Fed Hikes Quarter Point, Still Expects More Increases; Also Simplicius On Geopolitics
I assume Tom Luongo will continue the victory laps he’s been running—deservedly—for the last few days:
Additional translation: Banking and money isn’t just about domestic policy in this environment. It’s very much tied in to geopolitics
That’s it for now, as far as banking goes. No doubt there’s lots more to come.
We pivot to geopolitics, with Simplicius the Thinker. Simplicius does a pretty deep dive in a very lengthy article to explain where all these American wars are coming from, and how the dissolution of the Soviet Union opened the world to intentional destabilization. I’ll offer just a few excerpts, hopefully to entice readers to follow the link:
How the USSR's Fall Unleashed a Neocon Goldrush to the Heartland
The dissolution of the USSR kicked off immediate plans to seize the most vaunted corridor in history, one that would rupture the prized World Island.
Simplicius starts with an overview of what the dissolution of the USSR meant for the rest of the world. Americans like to view that event as a triumph of good over evil, but geopolitics are usually more complicated than that. While it’s true that the Cold War featured armed conflicts, the history of that period is gradually being rewritten. The current phase of Neocon hegemony is turning out to be nothing like the blessing for mankind that we were sold.
Many people are aware of the various disparate geopolitical events of the 1990s and their respective imports—from the dissolution of the USSR, to the rise of the American Neocon movement to center stage, which precipitated the imperialist military actions of the end of the 20th to the 21st centuries. But few recognize the essential teleological link binding these events with a direct causality.
When the USSR was brought to a controlled demolition in 1991, it set off a chain reaction that would change world history, and the global geopolitical landscape forever. But to understand these changes we must first start with an understanding of what the USSR represented specifically in terms of the global security framework.
The most important thing is that the USSR represented a balance of powers between global blocs, a multipolarity of sorts, which inherently fostered a deterrence system preventing one bloc or the other from exerting too much influence and bringing too many key geographical areas under one or the other’s control.
This balance played tangibly in a variety of post-WW2 conflicts, where a line was drawn between the two superpowers. Everything from the Korean War, to Vietnam, to the Arab-Israeli conflicts, and even to the Indo-Pakistan conflict of the 70s represented a push-and-pull competition between two sides. In some, one side achieved marginal gains, while the reverse happened in the next conflict. But ultimately, balance was maintained as neither could ‘overwhelm’ the global security architecture in such a way as to completely imbalance and break it.
More examples and discussion follow, throughout the article.
But with the end of the USSR, this all began to change. With US as sole remaining hegemon, the Neocons who for a long time salivated for their chance at total global hegemony now had an open path before them.
Zbigniew Brzezinski, who served as national security advisor to president Carter, wrote his book The Grand Chessboard, in which he famously described Eurasia as the center of global power. Brzezinski used Mackinder’s ‘Heartland Theory’ as the central foundation of his seminal work.
Considered the founding father of ‘geopolitics’ and ‘geostrategy’, Mackinder wrote The Geographical Pivot of History, where he described Europe, Asia, and Africa together as the ‘World Island’, and at the center of it, the most important region in the world: the Heartland.
What hasn’t changed from Mackinder to Brzezinski to the Neocon present is that Russia is viewed as the key area that must be controlled to ensure global hegemony. Again, Simplicius goes into the reasons in a fair amount of depth. Russia is the “Heartland” that must be controlled. This is what the expansion of NATO and the war on Russia in Ukraine is all about. Here is Mackinder’s key insight, as he saw it:
“Any power which controlled the World-Island would control well over 50% of the world's resources. The Heartland's size and central position made it the key to controlling the World-Island.”
In other words, we’re talking about a zero sum game. What is the strategy?
Just to understand: the ‘southern flank’ of the ‘Heartland’ is shielded by India, a country too powerful to be a weak entry postern by which to enter. The eastern flank is of course guarded by China. But the golden corridor for which the West has salivated since the days of the ‘Great Game’ of the 1800s is the one leading from Iran, to the ‘Stans and then straight into the Heartland.
Apparently Russian strategists understand all this, and have assiduously cultivated good relations with India, China, … and Iran.
During the tenure of the USSR, this corridor was off-limits due to the fact that most of these ‘Eurasian Balkans’ were part of the USSR; that is: Kyrgyzstan, Turkmenistan, Uzbekistan, Kazakhstan, and Tajikistan. United, they were formidable, unbreachable.
Iran, of course, was not part of the USSR, and it remained under serious CIA attack, and control. …
…
Even when the US began attempts to meddle in Afghanistan—which Brzezinski later admitted started much earlier in the 70s than is commonly acknowledged—the USSR stormed in to quickly quash the CIA-backed rebels who were threatening to destabilize the geopolitically key ‘back-door’ country.
Here I skip over the portion regarding the terrorist schemes of KSM and others. What’s important to take from those episodes is that Simplicius argues that the 1993 WTC bombing and 9/11 were used as justifications for launching a full scale war that would end with the US controlling Central Asia’s (former USSR) energy wealth. It’s at this point that Simplicius introduces the Straussians, the people commonly referred to as Neocons. Again, follow the links and/or read the entire article to get Simplicius’ view and/or Wikipedia’s view. It’s all important, but it’s been hashed over any number of times already. However, it is worth noting that the USSR’s “spoiler” or “balancing” role brought it into direct conflict with the US and Israel. That role continues, or has been resurrected, throughout the Middle East:
In many ways, the USSR had foiled Israeli zionist expansion for a long time. During the 60s and 70s, the USSR was the chief supporter of the Arab world during their many conflicts with Israel. From the Six Day War in 1967, to the subsequent War of Attrition, the Yom Kippur War of 1973, Lebanon War of 1982, the USSR each time fought against Israel. Sometimes even directly, like in Operation Rimon 20 during the War of Attrition, where Soviet pilots engaged the Israeli airforce on the side of Egypt; and during the Lebanon War of 1982, where USSR sent over 2,000 air defense troops to help Syria repel Israeli aggression. Thus the dissolution of the USSR left Israel a lot to gain in its immediate vicinity, as there was no longer a ‘big brother’ to protect their Arab enemies.
Former general Wesley Clark explains that in the immediate aftermath of 9/11 the Neocons were already thinking big—VERY big. Seven countries in five years:
But the important thing to note, is how perfectly those countries align with an exact, direct route straight into that ‘backdoor’ of the ‘Heartland’ zone. From Lebanon on the westernmost coast, onto adjacent Syria, then Iraq, Iran, and adjacent Afghanistan, it creates a full-on sanitation corridor for the US imperial control of the famed vulnerable southwestern flank of the ‘World Island’.
Circled in blue above is a point of interest: Xinjiang province of China, which is home to the Uyghurs,
to destabilize the region—a sort of ‘picking of the lock’ to China’s rear postern gate, in its most vulnerable region—China’s own Chechen Republic.
I’ll take a bit of a bow here. At the time, although I had never heard of Mackinder and the Heartland Theory, I maintained that this was all about control of Central Asian energy.
Simplicius goes on to discuss all the many attempts to squeeze and destabilize Russia: Serbia, Georgia, Armenia, Azerbaijan, and the Stans: Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, and Tajikistan. And, of course, Eastern Europe: Ukraine, Poland, Romania, the Baltics, Finland. The list goes on. However, Simplicius concludes:
But in many ways these are the angsty death throes of a vengeful foe, thrashing about, unable to come to terms with its defeat. With the coming era of rapprochements between the various Middle Powers of the region, we will likely see ever tightening cooperation and a focus on economic stability, particularly led by China’s various OBOR/Silk Road initiatives.
And this, I think, explains Putin’s and Xi’s remarkable patience in the face of repeated provocations and insults. They’re looking at the Big Game.
Finally, here’s a video of Doug Macgregor. There’s a lot in this video, including his comments on depleted uranium ammunition—he knows all about it, having been a tank commander. However, for your viewing pleasure I’m going to cue the video up for about the last ten minutes:
Danielle DiMartino Booth
@DiMartinoBooth
·
Third, she’s in way over her head.
Randy Woodward
@TheBondFreak
·
Replying to @DiMartinoBooth and @business
Ok, so we can determine with high confidence two things from these Yellen comments. First, she does not have a smartphone. Second, she does not realize deposits are up 4x since the FDIC last increased insurance to $250k Oct. 3rd, 2008.
What stupidity! Total global hegemony. I'm sure the average American goes to bed dreaming of this. If only we could take over the most important region in the world: the Heartland! Nice to know "the USSR had foiled Israeli zionist expansion for a long time." Like when little Israel ceded the West Bank and Gaza to the Palestinians and became even more tiny. If these theories are what is driving our 'elite,' I suggest they spend some energy on propping up their support among normal American citizens before they attempt to project their power globally.