Southeast Asia on Course to Ukraine-Style Crisis Amid US Militarization of Philippines
By Ilya Tsukanov – Sputnik – 22.04.2024
US and Philippine troops kicked off the largest iteration of their annual Balikatan exercises in decades this week, with this year’s drills involving some 11,000 US and 5,000 Filipino military personnel, plus forces from Australia and France. Geopolitical analyst and former US Marine Brian Berletic explains why the drills are so dangerous.
Chinese diplomatic and military officials slammed Washington and Manila over the Balikatan drills on Monday, accusing participants of attempting to “flex” their “gunboat muscles,” stoking confrontation in the South China Sea and undermining regional security.
“Reality has shown that those who make deliberate provocations, stoke tensions, or support one side against another for selfish gains will ultimately only hurt themselves,” Chinese Central Military Commission Zhang Youxia said, warning that US-led attempts at “maritime containment, encirclement and island blockades will only plunge the world into a vortex of division and turbulence.”
The Chinese military plans to increase its naval and air patrols in the South China Sea amid the US-Philippines exercises, which will run until May 10, and include everything from maritime security and air defense operations to cyber and information warfare, and simulate the seizure of islands in the vicinity of Taiwan and the South China Sea.
Crucially, drilling will include naval exercises outside the Philippines’ internationally recognized territorial waters near the disputed South China Sea – parts of which are claimed by both Manila and Beijing.
Former Philippines president Rodrigo Duterte warned current President Bongbong Marcos Jr last week about the risks of cozying up with the US at the expense of balanced relations with China, accusing Washington of trying to provoke a war between the Philippines and China, and emphasizing that he doesn’t believe “America will die for us” if tensions grow into direct clashes.
“I would remove the bases. And I would tell the Americans, you have so many ships, so you do not need my island as a launching pad or a launching deck for you,” Duterte said.
Assuming office in 2022, the Marcos Jr. government moved to expand the Philippines’ Enhanced Defense Cooperation Agreement with the United States, nearly doubling the number of military bases in the country that the US gets access to from five to nine in 2023. Two of the facilities, the Antonio Bautista Air Base and the Balabac Island Air Base in the Palawan archipelago, border directly on contested waters in the South China Sea.
Echoes of Ukrainian Escalation
Filipinos are right to be concerned about US attempts to militarize their country, says former US Marine-turned author, journalist and independent geopolitical analyst Brian Berletic.
“The Philippines were previously a US colony gaining independence only in 1945. Since then, the US has attempted to reassert political control over the country as well as maintain a large US military presence on its shores. The goal is to militarize the country and use it as part of a wider united front against China,” Berletic told Sputnik.
“Exercises like Balikatan give the US an opportunity to shape the Philippines’ armed forces into a suitable proxy for a potential conflict with China,” the observer warned.
The creeping militarization of the island nation is not unlike processes witnessed in the aftermath of the Euromaidan coup d’état in Ukraine in 2014, which were followed by joint military exercises involving US and Ukrainian troops, Berletic recalled.
These processes ultimately culminated in the 2022 escalation of the Donbass crisis into a full-blown NATO-Russia proxy war.
“Washington’s primary objective in the Asia-Pacific region is to encircle and contain China. To do this, the US is attempting to compromise the governments of nations along China’s periphery including the Philippines, establish a US military presence within their borders, and militarize these countries against China,” the observer explained.
In addition to allowing the US to move its military assets “dangerously close to Chinese territory,” including in the disputed waters of the South China Sea and off the shores of the breakaway Chinese island province of Taiwan, US activities in the Philippines are designed to take advantage of and artificially inflame outstanding regional maritime disputes.
This enables Washington to “both justify a larger US military presence in the region, and turn nations in the region against China,” Berletic said.
“This will result in a similar crisis as seen in Europe where the US not only used Ukraine in a highly destructive proxy war against Russia, but also decimated Europe’s economy, socio-political stability, and placed the entire region on the precipice of a US-driven war,” Berletic fears.
South China Sea Dispute
The dispute between China, the Philippines and other nations over the strategic, energy and fishing resource-rich waters of the South China Sea dates back to the immediate post-WWII period, with Beijing staking claims on the basis of imperial dynasties’ near total control over waters in the area prior to the arrival of the Europeans and Americans in the region.
China has been exploring a regional dispute mechanism with its South China Sea neighbors since 2002, and has called on Washington – which has no claims to the region, to butt out. The US has gradually ramped up its military presence in the region since the early 2010s, when Obama Secretary of State Hillary Clinton called the South China Sea a matter of US “national interest.” In addition to shoring up a network of alliances and undermining Chinese negotiating efforts, the US has deployed Navy and Coast Guard ships into the South China Sea on so-called ‘freedom of navigation’ missions to challenge Chinese sovereignty claims. These missions have resulted in a series of close calls between Chinese, US and US-allied warships and military aircraft.
America’s “national interest” in the South China Sea is also inexorably tied in part to a strategy of containing China through the so-called ‘Island Chain Strategy’, which envisions a broad network of US bases and bilateral pacts with regional powers to prevent the Chinese Navy from being able to mount operations beyond its home waters.
World Military Expenditure Reaches All-Time High of $2,443Bln in 2023 – SIPRI
Sputnik – 22.04.2024
Global military expenditure increased by 6.8% in 2023 year-over-year and reached a new record high of $2,443 billion, with the three largest spenders being the US, China and Russia, according to new data published on Monday by the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute (SIPRI).
“World military expenditure rose for the ninth consecutive year to an all-time high of $2,443 billion,” SIPRI said.
Moreover, military expenditure increased in all five of the geographical regions defined by SIPRI, the institute added.
The US remained the world’s biggest military spender with a 37% share of the world total and $916 billion spent in 2023. It is followed by China with a 12% share and an estimated $296 billion spent on the military and Russia with a 4.5% share and an estimated $109 billion spent on defense last year, which represents a 24% increase compared to 2022.
