Trump is not Stupid

It's fashionable, even expected, to pour scorn on the current President of the United States - Donald Trump. Of course, he brings It upon himself with his unmatched egotistical meanderings. That being said, there is a definite method behind his madness that eludes most political commentators. What Trump is very deliberately doing, albeit from many different directions, is attacking China's attempt to replace the United States as the preeminent economy with the world's new reserve currency.

Since the fall of the Berlin Wall, China has taken a different tact in its march to world supremacy - the economic route. It transformed itself from an insulated and agrarian society to essentially a quasi-capitalistic sweat shop. For decades the Chinese people slaved in factories to produce the cheapest possible products for primarily American multi-nationals. America became almost deindustrialized as a result. However, the American services economy grew exponentially as a result of cheap Chinese imports. It looked like a win-win for the US and Chinese economies.

However, the Chinese government saved a substantial amount of the funds it earned at the hands of its citizens, and reinvested the funds in US real estate, stocks, bonds and currencies. It did the same in many other countries in the world as well. It has stocked up on massive quantities of gold to back its national currency. It has created its own version of the World Monetary Fund. To make a long story short, the Chinese used discipline to place themselves in the position to replace both the US dollar and the American economy as the primary economic pillars of the world today.

So great has the Chinese effort been, that it now can challenge the US dollar as the primary economic, political, and even military tool in the world. Just very recently China has concluded deals with Russia and Iran to purchase oil and other goods in their national currencies, excluding the US dollar as a necessity for trade. Even more perilous for the Us is China's ambition to create the same agreements throughout Asia, Africa, South America, and even Europe. In a nutshell, the American Empire is under direct threat by a "communist" country that has beat them at their own game. The solution? Change the game.

Enter Donald Trump. What the majority of the world seems to be missing is that Trump is not some lunatic fanning his ego with schizophrenic economic and military policies. Nothing could be further from the truth. Rather, he is directing the disassembling of the world order the United States created, because they are losing their own game. His strategy is clear: isolate China by any means. Whether its fanciful deals to bribe North Korea's regime away from China's wing, threats of war against Venezuela's government, appeasing Russia to try and sway it away from Beijing, the result is the same: isolate China. By isolating China Trump hopes to stop China's ambitious "Belt and Road" project and stymie a Eurasian takeover of the world economy. It's that simple. Trump's speech in Poland in 2017 very clearly reinforces that belief:

"The fundamental question of our time is whether the West has the will to survive. Do we have the confidence in our values to defend them at any cost? Do we have the courage to preserve our civilization in the face of those who would subvert it and destroy it?"

This was just a part of his "Churchillian-type" speech to the people of the West from the capital of Poland in 2017, but it raises some immediate and obvious questions: Is there a threat to the survival of the West that we are unaware of; is it necessary to defend them at "any cost"; and is our civilization under immediate threat of extinction? You could be forgiven for thinking these words were some kind of attempt by Trump to sound Churchillian or Kennedy-like in the depths of the Cold War, but the truth is we aren't in the depth of a Cold War are we? At least not one we are aware of in any case. What we are in is the final stages of American dominance of global affairs using economic tools to foist itself upon the peoples of the world. So if that qualifies as the end of civilization, well, then I suppose we are almost there.

The truth is, like any other politician, Trump is the front man for those in the back ground, or "backroom" as we say here in Canada. It's worth noting that at one point or another his entire cabinet seems to reflect every branch of the US military. It's also worth noting that he threatens countries with maximum consequences, but holds out credence for those that follow his line. So it has been worth watching as he pursues a trade war with China, despite China's attempts to placate him. China now appears to have learned the lesson that they are in fact the strategic target of the US, and as such Trump will go all the way with them. What we in the rest of the world need to understand about Trump is that he is not the "dotard" of the political realm, but rather a very deliberate person doing a very calculated thing, with every intention of taking it all the way. "All the way" means if the economic war does not bring China, and by ricochet Eurasia, to its knees then actual war will follow - "...at any cost?".

Trump is, as they say, dumb as a fox. While the world may be dazzled by his approach, it should not fail to see his aim. Trump, and specifically those behind Trump (read the US "Military Industrial Complex") aim to preserve US hegemony over the world, and to do so they must rip apart the current world order they built and replace it with another. So, belittle and scoff at Trump all you want, but be warned he is most definitely not the court jester you may imagine him to be.  

Is Putin hurting Russia?

A strong Russia, or perhaps a strong Eurasia, is in the interest of a peaceful world. That may not be the most politically correct position to take as a writer in the West, but I'm convinced of it. Growing up in the Cold War era wasn't easy on the nerves as the great powers from each side starred each other down, but with age comes wisdom, and for me that means an unshakeable belief that nations are people - people are possessed with "want" - and want creates tension. In other words, we as a species aren't happy unless we can control and consume everything we choose, and when we choose it.

Enter modern day Russia. Enter Putin. Ostensibly, Vladimir Putin is serving the function of President of Russia, but in the bigger picture his role (and responsibility) is far greater than that. He, and Russia, are the major force behind a greater Eurasia. You can call it the "Silk Road" or whatever you like, but in reality Eurasia represents a deterrent to American unilateralism (or domination if you like). Putin's job has been to use oil money to rebuild Russia after the fall of the Soviet Union, and he has done so with great discipline. The question, however, is whether he can place Russia in the shoes of the Soviet Union and re-establish a multi-polar world. That question is both burning and unanswered.

