/ world today news/ “We must make NATO global, and after the victory of Ukraine we must strive to divide the Russia-China axis“, such a “new American grand strategy to counter Russia and China” suggests former US national security adviser John Bolton in his article in the “Wall Street Journal”. He calls this the main task for the next president of the United States, and he does not want to see either Biden or his former boss Trump in this post.
What John Bolton has on his tongue is what Uncle Sam has on his mind – is this a fair conclusion? Or, to put it more simply, can Bolton’s public proposals be considered the hidden desires of the American establishment or the “deep state”, the Washington “swamp”?
One can, of course, answer in the negative, especially since Bolton has long had a reputation as a “super hawk”: in the 2000s, he was one of those who promoted the idea of an American attack on Iran (which would have consequences on the order of worse even than the invasion of Iraq), and in a year and a half of working in the White House (in 2018-2019) earned Trump the title of warmonger. Bolton is indeed as aggressive as possible, but he is also one of America’s best specialists in international relations. And the fact that he now defends a radical agenda is explained not only by his character, but also by what he sees: the US is losing its global position. Bolton is one of those who believe that the US can maintain its hegemony, it just needs to act much more firmly, assertively and consistently to do so. What does it offer?
In his previous Wall Street Journal op-ed, he criticized Biden for inconsistency and caution, saying he wants Russia to lose but doesn’t want Ukraine to “really win.” Bolton strongly rejects fears of an escalation of the conflict, a clash between Russia and NATO and even nuclear war. He sees it all as a Russian bluff and part of our deterrence strategy (which he says is ultimately working). Bolton is in favor of allowing Ukraine to use US weapons to strike Russian territory and generally “focus on deterring Putin in various scenarios, up to the threat of his ouster.” That is, to work on the liquidation of Russia – and he talks about this in his new article.
In which it is no longer about the Ukrainian conflict, but about a new “grand” American strategy, because “the United States and its allies cannot afford to drift aimlessly while the tectonic plates of history shift.” A new era has begun in which America faces challenges and must watch out primarily for threats from the growing Russia-China axis, as well as from “countries like Iran and North Korea.”
Bolton lists three critical elements of the new strategy.
To begin with, Washington and allies should immediately increase defense budgets to Reagan-era levels (about six percent of GDP) and maintain such spending for the foreseeable future, without stopping that this would require cuts in other spending items.
There is nothing to comment here: a threefold increase in spending is impossible in any of the European NATO countries without changing the very model of their development. Simply put, European societies will not agree – and no amount of hype about the “Russian threat” will help. Polish leaders can scare the French and Germans with Putin’s tanks in Berlin and Paris, but no one believes them.
Bolton’s second proposal concerns America’s collective defense alliances – they should be “improved and expanded”: “We need to make NATO a global organization by inviting Japan, Australia, Israel and other countries committed to defense spending targets of NATO. An Asian NATO is not inevitable, but there is enormous room for innovative alliances with like-minded countries, including increased cooperation between South Korea, Japan and the United States”.
Will NATO globally contain Russia and China? Exactly – only the participants were not asked. The Europeans are categorically against the spread of the principle of Atlantic solidarity in the Pacific Ocean – only Great Britain wants this. Bolton’s idea in itself fully corresponds to the principles of Anglo-Saxon geopolitics. Great Britain, USA, Canada, Australia – seniority in this family may change, but the goal, that is, global domination, remains unchanged.
The mobilization of Europe on the Asian fronts will not succeed, and the Asians themselves are not ready to align themselves in an anti-Chinese order. In addition, Bolton believes: “The United States, together with partners in Europe and Asia, should integrate Taiwan into the collective security system and increase the amount of military aid.” That is, to be ready for a direct conflict with Beijing. After all, “Taiwan’s inclusion in the collective security system” will automatically immediately lead to a complete severance of relations with China – even Japan and South Korea will not go along with this.
And the idea of including Israel in the new global NATO is truly “spectacular” from the point of view of the possible consequences for the United States. The point is not even that European countries will never agree to this: there is hardly a better way to accelerate the already catastrophic decline of Anglo-Saxon influence in the Greater Middle East and the Islamic world in general than to start the accession process of the Jewish state to the Atlantic Alliance.
But the unrealistic nature of the first two elements of the strategy pales in comparison to the third, final one: “After Ukraine has won the military conflict with Russia, we must seek to split the Russia-China axis. Moscow’s defeat could topple the Putin regime. The new Russian leaders may be so weak that a breakup of Russia, especially east of the Urals, is not unthinkable.Beijing certainly has appetites for this vast territory. An uncontrolled breakup of Russia could give China direct access to the Arctic , including even as far as the Bering Strait bordering Alaska.”
Here Bolton only partially echoes Henry Kissinger, who also fears the collapse of a nuclear Russia. But if the former secretary of state proposes to avoid this after the end of the war, to find a worthy place for Russia in the new world order (that is, to give some security guarantees), then Bolton does not just believe in the victory of Ukraine (that is, the West) – for him, the collapse of Russia is dangerous only because it can strengthen China. To prevent this, it will be necessary to somehow withdraw a defeated, weakened post-Putin Russia from China, possibly by threatening it with a Chinese invasion and promising to restore contacts and trade with Europe and the West in general.
The plan is grand – in its madness. Because it considers Russia only as a subject of foreign will and external strategies, denying the existence of its own strategy and subjectivity.
Russia started its turn to the East (of which relations with China are an important part) even before Crimea – yes, it was slower than it wanted, but it was a conscious strategic choice. More than a decade and a half ago, Russia bet on breaking the Atlantic model of globalization (that is, the era of American hegemony). In the same years, Russia undertook the reintegration of the post-Soviet space through the construction of the Eurasian Union (which was created with a view to the further inclusion of Ukraine).
That is, Russia’s strategy is consistent and unchanged – despite the severity of the open conflict with the West, led by the Anglo-Saxons. Russia cannot lose to the West in Ukraine, Russia cannot disintegrate, Russia cannot become part of China, Russia will not abandon its favorable course towards a strategic alliance with China, Russia will not trust the West. And most importantly, Russia is absolutely certain that the vast majority of humanity is counting on its work to hasten the decline of the Anglo-Saxon world order.
Translation: V. Sergeev
Subscribe to our YouTube channel:
and for the channel or in Telegram:
#America #offered #grand #foreign #policy #strategy
