What went wrong? The world economy is a system and the US failed to grasp Russia's place in the system and also the state of the system itself. As a result, assumptions turned out to be wildly wrong since they were not reality-based but rather figments of fantasy.
Thus far, this has turned out to be a monumental strategic blunder.
The overall result is biasing the world system against the Global North/West in the Global South/East much to Western consternation as its former dominance fades markedly. The information war on the part of the West has failed in the Global South/East as China and India support Russia economically and Russia supports them with resources.
However, the game is far from over. The combined West is still powerful economically and is reacting. But this West now facing a strategic alliance of Russia, China and Iran that is open about its aims, which it views as existential. Putin declared recently that this conflict is existential for Russia, fulfilling the requirement for the first use of nuclear weapons. Moreover, Russian nuclear doctrine is under revision to bring it in line with US doctrine, which allows for a preemptive first strike. (And while North Korea is not usually mentioned as part of this alliance, it is for all practical purposes.)
This is US foreign policy realists' worst nightmare scenario, since China reputedly having great national capacity than the US, UK and continental Europe combined, and Russia is a nuclear peer.
And it could get worse if Russia shares military technology with China, Iran and North Korea. Moreover, no one in the West seems to know if this has already occurred and if so, to what degree.
Not to mention that the pace is increasing one might say, "exponentially," chiefly owing to US and UK brinksmanship.
So, failure of the economic war that was supposed to crash the Russian economy in weeks has resulted in a strategic upheaval following the US refusal to acknowledge Russia's security needs.
Responsible Statecraft
We were promised ‘economic shock and awe’ against Russia
Responsible Statecraft
We were promised ‘economic shock and awe’ against Russia
Andrew Cockburn
See also
Manichaeism and ‘An Ideology of Liberal Empire’ – Biden’s Forever Cosmic War Against Russian ‘Evil’
Alastair Crooke | founder and director of the Conflicts Forum, former British diplomat and senior figure in British intelligence and in European Union diplomacy
This isn't a catastrophe for the US empire, unless it all goes nuclear.
ReplyDelete"unless it all goes nuclear"
ReplyDeleteWould you bother reading/posting these articles if you believed nuclear war was inevitable?
ReplyDeleteSure, accidents can happen. And there are lunatics who believe such a war can be won. But we have to assume no nuclear war, if we want to assume we have a future.
These old books about Eurasia are from a bygone era, when empires could dream about conquest. The advent of nuclear deterrence put an end to the age of conquest. That leaves economics. However, preventing neighbours from trading with each other is a losing proposition. How long can Washington manipulate European perception towards Russia?
Imagine the effort required to prevent Canada from trading with the US. It would take a combined Russian/Chinese psyops decades in the making. In the end, Canada/US will naturally trade with each other. Geography wins.
As the age of fossil fuels comes to an end, military intervention against nations that don't have a nuclear deterrent become physically impossible. No one will be able to bully anyone. Global trade will decline, in favour of regional and local trade. That leaves the economic component of the 'world island' irrelevant.
For ordinary folks, the failure of empire has little effect on our lives. Ukraine is far away, on another continent. Americans are worried about migration across the southern border, but the empire is unconcerned. Americans are worried about domestic issues, but their concerns are seemingly irrelevant to Washington's political establishment. The end of cheap fossil fuels will radically alter our standard of living, but no one talks about it. The situation will get worse, but not because of geopolitics. As William Catton observed, there is no one to blame:
"Perhaps the most important thing to note about Catton is that he did not blame anyone for the human predicament. To him that predicament is the natural outcome of evolutionary processes and the powers given to humans through those processes. That predicament is no more a product of conscious thought and intention than is the beating of our own hearts."
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/William_R._Catton_Jr.
Would you bother reading/posting these articles if you believed nuclear war was inevitable?
ReplyDeleteThe trend is toward escalation. The ultimate end of continuing escalation is use of WMD, not limited to nukes but includes chemical and biological. Use of WMD will likely to further escalation. In fact, Russians have already asserted that chemical and biological weapons have already been used but this has not been acknowledged by the West or reported in Western media.
