Showing posts with label Pax Americana. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Pax Americana. Show all posts

Saturday, December 13, 2025

Too Little, Too Late.

Plus, the main generator of Russia's hatred cannot be removed in Europe--it is majority of population. And that is why Western Europe and Russia go their separate ways. 


East is East and West is West and Never the Twain Shall Meet"(c). It DOES NOT matter who comes to power in the Western Europe. 

Tuesday, June 14, 2022

Newspeak and Ing (I Mean) AmSoc.

How can one possibly start trying to extricate oneself from own pile of shit such as that created by the US Department of State in 404?  Tony Blinken--the strategists' strategist, the geopolitical thinker of the scale of Bismark... nah, I am screwing with you--some mediocrity with "soft degree" in some BS from Ivy League, but well versed in obfuscation, double meaning and gaslighting, in other words newspeak, tries. Here is his PBS interview:

Boy, they really do think that nobody remembers what was this all about? Those who matter in this world know what is this all about--it is all well documented and, as was predicted from the get go, is clearly understood for what it is--a rush to remove oneself from a whopper of geopolitical defeat which is unfolding before our eyes. No, it is not Afghanistan 2.0, not even close--Afghanistan is just a hiccup on the way to a convulsing end to Pax Americana, as was envisioned by the same "experts" in foreign affairs as Tony Blinken, Francis Fukuyama or Zbig. Now is the time to put a lipstick on the pig and try to look stately and smart. Like this, yet another Ph.D in "political science" from Pentagon.

The US is seeking to make the conflict in Ukraine more costly for Moscow than whatever Russian President Vladimir Putin hoped to achieve, Under Secretary of Defense for Policy Colin Kahl said on Tuesday. Kahl insisted that Russia was making only “tactical” gains in Ukraine and would be unable to achieve its “grandiose objectives” of taking over the entire country, in part thanks to massive US military aid. “We’ll continue to provide Ukraine what they need for the fight,” Kahl said on Tuesday, opening a conference organized by the Center for New American Security (CNAS), a Democrat-linked think tank where he used to work. The Biden administration alone has provided Ukraine with over $5.3 billion in military assistance, of which $4.6 billion has come since February 24, Kahl pointed out. 

They don't teach combined arms operations' planning and attrition rates in real wars in think-tanks in D.C. They simply have no clue what it is and how real wars look like, but, as Larch correctly stated today, they are shell-shocked and try to emulate brain activity in feeble attempts to save the face, which they never had. Looks like Blinken already understood something, this Kahl guy is still in the Bargaining stage of Kubler-Ross, but he will get there where Blinken is today, eventually. He just has to learn some standard "democracy" tropes from the lexicon of amateurs and sociopaths who are not only wrecking havoc with Europe but are killing own (own??) country with ruthless efficiency only madmen are capable of. 

In related news today, Vladimir Putin approved in principle the urgent delivery of wheat to Afghanistan if the "necessity arises" per report of inter-agency commission from Russia which returned from Afghanistan recently (in Russian). In my latest duet on PolitWera with Colonel Trukhan we touched upon this remarkable fact of Chechen guys (Kadyrovtsy) fighting heroically shoulder to shoulder with their brothers from LDNR and Russia. The fact that Ramzan Kadyrov has become not only an excellent counter-propaganda force in dispelling Ukie and West's BS, but a focal point of so many in Islamic World who look upon Russia not only in sympathy but with hope--I cannot emphasize enough the importance of that. The implications are enormous. And strategic. Do Blinken or Kahl understand that? Don't hold your breath.  

In sad news, Larry's mom has died today. I already expressed my profound condolences privately, I want you, those who believe in God, keep Larry's mom in your prayers. On behalf of all us our condolences to Larry and his family, let his mom Rest in Peace.  

Monday, August 30, 2021

What a Coincidence.

As I repeat ad nauseam--the root of the mythology of modern combined West is in WW II, where it was effectively saved from itself by primarily Red Army, and this fact completely messes up this whole idea of the United States exceptional "liberation" of Europe from the evils of Nazism, a strictly European invention, by those Stalin's dirty Asiatic hordes. Like in 1814 with Russian Army triumphantly entering Paris, Red Flag over Reichstag in May of 1945 doesn't allow many in the West to sleep and face the reality of the XX century, in which the West decided to commit a suicide. Removal of those Soviet/Russian "hordes" and those who led them in liberation of the death camps and Europe from the history, or re-framing their role in this process of liberation, is a task which Western historiography and propaganda machine got engaged with immediately after the WW II. This revisionism is vital for the existence of  Pax Americana, because modern world of ours was born in the crucible of WW II in which America was a second, however important, fiddle in ridding world of Nazism. 

There are several ways of how Western revisionists--a euphemism for barely literate people with agenda (a defining characteristic of Russia Study field in the West)--do their job.

1. They completely exonerate Nazi Germany and Axis from its crimes (e.g. visit Unz Review and see one of a highest concentrations of crypto-nazis dominating discussion boards there), often it goes hand-in-hand with Holocaust issue and total ignoring of Axis being responsible for 27 million lives of Soviet citizens and millions upon millions of other lives. These are the most insane and illiterate people and they are incapable of tracing basic causalities. 

2. They equate the responsibility of Nazi Germany with that of the USSR for unleashing the WW II. This cohort, including "professional historians" has a lot in common with those mentioned in p. 1. They also are on the position of stressing that even if Nazis were guilty, Stalin's USSR was so horrible and so Mordor that "hell with them, they had it coming". These people also are not strong in history, nor do they have a military background which would allow them to grasp technical, operational, strategic and economic realities of WW II, and as in p.1 in circle they place guilt on Stalin and Soviet Union.

3. Russian "voices" such as Rezun, Solzhenitsyn, adjacent to them Western voices, such as "mass rape specialist" (a euphemism for falsifier) Antony Beavor, other "Russian" dissidents who have an army of followers in the West, despite their sophomoric writing and open falsification of the history and who go for the jugular and deny Soviet/Russian people any agency and ability to distinguish right from wrong, which is wholesale attributed to "communist" ideology and Stalin is singled out as a main culprit. 

4. Pursuers of "Jewish-centric" version of Russian history, in which Russian October 1917 Revolution was a Jewish conspiracy and because of that Russians, as in p.2 "had it coming" and too bad Nazis didn't wipe Russians out.

All this is a result of a combination of factors of both very low and constantly declining intellectual level of Western societies in general, and of ideological imperatives of a Cold War which disregards actual, still available but shrinking, scholarship in favor of pure propaganda. Plus, of course, a visceral hatred of Western "elites" of Russians as an obstacle to West's delusional dreams of domination. This is a very brief review of this phenomenon and I dedicated two thirds of my first book to this issue. 

But evidently, there are still some people out there who are bothered by a murky stream of a grotesque pseudo-history in the United States and who cannot keep silent anymore. Ian Dowbiggin makes a review of yet another pseudo-historical excrement which passes in the United States for scholarship.

Rewriting History for the New Cold War. A Bard College professor has produced a sweeping, revisionist history of the Second World War that places the blame at Russia's doorstep.

Read the whole article, and pay attention to Unz "team" immediately appearing there to defend the book being reviewed and Dowbiggin arrives to a conclusion which for my readers shouldn't be a secret for many years:

Stalin’s War fits comfortably into a world where it is now fashionable to hate Russia. Earlier this summer, Nick Carter, Britain’s top military commander, told the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation that Putin’s Russia was “an acute threat” to European peace. The CBC’s coverage of Carter’s comment was the latest in a series of media stories in recent years about Putin’s foreign policy, his clampdown on dissent in Russia, and his alleged “meddling” in the domestic affairs of other countries. Last March, President Joe Biden even called Putin a “killer.” The twist on anti-Russianism today is that, unlike during the anti-communist years of the 1950s, it’s now the Soros-backed progressive left that demonizes Moscow.
Russians are keenly aware of that and here is a coincidence. Sergei Lavrov, speaking to veterans of Great Patriotic War in Volgograd (Stalingrad) today stated:

ВОЛГОГРАД, 30 августа. /ТАСС/. Попытки выставить Иосифа Сталина главным злодеем его эпохи являются частью атаки на отечественное прошлое, на итоги Второй мировой войны. Об этом заявил в понедельник министр иностранных дел России Сергей Лавров на встрече с ветеранами Великой Отечественной войны в Волгограде. Он подчеркнул, что осуществляемые извне нападки на историческое прошлое России нацелены не только на то, чтобы переписать историю, но и политически ослабить РФ. "[Вы упомянули] Иосифа Сталина, который <...> всеми процессами должен был руководить. Я абсолютно согласен с тем, что историю нельзя трогать. Кстати, нападки на Сталина как на главного злодея, сваливание в одну кучу всего, что он сделал в довоенное время, во время, после войны - это ведь тоже часть той самой атаки на наше прошлое, на итоги Второй мировой войны", - сказал министр.

Translation: VOLGOGRAD, August 30. / TASS /. Attempts to portray Joseph Stalin as the main villain of his era are part of an attack on our country's past, on the results of World War II. This was stated on Monday by Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov at a meeting with veterans of the Great Patriotic War in Volgograd. He stressed that outside attacks on Russia's historical past are aimed not only at rewriting history, but also politically weakening the Russian Federation. "[You mentioned] Joseph Stalin, who <...> was supposed to lead all the processes. I absolutely agree that history should not be touched. By the way, attacks on Stalin as the main villain, lumping together everything he did in the pre-war period, during, after the war - this is also part of that very attack on our past, on the results of World War II, "the minister said.

Lavrov's statement is not going to change anything in the West, least of all in the United States which as a society has no concept of a war as such nor is capable to think outside America-centric world, including its elites and most of "scholarship". This gap is unbridgeable and it will continue to grow. I guess the West needs new Solzhenitsyn, which is not easy to find in times of internet and social networks. Lavrov's statement is for Russians primarily, new generation, that is, which increasingly wants and demands to see the history of their country as a continuous process in which Soviet period, with all of its failures and achievements, is just another step in Russia achieving her greatness. Plus, can we cut the crap? Few westerners have any idea what Soviet period was and how it played out in the past and plays out in present day Russia. They just don't get it. They will not get it. But even registered foreign agent Levada Center and a cloaca of The Moscow Times cannot hide the fact:

Why this happens is beyond the grasp of people described above in this post (pp. 1-4), as per "Western history", I am on record--the whole clusterfuck which modern West is today is a direct result of a complete lack of self-awareness and of operational knowledge of the outside world across the whole spectrum of activity from economics, warfare, politics, culture and history. With "historians" like Sean McMeekien West as we know it doesn't have much time left anyway.

Tuesday, April 21, 2020

About "Hegemony". Fast Thought.

