finance capital has gutted the regulations constraining its activities within
the US and other center economies. Of course the impact of it comes to the global
economy since America applies globalization.
In the next chapter, Bello reveals the way financial speculation
increasingly drives global economic activity. In the name of globalization and
democratization, US introduced global economy to the third world countries. For
those that need finance capital, US introduced World Bank, IMF and WTO. There
are some key features of contemporary, they are:
➢ The flow of private capital to the South increased dramatically
➢ The commercial banks pulled back from international lending
➢ The roles of the banks in raising fund was eclipsed by “securitization” of
the transfer of capital through the sale of stock and bonds increasingly
raised money by selling equity or certificates redeemable in the future at
fixed interest rates.
➢ There was an explosion in both old and new activities and financial
instruments
➢ A great many transaction were increasingly hard to monitor because they
were made ‘over the counter’, not on the floor of an exchange but among a
few parties communicating by telephone and computer
America did this speculation mostly to those developing counties such as
South America and Asia. This speculation did not help them much. Like in
Mexico, this country could not get out from the crisis. The global economy aids
made this country came into another crisis. Some Asian countries refused the aids
after learning the policy carefully even though some often could not run away
from the ‘trap’ including Indonesia, while in some other country like Argentina,
this policy did not make betterment in this country. The economy of this
developing country became bad after global economy influence which introduced
by America. So the speculation of liberation of finance capital promised economic
development, but unfortunately it has delivered severe instantly.

5
 Then, institutions like the U.S.-backed IMF, WTO, and World Bank lose
their legitimacy. Bello says that these world financial giants, which claim to offer
development models for the Third World, have instead “delivered severe
instability.” Instead of helping poor countries to advance, these financial despots
have “disciplined and re-subordinated the developing countries in the interests of
the United States and other center economies.”
We realize it or not, this program is actually anti-development. Those
institutions do not help the development of those countries’ economy but worsen
it. WTO, for instance, serve not much to promote global trade. It was made for
America which primarily served the interest of the US. World Bank and IMF also
had a lot of reason when the third world countries blame them; such as when the
economy crisis happened in Philippine, they denied the impact of the increasing
price of oil to this country’s economy by saying “the price increase was not due to
the agreement on agriculture, and besides there was never any agreement anyway
on who would be responsible for providing the assistance”. What a hell!
May be people do not know that at the World Bank, US share is 17.6
percent, somewhat above critical 15 percent it needs to exercise a veto over major
lending decision. And at IMF, Washington controls 19 percent of the vote, above
15 percent necessary for vetoing vital policy and budgetary decisions.
And may be US and those institutions do not realize that their program
made the number of people who live in poverty has dramatically increased as well
from 130 million in 1980 to 180 million in 1990. But, I do not know that their
campaign of this economy liberalism is always in the name of the poor. Is it so?
If any country won, it was Brazil. To the surprise of many, Washington
agreed to the Brazilian compromise a few weeks before Miami. It apparently had
no choice. According to one participant, that would have been a high-profile
setback the Bush administration could ill afford facing an election. So, it was
really private, Bush did it in the name of himself, not for his own country. I think
the collapse in Cancun and problem in Miami demonstrated the limits of US
hegemony and revealed how unilateralist economic diplomacy might backfire.
The in last chapter, Bello reveals the crisis of legitimacy. It describes the
empire’s profound ideological dilemma. Who will believe any longer in American