The nuclear outcome is not inevitable, however. The way I see it, given the current trajectory and people involved and their level of investment is that nuclear war can only be avoided by changes in government leadership, that is, different people with different views who lack the level of investment of the people now involved in the escalatory ramp up. The West is counting on this in the case of Russia and China, but that is fantasy in my opinion considering the evidence. So we are left with change in government in the West as a result of elections. However, given the state of the political situation that remains a long shot.
I agree with Catton about the key role of evolution in trait determination (although this is not the complete explanation in my view). This is why so-called reason often doesn't prevail in high-risk situations where survival is at issue (Russia, China) and dominance (US/NATO) is involved.
The situation won't escalate to the use of nukes. There's no strategic interest for Washington in Ukraine. Russia could occupy the entirety of Ukraine and that would solidify the break with Europe. A stand-off would then ensue, cold war style, or Korean style.
ReplyDeleteFrom Russia's perspective, they are winning the war. Hence no need to use nukes. If you want to be cynical, a Russian tactical nuclear attack on Ukraine might be met with no response other than condemnation. Russians would be forever branded as evil in European eyes.
Is the situation existential for Russia?
No, it's a humanitarian mission. Ukraine has not received the weapons or permission to strike Russian territory. The mistake Putin has made is to delay the end of this war. Destroying the Ukrainian military ends the threat of attacks on Crimea, Donbass, and Russia proper. It would also put an end to the 'Ukraine is winning' propaganda that continues to this day.
Putin is a moderate leader. Eventually, Moscow may be run by more aggressive hawks. That isn't necessarily worse for peace. Demonstration that Russia is not weak can be carried out with conventional armaments. This appears to be necessary, given the propaganda fed to western audiences over the past year.
All the death and destruction in Ukraine is cover for the destruction of a pipeline, and driving a wedge between trading partners. It is Machiavellian in its ruthlessness.
ReplyDeleteGeopolitically it is stupid. Washington had nothing to fear from Russian gas sales to Europe. The focus of the EU is on mass immigration, centralized bureaucracy, and beggar-thy-neighbour economics. They are only a threat to themselves.
If Biden, Blinken, Sullivan and Nuland had half a brain in total I might be inclined to agree with you. But they don't. Same with the UK leadership. And even if the the European leaders had any brains they wouldn't have the spine to use them to any avail.
ReplyDeleteBoth the Russian and Chinese leadership are quite aware that the leadership of NATO is like a bunch of kids playing with matches in a hayloft. A lot of leaders of other countries know this too.
Geopolitically it is stupid.
ReplyDeleteActually, not.
Europe is the main competitor of the US based on size and economic factors. Europe using inexpensive Russian resources and coupled with China through trading channels that are quickly developing threatens US hegemony. So while the action is focused on Russia and China, Europe was also central to the mix. The US just upset that apple cart. This much I will admit was well-played, but likely at considerable cost too. There will be blowback.
Hegemony is meaningless in today's world.
ReplyDelete1. Washington cannot dominate nations that have nuclear deterrents. The US military already reflects this. The Cold War forces are gone. Countries the size of Iraq or larger can no longer be occupied.
2. As the developing world progresses, the economic influence of the US declines. This is a relative measurement of population and trade. The US would've had to grow its population to match world population growth. But if that had happened, first world consumption would have run into physical limits decades ago. Now the nations of the world will compete for remaining resources. In this game, autarky equals survival.
3. The standard of living of American citizens is irrelevant to the ruling class idiots. So what is the point of US hegemony, if not to plunder the rest of the world at scale? The ruling class do not number 330 million.
We can't analyze what is impossible. There's no hope of controlling the 'world island' or its modern equivalent. To lay waste to China or Russia is to lay waste to America.
Europe and China are energy/resource dependent. This is a function of population, domestic living standards, and geographic area. A natural partnership exists between resource rich regions and energy dependent regions. As a Canadian, I can confirm that such arrangements are win-win. To meddle with them - or allow an 'ally' to sabotage them - is stupid.
They upset the apple cart, but they won't throw a tantrum and blow up the world. In a Machiavellian sense, this is entertainment. I can't bring myself to take this seriously, because the geopolitical aims of Washington are nonsensical.
According to Paul Craig Roberts, the American people in olden days, would have gone to DC and burned the whole thing to the ground. Even Canada did this.
"The situation won't escalate to the use of nukes. There's no strategic interest for Washington in Ukraine. Russia could occupy the entirety of Ukraine and that would solidify the break with Europe."
