Global Geopolitics is on holiday and will return on Aug. 23
Thank you for your readership and feel free to sift through the archived topics, tags and categories in the meantime.
Global Geopolitics is on holiday and will return on Aug. 23
Thank you for your readership and feel free to sift through the archived topics, tags and categories in the meantime.
There’s no greater villain in the world today than Vladimir Putin. He stands accused in the media and global public opinion of rigging his recent reelection, imprisoning his political enemies, murdering Russian spies turned double-agent, meddling in Western elections, seizing Crimea, destabilizing Ukraine, supporting a murderous dictator in Syria and exporting arms to terrorist nations like Iran.
The list of bad acts laid at Putin’s feet is much longer than the one just recited, but you get the idea. He’s no Mr. Nice Guy. Continue reading
The Silk Road, renamed the Belt and Road Initiative (BRI), is developing infrastructure along land and sea trade routes. However, little is known about China’s initiative in the Arctic Circle, which represents a new route that Beijing is now able to develop thanks to technology together with the strategic partnership with Russia.
Involving about 65 countries and affecting 4.4 billion people, constituting thirty percent of the world’s GDP, together with a total investment from Beijing that could surpass a trillion dollars, the is an immense project that requires a lot of imagination to grasp the intentions of the Chinese leadership. With a host of projects already in progress, and some almost completed (the Sino-Pakistan Corridor known as CPEC is archetypical), the overland and maritime routes are developing side by side. Plenty of ink has been used detailing Beijing’s intentions regarding the East-West connections of the super Eurasian continent. Pipelines, railway lines, fiber-optic cables, telecommunications infrastructure and highways dominate discussions, together with talks about costs, feasibility studies, the question of security, and the return on investment. The land Silk Road is certainly an imposing challenge that is not just commercial in nature but sets the foundation for greater cultural and social integration between neighbouring countries. It is a project that in the long term aims to blend together the Eurasian continent and overcome the contradictions contained therein through win-win cooperation and economic development. Continue reading
The message from BRICS to America is quite clear:
You are a dying nation — a dead man walking with a worthless fiat currency we’re already dumping. We are putting you out of commission one step at a time, with this being one of them, and the world will do just fine without you.
The President of Brazil, Dilma Rousseff announces publicly the creation of a world internet system INDEPENDENT from US and Britain ( the “US-centric internet”).
Not many understand that, while the immediate trigger for the decision (coupled with the cancellation of a summit with the US president) was the revelations on NSA spying, the reason why Rousseff can take such a historic step is that the alternative infrastructure: The BRICS cable from Vladivostock, Russia to Shantou, China to Chennai, India to Cape Town, South Africa to Fortaleza, Brazil, is being built and it’s, actually, in its final phase of implementation.
No amount of provocation and attempted “Springs” destabilizations and Color Revolution in the Middle East, Russia or Brazil can stop this process. The huge submerged part of the BRICS plan is not yet known by the broader public. Continue reading
This is a very important development in global geopolitics and it has very unfavorable implications for the USA, India and their allies. As you read about this, ask yourself if you heard or read anything about this extremely-important event on what are called “news” TV channels in the USA.
Pakistan, which has been called an “ally” of the USA in the “war on terrorism” has just thrown in its lot with China and dumped the USA as an ally. In truth, I don’t think the Pakistani-American alliance has actually existed for some time, but both nations were willing to pretend it was an alliance as long as Pakistan did a few favors for the USA (such as allowing the USA to supply its troops in Afghanistan via an arduous overland route via Pakistan) in exchange for billions of dollars from the USA–which were likely fantasy dollars turned into real dollars by the legerdemain of the US Federal Reserve Board. The US-Pakistani alliance, like a really bad marriage, is now coming apart. Pakistan has a new ally and partner–Communist China. The Pakistan’s leader declared to the Chinese leader that the new Chinese-Pakistani friendship is “higher than the Himalayas and deeper than the deepest sea in the world, and sweeter than honey.” That language is so affectionate I think these two nations “ought to get a room.” Continue reading
The Kremlin is quite horrible at being truthful, as every other week a news piece comes out mentioning Russian military advancement gains and superiority over their American counterparts. Here are a few examples:
It seems they’re still selling New Lies for Old — and sadly America has been taking the bait since the 60’s.
Russia’s top military officer on Thursday voiced skepticism about deeper nuclear arms cuts, saying they should require parallel reductions in non-nuclear precision weapons.
The statement by chief of Russia’s military General Staff, Gen. Valery Gerasimov, appeared to signal the Kremlin’s reluctance to negotiate a new nuclear arms deal with Washington. Continue reading
For further information on SCADAs, please see the following Global Geopolitics entries that were ahead of the curve:
“Red Dragon Rising: Communist China’s Military Threat to America” from 1999 is a highly recommended read. The United States is in more vulnerable than most people know, and longer than most people would have thought.
Cyberspies linked to China’s military targeted nearly two dozen US natural gas pipeline operators over a recent six-month period, stealing information that could be used to sabotage US gas pipelines, according to a restricted US government report and a source familiar with the government investigation.
From December 2011 through June 2012, cyberspies targeted 23 gas pipeline companies with e-mails crafted to deceive key personnel into clicking on malicious links or file attachments that let the attackers slip into company networks, says the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) report.
The report does not mention China, but the digital signatures of the attacks have been identified by independent cybersecurity researchers as belonging to a particular espionage group recently linked to China’s military.
The confluence of these factors – along with the sensitive operational and technical details that were stolen – make the cyberbreaches perhaps among the most serious so far, some experts say. The stolen information could give an adversary all the insider knowledge necessary to blow up not just a few compressor stations but perhaps many of them simultaneously, effectively holding the nation’s gas infrastructure hostage. Nearly 30 percent of the nation’s power grid now relies on natural gas generation.
“This theft of key information is about hearing the footsteps get closer and closer,” says William Rush, a retired scientist formerly with the Gas Technology Institute who chaired the effort to create a cybersecurity standard applicable to the gas pipeline industry.
“Anyone can blow up a gas pipeline with dynamite. But with this stolen information, if I wanted to blow up not one, but 1,000 compressor stations, I could,” he adds. “I could put the attack vectors in place, let them sit there for years, and set them all off at the same time. I don’t have to worry about getting people physically in place to do the job, I just pull the trigger with one mouse click.” Continue reading
Because people still refuse to reflect back on the historical past, one nation just might be doomed to repeat it. A likely target of the CCP in a hot war is Taiwan. Perhaps even border skirmishes and/or enormous protests would also suffice to drum up public support. The only thing that stands in their way is Democracy and the CCP knows China cannot survive with their form of oppressive government forever, therefore a distraction or scapegoat is necessary.
One of the biggest foreign and national security questions regarding the new Chinese Communist Party leadership is whether newly anointed General Secretary and Chairman of the Central Military Commission Xi Jinping will sponsor a foreign “adventure” to consolidate his relatively weak power base.
Historical parallels are not lacking. Continue reading
This is likely going to have severe implications for the Iran-Syria axis. Not only has Syria sent in its own units within Turkey, Iran has entered the fray. They already hold a mutual defense pact, so one can logically see why this is being done. However, being that Turkey is a NATO member, expect that NATO will be dragged into any future war. An attack on one is an attack on all. This also means American involvement since NATO is a US-born military construct.
Members of the Quds Forces’ elite Unit 400 have been activated inside Turkey to attack U.S. and Israeli interests and to support the Kurdish separatist movement PKK with violence as needed.
A source within the Revolutionary Guards confirmed the presence of the Iranian assets in Turkey as Iran increases pressure on the Turkish government to stop its support of the rebels against Bashar al-Assad in Syria.
The assets are to attack Western interests in Turkey should war break out against either Syria or Iran and at the same time work to destabilize Turkey as a warning for it not to interfere in Syria’s affairs.
Iranian leaders have continuously warned Turkey, Saudi Arabia and even America about any interference in Syria, that Assad’s regime is their red line.
At one time Iran and Turkey collaborated in fending off attacks by the Kurdish separatists both in Turkey and Iran, but now Iran, in order to destabilize Turkey, reportedly is supporting PKK guerrilla attacks inside Turkey.
During the last month, PKK fighters have attacked a military convoy and a police station, set off bombs and kidnapped Turks to create an environment similar to Syria’s.
Turkish security experts said that not only has Iran stopped intelligence collaboration on the Kurdish fighters with Turkey but also that the Islamic regime is actively collaborating with the fighters, the report added.