6
promise of democracy that has accompanied the drive for economic expansion
and strategic expansion? For American citizens it is important that the imperial
process be made to seem consistent with the democratic values. It is in the sense
that US is an imperial democracy. But unfortunately the practice was not as good
as the theory.
As a Filipino who involved much in Philippines economic development,
Bello starts the crisis from his own country. In 1900-1946 US brought its troops to
Philippine by the classic solution: prepare the Filipinos for responsible
independence, of course, by exporting the institutions of American democracy. By
the time of independence, in 1946, the Philippine political system was a mirror of
the American. It included a presidency, the separation of powers and a two-party
system. Later on it would bring Philippine to the People’s Power Revolution in
1986 during Marcos regime. Perhaps, the Philippine experience had the greatest
impact on the American political psyche: what happened in the Philippines
reconciled the drive for US strategic and economic expansion with America’s
democratic mission.
The next victim, Bello mentions as the second one is Latin America. In a
poll conducted by the UNDP in 2004, 54.7% of Latin Americans said they would
support authoritarian governments over democracy if the shift would solve their
economic problems. Unfortunately, the reversal of the third wave of
democratization loomed as a threat.
Then in South Asia, especially in Pakistan, the problem of democracy
came to reality. General Pervez Musharaf successfully ended Prime Minister
Nawaz Sharif’s eleven years of unstable democracy. Of course, it was not purely
Pakistanis army did that. There must be America interfere in it by its CIA and
Pentagon.
Internationally, democracy and in the name of globalization introduced by
America did not work well. Those countries finally quite understand imperial
purpose inside of the ideology. Unfortunately, it also happened inside of the
country, something was rotten back home in the US. Democracy showed
symptoms of decay in its self-proclaimed homeland. The influence of powerful
interest groups, which the Washington style electoral competition

7
institutionalized, reached massive proportions. Americans finally recognize that
their liberal democracy had been so thoroughly corrupted by corporate money that
it might better be described as a plutocracy. The American people believe that they
have no real control over the government but the one thing that they do not realize
is that the politicians have no control either. Shortly, Bush was successful being
the leader of an imperial democracy. It seemed that it turned into anarchy.

CONCLUSION
America must accept the impact of its will to dominate through the world.
May be its first purpose is to sustain Bretton Wood, in which it becomes the
leader. But then this condition has driven it into a challenge especially since the
end of Cold War. It becomes the only one super power country in which,
seemingly, many countries depend on it or pushed to be depended on it. America
always tries to help the ‘poor’ countries to be developed, including their
international affair and internal political matter such as the governance system.
One thing about America, as long as the regime is beneficial for it, it will help the
regime to stay long.
Unfortunately, the ‘good will’ of America did not run well. Many ‘poor’
countries fell down to the deeper hole by this policy. America did not help
anything. Some of them finally realize that American will continue to decline
economically because the global framework for transnational capitalist
cooperation to which the WTO in central is eroding. Bilateral and regional trade
arrangements are likely to proliferate.
For this and other reasons, Bello sees the collapse of U.S. empire as a
blessing and an opportunity. He wants empire to fail, for the Third World's sake as
well as for America's. The collapse of American empire is “a precondition for the
reemergence of a democratic republic. That was the American promise before it
was hijacked by imperial democracy.”

THE CRITIC
This book was written by outsider of America in which his country had
been imperialized by America in modern way since long time before it got its own

8
independency. But it does not mean he knows nothing about this super country
because he had spent long time there not only for studying but also for criticizing
the international affair of American policy especially under Bush leadership to
some developing countries.
He reveals a part of world history in post modern era in which economy
becomes the biggest matter. He criticizes all things America did especially to the
third world countries. It seems open world’s eyes about the decay America has. It
is true.
But may be Bello forgot that we live in the era in which all people need
being ‘large’. I mean although without American policy about democracy and
globalization, all countries will do it. Slowly but sure, America is just the trigger
to make it faster. No country will be able to live by itself. We need each other.
There must be a benefit in a loss. No matter what the name it is; monopoly,
hegemony, or globalization but the effect of it the development of some countries
such as in technology and education can be seen. They realized that they must
develop their own country and must be critical to all aids before they accept them.
Unfortunately also this book was written in 2005. I just imagine if this
book was written in 2008, proudly Bello would show to the world what he had
predicted about global crisis became true; and he also would laugh loudly when he
saw America was very busy inviting many countries to solve that problem under
Barrack Obama presidency.