I'm Gonna MAGA You, Baby ! │ Pepe Escobar

It’s the greatest show on earth – unleashing a double bill of New Paradigm and Manifest Destiny on crack. We are the greatest. We will rock you – in every sense. We will crush you. We will take whatever we want, because we can. And if you wanna walk away from the US dollar, we will destroy you. BRICS, we’re coming to get ya. Trump 2.0 – a mix of professional wrestling and MMA played in a giant planetary cage – is in da house, starting next Monday.

 A larger-than-life PsyOp to change the narrative.

Trump 2.0 aims to be in the driving seat of the global financial system, in control of the world’s oil trade and LNG supply, and on strategic media platforms. Trump 2.0 is gearing up to be an extended exercise in the capacity to hurt The Other. Any Other. Hostile takeovers – and blood on the tracks. That’s how we “negotiate.” Under Trump 2.0, global tech infrastructure must run on US software, not just on the profit front, but also on the spy front. AI data chips must be American only. AI data centers must be controlled by America only. “Free trade” and “globalization”? That’s for losers. Welcome to neo-imperial, techno-feudal mercantilism – powered by US tech supremacy.

 

Trump’s National Security Advisor, Mike Waltz, has named a few of the targets ahead: Greenland, Canada, assorted cartels, the Arctic, the Gulf of “America,” oil and gas, and rare earth minerals. All in the name of strengthening “national security.” A key plank: total control of the “Western Hemisphere.” Monroe Doctrine 2.0 – actually the Donroe Doctrine. America First, Last, and Always.

Why the Chessboard Needs to Be Rejigged

Well, let’s delve a bit into pesky material imperatives. The Empire of Chaos faces a humongous debt, owed to the usual suspect loan sharks, that may only be—partially—repaid through selected export surpluses. This would imply re-industrialization—a long, costly affair—and securing smooth military supply chains. Where will the resource base come from for this Sisyphean task? Washington simply cannot rely on Chinese exports and rare earths. The chessboard needs to be rejigged—with trade and tech unified under US unilateral, monopoly control.

 

Plan A, so far, was to simultaneously confront Russia and China: the two top BRICS and key vectors of Eurasia integration. China’s strategy, since the start of the millennium, has been to trade resources for infrastructure, developing Global South markets as China itself keeps developing. Russia’s strategy has been to help nations recover their sovereignty; actually helping nations to help themselves on the sustainable development front. Plan A against the concerted geoeconomic and geopolitical strategies of the Russia-China strategic partnership miserably failed. What has been attempted by the ghastly, exiting US administration has generated serial, massive blowbacks.

 

Next best option: Plunder the Chihuahuas.

So, it’s time for Plan B: Looting the allies. They are already dominated Chihuahuas anyway. The exploitation show must go on. And there are plenty of Chihuahuas available to be exploited. Canada has loads of fresh water, plus oil and mining wealth. The Canadian business class, in fact, has always dreamed of deep integration with the Empire of Chaos. Trump 2.0 and his team have been careful not to name names.

 

When it comes to the Arctic as a crucial, evolving battlefield, there may be a vague allusion to the Northwest Passage, but never a mention of what really matters: the Northern Sea Route—the Russian denomination; the Chinese call it the Arctic Silk Road. That’s one of the key connectivity corridors of the future. The Northern Sea Route encompasses at least 15% of the world’s unexplored oil and 30% of the world’s unexplored natural gas. Greenland is smack in the middle of this New Great Game—capable of supplying years of uranium, as much oil as Alaska (bought from Russia in 1867), plus rare earths—not to mention providing useful real estate for missile defense and offense. Washington has been trying to grab Greenland from Denmark since 1946. There’s a deal with Copenhagen in place guaranteeing military control—mostly naval. Now Greenland is being revamped as the ideal US entry point into the Arctic Great Game against Russia.

At the St. Petersburg forum last June, I had the privilege of following an exceptional roundtable on the Northern Sea Route: that’s an integral part of Russia’s 21st-century development project, focused on commercial navigation—“We need more icebreakers!”—and bound to surpass Suez and Gibraltar in the near future. Slightly over 50,000 Greenland residents—which already enjoy autonomy, especially vis-à-vis the EU—would more than accept a full Danish exit; Copenhagen actually abandoned them in 1951. Greenlanders will love to profit from vast US investments. Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov went straight to the point: “The first step is to listen to the Greenlanders”—comparing it to how Russia listened to the residents of Crimea, Donbass, and Novorossiya vis-à-vis Kiev.

 The New Great Game and the Northern Sea Route.

What Trump 2.0 actually wants from Greenland is crystal clear: total militarization; privileged access to rare earths; and the commercial exclusion of Russia and Chinese companies. Chinese military expert Yu Chun noted that “soon, the long-desired ‘golden waterway’ of the Arctic Ocean is expected to open, allowing ships to traverse the Pacific Ocean and sail along the northern coasts of North America and Eurasia into the Atlantic Ocean.” As the Northern Sea Route is “a key element of Sino-Russian cooperation,” it’s inevitable that the US’s “strategic vision is to prevent the establishment of a ‘golden waterway’ between China, Russia, and Europe by controlling Greenland.”

Freak Out on the Chihuahua Front

On the wider Chihuahua front, activity is frantic. Assorted Davos/Deep State-linked elites across NATOstan—from Europe to Canada—are in the process of being replaced by new, Trump 2.0-affiliated elites. That’s indissociably linked to the Looting the Allies strategy: the further destruction of the vassal EU economy to strengthen the heart of the Empire. In Germany, the AfD’s Alice Weidel—pragmatic, intellectually capable—offers a quite intriguing perspective. She is stressing, on the record, that Germany needs to restart importing raw materials and cheap natural gas—let’s reopen Nord Stream—from Russia.

That opens the tantalizing possibility that Trump and his factotum Elon Musk fully realize that Germany is worthless to the US as a de-industrialized backwater—even under the overall framework of a hardcore neoliberal asset-stripping offensive. Of course, Trump 2.0 will extract a hefty price for Germans to get a revitalized nation back.

Trump 2.0 at least holds the—dubious—merit of a relatively realistic reading of the chessboard; Russia, India, China—the Primakov triangle—as well as Iran have become too powerful to be looted. So, the next best option is: Plunder the Chihuahuas. The blowing up of Nord Stream, as ordered by the Biden crime family—as detailed by Sy Hersh—was a gleaming starter.

The future of NATO in the Great America project is now up for grabs. Gotta pay up—or else: the contribution of each member nation should go up to 5% of GDP instead of the current 2%. Talk about a 150% price hike. Incidentally, Trump so far has not even muttered the nonsensical expression “Indo-Pacific.” For all practical purposes, Trump is telling NATO to take a hike. In the event of a double NATOstan annexation of Canada and Greenland, the US may even be able to match Russia’s resource base. Arguably, that’s the key rationale for unleashing this New Great Game. Forget “multipolarity.” BRICS, take note.

 

I’m gonna MAGA you, baby! 

Andrew Napolitano talks with Pepe Escobar, January 15, 2025.

The most intriguing side plot is, of course, Elon Musk. Trump badly needs Musk’s massive social media/propaganda digital megaphone. Simultaneously, on the Chihuahua front, the platinum sidekick wants to profit from a Europe capable of assessing enough energy, raw materials, and loads of consumers with solid purchasing power. The facts on the ground already spell out the “rules-based international order” being replaced in a flash by a no-rules international disorder. After all, international law has already been abolished by the Empire of Chaos itself (that’s bipartisan)—when it comes to illegal, unilateral sanctions, theft of financial assets, or legitimization of genocide and head-chopping “moderate rebels.”

Trump 2.0 will be nothing but enforcing a de facto phenomenon: a post-historical disorder. End of History—that was always for suckers. All of this incendiary chain of events is on a roll essentially because of one single reason: the Empire of Chaos lost the proxy war in Ukraine. What remains to be discussed is the modality of the surrender. So, it’s no wonder Trump had to come up with a seductive, but still fraught-with-danger, larger-than-life PsyOp to imperatively change the narrative.

Quoted from:
Pepe Escobar (January 14, 2025) - I'm Gonna MAGA You, Baby!

 

See also:
Simon Hunt (January 12, 2025) - Markets Amidst Trump 2.0: Geopolitics & Geoeconomics in 2025.
Lu Qiyuan (December 8, 2024) - Scott Bessent's Covert MAGA Strategy for Trump 2.0.

Germany at the Crossroads: It’s the System, Stupid │ Gerry Nolan

Germany, once Europe’s industrial juggernaut, now stumbles in a state of managed decline. With elections looming, the theatre is set. But let’s be clear: this isn’t about who wins, but whether Germans can reject the system that’s strangling their sovereignty. Because unless they do, these elections are nothing more than a distraction, a masterclass in divide-and-conquer.

 

» Know your enemy. «

  Sun Tzu.

 

Scenario 1: Banning AfD, A Gamble with Fire

Banning AfD wouldn’t be a show of strength but a desperate move to silence over a quarter of the electorate, especially in the former DDR where resentment still burns over decades of economic neglect. Friedrich Merz, obedient globalist and former BlackRock operative, would become Chancellor. The result? More war, deindustrialization, and blind subservience to the US. But silencing AfD won’t kill populism, it’ll fuel it. BSW would emerge as the strongest opposition, carrying the banner for those abandoned by the establishment.