Even today, when browsing media--I am not going to give links, they are easy to find--I stumble constantly on definition of the United States as hegemon. Hegemon this, hegemon that and all of this usage ONLY in the context of what Fed will do, how Mnuchin slept last night, and what is the state of banks. I think, using financial voodoo which is being presented as a "science" in Anglo-sphere media and its iterations in, say, Russia among what is known today as Russian liberda circles with appropriate media such as Kommersant of RBC, one is literally forced by narrative to believe that the US is a hegemon because US Dollar is world's reserve currency and everything flows from it. Well, this is a preposterous and utterly incompetent view because even a generic definition of hegemony doesn't support those assumptions in the least, because in real world US Dollar being (for now) global reserve currency is merely an advantage, malignant at that for the US itself, but hegemony is something else altogether:   
My latest book, my previous book, my third book which I am writing are all dedicated to a deconstruction of the myth of the United States being a real hegemon, because "control" is a very vague term until one begins to specify elements of this control and here is this slight problem: one cannot define "control" merely by balance sheet, because real hegemony realistically is built around... I know, I know, I am such a bore... tangibles. Or, as I write for years--by actual predictors, overwhelming majority of which are based on real economy and real capability. Let's recall this from more than 4 years ago
1. Owns and operates the international banking system;

2. Controls all hard currencies;

3. Is the world's principal customer;

4. Provides the majority of the worlds finished goods;

5. Dominates international capital markets;

6. Exerts considerable moral leadership within many societies;

7. Is capable of massive military intervention;

8. Controls the sea lanes;

9. Conducts most advanced technical research and development;

10. Controls leading edge technical education;

11. Dominates access to space;

12. Dominates aerospace industry;

13. Dominates international communications;

14. Dominates the high-tech weapons industry. 
Out of those 14 points, highlighted 11, that is 78.6%, are directly connected to a very serious manufacturing or, in modern lingo, "real economy". If one throws away BS about "considerable moral leadership" (a delusion still propagated by Huntington's founded Foreign Policy magazine) and the point about control of all hard currencies, this share increases to 11 out of 12, that is roughly 92%.  It is also what makes one a military power. And even this list is still incomplete....
In general, real hegemony without military hegemony is nothing more than exercise in PR and feel-good-about-oneself delusion. In general, hegemony without kinetic ability to prove, by means of power enforcing, of the order hegemon wants to establish is not a hegemony. This military hegemony is based on REAL economy, not on stock market or futures or any other paper issued by any bank. Well, guess what American hegemony was based upon--two myths: alleged military power characteristic of hegemon, myth of US economy based on valuations of financial markets. Once those two myths have been removed the collapse ensued, because trust, deep down, in the deepest recesses of their minds many believed primarily in those two myths. Not anymore, the trust had been broken. It doesn't work anymore, it is either non-existent in some places, in other--is running out and really fast at that. Reason--US cannot enforce Bretton Woods, petrodollar, Eurodollar or whatever the hell other simulacra anyone uses to describe Pax Americana, because to do so one actually needs to perform, especially militarily and technologically. US cannot do that. It couldn't for a long time, but it took some effort and time to "explain" or to convey this simple truth to people who, like majority of the so called "investors", know about fictional financial markets but do not understand anything in terms of actual warfare, how military works, how real economy operates based on tangibles, from R&D to industrial manufacturing. They just don't! It is not surprising that good ol' Henry Kissinger ended up on the board of directors of Theranos fraudulent company or Boeing had on its board of directors people, like Nikki Hailey, who have same relation to aerospace as I have to Kabuki Theater. Plus, of course, one cannot continue losing wars against weak opposition non-stop. The doubt, is a like a slow metastasized cancer--once started and not detected, it will spread and kill patient. This exactly what is happening now: we see doubts being realized on the level of general population, some of which is well-off and are "investors" who are completely at loss with their mostly virtual "papers" which very few will be interested in in coming months. 

Friday, February 21, 2020

Addendum To Two "No Shit" Moments In A Row.

It occurred to me that some explanations regarding US Treasuries and main holders of those financial "instruments" must be explored in a separate addendum. This will help understand the dynamics of Russian-American relations. The main question is WHY buy US treasuries or US Treasury Bonds? Let's give those a clear definition from financial "wizards" from Fidelity
So, as you can see, the United States treasury sells US debt to, actually, finance US economy. Foreign entities buy this debt because they think they can earn low yield but reliable buck on those. Buying US treasuries is also a good indicator of trust, or otherwise, in US not only economically, but even more so geopolitically. I repeat ad nauseam that Pax Americana's financial pyramid rests primarily with American military power mythology, not with US real economy. US real economy cannot generate enough growth to even scratch the surface of US debt obligations. Prior to roughly 2014 foreign governments' buying of US treasuries was based on US economic data which was, to put it mildly, not exactly connected to the reality and risk expectations were allayed primarily by the ideas that the United States, having enough military wherewithal, would be able to coerce a whole host of countries to "offer" their resources to the United States, thus providing enough fuel for continuation of the racket for a little bit longer. Then something got broken. Exactly around 2014. 

The US military "primacy" was called into a serious question. You all know what happened then. Then there was 2015, and then March of 2018, and on and on, and on. The only country in the world who can both wipe the United States off the map and defeat in conventionally in Europe simply stated that she doesn't really give a shit. Recall this:
Russia is continuing to diversify state reserves away from US debt. The latest data from the US Treasury shows that Russia's share hit an 11-year minimum and totaled only $14.9 billion.The share of US sovereign debt bonds in Russia's portfolio has been reduced dramatically in recent months. Russia held $96.1 billion in US Treasuries in March before selling half its holdings in April, dropping to 22nd place among major foreign holders of American treasury securities at $48.7 billion.In 2010, Russia was among the top 10 holders of US Treasuries at $176.3 billion. With its holdings falling to $14.9 billion in May, the country is now below the $30 billion threshold for inclusion on the Treasury Department’s monthly report of major holders. On Tuesday, the Treasury released a list of 33 countries which includes the biggest holder China to the smallest Chile. Russia is no longer on the list. 
Pay attention to the date of this report: 18 July 2018. About 100 days after Putin's address to Federal Assembly on March 1, 2018.  The dates are not accidental. As anyone can see, US treasuries are a bit more than just financial instruments (any government issues those) but they have more sacral meaning as world's admission, and a sign of belonging, to what was considered the global elite club based in Washington D.C. Now take a look at this graph:
Can you find Russia in it? Don't even try. Russia is not going to be financing the economy of a country which declared Russia an absolute evil. You just don't help people who viscerally hate and ready to kill you. So, as reputable Vesti reports (in Russian), Russia's "investment" in the US treasuries on December 2019 was exactly $9.974 Billion. In other words, Russia has 7 times fewer US treasuries than Bermuda, and 25 times less than mighty Luxembourg. You see, at issue here is what drives the American "elites" completely mad and desperate. Here is simple answer, unlike even China, not to speak of occupied Japan, Russia has an official receipt of being fully sovereign country. Even economically mighty China cannot have as much freedom as Russia does in China's economically symbiotic relations with the United States. 
Russia does have those freedoms not just because she has one of the most, if not THE MOST, undervalued economy in the world--a courtesy of swindlers from all kinds of Western ratings and economic "analysis" institutions--but because this grossly undervalued economy produces weapons which allow Russia to insulate herself from any kind of blackmail and be her own thing. One of those major things is Russia's refusal to get US financial "debt" as a sign of submission to the rules of self-proclaimed hegemon. Moreover, Russia, considering her global status, is leading the way in dumping US treasuries, and that is a deadly threat to existing regime in the West. As many observers within the Empire are noting, something really strange is happening to the symbol of the financial reign by the United States:
Under the impact of a stupendous spending binge peppered with juicy tax cuts, the Treasury Department has had to issue a flood of Treasury securities to fund the cash outflow. So, over the past 12 months, the US gross national debt has ballooned by $1.5 trillion to $22 trillion as of January 30, according to Treasury Department data. And these are the good times when the economy is hopping. At the next recession, this is going to get cute.But who the heck is buying all this debt? That question will grow increasingly important and worrisome as we move forward with this gigantic ballooning debt, fueled by deficits that Fed chairman Jerome Powell calls “unsustainable” at every chance he gets  
The answer is simple: 
American banks (very large holders), hedge funds, pension funds, mutual funds, and other institutions along with individual investors in their brokerage accounts or at their accounts with the US Treasury were huge net buyers, while nearly everyone else was selling, increasing their holdings by $1.36 trillion over the 12-month period. These American entities combined owned the remainder of the US gross national debt, $7.5 trillion, or 34.4% of the total!
The United States literally turns itself into the self-licking ice-cream cone and, eventually, she will lick herself into the empty cone, with no ice-cream left. Moreover, the United States has been denied her post WW II myth of military omnipotence thus showing very clear signs of weakness, like recent events with Iran, which indicate to many foreign US treasuries' holders that at some point of time they may submit those obligations for cashing without serious consequences for themselves and that is the big game and plan for them--big players, such as China, already doing this, however slowly (but then again, China holds more than a trillion worth of US treasuries) and the whole thing is already in progress and pass the point of no return. 

American "elites" know who drives this process--Russia. And China. And desperation shows: 
Speaking today at London's Royal United Services Institute, Esper said the political and economic leverage wielded by the Chinese is already eroding the sovereignty of some nations. And Russian invasion of Georgia, annexation of Crimea and violation of the Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces Treaty, as it continued to build up its inventory of strategic arms, shows that Russia is unwilling to be a responsible international actor, he said. "[We] cannot stand idly by while authoritarian nations attempt to reshape the global security environment to their favor at the expense of others," Esper said. "Doing so would invite continued aggression and diminish our ability to deter future conflicts. As such, America's National Defense Strategy makes it clear that great power competition is once again the primary concern of U.S. national security."
Mark Esper and many people in Pentagon are not stupid, they can calculate and do operational planning, they know that the US military today is capable to fight only third world militaries, and even there success is not guaranteed. And yes, in Esper's definition of Russia "not willing to be a responsible international actor" is correct, precisely because she knows what kind of rogue state she is dealing with and that is why she was in a separation mode non-stop since 2014. But Russia is still in business with the US, as she should be, because Russians finally learned a good ol' capitalist truism--money doesn't smell, only business--nothing personal. Only hard cold cash--no treasuries. What a funny world we all live in. 

Thursday, January 9, 2020

No Shit, Pardon My French.

It seems that self-evident things take time for a modern crop of Western economists to dawn. 
No way! Actual things are "real assets". How could this be? I always thought that commercial and combat aircraft were growing on the trees, and that gas, oil, nuclear and other types of energy were appearing out of nothing due to quantum instability of the vacuum not as the result of human labor, creativity, education  and, often, sacrifice. Wait a minute, Wall Street is on-line with me... what do you say? Ahh, phew, now I can sleep calmly--it is all BS, real assets are papers produced on the Wall Street and TV, Radio and Internet entertainment. Facebook, too, with Twitter and other social networks being a real deal. Virtual economy, you know, like the insurance or real estate speculation and their "paper" derivatives--that is the real deal. Not mining, computing, processing, manufacturing technologies. Nah, indeed, cannot be right. Facebook stock, on the other hand... You get me being sardonic here, I hope.  