Just like most things in life, Putin's great strengths are also in many ways Russia's great weaknesses. On the one hand, Putin is a master of the concept "don't use a hammer to kill a fly", but on the other hand he is failing to realize that great statesmanship may necessitate the use of a hammer to send a message to the rest of the flies. In other words, a taking of one's place with authority. His decision to allow Russian athletes to compete at the Olympics while Russia itself was humiliated as a sort of "non-country" is a case in point. Putin had all sorts of reasons for sending his athletes, but he failed his country horribly by doing so. A great power, or even just a self-respecting power, does not allow other nations to disrespect its colours. That is as old as humans' presence on this earth. Yet, Russian athletes were subjected to just that in South Korea. It was the Russian men's hockey team that refused to allow that humiliation to taint them, yet their "unlawful" singing of the Russian national anthem was more an act of defiance than a proclamation. That is a key difference. Great nations do not commit acts of defiance, because to do so is to admit they are unequal - as defiance is the act of the weaker while principled decision is the role of the strongest.

It's important to note, and their must be many in Russia that would agree with this, that a country is meant to be run as a country and not an intelligence agency. Putin, out of necessity and likely habit, has run Russia like an intelligence agent - harkening on his old career no doubt. While those skills may have been well placed in placing Russia back to a position of strength, they now hold Russia back from its position as a great power, and without Russia being a great power America is free to continue its relatively unopposed world rule. The best current example of that is Syria.

Syria is really more of a Putin failure than it is an American success. Putin is deathly afraid of  "another Afghanistan". Afghanistan rings in the Russian ears as Vietnam rang in American ears before Ronald Reagan. Reagan, however, used his popularity  to move the American people past the Vietnam era, and pushed them into global military supremacy. Think what you will of Reagan, but that was an act of great leadership. Unfortunately, it appears Putin is not as confident in his ability to lead the Russian people past their Afghanistan mindset and into their place as an equal super power. Instead he prefers to sit himself, and Russia, in the shadows of international conflicts. His approach is that of an experienced intelligence officer - careful, targeted, and effective. What's wrong with that you might say.

It boils down to this: It's a totally predictable weakness. Great nations make great gestures. The prerequisite of a great nation status is that you will fully commit to the defence of your allies. Now just this week Putin claimed he would do just that, but it's been taken as just talk. And he has often wondered publicly why the West doesn't listen to him. Well the answer is quite simple - they don't respect him. Talk is cheap. The willingness to sacrifice is strength. Putin has not proven by action that he is willing to sacrifice for hos allies or even his country (ie. the recent Olympics). He's going along to get along. Sure Russia has intervened with primarily safe air force assets to stop the overthrow of Assad in Syria, but what else has it accomplished? Syria sits divided, with a now dug in American military presence insuring it remains that way. Instead of taking decisive military action at the very beginning of the conflict, which in this case would have meant sending armed divisions into Syria back in 2013, Putin took the least costly option possible and now faces a direct confrontation with the US to make Syria whole again. Ditto for Ukraine - another frozen conflict and another broken ally.

Indeed, the answer to Putin's public ruminations about the West not listening to his dire warnings lies in his mirror. When unfettered strength has been called for he has used measured responses rather than decisive strength. He has failed to set the tone that would demand respect. You don't pick your battles as the leader of a great nation. Rather, you forcefully engage those that bring battle to your doorstep. If it's war then it's war. If it's peace then it's peace. Israel is a good example of this. The reason the world listens to Israel is because they know that Israel will act - and forcefully so. There is no such feeling now for Russia. That lack of respect is something that is severely undermining the idea of a multi-polar world, and without a multi-polar world then why does Russia even matter? For Putin, the person who  is in place at this time in world history to make it happen, the mission is forget your KGB mentality and be a great statesman of a great power.

War With China

There are only so many coincidences in politics, and even less so in international politics. Today we stand on the precipice of  a war with China - all the coincidences point to it.

India

The Indian military's move into tiny Bhutan, which is located between India and China, is the latest hostile act between the two neighbors. The Indian army allegedly moved troops into the western part of Bhutan at the request of Bhutan's government in order to halt Chinese road construction on what it considers to be its sovereign territory. Each side has its own view of who's territory or claim is the truest, but the bottom line is China now has a mounting, perhaps imminent conflict on its southern border with India. As the Indian deployment in Bhutan remains ongoing, both sides have assembled forces on the border waiting to engage each other should the need rise.

The South China Sea

China's claim to the South China Sea has caused rifts with its neighbors - many of them in fact. From a purely legal point of view, China's claims to the Sea are out of whack with international law which delineates maritime boundaries between nations. The only possible way China can legitimately claim the South China Sea is to prove its has been a part of China. However, putting the legitimacy of the claim aside for the moment, let's take into account what is happening "on the ground" there. The United States navy has been conducting "freedom of navigation" drills, one tiny frigate at a time, in the Sea for months now - three since Trump became president of the US. In addition, the US has mounted aerial challenges to China's claim with mainly electronic surveillance aircraft. These challenges have been met with intercepting Chinese jet fighters. The naval challenges have not been met on the seas to any extent.

Taiwan

Taiwan has been a thorn in the side of China since anti-communist forces retreated to the island after the Chinese civil war. The US, in order to keep the peace presumably, has respected the "one China" policy that views Taiwan as essentially a part of China. However, that has not stopped the US from selling massive amounts of arms to Taiwan, and formally guaranteeing Taiwan's independence from China - essentially a country to country defence treaty. That policy hasn't changed under Trump. Instead, the Trump administration caused a furor when it suggested it may not recognize the long standing "one China" policy. It quickly changed its mind when China became enraged with the suggestion. However, the US did continue to sign multi-billion arms deals with Taiwan for the latest in military hardware.

