Wednesday, September 7, 2016

Hegemony by Design by Erick San Juan

Hegemony by Design by Erick San Juan

When you study how the United States goes to war, there is a prevalent, though not perfect, pattern. The triggering event is often a sudden crisis that galvanizes popular opinion and becomes the immediate occasion for military intervention, but subsequently is exposed as a misguided perception or outright fabrication. (Source: Joseph Ellis, Los Angeles Times, 7-6-2014)                                                                                                                          

Such pattern, most of the time is considered as false flag operation by a lot of pundits where a superpower wanted to maintain a unipolar world – hegemony over sovereign states. Gradually this 'op' is losing its clout because world leaders are now beginning to realize that humankind has to shift to multipolar world.

Of course the mighty 'Uncle' will not allow such move and so is the containment of Russia and China, countries advocating a multipolar world. Their effort ranges from economic to military cooperation. With the initiative of both Russia and China, there are several cooperation, coalitions and organizations created to counter the hegemony of a single power over the world. Despite that these two big powers don't really trust each other, using the principle of- 'The enemy of my enemy is my friend', they have to cooperate with each other in some ways to protect their interests.

To name some, from the article of Pepe Escobar published in the Information Clearing House – “Slowly but surely — see for instance the possibility of an ATM (Ankara-Tehran-Moscow) coalition in the making — global power continues to insist on shifting East. That goes beyond Russia's pivoting to Asia; Germany's industrialists are just waiting for the right political conjunction, before the end of the decade, to also pivot to Asia, conforming a BMB (Berlin-Moscow-Beijing) coalition.

Germany already rules over Europe. The only way for a global trade power to solidify its reach is to go East. NATO member Germany, with a GDP that outstrips the UK, Canada, Australia and New Zealand, is not even allowed to share information with the "Five Eyes" secret cabal.

Russian President Vladimir Putin, years ago, was keen on a Lisbon-to-Vladivostok emporium. He may eventually be rewarded — delayed gratification?— by BMB, a trade/economic union that, combined with the Chinese-driven One Belt, One Road (OBOR), will eventually dwarf and effectively replace the dwindling post-WWII Anglo-Saxon crafted/controlled international order.

This inexorable movement East underscores all the interconnections — and evolving connectivity — related to the New Silk Roads, the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO), the BRICS's New Development Bank (NDB), the Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank (AIIB), the Eurasia Economic Union (EEU). The crux of RC, the Russia-China strategic partnership, is to make the multipolar, post-Atlantic world happen. Or, updating Ezra Pound, to Make It New.

Such luminary ideologues as Dr. Zbig "Grand Chessboard" Brzezinski — foreign policy mentor to President Barack Obama — are supremely dejected.

When Brzezinski looks at progressive Eurasia integration, he simply cannot fail to detect how those "three grand imperatives of imperial geostrategy" he outlined in 'The Grand Chessboard' are simply dissolving; "to prevent collusion and maintain security dependence among the vassals, to keep tributaries pliant and protected, and to keep the barbarians from coming together."

Those GCC vassals — starting with the House of Saud — are now terrified about their own security; same with the hysteric Baltics. Tributaries are not pliant anymore — and that includes an array of Europeans. The "barbarians" coming together are in fact old civilizations — China, Persia, Russia — fed up with upstart-controlled unipolarity.

Unsurprisingly, to "contain" RC, defined as "potentially threatening" (the Pentagon considers the threats are existential) Brzezinski suggests — what else — Divide and Rule; as in "containing the least predictable but potentially the most likely to overreach." Still he doesn't know which is which; "Currently, the more likely to overreach is Russia, but in the longer run it could be China."   

The board game will have to reach a point where a change of players and rules of the game be created in order to prevent a world war. Although we have to accept that the change of players on the side of the single superpower will affect the pivot from unipolar to multipolar, or worst to stage a war or not.

“In many aspects, not much has changed from 24 years ago when, only three months after the dissolution of the USSR, the Pentagon's Defense Planning Guidance proclaimed.

"Our first objective is to prevent the reemergence of a new rival…This requires that we endeavor to prevent any hostile power from dominating a region whose resources would, under consolidated control, be sufficient to generate global power. These regions include Western Europe, East Asia, the territory of the former Soviet Union and southwest Asia."

Talk about a prescient road map of what's happening right now; the "rival",  hostile power is actually two powers involved in a strategic partnership: Russia and China. 

Compounding this Pentagon nightmare, the endgame keeps drawing near; the next manifestations and reverberations of the never-ending 2008 financial crisis may eventually torpedo the fundamentals of the global "order" — as in the petrodollar racket/tributary scam.

There will be blood. Hillary Clinton smells it already — from Syria to Iran to the South China Sea. The question is whether she — and virtually the whole Beltway establishment behind her — will be mad enough to provoke Russia and China and buy a one-way ticket to post-MAD (Mutual Assured Destruction) territory.”

The programmed world war is coming as designed. Can the emerging multipolar world prevent it from happening? Scary indeed.

No comments: