Geopolitics of multipolarity (Beijing lecture) — Alexander Dugin

I have written about this previously in the comments. Alexander Dugin summarized the main points pretty well. To understand the dynamic going on now in international relations, foreign affairs, military affairs, geopolitics, geostrategy, and choice of tactics, it is necessary to understand this outline in some detail. This is the grand chessboard on which the great game is being played presently between the land powers and their allies and the sea powers and their allies. The stakes are world domination for the foreseeable future, if this is a future given the enormous power of weapons of mass destruction that may be brought into play.

Geopolitika
Geopolitics of multipolarity (Beijing lecture)

Alexander Dugin

See also by Alexander Dugin at Geopolitika

The main principles of multipolar world order

• Philosophically: real pluralism, diversity, multitude of subjects
• Anthropologically: inclusive humanism, multinaturalism
• Geopolitically: complex system of regional powers (Gross Raum)
• Economically: free trade without (neo) liberal dogmatic
• Politically: diversity of political systems (dependeing on historical traditions of each people)
• Culturally: positive acceptance of different identities

We need to begin forming the philosophy of multipolarity that should replace the liberal globalist theory (end of history, Western hegemony, world capitalism, unipolarity and so on)

The basis of the MPW is Russia-China multipolar allience. If there is such allience, MPW exists already today. Russia is one of the two major nuclear powers. China is one of the two major economic powers. If we unite Russian and China in multipolar allience, MPW is already here. India joins immediately after. Entrance of India and Pakistann in SCO is symbol of great importance.

BRI project wnen it includes Russia, is precisely the decisive step toward this multipolar allience. Putin recently suggested to link to BRI Northern Polar Road. So BRI goes eurasian....

Dugin calls it traditionalism as opposed to Western liberalism, but it sounds like a version of liberalism that integrates traditionalism instead of a version of liberalism that regard liberalism and traditionalism as mutually exclusive.

Multipolarity: Greater Eurasia vision

Fredrico Pieraccini — The Strategic Triangle that Is Changing the World

Away from the current chaos in the United States, major developments are progressing, with Iran, Russia and China coordinating on a series of significant moves crucial for the future of the Eurasian continent. With a population of more than five billion people, constituting about two-thirds of the Earth's population, the future of humanity passes through this immense area. Signaling a major change from a unipolar world order based on Europe and the United States to a multipolar world steered by China, Russia and Iran, these Eurasian states are carving out a leading role in the development of the vast continent. As part of the challenges faced by these leading multipolar countries, the disruptive events originating in the post-WWII Euro-Atlantic world order will need to be tackled....

Strategic Culture Foundation
The Strategic Triangle that Is Changing the World
Fredrico Pieraccini

F. William Engdahl — Mackinder Reincarnates–Now Hungary Joins Silk Road

Geopolitics in the 20th and 21st centuries.

New Eastern Outlook
Mackinder Reincarnates–Now Hungary Joins Silk Road

F. William Engdahl

Alfred W. McCoy — Washington's Great Game and Why It's Failing

For even the greatest of empires, geography is often destiny. You wouldn’t know it in Washington, though. America’s political, national security, and foreign policy elites continue to ignore the basics of geopolitics that have shaped the fate of world empires for the past 500 years. Consequently, they have missed the significance of the rapid global changes in Eurasia that are in the process of undermining the grand strategy for world dominion that Washington has pursued these past seven decades.

This is a summary of things I have posted in the past at MNE about geopolitics and geostrategy.

However, I don't like the term "decline." The post is not so much about America's supposed decline as about failure to understand and act on basics of geopolitics and geostrategy that are grounded in geography.

America's geographical situation as an "island" continent is a plus for defense but a minus for dominating world events from the geographical core. Russia and China are well placed for that, being situated at "the geographical pivot of history." With Russia having too much land and too may resources to employ itself and China with too many people and too few resources, their eventual cooperation is ordained by geographically position at the core.

There is no way that the US can permanently dominate them individually or prevent them from combining resources. The only thing possible is a delaying game, and that comes with risks, e.g., the overreach that has ended empires previously. America is already stretching itself in the attempt to project power globally and cover all the bases with bases, for example.