Ukraine, the eighth largest spender in 2023, increased its military spending by 51% year-over-year to $64.8 billion, which is 58% of the country’s total government spending.
The Middle East has seen a 9% surge in military spending, with Israel’s spending growing by 24% to $27.5 billion amid its operation in the Gaza Strip, the institute added.
US house speaker announces ‘new axis of evil’
RT | April 19, 2024
In a dramatic break from his party’s hardline conservative base, US House Speaker MIke Johnson this week praised the country’s deep state, named Russia, China, and Iran as an “axis of evil,” and vowed to put his job on the line to funnel more than $60 billion to Kiev.
For months, Johnson has resisted bringing a $95 billion foreign aid bill to a vote, arguing that neither he nor his fellow Republicans could support such a bill – which would give $14 billion in military aid to Israel and $60 billion to Ukraine – without it being tied to an overhaul of US border security.
However, after a series of recent meetings with US intelligence chiefs, Johnson has changed his tune.
“This is a critical time right now, a critical time on the world stage,” Johnson told reporters on Wednesday. “I think providing lethal aid to Ukraine right now is critically important. I really do. I really do believe the intel and the briefings that we’ve gotten.”
“I believe [Chinese President] Xi [Jinping] and [Russian President] Vladimir Putin and Iran really are an axis of evil,” he continued. “I think they’re in coordination on this. I think that Vladimir Putin would continue to march through Europe if he were allowed.”
Johnson’s comments represented a break with the Republican Party’s pro-Trump wing. These supporters of the former president – most prominent among them Georgia Representative Marjorie Taylor Greene and Florida Rep. Matt Gaetz – view the country’s intelligence agencies as arms of the anti-Trump “deep state,” and have called for the flow of money to Kiev to be halted.
“Fighting a proxy war with Russia in Ukraine, which is a non-NATO member nation, is not protecting America’s national security interests, it doesn’t protect the United States of America, as a matter of fact, it pushes us closer and closer to world war three,” Greene told journalist Tucker Carlson earlier this month.
Johnson’s reference to an “axis of evil,” however, invokes the more interventionist GOP of the past. Coined by speechwriter David Frum, the phrase was first used by George W. Bush to refer to Iran, Iraq, and North Korea in the months leading up to the invasion of Iraq. Former National Security Adviser John Bolton later added Cuba, Libya and Syria to the list.
Despite resistance from some of its Republican members, the House Rules Committee agreed on Thursday to split the foreign aid bill into three separate bills – one each for Ukraine, Israel, and Taiwan. The house voted in favor of this move on Friday, leaving Johnson free to schedule a vote on each bill for Saturday, even as Greene filed a motion to remove him from the speakership.
Johnson said on Wednesday that he anticipated such a move, telling reporters that he was willing to “take personal risk” to pass the bills.
US Will Try to Rally Other Nations to Sanction Iran Over Israel Attack
By Kyle Anzalone | The Libertarian Institute | April 16, 2024
US Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen will attempt to convince the international community to increase economic penalties on Iran as punishment for the drone and missile barrage Tehran launched at Israel. Iran’s attack followed Israel’s assassination of several high-ranking officials when Tel Aviv bombed Tehran’s consulate in Damascus.
On Tuesday, Axios reported that the Treasury is preparing new sanctions to levy on Iran and will use an International Monetary Fund (IMF) meeting later this week to try to convince other countries to join. “All options to disrupt terrorist financing of Iran continue to be on the table,” she said.
The sanctions would be a response to Iran’s drone and missile attack on Israel. The Iranian attack was a response to Israel’s bombing of the Iranian consulate in Syria, which killed 16 people, including seven IRGC officials.
“Treasury will not hesitate to work with our allies to use our sanctions authority to continue disrupting the Iranian regime’s malign and destabilizing activity,” Yellen is set to say during her opening remarks at the IMF conference. “The attack by Iran and its proxies underscores the importance of Treasury’s work to use our economic tools to counter Iran’s malign activity.”
According to Axios, Washington hopes the sanctions will show Tel Aviv that there is a way to punish Tehran without a direct attack on Iran. The war government in Tel Aviv says it will respond to the Iranian attack “clearly and forcefully.”
However, the Washington Post notes that the White House has few options for sanctioning Tehran as the Iranian economy is already one of the most heavily sanctioned. The Post explains that one of Washington’s few options for expanding sanctions on Iran is to blacklist Chinese firms purchasing Iranian crude oil.
Pursuing that path may create more problems for the White House as it will likely upset Beijing and drive up oil prices. The Biden administration is seeking to prevent an increase in gas prices in an election year and has previously asked Ukraine not to attack Russian energy infrastructure.
Why US Scheme to Kill Russia’s Arctic LNG 2 is Dead in the Water
By Ekaterina Blinova – Sputnik – 16.04.2024
The US is trying to upend Russia’s Arctic LNG 2 project and do whatever it takes to ensure it is “dead in the water.” Will Washington succeed in killing Russia’s bold energy endeavor?
The US plans to use sanctions to asphyxiate the Arctic LNG-2 gas liquefaction project by the Russian company Novatek, the Wall Street Journal reported on Sunday, citing US Assistant Secretary of State for Energy Geoffrey Pyatt.
In particular, Washington is trying to prevent Moscow from receiving specialized ice-class tankers needed for transporting liquefied natural gas (LNG). As a result, the South Korean shipbuilder Hanwha Ocean, assigned with building six gas carriers for the project, has ceased cooperation with the customer.
Washington’s actions go well beyond international law or free market rules, according to Stanislav Mitrakhovich, leading expert of the National Energy Security Foundation and the Financial University under the Government of the Russian Federation.
“The Americans simply use their clout in the world, that is, their financial, political, and technological influence, to force the whole world to act in the way they want,” Mitrakhovich clarified.
When it comes to Russia’s energy trade, the US has a long history of trying to squeeze the nation out of the European market under various pretexts. Eventually, Washington managed to force the EU into severing energy ties with Russia (to Europe’s detriment) after the beginning of the special military operation in Ukraine in February 2022.
In September 2022, the Nord Stream pipelines carrying natural gas from Russia to Europe were destroyed by “unknown perpetrators”, believed by Pulitzer Prize-winning journalist Seymour Hersh to be American and Norwegian operatives acting on Team Biden’s orders.
Thus, it was hardly surprising that the US emerged as the largest supplier of liquefied natural gas (LNG) to Europe (EU-27 and the UK) in 2022 and 2023, as per the US Energy Information Administration (EIA). Nonetheless, Russia remained Europe’s third-largest LNG supplier. According to some estimates, EU imports of Russian LNG have soared by 40% since February 2022.
Arctic LNG-2 is Russia’s third LNG project. According to expectations, once the endeavor is completed, it would encompass three liquefaction trains producing a total of 19.8 million tons per annum (MTPA) of LNG and up to 1.6 MTPA of stable gas condensate (SGC). Apparently, that does not fit into the US energy market expansion plans.
West No Longer Trustworthy
Russian President Vladimir Putin repeatedly stated that Western restrictions against Russia violate the principles of the World Trade Organization (WTO) and are unfair methods of competition.
According to Mitrakhovich, the US and its allies have demonstrated that they cannot be trusted neither as guarantors of the global economy, nor as standard-bearers, or responsible partners.
“It’s hard to trust the West as a banker because they can seize those assets. It is difficult to trust the West as a technological partner because it can say: ‘I will no longer provide technologies, despite existing contracts.’ The West cannot be trusted as a country that honors contracts; on the contrary, the West has shown in every possible way over the past couple of years that contracts mean little to them, thereby violating the basic principle of Roman law that contracts must be respected,” he pointed out.
Western Sanctions Catalyzed Russia’s Development
That said, Western sanctions have triggered Russia’s re-industrialization and import substation, Mitrakhovich noted.
The expert has no doubts that the work on Arctic LNG-2 will be continued despite Western pressure. It will take time and effort to launch the production of suitable ice-class gas tankers at Russia’s shipbuilding facilities instead of those stuck in South Korea, acknowledged Mitrakhovich, adding that Moscow has another technological partner in Asia.
“I would be glad to see Russian-Chinese cooperation in the field of shipbuilding,” the expert said, referring to vast untapped opportunities in the sphere.
In addition, there are several alternatives of how to proceed with the project without significant delays, Mitrakhovich continued:
“One option is to move the second and third lines of Arctic LNG-2 to the Murmansk region, near the locations where these lines are being technologically built. What is interesting about the transfer to the Murmansk region is that from there gas can be exported to world markets. For example, it can be exported to Asia without going through the ice barrier. In other words, regular tankers will be needed, instead of ice-class ones.”
Western Options are Limited
On top of that, the West’s capabilities of hindering Russia’s flagship LNG projects are limited, according to Sputnik’s interlocutor. Even though the EU Parliament has recently approved legal options to block Russian LNG imports to the Old Continent and the US has vowed to introduce new sanctions as well, other global players are continuing to boost energy cooperation with Moscow, the expert stressed.
“Thirty years ago, in 1994, when there was a US unipolar moment, the Americans could do almost anything in the world, and few people could withstand them,” Mitrakhovich noted. “Now the situation has changed. There are countries that are acting independently on the world arena. These are Russia, China and India. And they can use their technologies, expand mutual trade, and so on. Therefore, America will not be able to completely stifle the independence of these countries,” he pointed out.
Furthermore, Washington’s aggressive actions on the world stage are accelerating the pace of rapprochement between major Eurasian players, the expert highlighted.
“The Chinese see how unceremoniously the Americans are acting. And in fact, all these American attacks against Russia are being actively studied in China. I think this will ultimately push the Chinese to focus more on cooperation with Russia instead of that with America,” he said.
“I think that the [Russo-Chinese] project Power of Siberia-2 needs to be accelerated, because in the event of a mess in Taiwan the Americans could limit the supply of all sorts of commodities to China by sea. And if there is a pipe from Russia, [China wouldn’t suffer from a possible energy blockade]. Russia’s LNG exports could also be redirected to China (…) along the safe Northern Sea Route,”he said.
The West can throw sand in Russia’s gears, but it cannot stop the nation’s industrial and technological development based on its vast resources, expertise, and international links, the expert concluded.
Scholz has one trump card in talks with China, but he’ll never use it
By Tarik Cyril Amar | RT | April 16, 2024
German Chancellor Olaf Scholz is on a three-day visit to China. He is not traveling alone. A large delegation of German business representatives, including from flagship companies such as Mercedes, Siemens, and BMW, is coming along. Scholz’s agenda is ambitious: The chancellor wishes to talk about international trade and competition, climate politics, the tensions over Taiwan, the war in Ukraine and Beijing’s relationship with Russia. Since Iran has just made use of its clear right to self-defense and retaliated following Israel’s illegal attack on Tehran’s diplomatic premises in Damascus, Scholz felt compelled to make a statement about that as well.
Two of these topics tower above the others: matters of trade and the relationship between China and Russia. Regarding trade, the crucial issue is that the West in general – led by the US – has embarked on a policy of de facto economic warfare against China, while constantly threatening to escalate further.
That was the essence of Janet Yellen’s recent Beijing trip; the US Treasury Secretary arrived with a list of demands to curb what America denounced as Chinese “overcapacity” and dumping, and left with a blunt warning that “nothing was off the table” in terms of additional strikes against China’s economy.
Then there is the EU, which as usual, follows Washington’s lead. Under hardliners like European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen and Vice President Margrethe Vestager, Brussels is ramping up anti-Chinese rhetoric and measures. Beijing has officially been declared a “partner for cooperation, an economic competitor, and a systemic rival.” With the EU Commission defining “economic security” clearly in opposition to China and launching probes targeting Chinese electric vehicles, wind turbines, and soon the procurement of medical devices, the accent clearly is on competitor and rival.
At the same time, however, German business leaders know that they cannot afford a policy of sustained conflict. A high-ranking Siemens executive has just gone public with a warning that “decoupling” from Chinese manufacturing would take “decades.” That, clearly, is just another way of saying it’s a very bad idea to even try.
Superficially, it may appear that there is an opportunity here for Scholz – an opportunist to a fault – to appear as a mediator or, at least, to deftly balance and weave between competing demands. The Global Times, a media outlet owned by the Central Committee of the Chinese Communist Party, prefaced the chancellor’s visit with a generally welcoming article, depicting Scholz as, in essence, a dove among hawks, arguing that while Foreign Minister Annalena Baerbock and Economic Minister Robert Habeck stand for confrontation, the chancellor is seeking to find a balanced approach.
Yet, even if he wanted to try to be smart and flexible, Scholz is hamstrung in multiple ways. He will struggle to be taken seriously because both Germany and its chancellor lack international standing, and Germany lacks leverage in its relationship with China.
Let’s look at the leverage deficit first: In economic terms, the Chinese-German relationship is substantial and complex. Many factors are important; multiple indicators are relevant, such as, for instance, foreign direct investment (which is currently dipping). But overall trade volumes suffice to show that Germany cannot speak to Beijing from a position of strength or even parity.
China, according to 2023 export data, is still Germany’s single biggest trading partner, as Bloomberg has noted. That is not unusual in today’s world: with the second-largest economy in the world (the largest in Purchasing Power Parity terms), China is the top trade partner for a total of 120 countries. China is also the largest (external) trade partner of the European Union as whole. However, from China’s perspective, Germany ranks only 8th among export destinations, less than the US, Japan, and even Vietnam.
None of the above means that the economic relationship with Berlin does not matter to Beijing, but it does mean that it matters even more for Berlin. Among rational actors, such a pattern of mutual dependency is a reason for cooperation. What it certainly is not is one-sided leverage for Germany. If anyone has the whip hand here, it’s China, which may have tried to “gently” signal this fact with Scholz’s intriguingly low-key, not to say humiliating reception on his arrival in the Chinese manufacturing metropolis Chongqing.
In fundamental terms, Germany, according to data from the International Monetary Fund (IMF), is a country of not quite 84 million people (in China, Chongqing alone is home to over 30 million inhabitants) with projected GDP growth this year down to almost zero (0.5 percent). China has a population of over 1.4 billion, and its GDP is estimated to grow by 4.6 percent.
In sum, China’s economy has problems, such as its over-expanded real estate sector, which are inevitable and often obsessively exaggerated by Western “China doomers.” Germany’s economy is a problem.
The German chancellor can only play a weak hand, due to economics. There is only one way to play it well, and that would involve politics. Scholz could create some room for maneuver for Germany if he did what the Global Times article signaled Beijing would like to see from him: to show some autonomy, a little bit of distance between himself and the hardliners now dominating both Washington and Brussels.
Indeed, for the China hawks in the West, the mere possibility that the German chancellor might go off script is such a nightmare scenario it had to be exorcised in one of America’s two most authoritative journals on international politics. Foreign Policy dedicated a whole article to, in essence, asking if Scholz will chicken out and be too conciliatory toward Beijing. If the Global Times sent an invitation of the “an-offer-you-should-not-refuse” kind, Foreign Policy’s message was “don’t you dare.”
Scholz should dare. It would be only rational because it is really the only trump card he has. As Foreign Policy acknowledges, the EU’s hardball approach cannot work if Berlin is not on board. Without the EU toeing the line, Washington’s game would become much more challenging, too. That is power right there: the power to balance and play both sides.
Unfortunately, this is where we come up against Scholz’s very narrow limits. This is no Bismarck. Instead, we are dealing with a chancellor who can be called the most recklessly and – it must be said, spinelessly – subservient to the US in Germany’s post-WWII history. Scholz grinned when Biden announced, in essence, that the US would destroy the Nord Stream pipelines if it felt like it. When it happened, nothing happened: Germany took it and kept grinning.
Under Scholz, Berlin has become a perfect client of the US. Accordingly, there is no real daylight between Berlin and Brussels either; another ultra-Atlanticist German, Ursula von der Leyen, runs the European Commission. True, some observers speculate that Germany is slyly cutting corners, but that will amount to too little, in absolute terms, for Beijing.
The issue of dependency also brings us to the penultimate irony of Scholz’s visit: The German chancellor has let it be known that he intends to challenge Beijing on its policy toward Russia and thus the war in Ukraine. In essence, Scholz seems to believe it is his job – and within his rights – to urge China to loosen its ties with Russia as well as to support the West’s unrealistic proposals for ending the war in Ukraine without acknowledging that Russia is winning it.
There are two things wrong with this astonishingly tone-deaf attitude: First, obviously, neither Germany nor the EU are in a position to make such requests of Beijing. They have neither the arguments nor the power to back them up. In such cases, the wiser and more dignified course is to be quiet. Second, less obviously, who is Scholz to try to interfere in the partnership between Moscow and Beijing, a partnership marked by rationality and respect for both partners’ national interests? As long as Germany offers a spectacle of unquestioning and irrational obedience to Washington, no one will be interested in its advice on how to cooperate.