  » Election isn’t about who governs. «

Scenario 2: AfD Grows, But the System Holds

AfD and CDU dominate the elections, but the anti-AfD cordon sanitaire holds. Merz scrambles to cobble together a coalition with Greens and SPD, a circus of contradictions. Meanwhile, AfD becomes the largest opposition party, and with BSW rising in tandem, Germany’s parliament turns into a warzone of populist resistance.

 
But the cracks widen as Germany faces three brutal realities: NATO’s inevitable defeat in Ukraine, an economic crisis fueled by sanctions and energy dependency, and mounting unrest from a population tired of being sacrificed on the altar of vassalage. 

 

Scenario 3: AfD Triumphs – The System Strikes Back

An AfD victory would trigger nothing short of institutional war. Mockingbird media, and globalist puppeteers would unleash chaos: mass protests, endless scandals, “mystery” corruption charges, and lawfare targeting AfD leaders. Color revolution tactics, international condemnation, and Soros-funded street movements would all be in play.

 

» It’s the System, Stupid. «

 

These scenarios expose a single rigged system. This election isn’t about who governs, it’s about maintaining control while gaslighting the public into thinking change is possible. Divide and conquer, with AfD voters demonized as extremists and BSW supporters dismissed as utopian dreamers, all while the establishment engineers the decline.

Here’s the uncomfortable reality: Germany’s democracy is theatre, scripted to ensure one outcome, continued vassalage to Washington. The Nord Stream sabotage was a declaration of US dominance over Europe. Germany’s leaders didn’t even flinch. Their silence was an endorsement of their own country’s humiliation.

If Germans want real change, it’s not about winning elections within a rigged system, it’s about rejecting the system itself. Imagine a post-SMO world where Germany reclaims sovereignty, realigns with Russia and China, and embraces BRICS. Imagine restoring its industrial base, securing cheap energy, and forging a just peace in Europe. This isn’t a fantasy, it’s a choice. But to make it, Germans must first wake up to the fact that their political elite serves Washington, not Berlin.

» Yankee, Go Home « – German cry for sovereignty.

 

The 80’s saw mass protests demanding the removal of US missiles and troops. It’s time for Germans to rediscover that spirit, to say "Yankee, go home" and reclaim their sovereignty. NATO has turned Europe into an American buffer, draining its resources, compromising its security, and hijacking its future.

A sovereign Germany could help lead Europe in a multipolar world, standing with the Global Majority rather than kneeling before the US. The alternative? Continued decline, economic ruin, and an electorate manipulated into fighting itself while the true oppressors profit from the chaos. The real question isn’t about CDU, AfD, or BSW, but whether Germans can see through the charade. The rigged script won’t save them; only rejecting NATO servitude and imagining a future aligned with the Global Majority can.

Quoted from:
Gerry Nolan (November 20, 2024) - Germany at the Crossroads: It’s the System, Stupid. 

See also:

RT (November 20, 2024) - Germany knew in advance about Nord Stream attack.
Gerry Nolan (November 20, 2024) - Nord Stream: Germany’s Quiet Admission of Vassalage.
Cyrus Janssen (May 8, 2024) - How the US Destroyed the German Economy.

Europe’s Catastrophic Russian Problem | Wang Xiangsui

Europe is becoming the biggest loser in the Ukraine conflict, despite having fostered closer ties with Russia following the collapse of the Soviet Union. Europe is now actively cutting these ties in an effort to align with the US policies aimed at punishing Russia. 

 

But the price is dear. The largest economy prior to the Ukraine war, Europe is now facing the prospect of political divisions and security threats. Its insensible actions are not only compromising Europe's autonomy and increasing its military reliance on the US, but also disrupting its energy supply chains, in which Russia played an important part. So what does the US stand to gain from this situation? 

 

 China called the Nord Stream pipeline blast of September 26, 2022 an 

'act of international terrorism' and an 'act of war against Germany and Russia'.

Quite a lot. In a scenario where Europe is on friendly terms with Russia and economically, militarily, and politically strengthened, Europe poses too significant a challenge for the US to handle. Hence, the estrangement between Europe and Russia is one of the US's most crucial strategic goals. As anticipated, Europe is now gripped by fear of Russian expansion and Russia fears NATO's eastward movement. And this prisoner's dilemma is further exacerbated by US intervention. 

 

It is evident that the European leaders struggle to discern who their allies and rivals truly are. It is their crucial mistake to view Russia, a potential provider of economic strength and security assurances, as a threat, and the US, a saboteur of the Euro and Europe's regional stability, as a friend. The rationale behind Europe's alignment with the US stems from their belief that Europe holds a prominent position within the US-led uni-polar world.

But time and again, the US disregarded and even intentionally harmed European interests. Europe's political stage is now occupied by liberal leftists whose obstinacy to ideology and blind loyalty to the US have deprived them of strategic foresight. If Europe fails to awaken to the reality, more losses will inevitably befall the European people. Acting as a suicide bomber in the Ukraine conflict will achieve nothing but harm Europe itself. Europe's tragedy is rooted in its failure to recognize the significance of the Ukraine conflict. What we are witnessing is merely the precursor to a brand new world order, an order of multi-polarity which neither the US nor Europe can prevent.  

 

If the current situation continues, Ukraine's status as an independent country will be called into question. At first glance, the US appears to be the biggest winner. To avoid instability, numerous European financial assets and capital are now being redirected to the US, bolstering its pandemic-stricken economy and positioning it as the best-performing developed country. Additionally, Europe is once again brought under the American security umbrella, abandoning its pursuit of strategic independence. Furthermore, the US has profited during the war by selling its own energy at high prices to Europe through sanctions on Russia's energy exports. However, when considering the bigger picture in the long run, the Russia-Ukraine conflict significantly weakens the US-dominated world order and damages the credibility of the US. To many countries, the war exposed the unreliability of the US and the precariousness of the uni-polar world order it perpetuates. 

 

Russia, on the other hand, is making leaps and bounces despite its losses. It has already achieved the initial goals outlined at the beginning of the special military operation. By deepening cooperation with China, India, and the global south, Russia's economy was able to withstand the blow after decoupling from the West. Two years into the war and nearly 20,000 sanctions from 48 countries, Russia maintains relative political and social stability, even experiencing a 3.6% GDP growth in 2023. And most importantly, through this war, Russia is reshaping its image and status as a formidable major power in the emerging multi-polar order. Therefore, in the long run, Russia may emerge as the real long-term winner of this conflict; a conflict that draws the curtains on the hegemonic uni-polar world order dictated by the US.

Quoted from:
Wang Xiangsui (February 29, 2024) - Europe’s Catastrophic Russian Problem.

 

Military strategist Professor Wang Xiangsui is a retired senior colonel in the People's Liberation Army. Wang's 1999 book 

'Unrestricted Warfare' reportedly shifted the views of former White House chief strategist Steve Bannon regarding China.

How the US Destroyed the German Economy | Cyrus Janssen

"To be an enemy of the US is dangerous, but to be a friend is fatal." This famous quote from Henry Kissinger is now unfolding in real time: Germany, Europe's largest economy and its industrial powerhouse, is now collapsing. Last year, Germany posted the worst performance among all major global economies, with its economy being the only one to actually shrink by 0.3%. Just last month, Germany's economic minister, Robert Habeck, stated that the German economy is performing "dramatically badly." Yet, the Western media has concealed the true cause.

 

» NATO's purpose is: Keep the Russians out, the Americans in, and the Germans down. «
Lord Hastings Lionel Ismay, NATO's first Secretary General, 1952.

 » Fuck the European Union! «
Victoria Nuland, US Assistant Secretary of State for European and Eurasian Affairs, 2014. 

 

Even worse, this bleak situation shows no signs of improving. There were high hopes that 2024 would turn things around and be a comeback year for Germany. Until recently, the German government projected a growth rate of 1.3%. However, shockingly, they have now been forced to slash this forecast to a mere 0.2%. The scariest part is that most economists and business leaders agree: this isn't just a temporary recession, but a deeper structural problem with the German economic model. If you think this is an exaggeration, consider that, by now, an astonishing two in three German companies have left Germany or at least partially relocated abroad, with most citing sky-high energy prices, inflation, over-regulation, and endless political debates as their reasons for leaving. What or who is causing this catastrophic collapse of Germany's long-standing economic and industrial prowess?

 

   » Halting Russian supplies can well create a systemic crisis that would be devastating

for the German economy and, indirectly, for the entire European Union. «

 RAND Corporation, 2022.

 

Germany has been played by the United States and continues to score own goals in tackling this economic crisis. The country's dire situation is caused by three main factors: first, the sky-high energy prices; second, reduced exports to Russia and China; and third, increased military expenditure.

 

   » China called the Nord Stream pipeline blast an act of international terrorism,
and an act of war against Germany and Russia. «

Hans-Benjamin Braun, 2023.

[...] As much as the US is to blame here, astonishingly, almost all of Germany's political elite, mainstream media, and general population have eagerly obeyed America's wishes to demonize and decouple from Russia and China. This is absolutely bizarre and frankly foolish, as numerous experts and German business leaders have repeatedly warned that decoupling would destroy the German economy. The sad truth is that much of Germany's political and media establishment has a long history of blindly accepting US-formed policy narratives at face value—even when they themselves are the ones getting harmed. The best recent example of this is the bombing of the Nord Stream pipeline, whose sole purpose was to transport natural gas from Russia to Germany and the rest of Western Europe.
 

 » Germany's establishment has been one of the biggest cheerleaders for severing its energy ties with Russia.

You seriously can't make this stuff up. «

Cyrus Janssen - March 12, 2024.

[...] After the Russian invasion of Ukraine in February 2022, Germany and the EU introduced sanctions against Russia, while Russia responded by sharply decreasing its delivery of natural gas to Europe. This caused Germany's energy prices to skyrocket and severely damaged its economy. Before the invasion, Germany imported a staggering 55% of its gas from Russia, and it was precisely this cheap Russian gas that enabled Germany to become an economic and industrial powerhouse. Of course, sanctioning your main energy supplier was never the smartest choice to begin with. The fallout cannot be understated: in the same year the war started, the market price for natural gas increased more than tenfold.

 Biden vows that the US will 'bring an end' to the Nord Stream 2 pipeline if Russia invades Ukraine, and German vassal Chancellor Scholz simply agrees. - February 7, 2022.

 

But it's not just ordinary Germans who have suffered. An astonishing 70% of Germany's mechanical engineering, industrial goods, and automotive sectors have relocated abroad, making it clear why Germany's economic and industrial power has collapsed so rapidly. The US role in Germany's energy crisis is much larger than merely taking advantage of the Germans. Not only did the US openly wish to eliminate Germany's energy relationship with Russia, but it also shares significant blame for causing the war in Ukraine, which led to Germany's crisis in the first place. However, once again, Germany shares the blame: the country's establishment is in virtual lockstep with the United States and has been one of the biggest cheerleaders for severing its energy ties with Russia. You seriously can't make this stuff up.

 

Quoted from:
Cyrus Janssen ( March 12, 2024) - How America Destroyed the German Economy. (video)

 » Ukraine's victory: whatever it takes, as long as it takes. «

German vassal chancellor Scholz - May 7, 2024.

See also:

Martin Armstrong (May 1, 2024) - Will Russia Push the Button?

Martin Armstrong (May 1, 2024) - It Is Unlikely That We Can Avoid A Third World War.
Timofey Bordachev (February 19, 2024) - Western Europe could become the new Ukraine.
Hans-Benjamin Braun (August 6, 2023) - Nord Stream Pipeline Blast By US-Nuke.

RAND Corporation (January 25, 2022) - Crush Europe and Strengthen the US.

500 Years of Western Dominance - What Comes Next | Glenn Diesen

Felix Abt: A great European religious war and the first pan-European conflict over superpower status came to an end in 1648. After 30 years of devastating wars and chaos, especially on German soil, with millions of deaths and shattered economies, the Peace of Westphalia brought a new, rules-based order to Europe, as the Western political class would call it today. This included the inviolability of borders and non-interference in the internal affairs of sovereign and equal states; it is regarded as a milestone in the development toward tolerance and secularization. How did this affect the new powers that emerged afterward and their quest for hegemony?

Glenn Diesen: The lesson from the Thirty Years War (1618-1648) was that no one power could restore order based on hegemony and universal values, as the other states in Europe would preserve their own sovereignty and distinctiveness by collectively balancing the most powerful state. This was evident when Catholic France supported Protestant Sweden to prevent the dominance of the Catholic Habsburgs. The Peace of Westphalia in 1648 gave birth to the modern world order, in which peace and order depend on a balance of power between sovereign states. The Westphalian system prevents hegemony as other states collectively balance the effort of an aspiring hegemon to establish economic and military dominance, and universal values are rejected to the extent they are used to reduce the sovereignty of other states.

» The Westphalian system prevents hegemony. « 

The 1648 peace treaty between the parties in the Thirty Years' War established the Westphalian system.

 

The principle, known as the Westphalian principle of sovereignty, prohibits interference in the internal affairs of another state, and every state is equal before international law, regardless of its size. Thus, every state has sovereignty over its territory and its internal affairs, to the exclusion of all external powers. But when the European colonial powers used violence to impose their will on other continents, they violated this ideal. Was this the beginning of this principle’s demise?

 

The Westphalian system should in principle be based on sovereign equality for all states. However, it originated as a European security order that later laid the foundation for a world order. Under the original Westphalian system, the Europeans claimed special privileges and the principle of equal sovereignty for states did not apply to everyone. Sovereignty was deemed to be a right and a responsibility assigned to “civilized peoples”, a reference to the Europeans as white Christians. The international system was divided between the civilized and the barbarians. There was one set of rules for the Europeans in the civilized “garden”, and another set of rules when the Europeans engaged with the so-called despotic barbarians in the “jungle”. The interference in the internal affairs of other peoples and the development of vast empires was framed as the right and the responsibility of civilized states to guide the barbaric peoples towards universal values of civilization. This responsibility to govern other peoples was termed the “white man’s burden” and the “civilizing mission”.

 » The gardeners have to go to the jungle. «

Josep Borrell's universal mission.

In our current era, we have abandoned the civilized-barbarian divide, but we have replaced it with a liberal democracy-authoritarian divide to legitimize sovereign inequality. The West can interfere in the domestic affairs of other states to promote democracy, invade countries to defend human rights, or even change the borders of countries in support of self-determination. This is the exclusive right and a responsibility of the West as the champions of the universal values of liberal democracy. As the EU foreign policy chief Josep Borrell explained: “The gardeners have to go to the jungle. Europeans have to be much more engaged with the rest of the world. Otherwise, the rest of the world will invade us”.

International law in accordance with the UN Charter defends the principle of sovereign equality for all states. The so-called “rules-based international order” is based on sovereign inequality, which introduces special privileges under the guise of universal liberal democratic values. For example, the West’s recognition of independence for Kosovo was a breach of international law as it violated the territorial integrity of Serbia, although it was legitimized by the liberal principle of respecting the self-determination of Kosovo Albanians. In Crimea the West decided that self-determination should not be the leading principle, but territorial integrity. The US refers to liberal democratic values to exercise its exclusive right to invade and occupy countries such as Iraq, Syria and Libya, although this right is not extended to countries in the jungle.  

» The so-called “rules-based international order” is based on sovereign inequality, 

which introduces special privileges under the guise of universal liberal democratic values. «

In 1945 fifty countries established the United Nations System. With the help of this supra-national governance

system the Anglo-Frankish-Zionist-Dönmeh-Wahhabi-Takfiri elites of the UK, France, Turkey, Saudi Arabia, the US and

some others, expected to secure their hegemonies beyond the foreseeable demise of traditional colonialism. 

The Bretton Woods conference, World Bank, IMF, nuclear bombing of Japan, dividing Korea 

and creating the State of Israel in Palestine are early show cases of what Pax Americana and UN are all about.

[...] The Ukrainian conflict is essentially an extension of American geopolitics, which aims to carry out Mackinder’s aforementioned stanza, “He who rules Eastern Europe rules the world.” What are your thoughts about it?

Preventing Germany and Russia from controlling Eastern Europe means that much of the Eurasian continent becomes landlocked. US control over Eastern Europe implies that Russia can not bridge Europe and Asia, but rather becomes an isolated land-locked region at the dual periphery of Europe and Asia.

Brzezinski outlined the strategy for developing and preserving US global primacy, which relies on the age-old wisdom of divide-and-rule. Brzezinski wrote that the US must “prevent collusion and maintain security dependence among the vassals, to keep tributaries pliant and protected, and keep the barbarians from coming together”. Historically, the British and the Americans have worked to prevent Germany and Russia from coming together as it would form an independent pole of power. Hegemony requires conflict between Germany and Russia, as Germany becomes a dependent ally and Russia is weakened. This logic is also applied to why it is beneficial to perpetuate tensions between the Arabs and Iran, or between China and its neighbors. The US has been very concerned about the economic integration between the Germans and Russians, which is why the US was so hostile to the Nord Stream pipelines and most likely was behind the attack on these pipelines. 

 

 Anka Feldhusen, a fine example of a German Neonazi apparatchik of the 21st century.

March 22, 2023.

 

 Wehrmacht 2.0 south of Kiev. 

There will be hell to pay.

March 22, 2024.

The problem is that the world is no longer Western-centric and by pushing Russia away from Germany, the US has pushed Russia towards China – a technological and industrial power much greater than Germany. In the mid-19th century, the British fought against Russia in the Crimean War with the explicit purpose of pushing Russia back into Asia, where it would remain technologically and economically backward and stagnant. NATO’s war in Ukraine is a repeat of the efforts to push Russia back into Asia, although this time Asia is much more dynamic than the West. The failure of the West to adjust our grand strategy to this new reality has been a mistake of immeasurable proportions. We have not subordinated Russia, rather we ended Russia’s 300-year-long Western-centric policies in which Moscow looked to the West for modernization.

What is driving this stunning anti-Chinese obsession in the United States against a country that upholds the principle of non-interference in other countries, that used its mighty navy only for trade and not for gunboat politics when it was a superpower in the past, and that follows the millennia-old concept of “Tianxia” (天下), which literally means “everything under heaven”, that is, an inclusive world full of harmony for all?

China does not threaten the US, but it threatens US dominance as the foundation for the unipolar world order established after the Cold War. The US is currently attempting to weaken China through economic warfare, convincing its allies to decouple from the Chinese economy, and knocking out Russia in Ukraine as a vital partner of China. If the US fails to achieve its objectives, then it will likely stoke conflicts between China and its neighbors to make the neighbors more dependent and obedient, and also create instability for the Chinese that will bleed it of resources. The ideal would be greater tensions between India and China, as India would have to make itself more reliant on the US and it would be an important ally to weaken China. If all fails, then the US could also fight an indirect war through a proxy similar to the way they are using Ukrainians to fight Russia – by for example pushing for Taiwan’s secession. Besides securing its supply chains and building a military for deterrence, China should prioritize resolving its disputes with India as any friction with China can be exploited.

» This is a Westphalian system with Eurasian characteristics. « 

Since 2009 BRICS is establishing a Multipolar World Order based on Westphalian principles and controlled by the 

Eurasian great powers China, India and Russia. Egypt, Ethiopia, Iran and the United Arab Emirates joined BRICS

on January 1, 2024. To date 15 more countries have formally applied to join.

Finally, in your new book you say that a new Westphalian world order is reasserting itself, albeit with Eurasian characteristics. Can you explain this in more detail?

We are returning to a Westphalian system based on a balance of power between sovereign states. However, the former Westphalian system was based on sovereign equality among the Western powers while the “barbarians” or “despots” outside the West were not deemed to be qualified for the responsibility of sovereignty. It was a dual system of collective hegemony of the West, with sovereign equality between the Western states. In the new Westphalian system, there are several powerful states that are not Western, with China as the leading economy in the world. The Eurasian powers such as China, Russia, India and others are developing the economic foundations for this system with new technologies, transportation corridors and financial instruments. The Eurasian powers are more prepared to include the Global South as sovereign equals. The Eurasian powers reject the so-called “rules-based international order” based on sovereign inequality, as Western dominance should not be legitimized by a civilized-barbarian or liberal democracy-authoritarian divide.

The Western powers over the past centuries have had an inclination for dominance and empire by controlling limited maritime corridors. Russia’s Eurasianism in the 19th century was a hegemonic strategy by dominating the Eurasian landmass through land corridors, although under the multipolar distribution of power the Russians do not have the capability or intentions to pursue hegemony. Instead, Eurasian integration entails moving from the dual periphery of Europe and Asia, to the center of a new Eurasian construct. Even China as the leading power does not have the capability or intention to pursue hegemony. Countries like Russia are content with China being the leading power, although they would not support China if it demanded dominance and hegemony. The Chinese demonstrate that they are not attempting to limit Russia’s economic connectivity with other states to make itself the only center of power. In the Global Civilization Initiative, the Chinese are also advocating for respecting civilizational differences and that all states have their own path to modernity, which implies that China is not claiming to represent universal values that legitimizes interference into the domestic affairs of other states. The West assumed that the Russia-China partnership was a “marriage of convenience” and that they would clash over influence in Central Asia, but this never happened because neither side demanded hegemony. Instead of sabotaging each other’s relations with the region, China and Russia harmonized their interests in Central Asia. China, Russia, India and other Eurasian powers have different visions and interests in terms of Eurasian integration, but they all need each other to realize their goals and pursue prosperity. Hegemony is not an option. This is a Westphalian system with Eurasian characteristics.

Quoted from:

500 Years of Western Dominance: Is it Coming to an End and What Comes Next?

Felix Abt talks with Glenn Diesen. In: Eastern Angle - March 22, 2024.

 

See also:

Glenn Diesen (2024) - The Ukraine War & the Eurasian World Order. 

Zbigniew Brzezinski (1997) - The Grand Chessboard: American Primacy and Its Geostrategic Imperatives.

Carl Schmitt (1950) - The Nomos of the Earth in the International Law of the Jus Publicum Europaeum.

Crush Europe and Strengthen the US | RAND Corporation

January 25, 2022 

Confidential

Distribution: WHCS, ANSA, Dept. of State, CIA, NSA, DNC 

 

Executive Summary

[...] The current German economic model is based on two pillars. These are unlimited access to cheap Russian energy resources and to cheap French electric power, thanks to the operation of nuclear power plants. The importance of the first factor is considerably higher. Halting Russian supplies can well create a systemic crisis that would be devastating for the German economy and, indirectly, for the entire European Union. The French energy sector could also soon begin to experience heavy problems. The predictable stop of Russian-controlled nuclear fuel supplies, combined with the unstable situation in the Sahel region, would make French energy sector critically dependent on Australian and Canadian fuel.

 

"A reduction in Russian energy supplies - ideally, a complete halt of such supplies -
would lead to disastrous outcomes for German industry." - RAND Corporation, Jan 25, 2022.