ReplyDeleteEchoing on Tom's points, no Russia wouldn't escalate to the nuclear level, it's the US we should worry about. The neocon gang in charge aren't rational statesmen of yesteryear, they're stark raving mad lunatics.. The propaganda campaign that's been waged has been absolutely stunning, enough to make even Kim Jong-Un say "bro, dial it back it a bit, that's embarrassing", turning reality around 180 degrees [insert Annalena Baerbock quip here]. Eventually reality will intrude on the public at some point. The reality-filled fissures have started (eg, Stoltzenberg publicly admitting the west is basically out-gunned). We're approaching the most dangerous phase of this conflict. It's not clear how the US is going to be able to declare victory and go home. Can they be content with the consolation prize of subjugating Europe while also losing to Russia along with accelerating US relative decline by god knows how many years?
It also makes me wonder if the neocon's craziness isn't part of the reason this much anticipated Russian winter offensive never happened. It's part of Russia's escalation management. If they come too hard too fast, it's more likely to provoke direct US/Nato involvement (while they still have enough conventional weapons left).. Also, their meat grinder strategy/poke-here-and-there strategy is working, it's costs less of their lives, the Ukrainians keep feeding in their lives, it's steadily burning down the entire west's ammo supplies, etc.
ReplyDeleteAlso makes me wonder where does the real power lie. It's the military that has the guns. Does there ever come a point where its leadership asserts itself and says "ya basta, you've weakened us enough"? Or is civilian control of the military a rock-solid thing?
The Chinese are scared shitless of losing their favored nation trading status with the U.S. Look at how meek they are when told by the U.S. not to supply military aid to Russia.
ReplyDelete“ as NATO countries buckle economically.”
ReplyDeleteLOL all their markets are at all time highs except Germany that was most financially tied to Russia petrochemicals… they will catch up..,
They finally got IOR above zero and they are starting to recover from the previous continuous regulatory capital reduction..,
Russia down almost 50% or wtf…
ReplyDeletehttps://www.cnbc.com/2023/02/16/european-markets-open-to-close-earnings-data-and-news.html
ReplyDelete“ European markets close higher; France’s CAC touches all-time high”
https://www.theguardian.com/business/2023/feb/08/ftse-100-hits-all-time-high
https://www.wsj.com/livecoverage/stock-market-news-today-02-27-2023/card/european-banks-finally-shine-uQHuMmxaiyFt1zU2RUGD
Yeah they’re really buckling…,
Eventually reality will intrude on the public at some point.
ReplyDeleteWere the 5th estate to be captured, I have my doubts that would happen. The 4th estate (i.e. MSM) will feed the public whatever they are ordered to feed them. American and Canadian TV viewers might be told that Ukraine is resisting long after they have surrendered. Total narrative control means the people only perceive reality the way the government wants them to. We're a minority, digging into the topic and following alternative media.
The reality-filled fissures have started (eg, Stoltzenberg publicly admitting the west is basically out-gunned). We're approaching the most dangerous phase of this conflict. It's not clear how the US is going to be able to declare victory and go home. Can they be content with the consolation prize of subjugating Europe while also losing to Russia along with accelerating US relative decline by god knows how many years?
The logical continuation is to announce that evil has managed to score a victory.
Decline...
Where is the concern among the ruling class for the decline in living standards among ordinary people?
That would require a different set of policies.
Concern for the decline of the US empire?
Only the managers of empire/deep state care about that. They'll never admit publicly that they're effing it up. They'll probably find a way to give themselves promotions.
The whole operation is a moneymaking farce. Remember the debacle in Afghanistan? We're hearing crickets from the MSM on that one. And that was a country with greater strategic importance (or perhaps more honestly: profit opportunity) than Ukraine.
Also makes me wonder where does the real power lie. It's the military that has the guns. Does there ever come a point where its leadership asserts itself and says "ya basta, you've weakened us enough"? Or is civilian control of the military a rock-solid thing?
ReplyDeleteWhat civilian control?
Calling the POTUS a civilian in a capital run by warmongers is a stretch of the imagination.
So they don't wear uniforms and they don't risk their lives - yet this is similar to how a business is run. Owners and managers don't do the risky, dirty work.
"Decline...
ReplyDeleteWhere is the concern among the ruling class for the decline in living standards among ordinary people?
