Showing posts with label Multipolarity. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Multipolarity. Show all posts

Thursday, July 30, 2026

Iran's Methodical Gutting of US Power in West Asia | Pepe Escobar

The ways Iran is dismantling the entire American military ecosystem across West Asia with an extremely disciplined strategy are something to behold. The whole CENTCOM support infrastructure is devastatingly fair game: from costly early warning radars to full air defense systems; from hangars to logistics hubs; from fuel and ammunition storage to forward operating bases; from naval and maritime surveillance assets to intel collection and communications nodes. [...] Iran knows where everything is located—to the millimeter. No need to go for flashy photo ops, Shock'n Awe-style, monopolizing the news cycle. What matters is the Chinese torture of steadily degrading the enemy's capabilities; the strategy is painfully methodical and painfully precise.
 
The core elements of American naval power projection rely on supercarriers positioned as the central flagships and command hubs of the fleet. They are accompanied by escort vessels like destroyers and frigates that provide essential anti-air, anti-submarine, and surface protection. Additionally, support ships serve as logistics units responsible for underway replenishment and refueling at sea.
» 
Hitting one of those sitting ducks is being kept for the appropriate time. «
   
[...] The Iranian Way of War is a sophisticated mix that may eventually be studied in Western military academies. All logically interconnected—from destruction of enemy support infrastructure to steady degradation of intel, surveillance, and reconnaissance capabilities; from attrition of air defense and interceptor inventories to widespread disruption of logistics. And all that is supremely cost-effective—but certainly not for the attacking Empire, as every malfunctioning Patriot costs millions of dollars and simply cannot defend scores of different locations simultaneously.

» 
Iranian Way of War may eventually be studied in Western military academies. «
 
[...] In the bigger picture, the Russia-China-Iran interlocking strategic Eurasia partnerships remain in full effect. That's Russia-China in practice supporting the Axis of Resistance. Iran uses the Russian Murmansk systeminexorably jamming GPS and blinding US/Israeli missiles. Iran also uses Chinese BeiDouthe equivalent of GPS, unjammable by the Americans and rendering precision to the centimeter to Iranian missiles and drones. And Iran uses the Russian Kometa: electronic chips equipping missiles and drones wreaking havoc on American electronic warfare.
 
» Just check the satellite images. «
 
In a nutshell: this is how a systematic degradation of the whole regional architecture that allows the US and its vassals to project military power across West Asia looks. Played out in front of the whole Global South. The manual is available for all, live, in real time. [...] Iran's precision, restraint, and reach are shutting up the whole vociferating spectacle emanating from the Empire of Narratives, as Iranian missiles and drones relentlessly strike fighter jets, Black Hawks, data centers, logistics depots, power plants—and more.

 
The Global South just needs to check the satellite images of proverbial craters across Kuwait, Qatar, Bahrain, and the UAE. And Iran hasn't even started yet. Were Iran to obliterate Qatar’s remaining LNG trains, that would leave most of the planet with no LNG from Doha for at least a decade—not to mention the helium for making microchips.

The massive humiliation of hitting and disabling one of those multibillion-dollar sitting ducks is being kept for the appropriate time. And as everyone knows, Iran runs the clock, and time is on its side. None of that, of course, minimizes the risks of the escalation ladder; and we are still in the middle of what could become the Mother of All Escalation Ladders.

 

Wednesday, July 29, 2026

Lose Hormuz, Lose the Dollar, Lose Hegemony: Game Over | Jeffrey Currie

Jeffrey Currie, former Goldman Sachs head of commodities and a lifelong insider of the dollar system, defines the one red line America cannot cross: handing control of the Strait of Hormuz to Iran is not a tactical retreat; it is the formal end of the US as a global hegemon and the death of the dollar as the world’s reserve currency.

For the Epstein class, the only acceptable Iran is one
that caves in to the hegemon and its dollar scheme.

In 1945, the US made a deal the world still lives under: it would control every major shipping lane with its navy, and in return, the world would use the dollar and recycle capital through New York. Oil was the strategic commodity that made the bargain stick. After Nixon broke the gold standard in 1971, that same arrangement evolved into the petrodollar system that still funds American living standards today.
 
