Showing posts with label World Order. Show all posts
Showing posts with label World Order. Show all posts

Friday, January 5, 2024

The Rest against the West │ Samuel P. Huntington

The central axis of world events will be conflict between Western and non-Western civilizations, conflict between the West and the Rest. The Rest has now three options:
 
The Rest against the West.
  • Surrender and submission
  • Isolation and protection of sovereignty and values. The costs are very high. Only few pursue this option.
  • Protection and defense of values and sovereign institutions through constant development of economic-military power and through cooperation and alliance with the West's other enemies.
Reference:
 
 Projection from Bharat.

Benjamin Netanyahu, 1990.
 
The man who ruined all the US’s illegitimate plots in West Asia:
Qasem Soleimani, Major General, Commander of 41st Tharallah Division of Kerman Quds Force (1957-2020).

»
The world is witnessing an asymmetrical confrontation between two opposing sides, which has displayed the peak of brutality as well as desperation on one side and innocence along with heroic resistance on the other side. With a broader look at the years of confrontation and conflict between Global Arrogance and its vassals in West Asia on the one hand, and the Resistance Front and popular forces on the other hand, there remains no doubt that the astonishing work by Hamas and the residents of Gaza in Palestine are the domino effect of successive defeats of the hegemons and global colonialism in the region. «

See
also:

Sunday, December 31, 2023

The Time of the Civilisational States │ Alain de Benoist

The way in which, since the 1990s, the Chinese authorities, claiming to have ‘Asian values’, have rejected criticism in the name of the human rights ideology is significant. In January 2021, at the Davos Forum, Xi Jinping said, ‘Just as no two leaves in the world are the same, no two histories, no two cultures, no two social systems are the same. Each country is unique in all these areas, and no country is superior to another. There is no need to worry about differences, but rather about attempts to impose a hierarchy between civilisations or to force some of them to align themselves with another in terms of history, culture or social system.’

 » The logic of great spaces does not have a universalist scope. The paradigm is no longer national, but spatial. «
Carl Schmitt, 1941.

The recognition of the crisis of universalism and Western hegemonism thus goes hand in hand with the feeling that the era of the international order based on the conflicting balance of nation-states has ended, as Carl Schmitt foresaw as early as the 1930s. The rise of civilisational states signals the entry into an era in which the world order is no longer reduced to the unstable equilibrium of nation-states. As civilisational norms become a pivotal point in geopolitics, the main competition is no longer the traditional one between nation-states but the one between civilisations. Civilisational states give rise to a new mode of sovereignty that is no longer that of nation-states. 
 
[...] The notion of the civilisational state is even more reminiscent of the ‘great space’ (Großraum) theorised by Carl Schmitt to rethink international relations beyond the codification of relations between nation-states. A ‘great space’, Schmitt says, requires a ‘great people’, a vast territory and an autonomous political will. ‘Empires’, he writes, ‘are those ruling powers that carry a political idea radiating out into a determined great space from which they exclude, as a matter of principle, the interventions of foreign powers.’ And he adds this essential reminder: ‘The empire is more than an enlarged state, just as the great space is not just an enlarged micro-space.’ ‘The logic of great spaces does not have a universalist scope. It only integrates the historical evolution of the great territorial powers influencing third countries. The paradigm is therefore no longer national, but spatial.

Tuesday, February 7, 2023

On the Price of Russian Oil | Igor Sechin

The EU will no longer set prices for Russia’s flagship Urals oil blend, now that Asia is the largest consumer of western-sanctioned Russian crude, the head of the country’s oil major Rosneft, Igor Sechin, said on Monday.

An EU embargo on seaborne exports of crude accompanied by price caps on oil and petroleum products originating from Russia has triggered a reshuffle in global oil supply. In a matter of months, Moscow rerouted most of its oil flows that used to go to Europe, to Asian markets. The country has ramped up its seaborne oil shipments to China, India and Türkiye at the expense of Western nations.
 

Oil exports to India alone jumped 33 times in December, with Russia now the country’s largest supplier, replacing Iraq. About 70% of Urals cargoes loaded last month went to New Delhi, according to Reuters calculations.

If Russian oil does not enter the European market, then there is no reference price. Reference prices will be formed where oil volumes actually go,” Sechin pointed out, speaking at the India Energy Week forum.

The Russian government is now discussing how to calculate Russia's taxable oil price following the import ban and price caps set by the EU and G7 countries. Currently, for tax purposes, the average price for Urals on the world market is used, in particular in the ports of Augusta (Italy) and Rotterdam (Netherlands). But due to sanctions, Russian oil is practically not supplied there. Sechin also suggested that “futures contracts, futures settlements” should be abandoned at the first stage in order to regulate market indicators. To stress his point, the head of Russia’s oil giant even quoted from the Bible. “As it is written in Ecclesiastes, "What is crooked cannot be made straight. And what is lacking cannot be counted.

Meanwhile, Asian buyers have ramped up imports of a wide variety of Russian crude oil, including lesser-known Arctic grades. Two other popular blends, ESPO and Sokol, have been trading above the Western price ceiling of $60 a barrel, at $66 and $71 per barrel respectively, as of Tuesday.
 
Quoted from:
 
See also: