So Much Going On

What follows is a tentative effort at constructing a big picture narrative. I have no doubt that there’s much that needs development or correction. My hope is that it will stimulate reflection about the turmoil we’re seeing almost everywhere around us.

With the world seemingly descending into deeper chaos every day--from an American centric perspective both domestically and globally--the question arises: How did we get to this point? Is it possible to construct some sort of a timeline?

With the end of the Cold War and the collapse of the Soviet Union, replaced by a prostrate Russia shorn of many of its formerly federated republics and Eastern European client regimes, world affairs seemed headed in the right direction: peace and prosperity, fueled by a "peace dividend." That feeling didn't last long.

The collapse of the Soviet Union led to the hubristic ideology propagated by the Clinton regime that America would lead a new Rules Based Order that would dictate terms of existence to the rest of the world. That new global regime got off to a bang with the war on Serbia and the aggressive expansion of NATO in the direction of Russia. Both moves were highly antagonistic toward Russia and sent the clear signal that Russia would not be treated as a pariah nation with no national interests that were not conceded to Russia by America. These moves also signaled that the Rules Based Order would be an evolving regime, with that evolution directed by America. These developments led to the rise of Vladimir Putin and Russia's decision to rebuild itself with an eye to the clear and present danger that America had signaled was coming.

Did the Clinton regime and the Deep State have specific plans in view at this relatively early date? It's difficult to say, and not really necessary. If so, those plans may have been derailed or slowed down by the first of the major financial crises in America that arose from the increasingly reckless financial management of the country, following the Vietnam war: Long Term Capital Management https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Long-Term_Capital_Management

The Dubya regime came on the scene with clear signals that it would be following a foreign policy that would be just as, if not more, aggressive as the Clinton team. The roster of Neocons and assorted Russia hawks that staffed the national security apparatus was an unmistakable message to Russia and the rest of the world. Whatever their plans may have been, they were quickly put aside for a time by the 9/11 attacks and the ensuing wars in Iraq, Afghanistan, and various other locales. While these wars may have slowed the march of American Empire during the first decade of the 21st century, they didn't prevent the collective West--under US leadership--from fishing in troubled waters by taking advantage of the Second Chechen War. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Second_Chechen_War The 9/11 attacks had another important effect—they justified the passage of the Patriot Act which has led to the transformation of the American Republic into a national security state with unprecedented internal surveillance powers.

The final years of the Dubya regime were marked by two signal events. The first was the American effort to tighten the ring around Russia by advocating expansion of NATO to include Ukraine and Georgia. Expansion of NATO into actual former Soviet republics crossed an explicit Russia red line, as explained to then US ambassador to Russia, now CIA Director, William Burns, by current Russian foreign minister Sergei Lavrov. The point was driven home by the Russian intervention in Georgia, which had become a virtual US client state. The second event which, as in the closing Clinton years, may have slowed down the march of empire, was the second of the strong financial crises in 2007-2008. That crisis was strongly affected by the bailout of LTCM--a precedent that led to the much larger bailout and the enshrining of the idea of "too big to fail". Once again, no reform took place and no real accountability was exacted. The principle that the Fed would bail out Wall St. to the detriment of Main st. was enshrined as the Fed Put. We still live in the aftermath of this reckless Neo-Keynsian bailout, which fed into the Covid spending spree and the current budget crisis.

The Obama regime brought a continuation of global warfare to extend the Rules Based Order. Perhaps ironically spurred by Obama’s Islamic sympathies, the Obama regime embarked on the Arab Spring—a series of attempts at regime change throughout the Middle East, which backfired spectacularly, with enormous and continuing humanitarian blowback. Interestingly, as noted by Simplicius this morning, the NATO war on Libya (2011) appears to have been a monetary war. The real leverage of control that the American Empire has at its disposal is the role of King Dollar as the world reserve currency (more below). Among other effects, this dollar hegemony has allowed the US to export its inflation to the rest of the world, which in turn supports the huge US military and intelligence establishment, with bases around the world. Qaddafi had planned to break out of the dollar regime by ginning up a gold based regional currency:

[Clinton aide Sidney] Blumenthal pointed out the purpose of Qaddafi's precious metal [purchases]: "This gold was accumulated prior to the current rebellion and was intended to be used to establish a pan-African currency based on the Libyan golden Dinar. This plan was designed to provide the Francophone African Countries with an alternative to the French franc (CFA)."