That was the penultimate irony. Here is the ultimate one: Scholz’s visit is, most fundamentally, an outcome of the fact that the West has not been able to cajole China. With respect to Germany in particular, it is true that, according to a recent poll, two thirds of German businesses active in China complain of unequal treatment. And yet they are there. And yet a German chancellor still arrives with a planeload of business leaders.
The true message of the poll is about how indispensable China is, talk of “derisking” this and “decoupling” that notwithstanding. In the not-too-distant future, a successor of Scholz may well find himself on a similar trip, but to Moscow. Namely, when two realities will have become so compelling that they must be acknowledged: Russia, too, cannot be cajoled by the West; and, for Germany as well as for Europe as a whole, Russia, too, remains indispensable.
Tarik Cyril Amar is a historian from Germany working at Koç University, Istanbul.
All for One and One for All
By William Schryver – imetatronink – April 13, 2024
Russia, China, and Iran have now formed a de facto military and economic alliance — what they prefer to call a “partnership”.
In the case of Russia and China, a comprehensive full-spectrum partnership has emerged: military, economic, and monetary.
Trade between Russia and China has exploded both quantitatively and qualitatively.
Importantly, trade settlement is overwhelmingly denominated in rubles and renminbi. Use of the dollar and its international mechanisms is being aggressively deprecated.
Russia and China now conduct regular joint naval and air patrols of the western Pacific, from Alaska to the South China Sea.
Russia, China, and Iran conduct regular joint exercises in the Arabian Sea. Those exercises have increased in both scope and frequency in recent years.
Both Russia and China are investing vast sums of capital in Iran, much of it in the energy sector and in ambitious transportation projects aiming to construct fast and efficient trade corridors linking China, Iran, and Russia as primary nodes of Eurasian commerce.
Arms and technology transfers between the three countries have reached unprecedented levels.
Russian foreign minister Sergey Lavrov just concluded several days of talks with Chinese leaders, including both Wang Yi and Xi Jinping. In its report of the talks, the Chinese government’s flagship media organ, Global Times, summarized (in the words of prominent CPC commentator Li Haidong) the current state of the Russia/China relationship:
“China and Russia will not target any third party, but if hegemonic forces threaten China and Russia, or threaten world peace, China and Russia will stand together and fight to protect their own interests and safeguard world peace together.”
It is increasingly evident that Russia, China, and Iran recognize that an attack against any one of them would constitute an existential threat to them all. The strategic interests of all three countries are now inextricably intertwined.
Most importantly, they are united in a single overriding strategic objective: to dismantle the dominion of the long-reigning Anglo-American empire.
Naturally, the rapidly waning global hegemon is not inclined to relinquish its throne without a fight. What form that fight takes remains to be seen. But if the empire attempts to preserve its so-called “rules-based international order” via force of arms, it is essential to understand this incontrovertible reality:
In order for the United States to make war against any ONE of Russia, China, or Iran, it would be necessary to effectively vacate every major US base on the planet in order to concentrate enough military power to undertake the mission.
In a putative war between the United States and Iran, both Russia and China would actively support Iran. I’m not suggesting Russian or Chinese forces would fight alongside Iranians — although that could happen. But it would likely not be necessary. Iran would simply be supplemented with arms and other logistical necessities from both its partners — and quite possibly taken under their nuclear umbrella in an explicit act of deterrence.
Additionally, in consequence of the US weakening its force posture in Europe and the western Pacific in a bid to militarily subdue Iran, Russia and China would be enabled to apply immense pressure to western logistics, trade, and political influence in those regions. This is not to suggest that China would invade Taiwan or Russia would invade the Baltics or Poland. They would need only to exert their dominant influence in what were previously considered to be unassailable American imperial domains in east Asia and Europe.
The empire is stretched so thin and its potential for power projection is so diluted that undertaking even one Big War would be enough to bring the entire house of cards tumbling down.
This is the harsh reality the Masters of Empire are now facing, and no amount of mythologizing about the “limitless” power at their disposal can change it.
There is a vast difference between imagined power and the actual ability to project and sustain power against the adversaries the United States military must now face and defeat in order to prevent or even meaningfully delay the end of American global hegemony.
And, to the extent Russia, China, and Iran are determined to act all for one and one for all, they represent a combination of global military and economic power that cannot be defeated.
China tells US it won’t be bullied on Russia
RT | April 10, 2024
Relations between Beijing and Moscow are their business alone, Chinese Foreign Ministry spokeswoman Mao Ning has said, responding to veiled threats by a senior American diplomat.
US Deputy Secretary of State Kurt Campbell said on Tuesday that any further Russian advances in Ukraine will “have an impact” on the US-China relationship.
“China and Russia have the right to carry out normal cooperation. Such cooperation should not come under external interference or constraint,” Mao said, when asked about Campbell’s comments at Wednesday’s press briefing. “China will not accept the accusations and pressuring.”
Speaking to the nonprofit National Committee on US-China Relations, Campbell – who recently took over from Victoria Nuland – said that recent Russian gains could “alter the balance of power in Europe in ways that are, frankly, unacceptable” to Washington, and that the State Department has told Beijing as much.
“On Ukraine, China has always taken an objective and just position and played a constructive role in actively promoting peace talks,” Mao told reporters. “If certain countries truly care about peace and want an early end to the crisis, they should reflect on the root cause of the crisis and do something that will actually help bring about peace, rather than deflect the blame to China.”
Beijing has repeatedly resisted US pressure to side with Kiev and join the Washington-led embargo against Moscow.
Campbell’s remarks echoed the statements made by US Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen during her visit to China earlier this week. Mao responded by saying that China would “take resolute measures to safeguard our legitimate rights and interests.”
On Wednesday, the Chinese Foreign Ministry spokeswoman also condemned US travel warnings as “totally unwarranted,” “wrongful” and “groundless,” noting that they have “deterred many Americans” who wanted to visit the country.