North Korea

By far the most pressing issue between the two super powers is that of North Korea. Having been levelled by the US air force during the Korean War of the 1950's, North Korea seems completely unprepared to surrender its nuclear weapons, and/or nuclear program. It claims self-defence, and views the massive military exercises between the US and South Korea as evidence of an ongoing hostility toward it. And on it goes. What has been completely lost in this whole conflict, at least in the mass media and therefore with most of the general public, is that China and North Korea have a "NATO-like" defence treaty known as the Sino-North Korean Mutual Aid and Cooperation Friendship Treaty. The treaty was signed in 1961, renews every 20 years automatically, and Article 2 requires each side to come to the defence of the other in case attacked by an enemy or coalition of enemies. In other words, war with North Korea means war with China.

Now, there can be no doubt that the US government is fully aware of China's obligations to North Korea, yet the US is dramatically escalating the conflict with North Korea. US President Trump has even gone so far as to threaten North Korea with "fire and fury the world has never seen". What the US government is conveniently leaving out of its pronouncements is that, should it attack North Korea, it will immediately be at war with China. That's a revelation that may well alter any war licence the American people might grant their politicians. After all, it is questionable whether North Korea poses a serious threat to the existence of the US, but there is no question that China could end that existence via nuclear war - at least there shouldn't be.

Connecting the Dots

The pressure being placed on China at multiple fronts is very similar to the pressure being placed on Russia at multiple fronts. One similarity is these areas of conflicts are on China's and Russia's borders for the most part - with the exception of Syria. Just this week the top US military types were claiming "thousands would die", but those thousands would be in North Korea and not the United States. So, it seems safe to say, that the deliberate US strategy is to engage China and Russia, in an aggressive fashion, on those countries borders. A second similarity is the deployment of anti-ballistic missile systems by the US on both Chinese and Russian borders. In the case of China, the THADD system set up in South Korea to nominally defend it against ballistic missile attack from North Korea. In the case of Russia, the construction of a "missile shield" in former Soviet bloc countries to thwart potential Iranian missiles. These deployments, however, clearly effect the ground based retaliatory measures either China or Russia could take in the event of a nuclear war - back to the whole only so many coincidences thing.

Just in case you believe all these geopolitical moves have a single thing to do with "saving the world for democracy" or "fighting rouge regimes", pause, take a deep breath, and think. China is eclipsing the US as the dominant world power - a movement that has been happening slowly but surely since the early 1990's. China and Russia are in the midst of building their own world economy - Eurasia, BRICS, and the Silk Road - and this is perceived by the US as a direct threat to its "place in the world". To emphasize the point, in response to this weeks US sanctions against Russia, Russian President Putin announced his country would be dramatically ramping up its "settlement of trades" aim. Essentially, dropping the US currency as the means for trading internationally. China will likely not be far behind. The plain, obvious and simple truth is the move toward wars with China and Russia is all about business. Not the kind of business you often hear about with accusations of the "military industrial complex" looking to make more arms sales. No, not that. It's the war for economic supremacy, or better put the war to maintain economic supremacy. That's all this is about. Don't wrap yourself in a flag over it. If you have to wrap yourself in anything pick a dollar.

My final thought on the machinations happening around the world right now is this: God must be very disappointed in his creation at this time.  

The Trump Wars

The United States is at war - with itself at the moment. Donald John Trump, the 45th President of the United States, wants to reverse all the wrongs he sees plaguing his country. Fair enough. New leaders often come in with the strongest of intentions. Nothing new there. This time it's different though. It is said that politics is the game of rich men. Trump won the presidency without having to cut deals with the US establishment. In doing so he cut them out of the power equation they have been used to holding, and that has become dangerous. Only a rich man could do it. One who could fund his own campaign. One who could pay for his own mistakes. That is Trump, and that's exactly what he did.

Now we have the aftermath. An unprecedented situation in western political history which many would welcome, but which also holds real danger for all. Trump is not controlled by the US elite. He now has the power in many ways to act unilaterally on the international scene - including deploying US forces into conflict.  The Chinese refer to politics as war without bloodshed, and to war as politics with bloodshed. A very accurate way to measure the dynamics of mankind. Today we are at the point of war without bloodshed - at least in the West. In the near future we will be immersed in politics with bloodshed - unfortunately for us all.

A troubling sign of  this was Trump's election campaign, and the constant reference to Iran as a pariah state. Another was a similar view of China. In my mind though, the Iran war is more immanent than the Chinese conflict. The reason for that conclusion? In a word - Israel. Trump has made his son-in-law his strategic adviser on the Middle East. His son-in-law is Jewish. That creates an immediate problem of perception. For instance, what if his son-in-law was Saudi or Palestinian? The optics are quite obvious - the strategic advice is more than likely to be slanted in one direction. That creates real danger for the world. It leaves him open to influence.

On the campaign trail, a bombastic Trump promised the crowds that he would "rip up" the Iranian nuclear deal which is just months old. That in itself is troubling. Even more troubling is the fact that such an act is fully inline with Israel's policy on the agreement. Just remember that without a nuclear deal Israel was pressing for a military strike against Iran's nuclear facilities. It appears that is now back on the table. They aren't talking about it publicly yet, but a curious, foreboding message was just released from the Israeli Prime Minister. The video message is directed at the Iranian people, and not the Iranian government he says. In it he calls the Israeli and Iranian people friends who are being separated by a religious dictatorship (regime). At one point, in the two minute video, he let's slip that the Iranian people will not he under the yoke of this regime much longer. The inference is clear. Iran is on the cusp of being "liberated". Regime change. War is coming, and he is asking the Iranian people to view Israel as a liberator.

