Peter Mertens: "Hope under the rubble"

Writing a book about current events at a time when they are unfolding at breakneck speed is a real challenge. "While writing this book, I had to leave quite a few things out," Peter Mertens explains. "Because events are unfolding at a mind-boggling pace. There was the kidnapping of Nicolás Maduro in Venezuela, the US threat regarding Greenland, the debate over how to make Europe less dependent on the United States, the economic stranglehold on Cuba, the ongoing genocide in Gaza, the endless war against Iran... All of that in just three months. That is completely mad!"

Stopping writing was out of the question. Because we need a book that captures the frenetic reality of today's world. "Many people feel like they are living in a madhouse. Our lives were turned upside down in the blink of an eye. Where are Europe and the United States headed? The world is changing, and it could go in two directions: the path that leads to more war and madness, or the path of socialism and democracy."
 

In the first part of your book, you examine what is happening in Europe today. You see the "shock doctrine" being implemented. What does that entail?

Peter Mertens. The shock doctrine involves using external shocks, such as war or natural disasters, to implement long-standing plans and shift the balance of power. That is what is currently happening in Europe. Chaos reigns; people cannot keep up anymore. And amidst all this chaos, some people come along, sure of themselves and with all the answers, like Bart De Wever. An index jump, with more political authority being handed to Europe at the expense of national parliaments, or the investment of 800 billion euros in the European defence industry: these are his responses to the current crisis. But many of the measures that are now being presented as logical and inevitable are in fact long-standing plans that are only now being brought to the table. The current uncertainty is being used as a lever to force these plans through.

For example?

Peter Mertens. At the European level, a number of rules are swiftly being abolished. Rules regarding the chain of liability for multinationals, for example. In Antwerp, we saw how, at Borealis, the final link in the subcontracting chain was found guilty of human trafficking: 174 people were being exploited as slaves. "Chain liability" is the simple yet fair principle that a parent company at the top of the chain must not turn a blind eye to what is happening at the bottom and can be held legally liable. Today, they want to get rid of this principle. Fewer rules and less bureaucracy may seem like a good thing, but we need to ask ourselves the following question: fewer rules for whom, and for what purpose?

A second example is the Capital Markets Union, which some are seeking to establish and which aims to help major European companies secure funding for their riskiest investments. And to do this, they want to tap into people's pensions and savings. Consequently, some of the banking regulations that were introduced after the 2008 banking crisis to protect savers must be scrapped, so that people's savings can be invested in the stock market.

Ultimately, all of this is aimed at quickly creating large European monopolies, which should then be able to compete with US companies on the global market. These are therefore not neutral projects that serve the common good.

They are projects that serve the interests of big business and capital, and for which the working class foot the bill...

Peter Mertens. These monopolies believe that Europe, with its 450 million inhabitants, is too small. Major financial and industrial interest groups want to expand into new markets and secure access to raw materials and supply chains. That is why these monopolies need a state that acts on their behalf to defend their interests both within and outside Europe. That is why they want a Europe capable of military intervention in the Sahel and the Congo, for example. Social security and public services are being sacrificed in Europe in order to fund this military arm.

German Chancellor Friedrich Merz says it clearly: "The welfare state as it exists today can no longer be financed." At the same time, Germany is set to invest one trillion euros in military spending. Across Europe, social gains are being demolished, not with a hammer, but with a jackhammer.

Defence Minister Theo Francken claims that the United States has always been right to invest in military security rather than in social services. In his view, Europe has been far too lax. That is his view of the world. The US model, where people have no social safety net, suffer from addiction, receive no assistance, and where veterans returning from war are rejected and forced to survive in tents... That is the model Theo Francken wants. According to him, this is the path we must follow to build a military-industrial complex here too. War abroad always leads to war at home. Because a war economy can only be built by dismantling the social security system.

But this approach is meeting with resistance.