In related news, about US Dollar: everything what made US Dollar at some point of time a desired (and reserve) currency--America's immense manufacturing capacity and an illusion of global military power--are all gone. Long time ago. Since 2000s it was a mythology of US military power which served as a foundation of US Dollars' reserve currency status, meaning that anyone without nuclear weapons, who would decide to use anything but USD in its trade would get thrashed by US military might. Like Libya. Remove military power aura from USD and suddenly things begin to look rather shaky. As I continue to say ad nauseam (I know, I sound as a parrot)--Eurasia, which is a main, by a gigantic margin, global production and consumer market, increasingly understands that she will be protected. Militarily. It is not one day process, of course, but it is fully in motion and once Eurasia is protected, the need for US Dollar will evaporate, in fact, it is already evaporating. Iran's strikes on US bases in Iraq is yet another tick in the last minutes of US Dollar's existence as a reserve currency. Indeed, what is a currency if it is not defended or, as is the case of Pax Americana, cannot be forcefully imposed? Not much really. Facebook's "capitalization" may be in hundreds of billions of US Dollars, but it takes merely a couple salvos of cruise missiles to make it zero. 

Gazprom's capitalization maybe down (due to mostly PR manipulations), but its real WORTH is orders of magnitude more than that of the few buildings with computers and routers of Facebook. People WILL survive without Facebook, in fact another iteration of a platform for exhibitionism and reports on bowel movements and Botox injections will emerge immediately, but without gas and heating, production will stop and people will begin to die from cold. Obviously, Gazprom, as is Rosatom, among many, are defended by actual military power, which CAN and WILL defend them in particular, and Russia in general. I can go on forever with those analogies, but, I guess, you got my drift. Five years ago, yes, I repeat it again, and, no, not for self-praise, I stated that American criminal coup in Ukraine was the start of the count-down to US demise. I based my, as it turned out correct, conclusion only on things which  "are the real assets", ranging from real economy and manufacturing capacity, real resources and real military power, not some ethereal BS of electronic transactions in imagination and air. So, I have a bit of disagreement with Mr. Feierstein--we are down to few years (less than decade) before the whole thing becomes irrelevant and, as much as I hate all those silly predictions, the amount of time left for US Dollar as premier global currency depends not even on successful completion of China's massive BRI project, with China's economy already dwarfing that of the US. No, this will depend on a progress of National Projects of Russia of which we will see first results by 2024. Why? Because of Russian culture and its ability to generate civilization models from which anyone can draw most attractive features. But here we are entering the issue of metaphysics, granted supported by Russia's massive "commodities", increasing manufacturing capacity and state-of-the-art military machine. 

Tuesday, January 7, 2020

Orwellian

In the extreme. 
WASHINGTON (AP) — The Pentagon on Monday distanced itself from President Donald Trump’s assertions that he would bomb Iranian cultural sites despite international prohibitions on such attacks. Defense Secretary Mark Esper said the U.S. will “follow the laws of armed conflict.” When asked if that ruled out targeting cultural sites, Esper said pointedly, “That’s the laws of armed conflict.” The split between the president and his Pentagon chief came amid heightened tensions with Tehran following a U.S. drone strike that killed Gen. Qassem Soleimani, the head of Iran’s elite Quds Force. Trump had twice warned that he would hit Iranian cultural sites if Tehran retaliates against the U.S. Esper’s public comments reflected the private concerns of other defense and military officials, who cited legal prohibitions on attacks on civilian, cultural and religious sites, except under certain, threatening circumstances.
As I continue to say non-stop: while there are a lot of questions regarding US military's conduct, truth is--it is the last American institution which still has some vestiges of competence and common sense surviving within itself. The rest of US governance class is an Exhibit A of insanity and outright criminality. 
“We have targeted 52 Iranian sites (representing the 52 American hostages taken by Iran many years ago), some at a very high level & important to Iran & Iranian culture, and those targets, and Iran itself, WILL BE HIT VERY FAST AND VERY HARD," he tweeted. His Twitter message caught administration officials off-guard and prompted an immediate outcry from legal scholars, national security experts and Democratic lawmakers. But the president stood by his threat the following day. “They’re allowed to kill our people. They’re allowed to torture and maim our people. They’re allowed to use roadside bombs and blow up our people,” he told reporters traveling with him on Air Force One. “And we’re not allowed to touch their cultural sites? It doesn’t work that way.” By international law, however, it does.
I think the signals from US political top coming since the treacherous assassination of General Soleimani who was on a diplomatic mission in the third country are a testament to a complete breakdown of any command and control chains within Administration. They also testify to a continuous and accelerating ripping of the fabric of American statehood due to US "elites" reaching or nearing the limits of corruption, dual loyalty and incompetence beyond which governance becomes impossible and the system implodes. Those signs are all around us. Indeed, for the Head of State to threaten to attack holiest places of an ancient civilization--this is unprecedented. What would Donald Trump do if tomorrow (let's imagine unimaginable, as an example) Russian President would state that Russia will hit very fast and very hard Lincoln Memorial, Arlington Cemetery and Capitol, granted Russia can actually do it, what would the reaction be? There are things one simply doesn't do in the position of the Head of State even verbally, even in private--threatening national holy sites of immense religious and cultural significance. But, I guess, for NYC real estate shyster this element of state dignity and, in case of the United States, whatever remains (not much, if any) of moral "high" ground is completely unknown. But this is not what I am trying to say here, others did it better than me already, anyway. Such as Pepe Escobar.