French president Sarkozy appealed to the US to lead a war to thwart Qaddafi’s plans. This may have been the first war launched with the explicit intent of preventing any challenge to dollar hegemony. It’s possible that this drastic action was spurred by the rise of the BRICS movement, beginning in 2009:

In the aftermath of the Yekaterinburg summit [2009], the BRIC nations announced the need for a new global reserve currency, which would have to be "diverse, stable and predictable." Although the statement that was released did not directly criticize the perceived "dominance" of the US dollar – something that Russia had criticized in the past – it did spark a fall in the value of the dollar against other major currencies.

All this came about in the wake of the 2007 - 2008 financial crisis. That event is certainly what has led to the search for alternatives to dollar hegemony—as well as to the clandestine Chinese gold buying spree, which has led to both Russia and China vastly increasing their gold reserves since then. Did the Russian and Chinese led search for an alternative to the dollar lead to a heightening of American aggression? There can be no doubt that that any threat to dollar hegemony is an existential threat to the American Empire and its Rules Based Order. Dollar hegemony is essential to the Empire. The problem is that the foundations of US economic leaderhship are increasingly shaky, due in large part to the insupportable US debt. It’s difficult to believe that US policy toward Russia and China is not driven by the concern that any shift away from the dollar would cause much of the edifice of Empire to come tumbling down.

What Strong Gold Says About The Weak Dollar

Whatever the reasons, under the direction of Hillary Clinton the US began developing the ability to intervene in Ukraine, culminating in the violent US led regime change/coup in 2014. This represented a clear existential threat to Russia and led directly to the Russian seizure of Crimea. The seizure of Crimea was, in a sense, a preliminary measure intended to safeguard its naval base at Sevastopol. In the longer term, there could be little doubt that Russia would need to prepare a proportionate response to this existential threat, but in 2014 Russia wasn’t ready for war.

The Trump years gave Russia a bit of a reprieve. Although Trump—who had hoped to establish businesslike relations with Russia—was thwarted from reaching out to Russia by the American Deep State through the Russia Hoax, Trump was not about to launch an all out war. That came with the Zhou regime and the cadre of Neocons who actually direct the regime. It now seems clear that the war on Russia, if it ever had any hope of succeeding, came to late. As we saw yesterday, even Politico is conceding that Ukraine is a lost cause. Moon of Alabama offers another good summary of where things stand this morning:

Biden Prepares To Give Up On Ukraine

The much ballyhooed Ukrainian 'counteroffensive' is destined to fail its purpose of severing Russia's supply line to Crimea and to liberate 'occupied territory'. The Biden administration has finally recognized this and is out to lower expectations and to preemptively blame everyone but itself.

…

Back to Politico which draws the bigger picture. If Ukraine proves incapable of doing what the Pentagon had planned for it it will be pushed into a 'ceasefire' which is hoped to become a permanent solution. The Biden administration will then leave the Ukraine issue behind and fixate on its next big target - China:

…

Neither Ukraine nor the supporting NATO countries have the means to extend the war.

The reality, of course, is that Putin fully understands that any ‘ceasefire’ would only be intended to buy time—just like the Minsk accords. It can never be a permanent solution for Russia, which is exactly why Putin—in his draft treaties of 12/22 prior to the start of the Special Military Operation—demanded formal treaties that would embody a new security architecture between NATO and Russia, and a scaling back of NATO. America will find that walking away from Ukraine will not solve its problems with Russia—Russia isn’t Afghanistan, and is looking to the long term, as is clear from the expanding new monetary arrangements—and, increasingly, military—that have gone beyond BRICS to include heavyweights in the energy sector such as Saudi Arabia and Iran. Putin is in this to win, and postponing victory with a ceasefire isn’t the way to do that.

Nevertheless, Neocon Central is still breathing threats at China, even as the Empire is still flailing for ways to disengage from the war it started on Russia—and as Russia and China strengthen their ties:

Arnaud Bertrand

@RnaudBertrand

"America welcomes China’s economic modernization…so long as China’s development proceeds along lines that do not infringe on American leadership"

There is no overstating how crazy, and astoundingly short-sighted, this is.