»
 Give Iran the Strait, and the dollar dies. « 

If the US walks away and allows Iran and Oman to manage the Strait under any fee structure, the rest of the world will see that the big-stick policeman has quit. Every other chokepoint on earth immediately becomes fair game. The Fifth Fleet would then need Iranian permission to enter or leave its own base in Bahrain—an image that ends the illusion of global hegemony overnight.

Currie points to Switzerland, where a 30-year fixed mortgage can sit around 50 basis points because global capital floods into a perceived safe currency. That is the kind of privilege the US still enjoys. The country currently spends about 7 percent more than it produces; remove the forced global demand for dollars, and that gap becomes direct economic pain.
 
»
We're fighting wars. It's not possible for us to take care 
of Medicare, daycare, Medicaid, all these things. « 
 Orange ape guns and butter salad, July 27, 2026.
 
History offers no comforting precedent. No previous hegemon—Britain, Spain, or any other—lost control of the world’s most important sea lanes and remained the hegemon. The US can retreat to a Monroe/Donroe/Technate of America Doctrine posture and control only the Western Hemisphere, but then it is no longer a global power and the dollar is no longer the reserve currency. 
 
Reference:
 
Iran Conflict Now Existential for US Global Hegemony—No Exit Allowed | General Wesley Clark

Former NATO Supreme Allied Commander General Wesley Clark, a centrist-to-hawkish democrat, has laid out what he describes as the real thinking inside Washington. According to him, this is no longer simply about Iran; it is about whether the United States remains the global hegemon or watches its power collapse in real time. Stopping is not an option—that is the hard line now being drawn. Clark makes clear that if America pulls back and allows Iran to retain control of the Strait of Hormuz, the damage to U.S. global leadership would be permanent. He warns that such a retreat would undermine American deterrence, weaken influence in Asia, and compromise European security all at once. This moment represents a critical decision point: failure here would not be a temporary setback but the end of the post-1945 international order.


Clark rejects any notion of simply walking away or accepting a weaker deal. “Pulling back, that’s no good,” he states without hesitation. In his view, a memorandum of understanding worse than previous agreements would signal American weakness to every rival watching. China and Russia are already encouraged by the current trajectory, and he insists they should not be allowed to celebrate any further gains.There is no easy military solution, yet retreat would be far worse. The immediate focus must remain on keeping the Strait open and isolating the theater of operations. Any pause would only give Iran time to rebuild, rearm, and entrench itself more deeply. At the same time, Clark emphasizes that the longer-term threats posed by Iranian missiles and nuclear capabilities cannot be ignored.

In the end, Wesley Clark speaks not as a pundit but as a former NATO Supreme Commander with deep insight into how key circles in Washington view this conflict. For them, the war has become existential for American global power, and stopping is no longer on the table.
  

"Iran Will Make Sure the US Economy Is Destroyed" | Foad Izadi

Iranian Professor Foad Izadi of the Department of American Studies at the University of Tehran’s Faculty of World Studies has just laid out the clearest statement yet of Iran’s official current thinking. After failed talks and repeated US aggression, a growing number of voices inside Iran no longer believe diplomacy can work. Iran’s answer is simple and brutal: raise the cost until the American economy itself is broken.

» Make sure the US economy is destroyed while Trump is the president. « 
 
That is the explicit goal now being discussed. Take 20 percent of the oil coming from the region, and prices stay high for at least two years. High oil prices for two years mean the end of Trump, the end of his presidency, and the end of the American economy—three goals at the same time.

»
There is n
o diplomatic solution. Only a military solution. «
 
Negotiations have failed for more than 20 years. Every time Iran sat at the table, the US bombed the table. The problem with the US, therefore, has no diplomatic solution. It has a military solution. Continued attacks are needed to cause enough pain so this never happens again, and military deterrence is restored.
 
» They will go thirsty! «
Iran's plan to evict 50,000 US troops. 
 
Iran’s target list: oil facilities, hit hard enough that repairs take a long time; desalination plants that supply 98 percent of the water for Gulf countries. With 50,000 US troops in the region, if those countries lose water, the troops have no choice but to leave and drink water back home in America.

Why this level of force? For 46 years after the 1979 Iranian revolution, the US never attacked Iran the way it is attacking now. Only in the last year did the attacks intensify because Washington believed it could handle the cost. Iranians are tired of being hit every few weeks, losing civilians and infrastructure. Enough is enough. The cost so far has not been high enough. Trump keeps attacking. The equation must change.
 