Iran has warned Turkey that its interference in Syria will have unwanted consequences and that should it get militarily involved in confronting the Assad regime, Iran will attack Turkey to protect a fellow dictator. But even before such a history-changing event, it is increasing its support to Assad by shipping military equipment to Syria over Iraqi airspace, according to The New York Times.
In a meeting last March with Turkish Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan, the Iranian supreme leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, stated that, “The Islamic Republic will defend Syria because of its support for the resistance front against the Zionist regime (Israel) and is vehemently opposed to any intervention by foreign forces in Syrian internal affairs.”
Another commander of the Guards, Mohammad Ali Assoudi, warned on Saturday, “If America were to attack Syria, Iran, along with Syria’s allies, will take action, which would amount to a fiasco for America.”
Ever since the uprising in Syria started, the Islamic regime’s Revolutionary Guards have collaborated with the Assad regime’s suppression of its own people, which so far has killed more than 20,000 people, including women and children.
For Iran, it’s do or die as the fall of Assad could culminate in much more pressure on the Islamic regime, disconnect the supply line to Hezbollah and provide an opportunity for the West to confront Iran without it worrying that such confrontation would expand to all of the Middle East.
However, the Iranian regime is determined to continue its illicit nuclear program despite much international pressure. It is determined to protect Assad and come out of its current confrontation with the West and regional powers like Saudi Arabia and Turkey as the leader of the worldwide Islamic movement. It is determined to reshape the geopolitics of not only the region but the world.
Full article: Iran sends terror teams into Turkey (WND)
From time to time, Global Geopolitics will post an article in its entirety. This serves to be a case in point. From geopolitical expert, JR Nyquist’s August/September, 2012 column on his website, validating China’s true intention is the topic at hand. It’s highly recommended that visitors also pursue his weekly columns for in-depth knowledge and additional insight on all things geopolitical.
The following commentary should be appended to a discussion of the alleged speech of General Chi Haotian about destroying and invading the United States: In this regard you suggest (1) that the speech is a hoax. This is entirely possible, although close analysis tends in another direction. Strategy is my subject and my life-longstudy. Believe it or not, it is possible in strategy to know certain things indirectly, by inference and analysis. After careful consideration, with regard to the speeches attributed to General Chi, I think it is unwise to say “we don’t know” and “it doesn’t matter.” In fact, it’s not impossible to analyze a documentto determine its authenticity. Here is a task entirely within the reach of a strategic analyst. Furthermore, if the document is authentic then it matters agreat deal; for the enemy’s intentions are laid bare, with countless implications (and potential war-winning insights). When we first encounter an unfamiliar text, we don’t know how to judge it. We are completely lost, and this is normal. Those who claim to understand something on first contact are deceiving themselves. Nothing worth knowing is understood immediately. When I first read the two speeches attributed to General Chi Haotian my reaction was to dismiss them as you did. When I read the first paragraph of the second speech, I rolled my eyes and laughed at what seemed to be an obvious fraud. At first reading they were not credible. (This is the same reaction I had to Golitsyn in 1984). Two years elapsed and, as chance would have it, I was doing some research on Mao Zedong’s strategic ideas. In the midst of this research I was stunned by Mao’s determination to build a fleet and invade North America. I was also struck by the brutality and cynicism of his statements. I went back and started re-reading SunTzu and the commentaries on Sun Tzu. My mind suddenly drifted back to the two speeches attributed to General Chi Haotian.
On my second reading I realized these speeches are only incredible from a Western point of view. From a Chinese strategist’s point of view, these speeches are consistent with 2,500 years of Chinese history and thought. There is nothing inauthentic in these two speeches. If they are a hoax, then a genius produced them. More than that, this aforesaid genius possesses authentic tidbits of military intelligence that are not known by the general public — but were revealed to me by a high-ranking Russian military defector with more than three years experience in China. Mao once said that the first Chin emperor was nothing compared with himself. The first Chin emperor only killed a thousand Confucian scholars. Mao had killed hundreds of thousands of Confucian scholars. This was Mao’s boast. Such boasting is unknown to Western history, except to figures who are dismissed as madmen. One is reminded of the Chinese warlord whose father was taken prisoner and held hostage by a rival. In this instance, the rival threatened to boil the old man alive. The war lord sent his reply: “Save me some of the soup.” One has to dig through the Dark Ages of Western history to find anything like it. Or else it is something from the history of Caligula or Nero or Eliagabulus, who were considered dreadful failures and misfits. In China such behavior on the part of leaders has long been normalized. The Western ethic, which followed from the hero-worship of the ancient Greeks and Romans, places nobility as the true standard of greatness.