That simple insinuation says a few things. Firstly, it says that the Israeli Prime Minister knows there is a war coming with Iran - otherwise he wouldn't have put the words in that context. It also jives with the new US President's view toward Iran. Trump has promised to stop the US's foreign wars, and essentially make the US a pre-World War One isolationist power, so is there a contradiction in his view of Iran? Consider that Israel was prepared to bomb Iran's nuclear facilities prior to the nuclear agreement, but former President Obama would not "green light" that operation. Israel was held back. Now, however, the water on the beans has changed. Trump, it appears, is fully prepared to allow Israel a free hand in dealing with Iran. And that is very dangerous indeed.

It is now almost certain that Israel with attempt to bomb Iran. It's just as certain the Trump will turn a blind eye to it, with a quiet promise the US will back Israel if things get ugly. It's curious that just last week two unidentified drones were spotted over Iran's capital city - one was shot down. It's also interesting that during the same time Russia moved state of the art s-400 anti missile systems into the Moscow area, and placed them on "combat alert". The war of words with China dramatically escalated, as well, to the point Trump threatened China with a naval blockade. China, in turn, said it would not be deterred in the South China Sea by "word bombs" from the US. Clearly the world is moving dramatically toward conflict - armed conflict more likely than not. I suggest the first concrete step in that conflict will be Israel bombing Iran - sadly.

On the face of things it seems odd that Trump would be seeking to repair relations with Russia on the one hand, but raise the spectre of war with Russia's two most important allies, China and Iran, on the other hand. There seems to be a disconnect there. Of course, Trump is accused by his detractors as having many different disconnects on many different issues, so perhaps this is just another case. Or perhaps it is a ruse. Perhaps it's an attempt to split Russia away from China like Hitler tried to do with Britain and Europe. In any event, Russia is not about to abandon its eternal alliance with China, and strategically important alliance with Iran, to make nice with the Americans. That is not going to happen. So when Israel bombs Iran, and Iran and Israel go to war, it would seem inevitable that the US would back Israel and Russia/China would back Iran. Such a situation, if you can put the thought of nuclear destruction out of your mind for a moment, would give Trump the ammunition he needs to block China's access to many markets - a key plank in his way of thinking. Made in America, not made in China, is his goal. It fits pretty nicely.

One last very key point. The US is more divided as a country now than it has been since their civil war. Trump is not the cause, but he is the symptom. As Lincoln said: "a house divided against itself cannot stand." Has there ever been a clearer example of that than today's United States? The US, as a country, is in desperate need of a unifying cause. The US loves to unite for causes. In today's case, Trump is looking to use a war for that purpose. Dislike of Iran is almost universal in the US. It's almost a safe bet that the American people would rally around that - especially if Israel was attacked in retaliation for the bombing of its nuclear facilities. You can hear it now: "USA...USA..USA". Unfortunately, a war for the United States has become almost a national imperative. A patriotic duty to keep the country from breaking apart at the seams. The fact that such a war will almost certainly lead to a wider conflict with Russia and China will likely not mean a lot to a people in desperate need of a unifying cause.

Hope I'm wrong.

 

BRIC this.

BRIC, the Brazil, South Africa, Russia, India, China economic alliance is under assault - major assault. Not in the military sense per se, but rather the clandestine, less in-your-face type way. It seems that the US is not at peace with BRIC's idea of a multi-polar world and is making it known.

Argentina is a case in point. Although not in the BRIC name, Argentina was an important part of BRIC's South American equation. In May, 2015 Russia consummated that relationship with a vast set of agreements that included funding for hydro dam and nuclear projects, oil and gas exploration agreements, and a memorandum of defence cooperation (read supply of advanced military weaponry). Argentina was even granted status as a food supplier for Russia. Then, in Nov, 2015, Mauricio Macri, leader of the "Let's change" Party, won the presidency against Christina Fernandez de Kirchner's (the one who signed the Russian deal) hand selected replacement.

Brazil is a second case in point. Brazil is a founding member of the BRIC alliance - hence the "B" in BRIC. In July, 2014 Russian President Putin and Brazilian President Rouseff signed strategic agreements in energy development, gas, health care, science and technology and defence cooperation (read arms sales to Brazil). In 2015 Rouseff initiated free trade talks with the BRIC countries to solidify their alliance. In July, 2015 Eduardo Cunha, House Speaker was implicated in a bribe scheme and immediately turned on Rouseff and her Worker's Party by calling for her impeachment. The scandal threatens to engulf Rouseff, who was re-elected in 2014 as President of Brazil.

South Africa is another case in point. South Africa is not in the name BRIC, but it is an important foot hold for the Russians and Chinese in Africa. In 2014 South African President Jacob Zuma signed an agreement with Russia to supply his country with a number of nuclear reactors. Officially that nuclear development is up for tenders now, but unofficially the close relationship with Russia seals the deal. Furthermore, the two have signed agreements in general trade and strategic military and defence cooperation agreements. In 2014, the Opposition in South Africa accused Zuma of using millions of dollars to upgrade his rural home with a swimming pool and theater among other things. Just 15 hours ago he apologized to the nation saying he did not believe the upgrades constituted a fraud and that he would repay the money. So far he is surviving, and is commonly known as a great "escape artist".