My point is different. I think Vladimir Putin had it. Today he traveled unannounced, after all, who now knows what DJT or other factions in the US and Israel have in mind, to Syria. To meet Bashar Assad and, considering the presence of both Shoigu and Gerasimov in the delegation, to discuss some other "issues".  While in Damascus,  Putin visited both Umayyad Mosque and Holy Virgin Mary Orthodox Church. A rather very contrasting message to one(s) being produced by Trump Administration. But presence of Shoigu and Gerasimov, of course, was more than just symbolic. Syria borders Israel and is a key barrier to the attack of Iran either by Israel or whatever assets US Navy may decide to bring in the Eastern Med--it is about 900 miles (as the crow, or TLAM or JASSM fly) from Eastern Med to Tehran, so a bit of a pep-talk and maybe some check up of Russian forces in Syria, including ever important Air Defense part, was needed. We ARE in the state of war between US/Israel and Iran/Iraq. Bibi can spew whatever BS he wants, but Israel and its American governing neocon faction's culpability in assassination is unquestionable. After all, the United States fought few wars for its most trusted "ally" and only "democracy" in the Middle East.  

So, is Russia trying to contain the situation? Difficult to say at this stage since, in the end, it was and is clear to anyone who didn't spend last 10 years under the stone that "resolution", that is supplantation of the rotting and increasingly insane Pax Americana with real rules-based world order is bound to happen one way or another. The world is already very deep into the increasingly visible and felt multi-polarity, so, who knows, Russia may see some opening for final formalization of this new geopolitical reality by "helping" the United States to depart from largely self-proclaimed status of Hegemon. Iran could be, and, highly likely is this "Bridge Too Far" for the United States and if it takes the form of a proxy US-Iranian conflict initially, this could be the arrangement Russia be OK with. But there was some funny little piece of news today which, while by no means any confirmation of anything, still could be a somewhat circumstantial evidence of the whole "End of History" thingy coming apart at the seams. 

French Minister of Economy and Finances Bruno Le Maire, yesterday, suddenly felt an urge to "relaunch economic ties with Russia" by using "innovative ways" to circumnavigate US sanctions (in Russian). Here is the first question any normal Russian asks: what for? France is a second tier economic "partner" for Russia, with trade between two nations barely hitting EUR12 billion. Of course, Le Maire frames this "intention" as an action within Macron's plan of "improving strategic ties" with Russia. Well, it is all fine and dandy, but it is Germany and her market Russia primarily is interested in. But Le Maire's announcement is symptomatic, nonetheless. Macron and whoever "consults" him, obviously, figured it out that EU is America's sacrificial lamb and France, unlike totally emasculated Germany, still experiences phantom pains of European superpower, the seat of European culture and so on. Sure. The issue for Russia, however, is the fact that pains or no pains, France is United States' slap bitch and France depends greatly on American market, which the scale of trade between the two confirms. Unlike puny EUR12 billion of Russian-French trade, US-France trade reaches almost exactly an order of magnitude larger figure than the same with Russia, namely $139 billion. Add here France's special role (indeed, it was special) in the American history and voila'--things become very clear. US will order France to jump, French will ask how high. Thankfully for Russia, nobody of real power there exercises any illusions on "strategic relations" with France. Russia prefers to deal with sovereign nations. Among European sheeple, it is Germany which is more attractive as an economic partner, not France. After all, recall that it was Germany before 2014 which was Russia's main trade partner globally. Anyhow, try to find France in this list.  

France, as an American vassal has no future. Nor does she make any sense in terms of major economic partner, let alone some "strategic relations" partner, for Russia. Russia is not there to save anyone who is in the American fold, US sanctions on Russia are permanent and will only increase in scale and scope, so, no amount of "innovative ways" can change for Russia the fact that she is re-industrializing with a very good tempo and has very little cultural or metaphysical interest in what today passes for the "West", certainly not represented by France. But still, those weak voices of dissent from Europe are funny in terms of indication of a rudimentary self-interest guarding synapses appearing in otherwise dead European brain. Could it be a start of a long process of growing a spine against the background of the US departure? Well, the time for that growing has long since passed and for that Europeans have only themselves to blame. Russia, meanwhile, has a much bigger fish to fry.

Friday, December 14, 2018

Facepalm Of The Week.

Richard Haas wrote yet another (many others wrote similar crap, see Fukuyama's recent piece in this very same Foreign Affairs, among others) pretentious meandering piece on, what else, global "order", or disorder if one wishes, and continued a glorious tradition of American political "scientists", "diplomats" and other former bureaucrats in avoiding speaking about real reasons for decried by them "decay" or this global order. Haas starts with a wowser of generalizations in his piece titled How a World Order Ends:
I don't know if Haas senses a deep sarcasm in this his statement but the point is--those who proclaimed themselves the enforcer of this "order" succeeded gloriously in destabilizing the world they thought they "won" by the end of the Cold War. Since the times after late George H.W. Bush, that is starting from Clinton getting to power, terms "skillful statecraft" and the US can not be used in the same sentence since the degradation of American elites responsible for this alleged "craft" is nothing short of catastrophic both for the US and for the world. Haas is one of those "elites". So, to prove that he is "elite" and "intellectual" he, of course, waxes "historical". He gets to the point by predictably asking:
What lessons can be drawn from this history? As much as anything else, the rise and fall of major powers determines the viability of the prevailing order, since changes in economic strength, political cohesion, and military power shape what states can and are willing to do beyond their borders.  
He goes onto drawing parallels and looking for power balance symmetries in the events of the 19th century and this is where most American "thinkers" make huge mistake. History really teaches very little (albeit some generalizations, of course, are possible and even necessary for human nature is slow in changing), it certainly taught very little people like Haas, or Fukuyama who time after time buy into own pseudo-intellectual constructs trying to rationalize a subject which neither Haas, Fukuyama, Allison and most of the crop of the American, ahem, scholars have no clue about--the nature of military power and its application. It is simply not there; not having this clue about what, actually, always defined, defines and will continue to define balance of power, global "order", what have you in the foreseeable future, is rather peculiar feature of American (and Western) political scientists. Of course, appeals to history are cute, knowing few facts more about Metternich or about wording of some 19th Century treaty than your opponent makes a good background for "intellectual" exchange, debate and, eventual arrival to some form of intellectual "discovery" (especially if a good Scotch and cigar are involved) but in order to learn actual history one must learn real military history with all that it entails.They also must understand this simple (can I be arrogant and claim it?) Martyanov's axiom--world class military power is a function of the world-class nation-state, especially its economic and scientific potential. Both cannot exist without each-other.