China and other members of BRICS have helped Russia mitigate the “illegal policy of unilateral sanctions” by the West, Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov said on Tuesday, after meeting his counterpart Wang Yi in Beijing.
Moscow’s trade with the rest of the world has surged over the past two years, more than offsetting the embargo by the US and its allies, imposed over the Ukraine conflict.
Xi meets Lavrov, reaffirms China’s emphasis on partnership with Russia
By Yang Sheng | Global Times | April 9, 2024
Chinese President Xi Jinping met with Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov on Tuesday in Beijing. Chinese analysts said the meeting sends a strong signal that China will firmly develop its strategic partnership with Russia, despite pressure from the West. The China-Russia partnership continues to be key for the global strategic balance and the hope for promoting a multipolar world in which countries of the Global South will have greater roles to play.
Xi asked Lavrov to convey his sincere greetings to Russian President Vladimir Putin. Noting that this year marks the 75th anniversary of the establishment of diplomatic ties between the two countries, Xi said China and Russia have embarked on a new path of harmonious coexistence and win-win cooperation between major countries and neighbors, which has benefited the two countries and their peoples and contributed wisdom and strength to international fairness and justice, the Xinhua News Agency reported on Tuesday.
Earlier in the day, Chinese Foreign Minister Wang Yi held talks with Lavrov in Beijing, and both sides expressed hope for strengthening practical cooperation in various fields, Xinhua reported.
Wang, also a member of the Political Bureau of the Communist Party of China Central Committee, said that China is willing to work with Russia, in accordance with the consensus reached by the two heads of state, to strengthen the synergy of the two countries’ development plans and promote practical cooperation in various fields.
The top diplomats of the two countries held a joint press conference after their meeting. Wang mentioned “five always” at the press conference. For example, he said that the two countries should always follow the strategic guidance of head-of-state diplomacy, and should always adhere to the principle of no-alliance, no-confrontation and no-targeting at any third party.
China and Russia should always stay on the right course on major matters of principle. As permanent members of the UN Security Council and major emerging countries, China and Russia actively respond to the common aspirations and legitimate concerns of the people of all countries, advocate a new path of state-to-state relations featuring dialogue and partnership rather than confrontation and alliance, and actively promote the building of a community with a shared future for humanity, said Wang.
Yang Jin, an associate research fellow at the Institute of Russian, Eastern European and Central Asian Studies at the Chinese Academy of Social Sciences, told the Global Times on Tuesday that the remarks made by Xi and the “five always” raised by Wang provide a “framework and outline” for the future development of the China-Russia comprehensive strategic partnership of coordination.
Yet many voices from the West, mainly from the US as well as some senior NATO officials, insist on depicting the China-Russia relationship as akin to an “anti-West alliance,” which is completely wrong. By reaffirming the principles of “non-alignment, non-confrontation, and not targeting any third party,” China and Russia are refuting those voices with a clear stance, experts said.
Multipolar world
China always attaches great importance to the development of China-Russia relations, and stands ready to strengthen bilateral communication with Russia and enhance multilateral strategic coordination in BRICS and the Shanghai Cooperation Organisation (SCO), Xi said when meeting with the visiting Russian top diplomat.
Xi said that the two countries will show more responsibility, unite countries in the Global South in the spirit of equality, openness, transparency and inclusiveness, promote the reform of the global governance system, and vigorously lead the building of a community with a shared future for humanity.
China and Russia are trying to promote a multipolar world where developing countries and emerging economies of the Global South will play a greater role, which is the antithesis of the unipolar world dominated by the US, analysts said.
“China and Russia will not target any third party, but if hegemonic forces threaten China and Russia, or threaten world peace, China and Russia will stand together and fight to protect their own interests and safeguard world peace together,” said Li Haidong, a professor at the China Foreign Affairs University.
This is why China and Russia, as well as other members in the UN Security Council, are pushing an immediate cease-fire and the resumption of humanitarian aid to Gaza, even as the US vetoed these attempts time and again, before the Ramadan cease-fire resolution eventually passed on March 25, experts said.
Wang said at the joint press conference that Russia will hold the BRICS presidency this year, and China will take over the rotating presidency of SCO this year. The two sides will support each other’s chairmanship and light up the “moment of South” global governance.
Richard Sakwa, professor of Russian and European politics at the School of Politics and International Relations of the UK’s University of Kent, told the Global Times at a forum in Beijing on March 28 that China-Russia relations are “one of the key axes for international politics, and it’s not only very important but also necessary” to maintain the global strategic balance.
Lavrov said at the meeting with Wang that Russia supports the China-initiated Global Security Initiative, and is willing to deepen cooperation with China on multilateral platforms to promote the establishment of a more just and democratic international order.
The two sides also had in-depth exchanges on the Ukraine issue, the Palestinian-Israeli conflict, the situation in the Asia-Pacific region and other international and regional issues of common concern.
Ukraine crisis and counterterrorism
Wang said at the joint press conference with Lavrov that on the Ukraine issue, China hopes to see a “cease-fire and an end to the war as soon as possible.” China supports the timely convening of an international conference recognized by both Russia and Ukraine, with equal participation by all parties, and a fair discussion of all peace options, whether it is track one or track two, Wang noted.
Cui Heng, a scholar from the Shanghai-based China National Institute for SCO International Exchange and Judicial Cooperation, told the Global Times on Tuesday that “some Western countries have always blamed China for its ‘pro-Russia’ stance, but actually we are just asking for a mechanism that can be accepted by all parties and can treat everyone equally.”
“China’s stance is based on the desire to stop the bloodshed, but the US’ stance is to use the [Russia-Ukraine] conflict to weaken Russia as much as possible. The development of the crisis to some extent depends on the US presidential election later this year,” Cui noted “If Donald Trump is elected, there will be a chance to break the deadlock, but if Joe Biden gets reelected, we might also see some changes, as Washington and its allies might not be able to afford the war anymore.”
