Glaziev And Colonel Wilkerson About The Same.

Famous Russian economist and one of the advisers to President Putin Sergei Glaziev gave today a large interview to a famous Russian portal Vzglyad . 

Russia For The United States Is Another Link In The Chain Of Chaos.  

While interview is in Russian, capabilities of Google Translate will be enough to give a good grasp of what Glaziev is saying.  I will limit myself only to one of his several theses:

  

Объективно Америка Китаю проигрывает конкуренцию. Я бы сказал, что экономическая схватка за лидерство уже состоялась. Китай уже победил в смысле формирования нового глобального центра экономического развития. Вместе с Индией, Индокитаем и, возможно, с Японией, которая тоже к этому ядру примкнет, новый центр уже сформирован.

Американцы проиграли войну экономическую, но не хотят смириться с тем, что мир изменился, их модель либеральной глобализации исчерпала себя. Мир заинтересован в модели сотрудничества с безусловным доминированием международного права и взаимных обязательств.

Translation: Objectively, America is losing competition to China. I would say that economic clash for leadership has happened already. China won in a sense of formation of a new global center of economic development. Together with India, Indochina and, possibly, Japan which will join this new core, the new center is already formed. Americans lost economic war but do not want to come to terms with the fact that the world has changed, American model of liberal globalization completely exhausted itself. The world is interested in the cooperation model with unconditional domination of the international law and mutual obligations.   

Glaziev is unequivocal in stating that missile attack on Syria was a message to Russia. I do agree with Glaziev. Now comes this very interesting interview of Colonel Lawrence Wilkerson on April 7th:

   

In which he makes a number of very interesting and well-informed statements, among which his statement (starting at 13:50) about the danger of McMaster and Mattis and his desire for "going out more slowly than precipitously" echo very much what Glaziev says. In the end, Wilkerson, being a smart and principled, and well-connected, man understands the trend very well. United  States is fading and here is a conundrum:

1. If United States fades "slowly" and in an organized fashion she will not lose the status of superpower and will remain an extremely influential actor of the real (not neocon contrived) new world order, just one among other superpowers;

2. Precipitous, as Colonel Wilkerson characterizes it, that is "power" scenario of "fading" may result:

a) In the worst case scenario: US unleashing a thermonuclear           war with all horrendous consequences globally and for the US herself.    

b) Conventional conflict, which, as Publius Tacitus observes at Colonel Lang's famous blog:

If Russia decides to call our bluff and escalate things Trump will likely preside over a public humiliation that will explode America's military delusions of grandeur.

The good news here, however, is the fact that Russia's MO is unchanged--Russia will always try to avoid war, that is until the war becomes inevitable. Russia will call bluff only when it warrants it. This position is also a position of strength but also of vulnerability, since the good ol' boys (and girls) from D.C. are not bound, as latest events show, by knowledge, understanding of the warfare, in the end, by simple human decency. I do not want to speculate now on the mindset of people such as McMaster or Mattis (I can, and fact is, I can back some of my conclusions with facts) but it is becoming exceedingly clear that Washington's obsession with power expressed through military means is a constant sublimation of internal weakness. This is apart from US being de facto an Israel's army.

I am intent on buying McMaster's "Dereliction Of Duty" just to get a "feel" of his mind (I am long past the point when Vietnam War interests me) but based on the totality of facts of the last several months it is absolutely clear that US does think that she can clear Russia away, including  from the path towards some form of confrontation with China. If McMaster, who seems now emerging as a big wig in terms of decisions on applications of  military power, thinks that he is ready to face a world drastically different from what he ever encountered, I think he will have to get ready at  some point of time write "Dereliction Of Duty-II"--a favorite "stab in the back" military cliche'. Meanwhile, Russia apparently continues on clearing jihadists from Syria and the last I heard "stick and carrots" doctrine of foreign policy so loved in D.C. is not only obsolete, it is dead. As for Trump himself, well, no better description is possible than in Greg Johnson's superb piece at Unz Review, to which yours truly was invited to contribute by Ron Unz.