Peter Mertens. In fact, the resistance is very strong. This aspect is often dismissed. The fact that there has been opposition to the Arizona government for over 16 months in Belgium is unprecedented. This is not merely opposition to a government, but also to a vision of society, to a policy that invests everything in the economy of death, rather than building the economy of life. Resistance is also very much present in countries such as Italy and France. In the years to come, we will witness many new waves of resistance.

We are constantly being told that militarisation is necessary to defend us. But you write that it serves to facilitate interventions around the world.

Peter Mertens. There is only one minister in the federal parliament in Brussels who is rubbing his hands with glee: Theo Francken. He is the only one to receive substantial sums of money. He drew up a shopping list for military equipment worth 34 billion euros. All of this supposedly to stop the Russians. But when you look at his shopping list, you see that it includes armed drones costing 400 million euros each and 4,000 armoured amphibious vehicles that will be deployed in the Sahel. We're buying frigates, supposedly to secure our coastline, even though it is only 67 kilometres long. By the time such a frigate reaches cruising speed, it will already be well beyond Belgian waters. It's like putting a whale in a swimming pool. These frigates will be deployed to the Red Sea or the Strait of Hormuz to secure the oil supply there, alongside other imperialist forces.

Our Defence minister recently visited the Congo. Why? According to him, Europe's future will depend on the Congo's minerals. He is therefore stating, almost openly, that we must build up our military to secure "our" raw materials in the Congo and the Sahel.

We are not building a defence force, but an imperialist intervention force. And we are funding it with our pensions and public services. It is insane. It is a monster with an insatiable appetite. Let us take the United States as an example. The military consumes 270,000 barrels of oil a day there. The war in Iran costs a billion dollars per day. And how many human lives? Continuing to feed the bottomless pit of war is not a solution.

You also highlight the role of the far right in current developments. What role do they play?

Peter Mertens. Over the past four decades, the vast majority of laws in the European Parliament have been adopted through cooperation between Christian Democrats and Social Democrats. But the situation has changed. Christian Democrats now have a choice: They can work with the Social Democrats and the Liberals, but also with the far right. And today, for example, we see that the Omnibus Package, the first deregulation package, has been introduced with the support of the far right.

Recently, laws have also been passed to tighten control over civil society. Organisations such as Oxfam and Greenpeace are being closely monitored. This has also been made possible thanks to support from the far right. Of course, the far right is also playing a role in strengthening Europe's external borders. Everyone knows that war in Iran will cause a new wave of refugees. To prepare for this situation, increased border surveillance is being put in place.
 

The far right is becoming mainstream very quickly in Europe. Organised hate-mongers are being enlisted to save the system. Leaders of far-right parties, such as Geert Wilders in the Netherlands and Tom Van Grieken here, are tasked with promoting a "culture war" as an alternative to class struggle so that the oligarchs can sleep soundly.

And in this area, the United States is also involved...

Peter Mertens. It is clear from the US national security strategy that the United States supports the far right in Europe. We have seen how Elon Musk and Vice-President JD Vance travelled to Germany in 2025 to support the AfD (far-right party) during the elections.

Here, Tom Van Grieken was recently granted permission to meet with the US ambassador. He was received with full honours. Vlaams Belang in Belgium, the AfD in Germany, and the National Rally in France are backed by the far-right lobby in the White House. They don't even try to hide it. The far right enjoys the support of the European industrial lobby and Washington.

In the second part of the book, you focus on the United States. You mention the "shock and awe" doctrine, which refers to the military strategy of the same name used during the 2003 Iraq War. What does it involve?

Peter Mertens. Not everything is running smoothly for Donald Trump, but there is a system behind all this madness. This can be found in Project 2025, a document produced by The Heritage Foundation, a far-right think tank that has laid the groundwork for Donald Trump's second term. Its members have drawn up an extremely detailed roadmap that talks of taking control of the Supreme Court, breaking the power of the US states, strengthening the authority of the federal police, giving more power to ICE agents and deploying them against Democratic states and cities, and creating a scenario of civil war by stoking all manner of identity-based divisions, and so on. All these elements are set out in black and white in this document. We witnessed the "shock and awe" strategy during the first 100 days of President Trump's second term: so many measures were imposed all at once that everyone seemed at a loss and no one knew how to react.

Anyone who thinks we're simply dealing with Donald Trump's whims is seriously mistaken. There is a deliberate strategy aimed at a right-wing takeover by warmongers and tech barons. With his unpredictability, Trump is taking this strategy to extremes.

What is the ultimate goal of this strategy?

Peter Mertens. Behind all that is happening lies a deep-seated fear of China's rising power. After 500 years of Western dominance, the economic centre of gravity is shifting back to Asia. This situation is triggering an existential panic in the United States. That is why they have devised a new security strategy under which they intend to focus primarily on reclaiming the entire Western Hemisphere. The primary aim is to push back the Chinese. That is the main objective. China has become the leading trading partner for the whole of Latin America.

The United States is preparing for war against China. To do this, it needs to have its hands free. Europe must take on the fight against the Russians in its place, and Israel must fend for itself in the Middle East.

The United States' behaviour is driven by fear of a changing world. US hegemony is no more. They can no longer lecture other countries around the world. The aggression we are witnessing stems from this situation. It reflects the helplessness of an empire at the onset of its decline.

And to save this empire, must we also weaken Europe?

Peter Mertens. The US national security strategy is a 34-page official document, three pages of which are devoted to Europe. It states that the United States wants to divide Europe, encourage far-right forces, conclude as many agreements as possible with individual member states, and so on. All of this is set out in black and white in this document. US ambassadors in Europe, such as Bill White in Brussels, are being used to sow discord. All of this is part of a strategy aimed at weakening Europe. But when I speak about it in Parliament, nobody reacts.

However, Donald Trump is also facing resistance, particularly in the United States.

Peter Mertens. During his election campaign, Donald Trump promised that soldiers would no longer die on the front line. That there would be no more war. It was a popular promise. He also promised to create jobs and boost people's purchasing power. Trump is not keeping any of these promises; quite the opposite. That is why a strong resistance movement has emerged. In Minneapolis, for example, 40,000 people organised themselves into neighbourhood committees to oppose ICE forces and the policy of civil war in the United States (see page 46). Trump suffered a defeat there. This grassroots popular resistance also came to the fore on No Kings Day, which once again brought eight million people into the streets to protest against the tyranny of Trump and the super-rich. Opposition is also strong at the international level.

Former Prime Minister Guy Verhofstadt (Anders) recently stated in an interview that capitalism has failed to deliver on its promises. In his view, we need a "different kind of capitalism". You describe capitalism as "the elephant in the room".

Peter Mertens. These so-called "mea culpas" will become increasingly common. There will be a desire for a more moderate form of capitalism, one that may never have existed. But we cannot go back in time. We are currently in a period where the United States is fighting for its survival. The shift must be forward-looking, and it can go in one of two directions: one leading us towards more monopolies and war, or one leading us to try to envisage a different kind of economy at the European level. But in that case, it will be without imperialism, without a European army, and without the formation of monopolies.

Do you view the future with optimism?

Peter Mertens. I haven't written a pessimistic book. It is full of hope. I am optimistic because more and more people are organising to resist. We can also see that the driving force behind US imperialism is running out of steam. They are not winning their wars.

We are currently weathering the stormy autumn of imperialism.

A new world can only emerge if we learn from the old one. My book is, above all, an anti-imperialist work, an attempt to understand the madness of our times. Trying to understand is a first step towards optimism. People need knowledge to realise that what is happening today is not the will of God, that it is not the only possible scenario for this world. We are constantly being led to believe that there is no alternative. But they are weaker than we think, and we are also stronger than we think. This realisation brings with it a profound sense of hope.