 

[...] The only feasible way to guarantee Germany's rejection of Russian energy supplies is to involve both sides in the military conflict in Ukraine. Our further actions in this country will inevitably lead to a military response from Russia. Russians will obviously not be able to leave unanswered the massive Ukrainian army pressure on the unrecognized Donbas republics. That would make possible to declare Russia an aggressor and apply to it the entire package of sanctions prepared beforehand. Putin may in turn decide to impose limited counter-sanctions - primarily on Russian energy supplies to Europe. Thus, the damage to the EU countries will be quite comparable to the one to the Russians, and in some countries - primarily in Germany - it will be higher.

 

The prerequisite for Germany to fall into this trap is the leading role of green parties and ideology in Europe. The German Greens are a strongly dogmatic, if not zealous, movement, which makes it quite easy to make them ignore economic arguments. In this respect, the German Greens somewhat exceed their counterparts in the rest of Europe. Personal features and the lack of professionalism of their leaders - primarily Annalena Baerbock and Robert Habeck - permit to presume that it is next to impossible for them to admit their own mistakes in a timely manner.

 

Thus, it will be enough to quickly form the media image of Putin’s aggressive war to turn the Greens into ardent and hardline supporters of sanctions, a ‘party of war’. It will enable the sanctions regime to be introduced without any obstacles. The lack of professionalism of the current leaders will not allow a setback in the future, even when the negative impact of the chosen policy becomes obvious enough [...] This will ensure a sufficiently long gap in cooperation between Germany and Russia, which will make large German economic operators uncompetitive.

"The prerequisite for Germany to fall into this trap is the leading role of the German Greens."

[...] A reduction in Russian energy supplies - ideally, a complete halt of such supplies - would lead to disastrous outcomes for German industry. The need to divert significant amounts of Russian gas for winter heating of residential and public facilities will further exacerbate the shortages [...] A complete standstill at the largest in the chemical, metallurgical, and machine-building, plants is likely, while they have virtually no spare capacity to reduce energy consumption. It could lead to the shutting down of continuous-cycle enterprises, which would mean their destruction.

The cumulative losses of the German economy can be estimated only approximately. Even if the restriction of Russian supplies is limited to 2022, its consequences will last for several years, and the total losses could reach 200-300 billion euros. Not only will it deliver a devastating blow to the German economy, but the entire EU economy will inevitably collapse. We are talking not about a decline in economy growth pace, but about a sustained recession and a decline in GDP only in material production by 3-4% per year for the next 5-6 years. Such a fall will inevitably cause panic in the financial markets and may bring them to a collapse.

The euro will inevitably, and most likely irreversibly, fall below the dollar. A sharp fall of the euro will consequently cause its global sale. It will become a toxic currency, and all countries in the world will rapidly reduce its share in their forex reserves. This gap will be primarily filled with dollar and yuan.

 

NATO's purpose is "keep the Russians out, the Americans in, and the Germans down",
as Lord Hastings Lionel Ismay, NATO's first Secretary General, put it.

Another inevitable consequence of a prolonged economic recession will be a sharp drop in living standards and rising unemployment (up to 200,000-400,000 in Germany alone), which will entail the exodus of skilled labour and well-educated young people. There are literally no other destinations for such migration other than the United States today. A somewhat smaller, but also quite significant flow of migrants can be expected from other EU countries.

 

Since 1871 the prime U.S. geopolitical foreign policy doctrine for Europe is:
"Keep Germany and Russia separate and in conflict."
Or as Victoria Nuland put it in 2014: "Fuck the EU!"

The scenario under consideration will thus serve to strengthen the national financial condition both indirectly and most directly. In the short term, it will reverse the trend of the looming, economic recession and, in addition, consolidate American society by distracting it from immediate economic concerns. This, in turn, will reduce electoral risks.

In the medium term (4-5 years), the cumulative benefits of capital flight, re-oriented logistical flows and reduced competition in major industries may amount to USD 7-9 trillion. Unfortunately, China is also expected to benefit over the medium term from this emerging scenario. At the same time, Europe's deep political dependence on the U.S. allows us to effectively neutralise possible attempts by individual European states to draw closer to China [...]

Quoted from:
RAND Corporation (Jan 25, 2022) - Executive Summary: Weakening Germany, Strengthening the U.S.

See also:

Hans-Benjamin Braun (Apr 07, 2023) - Nord Stream Pipeline Blast by US-Nuke. 

Michel Chossudovsky (Aug 30, 2023) - Niger’s Military Junta is Supported by the Pentagon.

Washington’s Unspoken Objective: “Remove France from Africa”.

Max Blumenthal & Aaron Maté (2023) - German Greens, the world's most hypocritical party? (video)

 Bruno Maçães (2018) - Greater Eurasia: Russia’s New Energy Gamble.