That would require a different set of policies."
That's not the decline I'm talking about. I'm talking about the relative decline of US power abroad. It's been massively accelerated by this war. Most of the world has decided not to obey US diktats (China, India, Brazil, Mexico, Saudi Arabia, even Turkey is playing both sides). More trade is occurring outside the dollar. Dedollarization will take a long time, but it's gotten a big kick in the pants. What, maybe 10 years got compressed into one?
We'll see what China does vis-a-vis weapons to Russia. It doesn't appear Russian really needs them, but if I were China, I'd make a big public show of it, have a ribbon cutting ceremony for the factory newly-converted and renovated to produce Russian caliber munitions, along with the first convoy of trucks or train cars with newly manufactured shells crossing over into Russia. Is the US really going to cut off the 1/2 trillion of goods it imports from China?
I would think a military exchange involves Russian technology being transferred to China, who then manufacture it. US arms manufacturers don't like competition - it hurts sales.
ReplyDeleteThe American people won't notice what the mainstream doesn't report. USA #1 will continue as usual at every football pre-game.
I would think a military exchange involves Russian technology being transferred to China, who then manufacture it.
ReplyDeleteExactly. If this happens, China military build up will not only happen faster but it will have much more effective weapons. This may already have been happening to some degree.
US arms manufacturers don't like competition - it hurts sales.
The military also fears it since China has manufacturing capacity that is off the charts and hundreds of millions of potential military personnel. Game over.
Russia is creating a new type of military operations using nuclear weapons to protect against possible US aggression.
ReplyDeleteThe magazine "Military Thought" published by the Ministry of Defense of the Russian Federation spoke about the promising development.
📝 “The United States, losing its leadership in the world, plans to defeat Russia in the course of a “strategic multi-sphere operation.” It includes the instantaneous defeat of up to 70% of Russia's strategic nuclear forces, the neutralization of the remaining and launched carriers with the help of missile defense, and then a nuclear strike on Russian territory, ”the newspaper writes.
In turn, the Russian military is developing a strategic deterrence force operation that will be able to suppress American missile defense systems and inflict unacceptable damage to the enemy.
📝 “A US attack can be prevented if Russia convincingly demonstrates the ability to deter at least one of the stages of the American operation,” the magazine notes.
Slavyangrad on Telegram
https://t.me/Slavyangrad/35515
Dmitry Medvedev on NATO's direct participation in the war against Russia:
ReplyDeleteWestern analysts have heartily admitted that when NATO specialists teach Ukranazis how to use their military equipment in combat, it can be seen as NATO's direct involvement in a military conflict on the side of the Ukrainian regime.
It has been understood since the 1920s that a country can be recognized as a participant in hostilities if, in addition to supplying weapons, it trains its personnel to use them (the Briand-Kellogg Pact of 1928, the Budapest Resolution to the Pact of 1934).
This is what is happening today: Canadian and German instructors on EU territory are already teaching Ukrainian killers how to handle leopards.
If we imagine that the NATO planes delivered in the future will be serviced by their military in the territory of some impudent Poland (the only possibility, taking into account the deplorable state of the defense industry in Malorussia (Ukraine)), it would be a direct entry of Atlantists into the war against Russia with all the ensuing consequences. And all those who make decisions on the supply (repair) of such equipment or means of destruction, along with foreign mercenaries and military instructors, will have to be regarded as legitimate military targets.
Apparently, this is the only thing that keeps the Western infantiles from handing over the planes and means of destruction of increased range to the Kiev junkies. although not for long. The temptation to crush Russia is too great.
Also, - today's events have shown who the US, NATO, and the EU really support. It's not the "freedom-loving people of Ukraine" who don't want to return to the "Muscovite sovok" They are just Nazi bastards, terrorist scum who attack civilians while waving a stinking zhovto-blakit rag. Let them now be exonerated in London, Paris, Berlin, and Washington.
They are your pacifiers, Messrs. Sunak, Macron, Scholz, and Biden! And our attitude toward you is now the same as toward them. Now your countries are participants in the terrorist acts of the Ukrainian regime, and you are direct accomplices of terrorists.
@medvedev_telegram
https://t.me/+PUg0rQrZdiw4YWFh
Does that mean a Russian nuke will take out Parliament Hill in Ottawa?
ReplyDelete