Iran's Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) claims to have inflicted well over 200 US military fatalities across targeted bases in Bahrain, Kuwait, and Jordan, with waves of missiles overwhelming and effectively neutralizing billion-dollar US defense infrastructure.
America ends wars when its politicians finally realize they made a mistake. That is how US wars in Vietnam, Iraq, and Afghanistan ended. Either the executive branch or Congress concludes the price is too high, and the funding ends. 
» The President of the United States wants to give Iran's frozen assets to companies and countries that have suffered damage in the war. From now on, we announce that any company or country that accepts this proposal will never be allowed to transit the Strait of Hormuz. «
Iran's Khatam al-Anbiya Central Headquarters spokesman Ebrahim Zolfaqari, July 28, 2026.
The same logic is now being applied: force the realization that the current policy is destroying the US economy, and the policy will change. Iran has decided that only the language of force works. Raise the economic cost high enough, for long enough, and the United States will be forced to stop. This is no longer about limited deterrence. This is about breaking the American economy while Trump is still in office.

July 29, 2026: Iranian civil defense teams have miraculously rescued two children, transporting them to a hospital on Qeshm Island, as the search continues for three others trapped under the rubble from the latest US terror attack. How was this a legitimate target? The war crimes keep piling up as the US becomes more desperate.

Tuesday, April 21, 2026

Entering the First Global Total War | Alex Krainer

In their conversation, Lena Petrova (IR, MBA, CPA, and political economy analyst) and commodities trader, former hedge fund manager, and geopolitical analyst Alex Krainer examine the dimensions of what he terms the "First Global Total War," driven by major energy and trade disruptions and broader global market stress stemming from the US war against Iran.
 
» This is not the Third World War. This is the First Global Total War. « 
 
Krainer frames the present moment as a systemic confrontation between two competing models of governance: the Western-led, British-derived system of free trade (globalism)—criticized as fostering a regulatory and labor "race to the bottom"—and the emerging multipolar framework rooted in Alexander Hamilton’s American System of political economy (economic nationalism). The latter is a protectionist, nationally oriented, and genuinely wealth-creating model that was applied with notable success by the United States, Germany, and Japan in the 19th century, and later as sovereigntist derivatives by Korea, Mexico, Brazil, Iran, China, and numerous other nations throughout the 20th and early 21st centuries. 
 
"The Monkey System:" 1831 cartoon attacking Henry Clay's "American System" from a
Jacksonian Democratic perspective favoring limited federal economic intervention.
 
Krainer forecasts a prolonged systemic confrontation with significant implications for global energy production, industrial output, trade, and food markets, arguing that tensions and worldwide wars will persist until the foundations of the current Western neocolonial financial architecture (including private central banking) are fundamentally challenged, ultimately defeated, and replaced.
 
 
Since April 3, ten oil refineries, power plants, and energy facilities across
 seven countries have been destroyed by "fires," "explosions," and "accidents."   
 
Escalation of Conflict
Krainer interprets the wars in Ukraine and West Asia as interconnected theaters within a broader strategic struggle. He argues that Western powers seek to open additional fronts—potentially in the Baltics, the Balkans, and around the Strait of Malacca—to prevent de-escalation in Ukraine and sustain strategic pressure.

Energy as a Strategic Lever
Control over energy flows, particularly through chokepoints such as the Strait of Hormuz and the Strait of Malacca, is presented as the central axis of conflict. Krainer characterizes this dynamic as part of a long-standing effort by Western neocolonial financial interests to preserve influence over the Eurasian landmass.

Commodities Markets and Inflation
On the economic front, Krainer contends that elevated equity valuations are being sustained by central bank liquidity, masking underlying structural fragility. This, he argues, has produced a growing divergence between financial markets and the real economy. He anticipates upward pressure on oil and other commodities, describing current price behavior as slow-moving and lagged in its response to geopolitical developments.

 
Rise of a Parallel System
Krainer highlights the gradual emergence of alternative financial and commodity networks operating beyond Western institutional control. He notes that many countries in the Global South are exploring paths outside IMF-aligned frameworks, despite the political and economic risks involved.