The present strategy of containment and destabilization is creating what Pepe Escobar calls "the Empire of Chaos." That is not a strategy as much as a recipe for disaster.

Moreover, trying to impose liberalism is illiberal. The US is therefore caught in a policy contradiction that is obvious.

Tom Dispatch
Tomgram: Alfred McCoy, Washington's Great Game and Why It's Failing

Alfred W. McCoy | J.R.W. Smail Professor of History, University of Wisconsin-Madison

Francis P. Sempa — Is China Bidding for the Heartland?

Beijing doesn’t have to choose between land and sea predominance. It could have both.

The Diplomat
Is China Bidding for the Heartland?
Francis P. Sempa | Assistant U.S. Attorney for the Middle District of Pennsylvania, an adjunct professor of political science at Wilkes University, and a contributing editor to American Diplomacy

Akhilesh Pillalamarri — India Needs to Join Asia's Emerging 'Chinese Order'

A new Asian order is emerging and South Asia — including India — needs to be a part of it.

In the aftermath of the G20 and Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation (APEC) summits, it is becoming increasingly obvious that a new Asian order, complete with an economic architecture, has emerged. Whether this order is referred to as the “Pacific Age” or a New Silk Road or a pan-Eurasian system, all these terms refer to the same thing: a web of economic interdependence in Asia whose hub is the littoral around the East and South China seas, connecting China, Japan, South Korea, Taiwan, and Southeast Asia. This network of economic prosperity is increasingly being spread by Beijing westward to the rest of Eurasia in an initiative called the “New Silk Road.” Thus, it might not be inaccurate to write that the new Asian economic order can be described as described as the “Chinese Order” in which all roads lead to Zhongnanhai. This is because China’s economy and physical location constitute the hub that drives and connects the rest of Asia. 

Yet as China invests more than $40 billion in overland routes through Central Asia and Russia into Europe and maritime routes from Southeast Asia to the Middle East and Africa, there is one vital region in Asia that is at risk of missing out on joining this new Asian economic and infrastructure network. This region is South Asia, the region that perhaps needs to become part of this hub the most. This would better integrate South Asian countries with each other as well as with their neighbors in Southeast and East Asia. Economic integration within the region and with countries outside of the region is very low. This is despite the fact that China is both India and Pakistan’s largest trade partner (India and Pakistan hardly trade with each other). Most of this trade is one-sided and has not led to massive Chinese investment in infrastructure in either of these countries. South Asian integration into the Asian economic order would benefit all of the region’s countries and would especially help some of the poorest, like Nepal and Afghanistan.

Those who have been following my posts on geopolitics and geostrategy, especially about the world island the geographical pivot of history, will recognize that this is Zbigniew Brzezinski's worst nightmare coming true.

The Diplomat

India Needs to Join Asia's Emerging 'Chinese Order'
A new Asian order is emerging and South Asia — including India — needs to be a part of it.
Akhilesh Pillalamarri

Also

Can India Become the Next China?
Anthony Fensom

Based on OECD projections, the report predicts India outpacing rivals by growing at an average annual rate of 6.8 percent from 2018 to 2030 and 4.3 percent from 2031 to 2060, ahead of China’s 5.4 percent and 2.1 percent, respectively. 

“The demographics of India are more favorable than those of China as China’s labor force has already peaked. Conversely, India still has a young population and will grow at least through 2045 when the country is projected to be home to just under 1 billion workers…India will have 25 percent more workers than China by 2060 while China has 24 percent more today,” the report said. 

The report suggests the “demographic window” that has helped power economic development will close in China by 2020, remaining open in Indonesia until 2035, Malaysia until 2040 and not shutting in India until 2045. 

While China is expected to have a $30.6 trillion economy by 2030 compared to India’s $13.7 trillion, India’s growth is “poised to remain elevated for the foreseeable future, even as China’s economy slows.” Yet the report also cited challenges to the world’s most populous democracy, including its gridlocked lower house, compared to China’s “highly centralized and authoritarian government.”