/ world today news/ Washington‘s most important and terrible secret is that it has no strategy against Russia and China – neither against each of the countries separately, much less against them together. What the US is declaring and doing – “containment of the revisionists” (that is, Moscow and Beijing who have challenged the Atlantic world order) – is simply not working. Or rather, it works the other way around, strategically worsening America’s global standing and exposing the weaknesses of the declining hegemon. Therefore, it must be pretended that everything is under control and nothing unexpected is happening on the part of the Russians and the Chinese.
So did Joe Biden, who over the weekend said the strength of the Russian-Chinese alliance had been “grossly exaggerated”: “Look, I don’t take China lightly. I don’t take Russia lightly, but I think we’re exaggerating it a lot.”
In support of his words, Biden asked: what has China already done for Russia?
“For the last three months, I have been hearing that China is going to provide Russia with significant weapons. They haven’t done it yet, but that doesn’t mean they won’t,” he said.
Great manipulation: first he invented and promoted the topic of “the likelihood of upcoming deliveries of Chinese weapons to Russia”, and then claimed that since they are gone, then this means something (China is afraid of American pressure, China is pretending, not wants to really support Russia and so on). And this is despite the fact that neither Moscow nor Beijing have ever said anything about plans to supply weapons – but who cares.
Biden assures that if China and Russia really create a coalition, then it will not be as strong as the alliances that the US and the West create. And in general: the alliance of Moscow and Beijing will only help the West to unite even more and unite even more countries around it.
Does Biden himself believe what he says? It’s not that important. The problem is that the West no longer has the influence in the world it has had for centuries – and with the prospect of a further decline in the role of a united West, according to the vast majority of observers in various parts of the world
Including many Western analysts who are trying to steer the American “Titanic” off the dangerous course. The most famous of the realist globalists (realists not in the sense that their plans are feasible, but in that they come from reality, unlike the Biden team) is, of course, Henry Kissinger.
In the past year, although he abandoned his own opinion about the impossibility of Ukraine’s admission to NATO, he repeatedly warned against betting on crushing and isolating Russia. In excerpts from his conversation with British historian Neil Ferguson recently published in El Mundo, the former secretary of state praised NATO for rallying around support for Ukraine (“remembering previous threats from Russia”) but warned: “The question now will be how to end this conflict. Ultimately, we have to find a place for Ukraine and a place for Russia if we don’t want Russia to become an outpost of China in Europe.”
The conversation with Ferguson apparently took place before Xi Jinping’s visit to Moscow, but Kissinger’s assessment would not change. A person who built the right (for the United States) ratio in the Moscow-Washington-Beijing triangle is, of course, unpleasant to see how his successors are doing and wants to believe that not all is lost and the situation can be corrected.
At the same time, by momentum, even Kissinger continues to talk about the confrontation between the US and China, rather than between the US and China and Russia. That is, he discusses a more profitable option for America – but he talks about it without any optimism.
Now he already agrees that China and the US are already adversaries – until recently there were hopes that they are more competitors – but at the same time he does not support the absolutely speculative and propaganda thesis that China wants to take the place of the United States. He states: “I don’t think that China is thinking about world domination, but it is quite possible that it will become as powerful as we are. And that is not in our interest.”
Of course, not in the interests of America, because then the States will lose their hegemony (but this is already happening). But for Kissinger, the rise of Chinese power is also dangerous, because he sees it through the prism of a new cold war – comparing it to the last one, the US-Soviet one. And he considers it even more dangerous because China and the US “now have comparable economic resources, which was not the case during the first cold war, and the technologies of destruction have become even more terrifying, especially with the advent of artificial intelligence. “
The flaw in Kissinger’s analysis is that he compares the new confrontation with the old without noticing the fundamental difference. Then it all started with the confrontation of only one country, the USSR, against the entire Western world, which was actually the entire world. Yes, Moscow and the socialist countries were active in both Africa and Asia, trying to impose themselves in Latin America, but in general they represented a closed and small (albeit noticeable) part of the world community.
Now the situation is radically different: in place of the socialist camp, it will simply be the West. Yes, the weight and influence of the United States, Europe, Anglo-Saxon overseas countries (Canada, Australia, New Zealand) and Japan are enormous, but the trend of world development is clearly unfavorable to them. The West will remain first in total power for a long time, but already first among equals (blocs and regional associations), not an absolute hegemon. Not to mention the fact that it will be very, very difficult to maintain its unity – even if we are talking about subordinating Europe to the United States – in the medium term.
Worse, even Kissinger, who usually did not dwell on domestic issues, could not help pointing out that the United States was now “infinitely more divided” than it had been during the Vietnam War: “National interest was a meaningful term, and not subject to discussion. This is now a thing of the past. Every administration now faces unrelenting hostility from the opposition.”
But the divided States cannot agree on what is in their national interest, simply because most of the elite do not see the future of the United States as a nation state. The globalist part of the establishment bet on the preservation of world domination at any cost, putting at stake, among other things, the preservation of the unity of their own country.
As Nikolai Patrushev recalled on Monday, “Russia saved the United States itself at least twice – during the War of Independence and the Civil War. But I think it is inappropriate at this time to help the States maintain their integrity.”
Translation: V. Sergeev
Vote with ballot No. 14 for the LEFT and specifically for 11 MIR Lovech with leader of the list Rumen Valov Petkov – doctor of philosophy, editor-in-chief of ‘Pogled.Info’ and in 25 MIR-Sofia with preferential No. 105. Tell your friends in Lovech and Sofia who to support!?
Subscribe to our YouTube channel:
and for the channel or in Telegram:
#Washington #preparing #win #war #lost