Now, in the latest move, a death threat letter to Chinese President Xi was posted on a Chinese language website in the US that is read by many Chinese. It found its way onto many domestic Chinese websites before the authorities took it down altogether. The letter states he should resign:
"Out of concern for the party's endeavors, out of concern for the future of the country and its people, and out of concern for the personal safety of you and your family." There is currently an investigation under way in China with 20 people detained - including at least one journalist. The letter refers to its writers as "we" and amounts to a challenge to the leadership of China.

All in all there seems to be a trend for BRIC countries from 2014 to present. There are only so many coincidences in politics, and even less so in the game of international intrigue. Adding up the events of the last two years it is clear that Russia and china are spear heading a Eurasia with global reach, and whose intended goal is to challenge not just American economic dominance, but also that of its currency and military. The creation of a bipolar world of the West and Eurasia is not something the US wants and considers it a threat to its "national interests". It appears the intended weapon to fight the battle, at this time, is covert political operations - not dissimilar to the events that led to the Ukrainian revolution. The larger, and as yet unanswered question, is how will Eurasia respond? Will India get cold feet and back away from its growing and cozy relationship with China and Russia? More importantly, will China use its vast and fatal economic arsenal to retaliate? Will Russia use its growing and strong military forces to respond - as in Syria? Perhaps all of the above? The old saying is don't awaken the Chinese dragon. Perhaps the same can be said about the Russian bear. In any case, watch to see how these so-called unrelated events in the countries of the BRIC play themselves out, and what if any reaction toward the West will transpire for its "BRIC this" stance.

o sign cooperation agreements in the areas of defense, education, energy cooperation, gas, healthcare, science and technology.

This content was originally published by teleSUR at the following address: 
 "http://www.telesurtv.net/english/news/Brazil-and-Russia-Sign-Trade-Agreements--20140717-0206.html". If you intend to use it, please cite the source and provide a link to the original article. www.teleSURtv.net/english

o sign cooperation agreements in the areas of defense, education, energy cooperation, gas, healthcare, science and technology.

This content was originally published by teleSUR at the following address: 
 "http://www.telesurtv.net/english/news/Brazil-and-Russia-Sign-Trade-Agreements--20140717-0206.html". If you intend to use it, please cite the source and provide a link to the original article. www.teleSURtv.net/english

I'm Sorry Russia

There is something very wrong, and possibly very evil going on in our world today. Aside from all the conflicts spawned by greed and the desire to control in our world, there is some all too real revisionist history happening. When people, let alone governments, try to recreate history it's an ominous sign. A sign of hatred. Of deep hatred. That's what is happening right now in our world when it comes to the Russian (then Soviet) victory over Germany in World War Two.

The Soviet Union suffered 25 million killed in World War Two. By comparison, the other allied countries suffered:

United kingdom           450,900
United States                418,500
India                         2, 087,000
China                       15,000,000
Poland                       5,700,000
Yugoslavia                1,363,500
Dutch East Indies      3,500,000

and there are many more.

The Soviet Red Army suffered the most military deaths of any nation in World War Two at 9,750,000. Almost twice as many as the nearest country, its enemy, Germany. The Soviet people, comprised today of Russia, Georgia, Ukraine, and Belarus bled the German army white. Of all the German military deaths of World War Two, 2,742,909 were caused by the Soviet army on the Eastern Front. By way of comparison, only 534,683 were killed by all other allies put together on all other fronts. In this way it's clear to see that the vast majority of the German armed forces were wiped out by the Soviets between 1941-1945. For that sacrifice the world owes the old Soviet Union, or Russia, Ukraine, Georgia and Belarus our undying gratitude. No question. To believe otherwise is to disrespect the sacrifice of a generation.

However, that seems to be all the rage these days in the West. And, I'm having a very hard time with that. There are a few reasons. First off, we owe the families, mostly Russian, our eternal respect for the generations of young men and women lost. The families broken to bits. The loves lost. The communities, towns, cities destroyed. They took the steel punch of German Nazism for the rest of us. We set foot back in Normandy when the German army was essentially already defeated. Secondly, to white wash the heroic struggle of the Russian people is to invite a repetition of the same savage crime. We preach this constantly with the Holocaust - rightly so. However, it's as if the greater sacrifice of Russia is somehow less and open to some sort of political interpretation. Lastly, it speaks to who we are, not who they are. It says we are so superficial, so petulant, that we can allow such a sacrifice to be degraded to suit our present political needs or wants.

That leads me to the Victory Day celebrations and parade in Moscow in about a week from now. Countries like my own (Canada), Britain, the US, etc are boycotting the celebrations and parade marking the 70th anniversary of the Soviet defeat of Germany. As a son of a vet who fought in that war against the Nazis I find this new Western revisionism very hard to swallow. As a retired infantry vet myself I am ashamed by it. The disrespect is unconscionable. It is dark and it is evil. It goes against everything I believe in and hold as dear. The West should hold its head in collective shame. Not just the leadership, but also the people. It's a disgrace. I'm writing this post just to let the Russian people know that not everyone agrees with this slight. Not everyone sees sacrifice through the lens of political expediency. That the sacrifice of your people is recognized and honoured by anyone with any education and knowledge of history - even though it was just a short while ago. Mostly, I just wanted to say: "I'm sorry Russia".

The Bush Doctrine and Today

After the 911 attacks on the US, then President Bush declared the right to preemptive military strikes against countries before they actually committed an aggression against the United States. At the time, and until this day, very little attention has been paid to the "Bush Doctrine" announced back in those panicky days. Yet, those simple words have transformed the world. Diplomacy died on the vine of National Interest. International law became passe. So it was then with the US wars against Afghanistan and Iraq, so it is now almost everywhere in the world.

The most recent case, unfolding as I write, is the military blockading, bombing and soon to be invasion of Yemen. Ditto for Canada's newly announced policy of bombing within Syria. It was only a matter of months ago the federal government stated it would not send war planes into Syria without either a UN mandate, or an invitation from the Syrian government. Now, we will, and the rationale is section 51 of the UN Charter, and the declaration that Syria is either unable or unwilling to control the conflict within its own borders. That somehow, by bombing ISIS in Syria is a key to Canadian self-defence. It's true that ISIS inspired lone wolves have committed two acts of terror on Canadian soil resulting in two innocent deaths. It's also true that many hundreds more die or are maimed in car accidents daily in Canada. Somehow the idea that little black pajama men with daggers will swim to Canada enmasse to decapitate citizens is, well, just foolish. Yet, it's all possible under the Bush Doctrine. The doctrine of punch first, ask questions later.

Now a similar, and predictable confrontation is playing out just south of the Suez Canal in Yemen - for the moment. As Iran and Saudi Arabia play out their mutual hatred of each other on a regional basis, the Bush Doctrine unfolds yet again. Saudi claims to perceive an urgent need to restore to power a Sunni president, as the legitimately elected head of Yemen. Saudi is not exactly known for its zeal for democracy. What Saudi is known for is a draconian, barbaric oil state, that is ruled by one family - no elections.. no descent. A ruthless, dark place where no democratic fruit is allowed to grow. The truth is, quite simply put, Saudi refuses to allow the Shia Houthi, who are aligned with Iran, to take over at the expense of their guy. International law be dammed. The son of the Bush Doctrine.

When then president Bush declared the US's right to act unilaterally in world affairs, the US recreated the jungle. It took mankind back to the dark ages, only this time with weapons of mass destruction. It removed the need to be responsible and restrained in the exercise of power. It opened the Pandora's Box of "National Interest". As the saying goes, "two can play that game", and in the context of the world, many can play that game. That is exactly what we see unfolding before our very eyes. In every continent in the world - excepting Australia. In every "hot spot" in the world. Even within countries. We don't have to obey rules. We make the rules. Might is right, and we will prevail. Welcome back to the Stone Age. This is the state of our world today. A place where mutual respect is as barren as the desserts of Saudi Arabia, and where the innocent blood flows as it has throughout our history. We never learn that power exercised without restraint is poison to us all.

The West's Shame

There is something so bizarre, so inhumane about Western countries boycotting the parade for the 70th anniversary of the Soviet victory over Germany in World War II that I just had to write on it. Recently, the prime minister of the United Kingdom announced he will not be attending the parade. Previous to that, countries like Germany and the United States had announced the same. It's only a parade you say? No it's more than that.

The Soviet Union sacrificed 25 million people to defeat Nazi Germany in World War II. A sacrifice beyond imagination, and far, far greater than all the countries fighting Nazi Germany combined. In comparison, the Holocaust, which is rightly remembered annually, claimed the lives of six million people of the Jewish faith. These are really the two true tragedy's of World War II unleashed on the world by Nazi Germany. The stories of Soviet soldiers advancing without weapons to pickup the rifle of the next dead soldier are well known. The bloodbath of Stalingrad, the siege of Leningrad, the millions of Soviet soldiers killed and captured (only to then die in POW camps) during the early days of the German invasion, and so on, all markers of the brutality of man against his own, stand large in the history of the world. In fact, the German invasion of the Soviet Union stands as the largest military battle in the history of man.

Yet, western leaders have decided to not attend the parade that is meant to honour that sacrifice. When Britain announced it would not attend, well, that's the straw that broke the camel's back frankly. Of all the countries in the world, Britain was saved by the massive waves of young Soviet men and woman that bled the German army white. Hitler would have crushed Britain in short order if he had not diverted millions of German men to the invasion of the Soviet Union. Crucially, the diversion of aircraft, fighters and bombers, to the Soviet front saved Britain from the entire annihilation of a full blown, continuous air campaign, and the subsequent naval invasion that would certainly have occurred. In reality, the western allies left Stalin almost alone in Europe to battle the Nazi's, and take the majority of the casualties in doing so. By the time D-Day finally arrived, the German army and air force was only a shadow of it's former self as it existed in 1941. As bad and hard as it was for the allies to march east through Europe to Berlin, without the Soviet people's sacrifice, it would have never happened.

It's a place of honour in human history. To quarrel with that is to go beyond ignorance. To quarrel with that is the hateful and arrogant bastion of the very seeds that caused World War II in the first place. And now, as if history is repeating itself, Western leaders have entered that bastion of ignorance and arrogance to punish Russia for the Ukrainian civil war. By contrast, Russian president Putin, despite the ongoing conflict in Ukraine, attended the 70th anniversary of the D-Day landings in France last year. He was given the proverbial cold shoulder by western leaders, yet he subjected himself to that, in honour of the sacrifice of the men of Canada, Britain and the United States. He did not ignore the history or the price in blood of that action. He honoured it. He put the sacrifice ahead of his political position, and it could even be said his personal shunning. Now that the time is here to do the same for the Soviet Union's dead, we cannot bring ourselves to do the same.

What that says about us is really quite obvious. It means we haven't learned the lessons of history. That our political leadership has become so petty, so detached from historical reality, that it attempts to rewrite the history of 25 million souls. That is the danger of all of this. Russians don't really need the West to honour their sacrifice. They know it all too well. It's the West that needs to honour that sacrifice so it can clearly see the dangers of war on a scale far more destructive than anything it experienced on the western front, or anywhere else in history. Poland started this train rolling by refusing to invite the Russian president to the Holocaust remembrance at Auschwitz last year. This despite the fact that the Soviet army liberated all of Poland, and specifically Auschwitz from German armies.

The actions of our western politicians say more about us than the Russians could ever say themselves. They have portrayed us as people who refuse to honour the dead, those that gave their lives in another time to defeat a tyrant bent on world domination, and in doing so dishonour those men and women. As the son of a young man, training in England, fighting in North Africa, Italy, Holland, and Germany through those tumultuous years of war and senseless slaughter, I recognize the Soviet sacrifice that probably saved my Dad's life. How could you not? Yet, that is exactly what our politicians are doing today. You don't have to be a lover of this country, or that country to recognize and honour grave human injustice committed on a massive scale. You just have to be humane, and subordinate your own bias in the remembrance of the fallen. Is that really so hard? Isn't that what is expected of us all? Wouldn't we expect that from our children? I've never been so ashamed of the actions of our governments than I am now with the boycott of that parade in Moscow.


 

Russia's Weakness is the West's Gain

There was a time, back when, that the Soviet Union was feared and respected. That fear and respect created and maintained what we refer to as the Cold War. It divided the world in a sense, but it also provided a peculiar sense of stability. Each side was aware of where the lines not to cross were located, and neither side dared make a serious attempt to undermine them. There was no question of a strong, forceful Soviet response. Therein lies the problem for modern day Russia.

To be frank, Russia's handling of the Ukraine crisis on its own border displays the sort of weakness one would normally associate with the bluster of North Korea. Strong words but no action to back it up. Russian special forces quickly moved into Crimea before the West could stop them. But that was pretty much it. The Crimean assault was really a "sneaky" move rather than a forceful move of principle. There was no grand declaration of principle by the Russian government, other than it would defend the rights of Russian speaking people's - which it quickly abandoned in Donetsk and Luhansk republics prolonging the war there and massively increasing civilian and military casualties. Russian support for the separatist forces in East Ukraine was again of the "sneaky" variety. Weapons, ammunition, advisers, and some special forces. A grey war if you will.

The problem with a grey war is that each side is left with the ability to interpret it as it will. In other words, Ukraine can scream Russia is invading it, while Russia can respond that it has no troops there. There is no serious projection of power, and serious statement made to the other side. They are playing "footsies" with each other. The message is that of weakness. Russia is being dictated to by the West and simply responding defensively. It does not project the image of an equal. It actually reinforces Obama's arrogant comment that Russia is a "regional power". Now, Russia is not a regional power, to be clear. Iran is a regional power, as is Saudi Arabia. Russia is a world power. But, Russia's weak response to Western infiltration of the buffer zone known as Ukraine tends to back Obama's message.

Another well publicized event took place in Estonia where us mechanized troops paraded within 300 meters of the Russian border. Ditto for similar flippant moves by Lithuania and even Finland. Now, despite prohibitions against foreign troops in accordance with the Minsk Accord, the United States is sending a full airborne battalion to Ukraine to "train" Ukraine forces. Britain is sending 75 troops for a similar mission. The response from Russia is...nothing.


If Russia wants the role of super power in the world, or even at the very least top dog in its own neighborhood, it needs to seriously project strength. That means incorporating a "doctrine" which will be defended at any time and any place. The doctrine must be in strict defence of its sphere of influence - otherwise, it doesn't have one. Without a sphere of influence its not even a regional power, but rather a state power. Hard to imagine for a country with the history and tradition of Russia. The truth is, the world really needs Russia to be that strong player in the world. The world desperately needs balance. The US has proven that as the sole power projecting strength in the world, it has failed to recognize the need to restrain its own ambitions. In other words, power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely. Now, we live in a world that has no stability, because the rules have been thrown out the proverbial window. That is a failure by the US, but its also a failure of countries like Russia and China.

All of this is why I support the rise of a Eurasian bloc that includes countries like Russia, China, India, Brazil, South Africa and the like. It creates the counter balance so desperately needed in the world. Of course the Americans view this in the opposite light. So be it. All people in the world deserve a stable environment, not just Americans. In short, it's past time that Russia project serious strength. Allowing other nations to encroach on its borders is a sign of weakness, not strategy. It's being interpreted that way by its enemies as well. All of which creates a less stable world for the rest of us - including Russia.

Predictions for 2015 - Not a Pretty Picture

Last year my New Years predictions were for a "tumultuous, history making year". So this year I thought: "Well b'y, better be more specific."

For Newfoundland:

1. Halt of the Muskrat Falls project in the Courts.

2. Resignations of  Ed Martin and Gilbert Bennet, and a large scale purging at Nalcor.

3. A Liberal government so large that it has to appoint its own members as Opposition ala Frank McKenna.

4. Large scale cuts to the civil service, and project spending.

5. A huge downturn in the economy reflected in high unemployment numbers and falling real estate prices.

6. A serious downturn in Labrador's mining, exploration, and economy as a whole.

7. Wide spread anger throughout the land.

For Canada:

1. A new Liberal dominated minority government, caused by drops of support in Ontario and BC for the Conservatives, and the NDP maintaining a strong hold in Quebec. Canadians won't trust that Trudeau is ready to run the show without the strong hand of Mulcair to keep him in check.

2. Declines of oil markets in Saskatchewan, Alberta, and here are too large to offset export gains in Ontario and Quebec, and the country enters recession.