Xi stressed at the meeting with Lavrov that China supports the Russian people in following a development path that suits their national conditions, and supports Russia in combating terrorism and maintaining social security and stability.
At the joint press conference with Lavrov on Tuesday, Wang stressed that China must also pay attention to the resolution of other global and regional hot spot issues, including continuing to counter terrorism. “China once again reiterated its condemnation of the terrorist attack in Moscow and its condolences and support for Russia,” said Wang.
“The Chinese people are also victims of terrorism, and terrorism has always been a common threat facing mankind. The international community should resolutely combat all forms of terrorism with a ‘zero tolerance’ attitude, firmly support the efforts of all parties to maintain national security and stability, strengthen international anti-terrorism cooperation, coordinate development and security, and eliminate the breeding grounds for terrorism,” Wang remarked.
“I want to thank China for their condolences in connection with the terrorist attack in the Moscow Region on March 22, and for their support of Russia’s fight against terrorism,” Lavrov said during the meeting with Wang.
All those involved [in the terrorist attack] will be certainly punished, Russia’s top diplomat stated. “Our [Russia-China] cooperation on counter-terrorism will continue, including within the framework of multilateral institutions.”
China and Russia are two major powers in the SCO, and counter-terrorism cooperation between them and other SCO members is significant for regional peace and stability, especially when the threat of terrorism has reemerged in relevant regions, experts said. Apart from the discussion on the diplomatic level, the militaries, law-enforcement and intelligence agencies of the two countries will promote cooperation on combating terrorism, experts said.
Star wars coming – top US general
RT | April 9, 2024
The possibility of a conflict in space is no longer just theoretical, General Stephen Whiting, head of the US Space Command, said on Tuesday.
Speaking at the 39th Space Symposium at the command’s headquarters in Colorado Springs, Whiting painted an alarming picture of Russian and Chinese orbital capabilities.
China has built a “kill web over the Pacific Ocean to find, fix, track and, yes, target US and allied military capabilities,” Whiting said, describing Beijing’s efforts as moving at “breathtaking speed.”
Since 2018, Russia has doubled and China has tripled the number of their intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance (ISR) satellites in orbit, while also testing and fielding anti-satellite weapons. Meanwhile, the US has “the world’s best space architectures,” but its military constellations are “optimized for a benign environment,” he said.
Russian and Chinese space weapons “hold at risk our modern way of life and how we defend this nation, and we must be able to deter and counter these threats when called upon to achieve space superiority,” the general said.
Whiting described a possible armed conflict in space as “economically and environmentally devastating, perhaps for decades,” and said the US wishes to keep things in the state of “enduring competition” instead.
The US is already working with Canada, Australia and the UK on Operation Olympic Defender, a program intended to “optimize space operations,” according to the Space Command. Whiting announced that Germany, France and New Zealand have been invited to join as well.
He also revealed that the command’s new Capability Assessment and Validation Environment (CAVE) has achieved “minimum viable capability.” The modeling and simulation laboratory will enable the US military to “derive better ways of deterring and planning to conduct operations for a war that’s never happened, and a war we don’t want to happen,” he said.
Washington recently accused Moscow of having undisclosed anti-satellite capabilities, possibly nuclear in nature. Russian President Vladimir Putin said the US claims were “unfounded” and a ploy to manipulate arms control talks. The Russian embassy in Washington has also accused the US of using “Russophobic slogans” to mask its own plans to militarize space.
New hacking allegations against China aren’t what they seem
By Timur Fomenko | RT | April 5, 2024
In March, the UK, in conjunction with the US and other members of the Five Eyes intelligence alliance, accused China of engaging in a state-sponsored hacking campaign against them. In response to the alleged ‘attack’ they launched coordinated sanctions against a small group of hackers and their associated businesses.
The sanctions were particularly big news in Britain, where the government suddenly decided that Beijing had been behind a hack on the electoral commission three years ago. Notably, the country’s Conservative party-aligned newspapers all pushed this narrative in an aggressive fashion.
These accusations by the Five Eyes nations are not so much genuine concerns as they are a deliberate and opportunistic act of political theatre which, largely driven by the US, seeks to slander China for diplomatic and political gain. The sanctions, although narrow in scope and thus meaningless, are designed to try and send a message to and about China. It is essentially a fearmongering campaign, which seeks to both undermine Beijing’s engagement with other countries and serve domestic political purposes in the US.
The rhythm of US escalation and de-escalation with China
The US has an adept foreign policy whereby it intentionally chooses to escalate and de-escalate tensions with China at opportune moments, which is precisely why calls for “engagement” with Beijing coming from Washington D.C. cannot be trusted. The US does not change its goals or its policies, only its tactics in consideration of what suits it at that particular moment. Hence it has always alternated between overtures and deliberate provocations. It usually does so by having a certain report or development leaked to the media at an opportunistic time, in order to craft a particular narrative which mandates a certain set of reactions and policy responses.
To give some examples of such, the Trump administration played down tensions with China directly in 2019, even amidst the Hong Kong crisis, in order to secure a “trade deal” with Beijing. Once it got what it wanted by 2020, and the Covid-19 pandemic struck, it deliberately unleashed a full-on crusade against Beijing on every front. Similarly, the Biden administration came into office and then immediately upped tensions with China on the Xinjiang issue in order to damage China’s ties with Europe in a build-up to coordinated sanctions as a display of transatlantic unity.
After this was done, it then decided it wanted to “cool” things down for a bit and establish “guardrails” so the rhetoric guns went silent for a few months as Washington reached out to Beijing. Then, as the 2022 Beijing Winter Olympics came, it took the “Xinjiang card” off the shelf again with a number of timed leaks and publications geared towards supporting a Winter Olympics boycott, as well as a sweeping ban on all Xinjiang goods under the premise of “forced labour” at that time.