Chinese civilization places a high premium on realistic thinking, brutality and success. This is greatness in the Chinese context. How does this point argue the authenticity of the alleged speeches of General Chi? A person who disagrees with the strategic culture of China, favoring freedom and humane government, doesn’t possess the mentality needed to reproduce such abrilliant piece of mimicry. One would have to be a student of Sun Tzu and the Chin emperor and Mao Zedong, not a student of Thomas Jefferson or Lincoln. Such astudent would not value freedom, having absorbed a philosophy entirely at odds with Western culture. More than that, it is a culture that believes in the West’s weakness and inevitable fall. If you were going to advance a fraudulent speech by a Chinese communist leader, would you dare put into his mouth the statement that Nazi Germany was “too soft”? Would you dare open your first paragraph with the assertion that you are pleased that 80 percent of Chinese polled would approve killing women and children in a war? Anyone with the sophistication to produce this document would have avoided going so far, fearing that the reader would laugh out loud at such an obvious propaganda fraud. Only a simple person would start Chi’s second speech with that kind of paragraph, and a simple person did not compose this speech!
To make a credible fraud, you have to downplay the wickedness of the Communists. You must be subtle in your presentation so that the fraud has a chance to sound credible. But the Chi speech is not subtle as a fraudulent presentation would have to be. Instead, it is deep and profound and brilliant in its totalitarian perspective. The compassion for the American victims comes late in the second speech, long after the skeptics would’ve stopped reading it. I do not know if the speech is genuine. But if I had to lay a bet, then I’d wager on its authenticity. That is to say, I suspect it is authentic. And the way to test its authenticity is to see if Chinese actions are consistent with its program. There is something more, as well. I know from my discussions with a Russian defector that Russia and China agreed to split North America between them as follows: Russia would get Alaska and parts of Canada, while China would get the lower 48 states (which contains the best land). The agreement on this was affirmed by the Russian General Staff in early 1992. This joint agreement on a future wa ragainst America is the basis for the Sino-Russian alliance. And if you read General Chi’s speech carefully, you will see that he brilliantly lays out the logic of the Chinese offensive and their means of advancing. He does not mention Russia’s role because Party cadres don’t need to know about Russia’s military contribution. They only need the most general strategic outline and why the war is necessary. You must read this speech several times in order to understand its profound science. If this speech is counterfeit, the counterfeiter spent many years devising it. In fact, a hoax of this type could only be produced, as I noted before, by a genuis. If General Chi was not the author, then the author should be a general — and ought to have General Chi’s job.
In point (2) you mention 9/11. Chi’s speech explains why a false flag terror attack is necessary in advance of a biological warfare offensive against the United States. As would be proper, General Chi gives nothing away. He merely implies that the Americans will not know who is really attacking them. This is intrinsic to his speech, even though he doesn’t spare words explaining why. In point (3) you ask if this is good propaganda material against communism. Since our goal is to understand the enemy, the propaganda value is of secondary importance. importance. If these speeches are authentic, our activism must counter the Chinese.
Full article: Authenticating China’s Strategy: Letter to a friend (JR Nyquist)
This is precisely what Global Geopolitics has warned about in the Syria files for some time now. People unfamilliar with the situation might want to do some research on “American Hiroshima“. The threat is real as Iran is prepared — and has been waiting for a long time. America on the homeland is not prepared — and has been only been fixated on Kim Kardashian for a long time.
As everyone knows, the Iranians are refusing to give up their nuclear program. From all appearances, the six power talks, to be held in Moscow (June 18-19), will probably not achieve much. Iranian officials say their nuclear program is peaceful, and they insist that everyone accept and believe in this peacefulness. Those that know the regime best, like former Revolutionary Guardsman Reza Kahlili, say the regime in Tehran is the opposite of peaceful. According to Kahlili, Iran’s leaders want to ignite a nuclear war in order to facilitate an Islamic apocalypse. “The only true avenue to lasting peace in the Middle East,” says Kahlili, is to “help bring about a free and democratic Iran.” Of course, this is not going to happen. The West isn’t positioned for such a gamble. The Iranian government knows this, and that’s why they are becoming increasingly difficult to deal with. Last April the Iranian newspaper Kayhan, which is under the direct supervision of the Office of the Supreme Leader threatened: “If the U.S. strikes Iran with nuclear weapons, there are elements which will respond with nuclear blasts in the centers of America’s main cities.”
Tehran’s threat implies an Iranian nuclear capability. It also implies the possibility of nuclear terrorism, relying on Islamic terror networks. Of course, the statement is defensive in nature, and must be understood as such. Yet it acknowledges a nuclear capability. This is exactly the kind of capability the West would not like Iran to have. The Israeli’s, especially, are growing desperate about the possibility of a nuclear-armed Iran. Many are frightened by the prospect.
In a recent interview, Israeli vice premier and former IDF chief of staff Moshe Ya’alon said during an interview with Haaretz, “Let me say one thing to you in English, because it is very important for English speakers to understand it: We are not bluffing. If the political-economic pressure is played out … and Iran continues to hurtle toward a bomb, decisions will have to be made.” Ya’alon is under no illusion about Iran’s readiness to retaliate, especially against Isreal: “If anyone, no matter who, decides to take military action against Iran’s nuclear project, there is a high probability that Iran will react against us, too, and will fire missiles at Israel.” And those missiles might be armed with chemical or biological warheads. If Israel and Iran begin exchanging missiles, nobody knows how it would end – but we can guess. According to Jane’s Information Group, Israel has between 100 and 300 nuclear warheads. Some of these can be mounted on cruise missiles carried by Dolphin-class submarines. Israel’s land-based delivery system, the Jericho 3 missile, has a range of nearly 8,000 kilometers. If Iran started a biological/chemical missile war with Israel, the retaliation would be withering. One may doubt, indeed, the clerics’ readiness for martyrdom. Yet there is a crisis more immediate, which may soon eclipse the Iran crisis.
According to a June 16 DEBKAfile report, U.S. military intervention in the Syrian Civil War may be inevitable. The Americans want President Bashar al-Assad to step down. That happens to be a big problem for President Vladimir Putin of Russia. Putin favors the Assad government, a longtime client of Moscow and ally of Iran. As the chief arms supplier to Syria, the Russians have recently sent attack helicopters to the Assad regime. The United States strongly objected with Secretary of State Hillary Clinton issuing a statement. “We have confronted the Russians about stopping their arms shipments to Syria,” said Clinton, who thinks the conflict could escalate “dramatically.”
Perhaps the most alarming report comes from Aaron Klein, who reports that the Russians are warning the Assad regime that if “the coming counterinsurgency … is not successful in the next 4-6 weeks, Syria should be prepared for war.” Although Klein admits confusion regarding the meaning of Russia’s warning, the language is clear enough. The DEBKAfile report (above) provides the answer: “The intervention [by Americans] will happen. It is not a question of ‘if’ but ‘when.’” Market watchers should take note. Intervention in Syria may be coming, and it isn’t likely to be a picnic. It has long been suspected that Syria manufactures Sarin, Tabun, VX and mustard gas. According to businessinsider.com, Syria is “loaded up on all kinds of missiles, weapons of mass destruction, a solid air force, and enough Cold War relics to fill a dozen Air-and-Space museums.” Then there is the question of what kind of support the Iranians or Russians might provide Syria.
It is surprising to hear Secretary of State Hillary Clinton calling on Moscow to cut ties with Assad. Clinton probably does not sympathize with Russia’s loyalty to a longtime ally. After all, Obama ditched Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak. Why shouldn’t Putin ditch Assad? It should be obvious by now that the Kremlin does not pick allies on the basis of their human rights records. Russia plays a strategic game, and if it suits Russia to defend Assad then Assad will be defended. In all probability, however, Assad is not important enough for Russia to risk a war on unfavorable terms. Russia’s game is a long game, requiring patience. Let the Americans squander their political capital and military resources on an Arab Spring that may bring radical Islamic regimes to power across the Middle East. If the Russians simply wait, together with their Chinese and Iranian friends, the regimes that come to power in Syria, Egypt and Libya might be more anti-Western than the regimes they replaced.
Full article: New Middle East for Old (JR Nyquist)