Once such a commitment to actually learning stuff is made, one inevitably will arrive to conclusions on HOW and WHY "rise and fall of major powers" happens and this is a tricky and very sensitive issue for the United States because she is NOT a continental warfare power. With the exception of a turkey shoot of a third rate Saddam's Army in the Gulf and, granted, a magnificent victory in the Pacific during WW II, all other military events in the American history were of secondary importance when ranked against the background of a global military history. US "victories" in both WWI and WWII were coalition victories with the US arriving very late to the fight. American Civil War, while of importance as a first bona fide war of the industrial age (well, Crimean War certainly qualifies too) was primarily internal US and, to a degree, British endeavor. In other words, America's rise as a global power was predetermined primarily, apart from undeniable American technological and industrial genius, by a combination of very unique favorable circumstances in which NOT fighting a continental war with all it entails was a defining factor in American emergence as a true global player after WW II. Hence a rather foolhardy attitudes towards a war in the US because people who call on it all the time, including Haas (he wanted the US to be a global sheriff), Kagan cabal, US policy-makers and other public "servants" know extremely well that in case of war their asses will still reside in the safety of the America-proper while American GIs will die for whatever BS doctrine is a fad any given day in D.C. 

Haas needs, however, to justify the failure of the American doctrine-mongering (he knows about this failure, if he doesn't--then it is the case for medical psychology, not history) and he does what most of them do, he deludes himself with this:
Although Russia has avoided any direct military challenge to NATO, it has nonetheless shown a growing willingness to disrupt the status quo: through its use of force in Georgia in 2008 and Ukraine since 2014, its often indiscriminate military intervention in Syria, and its aggressive use of cyberwarfare to attempt to affect political outcomes in the United States and Europe.   
It is a very telling (false through and through) passage since it discloses a nagging, barely hidden under the surface, complex of inferiority they feel. It is schizophrenic really, akin to Russophrenia--when one has to both proclaim the US the "greatest" power that ever was, while having zero evidence of this power's military successes in the second half of the 20th and, especially, 21st centuries to support such claims. So, Haas and his keen of "intellectuals" who influence US foreign policy need to use a mental therapy by inventing things which are not there:

1. For starters, there is nothing, zero, "indiscriminate" in Russia's participation--Russia was invited to Syria by this country's legitimate government, does Mr.Haas know this? Russia kills in Syria, using a lot of SMART munitions, a Jihad Internationale ranging from ISIS, Al Qaeda to other unicorns ("democratic" head choppers supported by the US and her allies). US desperately wanted Russia and Assad government to fail--but since they didn't study military history they knew very little about what Russia's objectives were and how she fights in Syria. So people like Haas are really pissed--yet another of their forecast didn't pan out. 

2. Russia didn't really use her force in Ukraine. Yes, Russia, obviously, supports LDNR republics but I wouldn't call it use of force since if the force would have been really used, Ukraine would cease to exist as a state really-really fast with NATO getting a western rump of this largely failed state, while LDNR with Russia's help would reconstitute something new in the East and South of present day Ukraine. So, why Haas writes an obvious BS in supposedly scholarly magazine is a mystery. Self-medicating mentally? Possible.   

3. Ah, yes, Russiagate, Russians "meddling" in Western "democracies". Surely both Russia and US conduct cyber operations but this whole circus with Russia "influencing" outcomes is really pathetic (did Haas call Muller recently, I am sure after two years of "investigation" we all will get "evidence" about Russians subverting US "democracy" any minute now) and characteristic of a lack of any self-respect and huge insecurity of US "elites" who long ago hit the bottom and are on the level of travelers to Roswell in their attempts to connect spiritually with aliens. 

In general, there is nothing scholarly in this continuous, often murky, stream of recent American "thinkers" theses, ranging from magazine articles to books, since in their continuous lament about collapse of Pax Americana, or "global order", or "liberal order", whatever the moniker they want to slap on the global chaos the US is trying to perpetuate in an attempt to save its hegemony, they continuously forget to mention one simple military fact. This fact is the loss of American insulation from conventional warfare (who wants to fight a nuclear war, no, really?) she enjoyed since WW II and facing a very grim reality of getting conventional strikes on US Command and Control and military industrial infrastructure in case of igniting conventional conflict with, say, Russia. It is this massive change in military-strategic paradigm, driven this time by a very real, not contrived, Revolution in Military Affairs (RMA) which the US appeared to be not ready for. This is what drives this mass hysteria among those who want to blame their own lack of knowledge, education, foresight and of this proverbial statecraft on everyone else but themselves. Indeed, with "scholars" and "thinkers" like Haas (or Fukuyama, or Allison, or.....theirs is the army) there is very little surprise that the United States finds itself where it is. In other words, those "scholars" should have known better but they haven't and for that they have only themselves to blame, even if hiding behind pseudo-scientific rhetoric about "global order", because in the end one reaps what one sows.        

Monday, January 2, 2017

About US Sanctions On Russia (Again)

Since the inception of this blog (in reality much earlier) I preach the "know thy enemy" and "know thyself" gospel since without it the instability in a complex global military-political system grows exponentially. Being aware and being knowledgeable allows to avoid stupid and down right dangerous decisions. But this important lesson is completely lost on many in US Congress and the new 2017 year starts with some "ranking member" of House Intelligence Committee (US "intelligence" by now is a laughing stock of the rest of the world) stating that Congress will have a "vigorous" response to Trump's attempt to reverse US sanctions on Russia. Many times I stated that most of US establishment decision-makers have no clue on how those sanctions affect Russia and, as I stated not for once, it would cause a real shock if they will learn that huge segments of Russian society are... against lifting of the sanctions on Russia. In fact, majority of Russians are against lifting those "Western" sanctions, because they are good for Russia

1. For people whose formative years were spent in law and Wall Street economic faux-reality it is beyond their grasp that "sanctions" do not work and, in fact, discredit those who impose them. Consider Iran who under severe economic decades-long sanctions did not only OK, but fairly well. Well, Russia is not Iran and by a very very long shot. Thanks to Western sanctions on Russia the structure of Russia's GDP finally received a very needed impetus for a change. You may have guessed it already that this change had everything to do with manufacturing sector. Russia simply started to produce more, much more. Even globalists' shill Kudrin had to admit that the outlook for Russia is very good. Well, the growth, of course, is mostly in manufacturing. Even the brief review of Russia's new manufacturing gives a startling picture of impressive, often double-digit, growth especially in machine-building sectors. And here is the question:

2. Why would Donald Trump want to reverse Russia's sanctions? Is Donald Trump Russia's friend? No. Not even close. In fact, large number of contradictions between US and Russia remain and they may yet factor into serious Russian-American geopolitical dance. But Trump, certainly, knows the real state of the affairs inside the US and he (and his team) they know that in order for the United States to have a chance and a time for the recovery, it needs a new geopolitical arrangement with the player who within last 36 months changed geopolitical dynamics in the most dramatic fashion is an absolute must. This player is Russia and it will be really stupid, not to say embarrassing, to start the negotiations with the counterpart while having it under laughable sanctions. Make no mistake, there are still those who think that US could have imposed much heavier sanctions which could have "hurt" Russia. One of them is Dmitry Simes who passes in US as "Russia expert", because he can speak Russian and can communicate with Russia's uber-liberal "intelligentsia", who is as clueless about its own country as most of US "Russian studies" field. Yes, Simes thinks still that: What President Obama has actually done is to try to use excessively dramatic rhetoric to camouflage a remarkably weak response. For two years, his administration has carefully avoided sanctions that might actually affect Russian behavior, such as sanctions on the Russian Central Bank and other pillars of Russia’s financial system. Steps like this could impose serious costs on the Russian economy and on Mr. Putin’s ability to govern. (c)

Obviously, Simes is not capable (granted his closeness to late Richard Nixon, a man, together with Kissinger, responsible for growing US real serious opponent and rival--China) to even understand that attack on Russia's Central bank would have had a dramatically disastrous for US reaction which would have resulted, first, in a catastrophic reputational damage and, second, in the emergence of  the alternative, not US Dollar-driven, financial system--the process which is ongoing now anyway, but at much slower pace. But calculating consequences of own actions is not a strength of US Russia's "expertdom", infested with a lot of Soviet Jewish ex-pats who have about the same understanding of Russia as I have of Planet Zoltar.  In the end, the stupidity of the above excerpt is simply incomprehensible.  It is also indicative of a desperation within US "political class" of which Trump is keenly aware. Will he go for reversal of US sanctions on Russia? He probably will and this will create a shitstorm in US media and Congress.

3. Reality, however, is such that US "sanctions" on Russia are merely some, at the most, inconvenience and, for the most part, are of very little consequence. So, the reversal of sanctions in this case could merely be a good will gesture and a sign to negotiations' counterpart. Yes, this gesture is important: "The forms must be obeyed"(c). Trump knows this and he, being real American patriot, needs at least a pause in US decline and, if being smart enough, a reversal of it. This means only one thing--changing of geopolitical posture away from unsustainable (and greatly overrated) unipolarity (aka Pax Americana) which is being demolished as I type this. This means the change of the global order. This change, however, may come only with clear formulation of the American national interests. I can formulate one right now, right here--avoid any escalations which may lead to global war. We, actually, barely escaped one (and still not out of the woods with loonies in CIA, Pentagon and State Dept. still in place) recently. 

And here comes this very interesting question: does US have legitimate national interests (apart from obvious defense of Homeland) which may require (and justify) a war? I think US does have such interests, and being still a global power, and "World's Island", as Elmo Zumwalt used to say, she has a claim to control of a significant real estate, aka sphere of influence. How large is this sphere (it is going to be large) will be one of the major discussion points in what seems to be, as some already named it, a "new Yalta". Better late than never. As Pat Buchanan noted: The Russian people, having extended a hand in friendship and seen it slapped away, cheered the ouster of the accommodating Boris Yeltsin and the arrival of an autocratic strong man who would make Russia respected again. We ourselves prepared the path for Vladimir Putin.(c)

Will this "new Yalta" be the meeting of players trying to give it another, second chance for what could be a magnificent play, or will it be a meeting of once high school sweethearts, now married to a different people, having own families and life, getting to the bar to have a drink or two and then part ways never to see each-other again? I don't know, but the world surely has changed and continues to change and that is why I usually do not give any predictions. After all, a life, same as a war, is probabilistic and stochastic and we may only hope for the better, not count on it.