3. Northern sovereignty is challenged by Russia, and to a lesser extent others.

4. Aboriginal rights and militancy increase dramatically over living conditions and resources.

5. Political unrest and economic decline make Canada a very unstable place to be, but then the world mirrors it.

For the World:

1. Russia and China escalate the stakes in their economic war with the US. They create formal international structures, based on the Chinese Yuan, to reduce US influence in the developing world.

2. Turkey leaves the NATO/ US sphere of influence and moves toward the Eurasian Alliance - fueled by disgust over Israeli treatment of the Palestinians and greater economic prospects with Russia and China.

3. The war in Ukraine escalates and Russia intervenes militarily. The Ukrainian government falls.

4. Europe enters a period of deflation and recession, that evolves into depression.

5. Argentina attempts to retake the Falkland Islands.

6. The United Kingdom begins the process of leaving the EU.

7. Investors in the US stock market panic over events in Europe and loss of trade markets, sell off, and cause the largest single crash of the the stock market since the 1920's.



All in all, not a very happy or positive outlook on the year 2015. Sorry for that. It's probably just as well that none of us have a crystal ball and can see the future, but, for what it's worth, this is my attempt. Seems to me that we can't avoid the economic realities that continue to unfold around us. The best we can do is try and protect our own. On the upside, every collision of history has always resulted in a better result down the line, so keep that in mind as we weather the storm that will be 2015.

Sliding toward Deflation

Think of the world as an engine designed and built to run in a certain way, and at a certain speed. The fuel of the engine is growth.  The chemistry of the fuel is debt. Then imagine one half of the world (the developed countries) running at full speed for 60 years, while the other half of the world (Asia, Africa, and South America) idling. Because our half of the world has been running full speed, we have used the most debt to power our engines, and the world economy has built itself around that fact. Now imagine that so much debt has been used to fuel the engine that it is almost depleted. Meanwhile the other half of the world is just warming up its engine and has plenty of potential debt to consume. What is the logical consequence? One falls while the other soars.

Now superimpose the unfolding China/Russia/BRIC economic order that is forming to reflect that reality. Let's call it the "New Club". Roughly designed to resemble the Soviet days of trading between countries to the exclusion of others, the New Club is rapidly building a new engine. One that attempts to capitalize on each countries strengths and satisfying each countries needs. If that sounds familiar consider Karl Marx's famous borrowed slogan " From each according to his ability, to each according to his need". Essentially, this is the new slogan of the New Club. China has the currency and the manpower. Russia has the natural resources, technology, and the know how. India has the population and science. South America has specific resources. Africa has population and need.

Together, these countries are forming a new world order. They have combined resources to create a new IMF that will compete with the old western IMF to loan money to areas like Africa and South America. They will control the debt that fires those engines. Russia, China and India (almost 50% of the world population) have entered into formal agreements to use their own currencies to pay for resources from each other. They are excluding the US dollar from their market place as an economic foundation. Making it obsolete. They are reaching deeply into Africa in fierce competition with the US to develop that continent as a place to do business. They are quickly becoming the savior for many South American countries who have tapped out their debt in the Old Club and need a rescue line.

Of course, when one grows the other dies, and the other would be the western world, or the "Old Club". Our ability to consume and pay debt has over reached its maximum. That is reflected in the over valued prices we pay for everything compared to what would be paid for the same object in the Club. In some European countries that has led to such things as inter-generational mortgages on homes. In the US it led to the "housing bubble" in 2008. The price we pay for fuel, compared to the actual price per barrel on the international market, is a good indicator of how skewed the economic reality is. While world oil prices plummet, prices at the pump don't. They stay artificially high. The same can be said for the stock markets. They are valued at more than their 2008 pre-crash worth, despite the indebtedness/under-performance of the corporations listed on them. In other words, there is a space between where they should be at in pure economic terms, and where they exist today. An artificial bubble. An artificial economy. Prices inflated to try and maintain our way of life, our government coffers, and our debt.

While there was only one game in town, that game of artificial economy could be maintained to one degree or another. There would be cyclical recessions to try and balance debt vs income vs prices from time to time, but the system could carry on. But, more dollars printed to maintain that growth created inflation in prices.Our system continued to grow fed on inflation rather than real economic wealth. We created a society based on the artificial. Now we are facing a New Club that, for the most part, will not. As the two realities start to compete the Old Club will lose market share for its products, and a glut will create deflation. 

As sales slide, and corporations within the Old Club try to adjust their production downward, each country's GDP begins to shrink - in other words deflate. That leads to serious consequences for an economic order built on growth fueled by debt. A good current example of this is Germany's recent slide. Germany is the economic engine of Europe, and as its GDP continues to fall so do the hopes of the rest of the continent. Another good example is long term bond costs. Muskrat Falls financing was secured for 50 years at less then 3% interest. Indicative that the banks understand what is coming. What else can explain that length of commitment for such a small return on investment. Perhaps one of the most clear examples of things to come is the Brazilian company Rio Tinto. While North American iron ore mines close, scale back or simply don't develop, Rio Tinto is increasing production by 25%. All these corporations compete on the international market, yet they have two starkly different approaches. Perhaps the key to understanding  this is one corporation is in a BRIC country, and a strong m,ember of the new club, while the others are stuck in the old. 

There are signs all around us if we choose to really see them. The world is changing - for the better for some, and the opposite for others. Reality, or deflation as a measure of it, is coming sooner rather than later. There is really no way for governments to prepare for it financially. Instead, and perhaps a very real indication of intent, police forces through out the western world have been armed like military organizations. Like the banks, our governments see the inevitable deflation of our economies, and understand the social chaos that must follow. At that point order will take precedence over rights. It will be a new world for the Old Club.