The recent Observer editorial, 'A Declaration of Interdependence,' reveals more about the panic within Britain’s liberal-imperialist class than its analysis. It shows disorientation among a ruling elite whose global framework is collapsing under contradictions. The editors claim that Donald Trump has “pulled the rug from under the Starmer project,” implying that Britain’s capitalist crisis stems from a single reckless act rather than decades of militarism, austerity, and imperial decline. The editorial outlines four ways Trump has supposedly sabotaged Starmer. In truth, each “shock” merely exposes the corruption at the heart of the entire system.
1. The economic crisis is not Trump’s doing—it is
capitalism’s
The Observer laments that the UK’s fragile economic recovery
was disrupted when Trump authorized the US-Israeli attack on Iran, leading
Tehran to seal the Strait of Hormuz. It mournfully notes that “world oil prices
are still nearly 30% above prewar levels,” as if this situation were an
unpredictable act of God rather than a direct result of imperialist
intervention in the Middle East.
The editorial criticizes not the fact that the US and Israel
initiated another unjust war, but that it harms British capitalism's interests.
The hardships faced by Iranian and Palestinian civilians are ignored; what's
crucial is that Starmer’s “green shoots” story doesn’t resonate with voters in
Makerfield. This reveals the genuine stance of the Labour-liberal circle: war
can be justified or even needed, provided it doesn’t interfere with internal
political interests.
2. Labour’s crisis over Gaza is a crisis of imperialism,
not of messaging
The Observer criticizes Trump’s backing of Israel’s
destructive attack on Gaza, which has led to the loss of nearly 73,000
Palestinian lives, claiming it has caused a division within the Labour Party.
However, Labour's division was not caused by Trump; it was due to its
persistent support for imperialist violence.
Starmer’s so-called "tortured expressions of support
for Israel’s right to self-defence" are actually sincere, representing
Labour’s position within the British state. The real focus of the editorial is
that the working class, especially young people and Britain’s Muslim community,
is shifting away from Labour towards parties perceived as more supportive of
Palestine. For the Observer, the concern isn’t the widespread violence itself
but the political consequences it might trigger.
3. The culture‑war panic reveals the fragility of the
British state
The third critique in the editorial—that JD Vance and Elon
Musk are fueling Britain’s “culture wars”—exposes a feeling of helplessness.
The British elite, having spent years demonising migrants, refugees, and the
poor, now shows shock when their own reactionary rhetoric is echoed by their
American counterparts. The Observer points out that Musk "acted as an
arsonist, reposting flagrantly false and racist comments” following the Belfast
stabbing. However, Musk is not an anomaly; he embodies the core of capitalist
reaction. The far right's rise is not solely due to online provocateurs but
also because the political establishment—Labor included—has legitimised
nationalism, militarism, and xenophobia.
The editorial’s fear is not fascism, but the loss of control
over the forces it helped unleash.
4. The defence‑spending crisis exposes the bankruptcy of
British imperialism
The Observer’s final complaint is that Trump has called for
NATO members to allocate 5% of their GDP to defence, a target Starmer “can’t
afford.” This is seen as an outrageous demand from a reckless American leader.
However, it is actually a natural extension of Britain’s own imperial
commitments. The British government cannot sustain global wars, maintain a nuclear
arsenal, challenge Russia and China, and keep its welfare state intact all at
once. Something has to give—and the ruling class has already decided it will
not cut the military. The editorial worries that the working class might resist
this arrangement.
The Observer’s conclusion: a desperate plea for
imperialist unity
The article concludes by urging Britain to adopt
“interdependence” with NATO, Europe, and the U.S., framing it as a pragmatic
alternative to Brexit’s rejection of reality. However, in reality, it demands
that the working class endure ongoing austerity, perpetual conflict, and
subjugation to the major imperialist powers. The Observer claims Britain is
“fortunate” to be at the crossroads of these powerful systems. But is it
fortunate? To be a subordinate member of NATO’s military actions, Europe’s
austerity policies, and America’s military-industrial complex? That’s not luck;
it’s a trap.
The Observer fails to recognize that Britain’s crisis is
rooted in the failure of global capitalism itself, not in Trump, Brexit, or
Starmer’s errors. The decline of the “special relationship” reflects the
broader collapse of the post-Cold War international order. Ongoing conflicts in
Gaza, Iran, Ukraine, and the South China Sea are not isolated incidents but
signs of a coming global upheaval. The working class should reject the
Observer’s appeal for “interdependence” with imperialist powers. Instead, the only
effective solution is for workers across Britain, Europe, the U.S., and
worldwide to organize independently in opposition to war, nationalism, and
capitalism.