  

Wednesday, January 7, 2026

After Maduro, Might Makes Right | Alexander Dugin

What does the kidnapping of the president of a sovereign country mean? Like in the era of barbarian kingdoms, Maduro was brought in and paraded through the streets of New York like a captive enemy for the amusement of the crowd. Many note that this is reminiscent of Rome in its twilight years.

 » "Reshuffling of the deck" and global conflict. The world will never be the same again. «
 
[...] And what does all this mean? [...] International law no longer exists. Appealing to the UN, asking the West to pay attention to violations of certain principles, agreements, or provisions that contradict the letter and spirit of the law — all of this is now completely futile. 
 
[...] The idea that there are certain norms and rules that can be negotiated should be left in the past once and for all. There is no international law. There is only the law of force. In a sense, it has always been this way — this is nothing new. It’s just that, at certain times, after each "reshuffling of the deck" and global conflict, when spheres of influence are redistributed, the great powers assert their right to sovereignty.  
 
» International law is always a balance of power between the victors. « 

This was the case in the First and Second World Wars. When fascist Europe became a separate entity in world politics, it demanded that the world submit to it. The world rebelled, and that power is no more. But any international law is always a balance of power between the victors. That’s the point. For more than a century, nation-states have not been sovereign actors establishing world order; world relations are shaped by ideological blocs.

[...] Trump said nothing conceptually new, but he de facto scrapped the Yalta peace, the bipolar system, the UN, and even the very idea of globalization hitherto. His position is simple: "My interests are the interests of the world hegemon. Obey me." 

À la fin, ces voleurs infâmes et perdus, Comme fruits malheureux à cet arbre pendus, Montrent bien que le crime (horrible et noire engeance) Est lui-même instrument de honte et de vengeance. Et que c’est le destin des hommes vicieux D’éprouver tôt ou tard la justice des Cieux.  In the end, these infamous and lost thieves, Like wretched fruit hanging from this tree, Show clearly that crime—horrible and black in its breed— Is itself an instrument of shame and vengeance. And that it is the destiny of vicious men To experience, sooner or later, the justice of Heaven. 
 » In the end, these infamous and lost thieves, like wretched fruit hanging from this tree... « 
The Miseries and Misfortunes of War by Jacques Callot, 1633.
 
In fact, humanity is now in a state of fundamental humiliation. Trump simply called a spade a spade. Globalists used to soften this humiliation by pretending to listen to your opinion and allowing you to participate in the process. Now that multilateralism is over, only the right of force remains, and this is an irreversible process. The world will never be the same again.

We are in the midst of a protracted, long-running Third World War, where international law simply does not exist. It will exist sometime in the future, based on the outcome of this conflict. [...] Trump is casting an arrogant challenge: "If you are winners, then win. Like me, for example. Where is your Zelensky?" 
 
 » If you are winners, then win. Where is your Zelensky? «
 
From this point of view, only when you parade Zelensky, the terrorist Malyuk, the terrorist Budanov, or Zaluzhny through Moscow in a cage, and the crowd of "Russian Romans," the inhabitants of the Third Rome, shout "shame, murderers" at them, only then will they talk to you. Perhaps on some holiday: Labor Day or Friendship of Peoples Day. Only then will we be accepted into the club of great powers. But for now, no. We are trying to convince Trump with documents that hundreds of Ukrainian drones wanted to destroy the Russian president, and the response we get is something like, "I don’t believe it. First, you set it up yourselves; second, it’s a pity it didn’t work out; and third, I know that we sent them so that your life wouldn’t be too sweet."

[...] We must defend ourselves in the war with the West, because that is where the initiative to revoke our right to sovereign policy comes from. It is time to abandon illusions about "Western partners" or "shared values." Trump is right to drop the mask of hypocrisy and nonsense about human rights: for him, America comes first. We are in a shootout: shoot or you will be killed. Trump did not even start World War III — he simply confirmed its existence.

» Then the very moment would come. ‌« RS-28 Sarmat [dubbed 'Satan II' by NATO] is Russia's most capable hypersonic thermonuclear intercontinental ballistic missile (ICBM). With a range of 18,000 km and traveling 27 times the speed of sound, Sarmat can extinguish any target/country/enemy anywhere on the planet within minutes with one single strike. Including the US.
»
 
In this game without rules, Russia must win by any means necessary. «
 
[...] Only war decides everything — that’s the issue. And here the question of resources arises. Apparently, we are much better off with them than we thought: over four years of war, the people have demonstrated an incredible will for sovereignty. But now, in Ukraine, the question is not about the use of sovereignty, but about its acquisition. So far, it is not enough. Sovereignty is when you draw red lines and punish those who cross them. And when we demonstrate the Burevestnik, Poseidon, or Oreshnik, but nothing happens, it ceases to count in this world of shows and short cycles.

We have put everything at stake — the existence of Russia and our people — to prove our sovereignty. [...] In this game without rules, Russia must win by any means necessary. There are no taboo topics: we can abolish the Constitution, declare a state of emergency, do away with all conventions, and do whatever is necessary to survive. If we observe propriety and lose, it will not count in our favor. But if we succeed, no matter what, the victors will not be judged. Only the defeated are judged: if we slip up, they will hold a new Nuremberg trial over us.

 
This is the seriousness of 2026: it is a year of war and extraordinary measures. Peaceful life is being completely erased, like a wet rag wiping outdated formulas off a blackboard. Everything we counted on no longer works. We are in a cowboy saloon where a shootout is taking place without rules or regulations.
 
 [...] Now, thanks to Trump and his new doctrines, the situation has changed. Trump says, "I will conquer you all, I will shoot without warning." And look what he’s doing: he really is shooting. [...] We must act just like the strongest players — the West or Trump. Do as Trump does, but with completely different content, goals, and objectives. 
 
Key Aspects of Schmitt's Großraum Theory      Critique of the Nation-State: Schmitt perceived the nation-state as increasingly incapable of representing concrete spatial reality and managing the challenges of modern international politics, particularly what he saw as the failings of liberal universalism.     Hierarchical Order: In a Großraum-based world, the principle of formal equality among sovereign states is replaced by a hierarchical structure. A predominant, hegemonic power (like the German Reich in his vision) would exist within a larger territorial space, asserting leadership over subordinate nations.     The Monroe Doctrine as a Model: Schmitt viewed the United States' Monroe Doctrine (declaring the Americas off-limits to European colonization and influence) as the classic example of a functioning Großraum: a regional power establishing a sphere of influence and excluding external interference.     Exclusion of External Powers: A core tenet of the Großraum order is the right of a hegemonic power to define the external orientation of its region and prevent "spatially alien powers" from intervening in its sphere.     Pluralistic World Order: Ultimately, Schmitt envisioned a multipolar world (a "pluriverse") characterized by several independent Großräume, which would achieve a new balance of power, contrasting with a unipolar, liberal, or Anglo-American dominated global order.
Key Aspects of Schmitt's Großraum Theory      Critique of the Nation-State: Schmitt perceived the nation-state as increasingly incapable of representing concrete spatial reality and managing the challenges of modern international politics, particularly what he saw as the failings of liberal universalism.     Hierarchical Order: In a Großraum-based world, the principle of formal equality among sovereign states is replaced by a hierarchical structure. A predominant, hegemonic power (like the German Reich in his vision) would exist within a larger territorial space, asserting leadership over subordinate nations.     The Monroe Doctrine as a Model: Schmitt viewed the United States' Monroe Doctrine (declaring the Americas off-limits to European colonization and influence) as the classic example of a functioning Großraum: a regional power establishing a sphere of influence and excluding external interference.     Exclusion of External Powers: A core tenet of the Großraum order is the right of a hegemonic power to define the external orientation of its region and prevent "spatially alien powers" from intervening in its sphere.     Pluralistic World Order: Ultimately, Schmitt envisioned a multipolar world (a "pluriverse") characterized by several independent Großräume, which would achieve a new balance of power, contrasting with a unipolar, liberal, or Anglo-American dominated global order.
»
 
There is no other way out. «
 
Methodologically, there is no other way out. China has achieved its goals through economics, but in a military confrontation, the question remains open: the Chinese are not the most warlike people, and there is a huge pro-Western elite there. We have not been able to compete economically, but our strengths are warrior bravery, courage, and faith. God is on our side: "Tremble, nations, and submit, for God is with us."
 
Went from scramble for Africa to scramble for Europe and Latin America real quick.
 
Neolib Zionist supremacist Jake Tapper (CNN host) and neocon Zionist supremacist Stephen Miller (Trump's
Deputy Chief of Staff for Policy), fighting over how to execute the takeover of Venezuela, January 5, 2026.