Saturday, 23 April 2022
LEAD UP TO THE WAR
Tuesday, 19 April 2022
Sunday, 17 April 2022
POLITICAL DIRECTION OR CRISIS MANAGEMENT - WHAT FUTURE DEMOCRACY?
We are led by managers responding to crises with technical solutions that are costly and limit our freedom. Instead, what we need is what he had, politicians responding to the people with programs and policies.
For anyone following the French elections the campaigning and has been very very thorough and everyone all the candidates have had plenty of time to present their particular programs and the electorate has had a lot of time and still more to come to reach their conclusions and vote.
But it is interesting to note that the traditional moderate left and the right have faded out and all we have is extreme political views on the left and the right and then a crisis manager in the middle.
So the fundamental problem we have with democracy these days - and I mean since the the financial crisis let's say - is that the world has become a very complex place. This complexity has produced just a series of crisis and we roll from one criss to the next. If all you have is a series of crises, then all the electorate can do is pick rhe competent manager and then suffer his or her apolitical pragmatism.
The point is that democracy needs democrats, it needs potential leaders with a political philosophy and a vision of the good life, from which is derived their program and policies, and then competition at the hustings over different visions to actively create the future.
But all we have is reactive politics, crisis managers spending our money on short-term technical programs and we do not really have a choice about the quality of life and the culture that we want for us and our children. We have views about the ki d of world we want to live in, but only the elite, the oligarchs,are listened to; and the rest of humanity is flanneled and smothered in propaganda and given nonsense to believe such as The Woke or The Singularity.
Friday, 15 April 2022
THE HEARTLANDS (Sir Halford John Mackinder)
15 April 2022
John J Mearsheimer has been spot on for years.
https://youtu.be/XgiZXgYzI84
He has a theoretical framework understanding that he can lay over any IR security problem and explain it and offer solutions. But those that be (the people who1 govern us), they don't listen, not to him, and not to the people in this "democracy" of ours We are there to vote them in and give our support to their madness and a sense of legitimacy.
You could argue they flannel us with distractions like covid or wokism. So there is geopolitics, propaganda, and democracy. Mearsheimer is right, but rejected by government and the people. We are dissenters, heretics, free-thinkers, driven by facts and reason, not short-term hubris.
There are many determinants of foreign policy. Geography is very deterministic.
The Rus were dealt a really poor hand. They are like The Hordes, a people of the plains, the Eurasian landmass is their land. The plain continues to the West onto the plain of central Europe, with - as I see it so maybe I've misunderstood - defensive natural barriers for Russia, but these are just beyond Russia's grasp. Russia has 2,000 kilometers of long and vulnerable borderland that it must defend to stop any invasion from a well-funded and technologically sophisticated Western European sea-power - originally the British until Chrchill ceded to the American maritime power in 1945.
What are these natural defences? The Carpathian mountains - but alas, they're in Romania! Access to the Black Sea - it's in Ukraine! (or was). The Suwalki Gap which also gives access to the Baltic Sea - it's the other side of the Balkans (but Russia has Kaliningrad at the other end of the Gap - see a map)!
And so on - there are nine such gateways that enemies use to routinely invade Russia (identified in a Zeihan Youtube pres.), and Russia must have them all under lock and key, to feel secure. They've been invaded 50 times and more.
They'd need to plug the Transnistrie gap, a Russian separatist enclave in tiny Moldovia. Russia's also been invaded by the Swedes through the three Baltic countries so there are three NATO countries Putin would also need to invade (was he really planning this? Surely not.) The French through Belarus. Twice by the Germans through the Polish gap. The Bessarabian gap in Romania favoured by the Turks. Azerbaijan, Armenia and Georgia complete the nontep.
Now, it has NATO at its door, bristling with weapons. The Soviet Union had all nine of these gaps in its land mass, but Russia today has only Crimea and Kaliningrad. It needs to move West and take the seven remaining, five in NATO lands.
So this is about geography, as it affects security, ie Geopolitics. It's about security and insecurity, existence and (ominously) whatever it takes to survive. And this is the starting point of Mearsheimer's position. He is an "offensive structural realist". (Russian demographics - second worse in the world after China - is another factor, for another time.)
Geography means Russia needs to expand westwards into central Europe and capture the nine gateways. So it's not about personal ambition or nationalism or imperialism or historic revenge, it is a purely rational strategy to ensure national survival, it is about Russia's understandable insecurity.
And how does America respond to this? America is insecure too, being at the top of the greasy pole - it wants to rub out any regional competitors ... but what to put in their place? America responds with a deaf ear and aggression, as usual. Surely America has learnt by now that confrontation is followed by failure. And as a consequence of confrontation, America is throwing Russia into the arms of China, the new rising world hegemon, or so they tell us. China, with maybe Pakistan and Iran and even Turkey too, why not in its axis. But America needs Russia, as does Europe, for different reasons.
Contrast Russia's geography and insecurity with America's. The Americans feel supremely secure and confident, with oceans West and East, and Canada and Mexico North and South, so they are unassailable. Russians, on the other hand, are tremendously insecure: their citadel has no walls and Ukraine - where NATO could site Weapons of Mass Destruction - is just 500 kms away ... a lobster without a shell, ready for the pot, an egg without a shell.
Surely, this is understood and something cleverer than war, a response based in cooperation, as prefered by France and Germany, can be the tool to peace? I feel like there should be a parable in the bible to help understanding of this, next to Noah's Ark...maybe that sounds daft, but this whole conflict does go all the way back to a story about The People of the Trees v. The People of the Seas (though I can't find an internet reference).
In its orginal form, trees and seas, and the separating rimlands in between, is a neat geopolitical theory known as The Heartland Theory. One side or the other must take or defend the rimlands that separate them to win the heartland, giving that side victory and World Hegemon accolade. It is almost a board game. (Except the winner, America, is in the Americas, not the heartland of Asia, Africa, Eurasia.)
Sir Halford John Mackinder was a British geographer who wrote a paper in 1904 called "The Geographical Pivot of History." Who rules Eastern Europe commands the Heartland.
Many many strategists have been drawn to this theory:
a) it gets to the crux of the ambitions and weaknesses of world super-powers and explains the hatred for Russia
b) the Theory was passed onto George Kennan and thence Truman, and goes deep into the second world war, WW1 and WW2 ; and American understanding of how to deal with Germany, Russia and China (heartland powers) ; and Japan and UK (rimland)
c) Mackinder was a Scottish MP.
"Who rules East Europe commands the Heartland; who rules the Heartland commands the World-Island; who rules the World-Island commands the World."
Russia is the great Eurasian land-power. It is, by its geopolitical nature, eternally opposed to America, the liberal Atlantic sea-power. The worry is that Russia use its wealth of natural resources and manpower (intermi al decline now) to conquer the rimlands - which offer up 2,000 kilometers of central European near-abroad for Russia to plug and defend - to defeat the seapowers of Western Europe. America can only rest once Russia is contained and kept out of central Europe. Hence Truman's policy of containment.
By an identical logic, China - or the Eastern side of the heartland this time - is to be contained within its first island ring, of great strategic importance, consisting of Japan, S Korea, Taiwan and the Phillipines; and down as far as Indonesia, Singapore and Malaysia. So it is vitally important in the containment strategy for China to keep these countries "on program". And any American war alliance would extend to Australia, India, Russia (sic) and Turkey, not to mention Western Europe and UK.
Here is some reading on The Heartlands Theory.
https://www.newstatesman.com/culture/2019/01/halford-mackinder-father-geopolitics
https://youtu.be/MkrLUFAcjH0
(view from place 4'27")
The right-wing ideologue Aleksandr Dugin
https://youtu.be/TrafXfDL2CA
Peter Zeihan
https://youtu.be/rkuhWA9GdCo
Sunday, 10 April 2022
A STUPID WAR
This is just Stollenberg trying to plump up his remit, on the basis the Russians cannot be trusted.
The truth is that there is a fault line in Europe that runs from the Baltics to the Black Sea. This is the buffer zone that Russia needs having been invaded by the Swedes, the French and twice by the Germans.
Russia requested three things in its Note. It requested that NATO never admit Ukraine. It requested that Ukraine be neutral with no offensive weapons. And it requested that NATO withdraw from its near abroad: that buffer-zone from the Black Sea to the Baltics.
As far as I can see, this is a stupid war because NATO was never going to admit Ukraine in the first place and there are no weapons planted by America or NATO in Ukraine. As for the third demand, this was just a bargaining chip and Russia knows very well that NATO will never withdraw from all those countries shown on the Daily Telegraph map.
Russia has Belarus and a treaty should be agreed recognising the neutrality of at least Eastern Ukraine, which includes the Crimea, home to the Russian Navy at Sebastopol.
What has amazed everyone is how Germany has finally come off the fence. The great fear has always been that German capital and technology allied with Russian commodities and manpower would create a regional hegemon that America would have good reason to fear.
The worry is that under normal circumstances treaties are only signed after one side has won total victory over the other, but this would put Russia in a position where its very existence was threatened and that's where the nukes come out.
Saturday, 9 April 2022
MASTERING THE ART OF MANIPULATION
Thursday, 7 April 2022
EUROPEAN STRATEGIC COMPASS
"European Union Unveils New Strategy to Become a Global Power
by Soeren Kern • April 3, 2022 at 5:00 am
The goal is "strategic autonomy" — the ability for the EU to act independently of, and as a counterweight to, the United States and the North Atlantic Treaty Organization — in matters of defense and security.
The key component of the Strategic Compass is the development of a so-called EU Rapid Deployment Capacity (RDC), a military force able to intervene in "non-permissive environments" anywhere in the world.
The RDC is to become fully operational by 2025 and commanded by an institution called the "EU Military Planning and Conduct Capability." (The term "capability" is a politically correct substitute for "headquarters," as in "military headquarters.")
The push for Europe to achieve strategic autonomy from the United States is being spearheaded by Macron, who, as part of his reelection campaign, apparently hopes to replace former German Chancellor Angela Merkel as the de facto leader of Europe.
The danger is that many of the pie-in-the-sky policy proposals in the Strategic Compass will divert and drain resources and finances from where they are actually needed: NATO.
A logical course of action would be for EU member states to honor past pledges to increase defense spending as part of their contribution to the transatlantic alliance. That, however, would fly in the face of the folie de grandeur — the delusions of grandeur — of European federalists who dream of transforming the EU into a geopolitical "great power." "
Gate stone Institute April 3rd
ROTATOR CUFF AND CHARACTER
Friday, 1 April 2022
PUTIN'S PLANS
Wednesday, 30 March 2022
LESSONS FROM UKRAINE
Monday, 28 March 2022
IS UKRAINE IN RUSSIA?
In an unscripted speech in Poland this last week, Mr Biden said of Putin: “For God’s sake, this man cannot remain in power.”
Yes well, how embarrasing, in a senior moment, Biden
forgot he was the POTUS and let slip America's true intention, regime
change wherever converting the world's autocracies into democracies and
oppression turns to human rights.
Or put it another way, eliminate the competition and stay on top, Master of the World, forever.
We all know this as we read between the propagandas. In any case, who wouldnt want to live in an enlightenment democracy? Of course we do.
Except that this one is in decline and all we can do is point out the mistakes, knowing we won't be heard, the lessons from all previous post-cold war epic American failures. Need I list them? Will this time be any different? Never mind the past failures, what are the lessons?
First is that these days, no invasion of a sovereign country ever works out. Perhaps that was Putin's fundamental mistake, thinking that Ukraine was in Russia. The determination of the people to resist is proof that nationalism is the strongest force in politics - "my country, right or wrong". No point in NATO rolling into Moscow, shock and awe, best another hearts and minds job, tie the russian people into Europe socially and culturally and prosperity, till they do the regime change.
Secondly, what really risks to knock America off its no.1 block is its indebtedness. Too much for a post here, but debt, QE, inequality, civil strife and woke ... it all comes from mismanaging the reserve currency and a lax attitude to surplus diversity.
19 April 2022
is.gd/YHTz8v
From what I can gather there were 12 Russian navy ships in the Black Sea and now there are 10 and I would imagine that in the next couple of months there will be none.
It is hard to see how any of those 10 ships could leave the Black Sea and rejoin other Russian Navy fleets in the Baltic or Arctic ports, sailing past NAT lands; and similarly it is hard to see how those ships in other ports could come to support the 10 in the Black Sea or indeed to support the war.
Furthermore, once the Black Sea is emptied of Russian vessels, I'd imagine that NATO will sail up the Bosphorus which is Turkey and take over the Black Sea and presumably Sebastopol and Crimea.
But I also find it hard to imagine that happening without Russian resistance and this would surely be the situation for the use of tactical nuclear weapons.
Incidentally, today's tactical nuclear weapons carry a charge of two to three times those used in Hiroshima and Nagasaki, which were 10 kilotonnes. The West's reaction to the use of nuclear weapons is unknown - this is what is meant by dissuasion. And how would China react? or Ukraine? Or the Russian people? This sinking of the flagship is a new segment in the war, as is the attack by Ukraine on Russian villages over the border.
It is not that America's strategic military planners have not thought through all this: they have. It's just that there are so many scenarios to plan for and each scenario has an uncountable number of factors with incalculable weightings for each. The usual American trick is to throw all the cards up into the air see how they land and look at the opportunities that this presents.
The Americans since the end of the Cold War can absolutely be relied upon to create the most monumental disasters the world has ever seen.