What we see is that the US does not truly de-escalate with China, it “blows hot and cold” and essentially manipulates the media cycle to pursue its policy preferences as it sees fit. This means that major issues pertaining to China only tend to appear when there is an agenda serving it.
The newest phase
Now, the Biden administration has made a political design to escalate tensions with China by accusing it, in coordination with the Five Eyes, of state-backed hacking and cybercrime. The fact that the British government would sit on such an accusation for three years suggests both clear political purpose and timing. The question is, why? First, we are approaching a Presidential election in the US. It was always an inevitability that the administration would want to appear “tough” on China to prevent the issue from being used as an attack point by Biden’s rival, Donald Trump. As seen in 2020, an election year tends to become a year of very aggressive rhetoric and extreme theatrics.
Secondly, there is the goal of undermining China’s engagement with Europe. It has been publicly announced that Xi Jinping will visit a number of European countries in May, including France. As stated above, the US, with the support of the Five Eyes countries, actively seeks to damage Chinese diplomacy with Europe by weaponizing negative publicity in order to narrow political space for engagement.
What we see from this is that the US engages China on its own terms, but seeks to prevent those it deems as “allies” from doing the same, and thus resorts to psychological warfare through the manipulation of mass media.
In conclusion, when one sees these strategies being utilised, one recognises that the Western media has far less independence and impartiality than it claims to have, but is indirectly subject to the preferences of US policy. When the White House says “jump”, reporters ask, “how high?” and thus we see that a new propaganda campaign has been cultivated against Beijing, but of course, we should not be blind to the reality that there is no greater weaponisation of cyberspace and espionage in the world than the system created by the Five Eyes. And are we really going to pretend the CIA doesn’t hack anyone?
Featured Video
Chinese jet fuel and the myth of energy independence
or go to
Aletho News Archives – Video-Images
From the Archives
The Dirty Little Secret behind the “Global Terrorism Index”
The Omission of Israeli Terrorism in the Occupied Palestinian Territories
By Karin Brothers | Global Research | December 6, 2014
… The Israeli settlements — all of which are illegal – have been identified as a major impediment to peace. The refusal of a major “global” terrorism report to name the Israeli settlers as one of the groups most responsible for terrorism not only misrepresents a major source of regional violence but exposes the Global Terrorism Index as a propaganda tool that supports a U.S. agenda.
In recent years, governments have been attempting to thwart terrorism by blocking supportive fund-raising. When it comes to Israeli settlements, however, the US and Canada actually encourage fund-raising by giving organizations (such as Christian Friends of Israeli Communities (CFOIC) and the Jewish National Fund) financial support in the form of donor tax-deductions.
Charities which provide funds for the Israeli settlements should be regarded as terror-financing organizations. They should not only lose their tax-deductible status, but they should be banned because they support the violation of international humanitarian law. The terror-financing laws that are being strictly enforced for Muslim charities should be applied to Christian and Jewish charities as well. … Read full article
Blog Roll
Aletho News- Ukraine Sea Drone Fired From Libya Hit Russian Tanker in Mediterranean
- IRGC: Iranian forces launched no attacks during ceasefire hours
- Trump Administration Moves To Automate U.S. Military Draft Registration
- Spain orders reopening of Tehran embassy, condemns Israel’s carpet bombing of Lebanon
- Israel faces ‘unsustainable’ strategic crisis following 40-day war against Iran: Analyst
- Iran restricts Hormuz access to 15 vessels per day under ceasefire terms: Report
- The ‘Opposition Party’ Has Done Nothing to Stop the Iran War and Much to Goad Trump Into Continuing It
- Moscow backs Tehran on status of Lebanon in US-Iran deal
- How UK Regulator Ofcom Quietly Bypassed International Law to Police American Speech
- The Black Cube Files: How Former Mossad Operatives Flipped a Nation
- If Americans Knew
- Amnesty: Urgent – Protect Lebanese civilians from brutal escalation in Israeli attacks
- Is The War Against Iran Over?
- Inside the Israeli army’s propaganda wing
- Hundreds of Gaza Amputees Stranded in Legal Limbo
- The gallows law: Israel moves toward executing Palestinian children
- Tucker Carlson: The Path to Peace requires ending ‘special alliance’ with Israel
- This is ceasefire? Israel’s biggest massacre yet in Lebanon, another journalist killed in Gaza – Daily Update
- Tucker Carlson on Israel: This Is the Behavior of an Ally? Really?
- Gazans face a triple crisis: severe shortages of water and bread, healthcare in tatters
- NY Times reports how Netanyahu took the US into Iran War
- No Tricks Zone
- An Inconvenient Tree: Uncovered In Alps… Europe Much Warmer Than Today 6000 Years Ago
- New Study Reports A 60% Slowdown In Greenland’s Ice Loss Rate In The Last Decade
- Low Intensity Tornado Wrecks Major Solar Farm, Creating A Potential Toxic Dump
- New Study Finds Warming Saves Lives…Cold Temperatures 12 Times More Deadly Than Excess Heat
- German Science Blog Accuses PIK Climate Institute Of Hallucinating Climate Tipping Points
- Devastating Assessment Of Comirnaty Vaccine By Former Senior Pfizer Europe Toxicologist
- New Study: CO2 Is ‘Effectively Negligible’ As An Explanatory Climate Change Factor Since 2000
- Former Pfizer Toxicologist Dr. Helmut Sterz Tells Bundestag Hearing Pfizer Vaccine Should Have Never Been Approved
- Energy Expert: Germany’s Nuclear Phaseout Was A “500 Billion Euro Mistake”
- New Research: South Australia’s Mid-Holocene Sea Surface Temperatures Were 4°C Warmer Than Today
Aletho News 