America Has Dictated Its Economic Peace Terms to China

By refusing negotiation over China’s rise, the United States might be making conflict inevitable.

11:29 PM · Apr 24, 2023

This is a vision for an apartheid-like global order, where a nation with only 3% of the world's population insists on reserving itself the privilege of ruling the planet. No need to explain how this cannot fly.

And no need to explain how, if the US make this their "red line", it'll inevitably lead to conflict, like all unsustainable and unfair arrangements always do.

Simplicius, linked above, sketches out how this is viewed by the Neocons who have their hands on the levers of power in America. The Neocons see Empire slipping from their grasp—faster than they ever believed possible. I’ve written about this statement by Little Marco Rubio previously, but it bears repeating:

Rubio spells it out very clearly and explicitly: the coming global confrontations are all about the U.S. Empire’s desperate last-haul measure to protect its dollar hegemony, which is the only remaining leverage that U.S. has left in the world at all. As a flagging military power, entrenched on its own faraway world-island, U.S. no longer has the ability to project its might in a way that could deter Great Powers, or even regional ones. The dollar remains the sole instrument of the U.S.’s global dominance, but it is a privilege the American ruling class has abused to such a flagrant extent as to have extinguished its carrying power. Now, they are panicking, and openly admitting it.

“They’re going to trade in their own currencies, get right around the dollar,” cries bat-eared boy Rubio. “They’re creating a secondary economy in the world, totally independent of the United States,” he stammers. And the kicker: “We won’t have to talk about sanctions in five years, because there’ll be so many countries transacting in currencies other than the dollar, that we won’t have the ability to sanction them!”

As I read this—Rubio doesn’t say this explicitly, but I think it’s fair to take it this way—Rubio is saying: The US will use military force to enforce dollar hegemony. Loss of that hegemony—in five years!—will lead to inability to coerce other nations, but also (again, left unspoken by Rubio) the inability to project military force around the world.

Does this give some idea of what’s at stake, and what a knife’s edge the US finds itself trying to balance on? The loss of leverage that the American Empire has already suffered can be judged from this:

Central Bank Gold Buying At Highest Since 1950s, As 30% Of World Economies Are Now Sanctioned By The G7

That amounts to selling dollars and is a strong indication of what the world expects will be happening to the dollar’s status. Additionally, it’s a self fulfilling prediction that could accelerate the trend.

At any rate, hopefully this provides a context as well for the political turmoil we’re seeing in the US. Hope seems to me all we have to go on. There is the steady drip of leaks that appear to originate from the Pentagon and Deep State. Clearly there are people who are concerned with where things are heading and believe that the first step is to get rid of the Neocons who are behind Zhou. The GOP House has revived the Hunter investigations, with limited traction in the MSM. There’s also the whistleblower at IRS who also wants to talk about Hunter—Margot Cleveland has a good rundown on that. The Blinken Hoax—the claims by high level Deep State officials of “Russian Disinformation” to dismiss the Hunter laptop revelations—confirms that this was all no more than a Biden campaign op, leads to Jonathan Turley’s question:

After the false stories planted before the 2016 and 2020 elections, the question is what is in store for 2024?

Remarkably, the Seth Rich murder has not just gone away. Only a few days ago Kim Dotcom made a claim that makes sense to a lot of people:

False claim 6: Dotcom claimed that he worked with Seth Rich.

Truth: Seth Rich contacted me and offered information about the DNC. I rejected receiving the data personally and forwarded him to someone close to Wikileaks. That’s how Wikileaks got the DNC and Hillary Clinton leaks.

My point, as also made yesterday, is that there seems to be a power struggle going on within America’s ruling class. There are too many angles to cover in this already lengthy post, but there is no lack of information that could be used to remove Zhou and his grifting family from the White House. What’s lacking—at this point—is a consensus on how to move forward. This is what is being grappled with. Continued drift doesn’t seem possible, but could happen failing some sort of consensus—the domestic and geopolitical complications are that … complex.

Interesting times. And this video raises interesting questions: