Translated by Ollie Richardson & Angelina Siard

23:28:38
02/01/2017

regnum.ru

The full-scale resistance of the US to the inevitable emergence of a multipolar world has been growing during the whole of 2017. At the turn of 2018, the US literally forced the world community to split into two opposing camps. For some it was prescribed to pay a “tribute” and at the first demand to join any American adventure, and for others — to look for opportunities to counter the unfavourable-for-them ideas of the United States.

Practically all the countries of the collective West found themselves in the first group, and in the second — Russia, situational allies, and China. Each side has its own strengths and weaknesses, but both are too powerful to directly engage in an open conflict. For this reason, as always in world history, hostility between blocs developed at the platforms of mediated States.

CHINA – AMERICA

During all of 2017 clouds thickened along the Chinese borders. In December, 2017, it became obvious that with the US’ adoption of a new national security strategy, its policy of containing China finally exited the tactical level and entered the strategic level. In the foreign policy doctrine adopted for the next four years the term “China” is mentioned 33 times, and is clearly accompanied by the words “opponent”, “adversary”, or “rival”.

Serious changes are also occurring in a methodological sense. If earlier, under the rule of transnational American elites, the imbalance of foreign trade was acceptable (bringing profits into the pockets of private corporations), then with the arrival of Trump and the military, university, industrial, and other national unions that stand behind him – which, unlike TNCs, directly depend on the US economy, a $555 billion bilateral turnover, $360 billion of which went not in favor of America – became a real problem for US.

The complexity of the embodiment of the plans of the circles standing behind Trump during the entire year consisted in the fact that the very essence of American capitalism impeded the United States. The fight against outflows of investment in China, a ban on the issuing of new technologies from the country, waging a “war” using trade barriers (against their own Americans), and the internal confrontation too strongly contradicted the very essence of Anglo-Saxon monetary ideology, namely the attitude “profit at all costs”. A no smaller obstacle was the constant (since the times of Clinton) fall in the level of income of American households, in which the disappearance of cheap Chinese goods will have an even stronger effect.

China sees in this a historic loophole, and therefore in 2018 will continue the accelerated cultivation of 2-3 hundreds of millions of wealthy citizens, thus attempting to develop a sufficient capacity in its domestic market before the US will exert full pressure on its export-oriented economy.

In the center of the US-China rivalry in 2018 there will be the Petroyuan, the growing zone of Chinese currency, colossal banking, government and corporate debts of China, and conflicts initiated by the US in those countries and regions through which the construction of the new Chinese silk road is planned.

USA — RUSSIA

During the whole of 2017 attempts were actively made to unbalance our country and to push it into two, pre-prepared for this political directions – either in the direction of a global confrontation (with a disruption of diplomatic relations, trade wars, and the “Afghan” format of Russia’s participation in several military conflicts), or in the direction of Russia’s self-isolation, in response to the insult-causing blows to the national pride and honor of the country. Fortunately, Russia managed to circumvent both of these extremely negative scenarios.

In the process of the Russian-American confrontation of the past year, three key areas where Russia really “threatens” the US appeared on the surface: military, energy, and, for now, the sphere of fundamental science. China at this stage is dangerous for America only from the standpoint of the world economy, and, once again, only with the participation of Moscow.

The main method of strangling China during all previous years was the isolation of its production capacity from the world’s energy resources. However, thanks to the intervention of our country in Syria, the many-year strategy, at first, stalled, and, with the victory of Moscow, even turned into a farce. According to the outcome, two things became obvious for the US: 1) whilst an independent Russia still exists, a source of energy supply for China that is independent from the United States will also exist; 2) in the coming years, without Russia it will be possible to do whatever they want with China.

Accordingly, pressure on Russia will only grow. And only thanks to the parity of strategic forces and the second-best army in the world (which brought the US in Syria to reality, and during the provision of security for the referendum in Crimea) the US could only hold a military and energy competition during 2017 by putting pressure on the Russian economy.

Next year the policy of sanctions will continue; a currency, trade, and any other war besides a hot one is likely. Also, attempts will be made to squeeze out our State from the world’s energy markets. The standard policy of Washington to break those who cannot be purchased will continue next year. The only caveat is that such a policy towards Russia is historically proven to not be the best way. Bribery and deception could work, but direct pressure is unlikely to work.

Many in the US understand this simple truth, however, the situation in America today is such that the imposition of sanctions and the application of direct pressure on Russia, as well as the simultaneous economic strangulation and military encirclement of China are the necessary minimum without which the US won’t be able to preserve the current situation in the world. And it means they were obliged to contract their own territorial dimensions, which is unacceptable for the modern West.

Points of contention and global instability

Crimea

Russia in recent years achieved colossal successes in the military sphere, which the US simply didn’t expect. And it became clear for the first time after the failure to squeeze out the Russian fleet from the Black Sea. Back then, according to the results of the referendum in Crimea, the Black Sea basin, which the United States planned to turn into a springboard for its own naval base, became a huge base for Moscow itself. And it’s not that the fleet of the US Navy replaced the fleet of Russia – “retreating” from the Peninsula to Novorossiysk – but that the fleet of Russia expanded its influence in the South-Eastern part of the Mediterranean sea, the Black Sea waters, and the bases of all Eastern European anti-missile defenses.

Essentially, it was planned that the huge American naval base in Sevastopol and the acting Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces Treaty will allow NATO ships to cover, using medium-range missiles, most of the European Russian territory, while remaining covered by the land air-defense forces, European anti-missile defenses, and the “Aegis” naval systems. In this case, Russia’s response indeed was limited to the relevant paragraph of the Treaty, which allowed the marine component of the medium-range missiles, but forbids the land ones.

Instead of this, Crimea returned to Russia, the strategical (including in terms of military) Crimean bridge is almost completed, and air-defense and anti-missile defense systems, the contingent of military space forces, and many other “surprises” took aim at a significant part of the European and Turkish forces of NATO, and the “cunning” INF Treaty turned for America from an advantage to a problem.

North Korea

Tension around North Korea escalated during the whole of 2017. Of course, in the aspect of pressure against mainland China. The unstable North Korea is a direct path to the underbelly of China, and that’s why, under the pretext of escalating the conflict, the United States “legitimately” increases the degree of tension surrounding China. During the entire year political and media preparation was carried out to build a ring of American military facilities, to control and sabotage trade routes vital for China, to wring out funds from regional pro-American allies, and, of course, to inflate maximum anti-Chinese sentiment in the region.

In short, it is a scenario that is very familiar to Russia. While under the guise of the threat of the nuclear program of Kim Jong-un, “THAAD” systems are being deployed in South Korea (which “surveys” 1,500 kilometers of the Chinese and far Eastern Russian territories) and the US transfers to Japan technology for the production of “Tomahawk” cruise missiles and “Harpoon” anti-ship missiles.

Both are clearly not an act of defence against the North Korean regime, but are aimed at China’s capabilities. In order to maintain an escalation of the conflict the United States use proven methods, for example, for quite some time huge military refrigerators were and still are being brought to each exercise. In simple terms: refrigerators for cargo-200 [corpses – ed]. And it is difficult to think of a better example of a provocation against the North Korean military forces.

Washington needs a hostile Korea, and the US already received the first benefits from the volatility in the Asia-Pacific region. For example, not so long ago, in the framework of December “exercises” aimed “against the North Korean forces”, combat aircraft of the US and regional allies made direct manoeuvres over the disputed artificial Chinese Islands. The carrier strike group of the US sits in the narrow isthmuses of sea routes for regional and global trade, and 90% of Chinese exports depends precisely on them.

Thus, in 2018, the ring around China will continue to shrink, the threat of the conflict escalating on the Peninsula, with the help of which it will be easily possible to declare trade isthmuses as combat zones or areas of “unsafe navigation”, will remain, and the scenarios will depend on how America, China, and, of course, our country will behave in the future.

Syria

The situation in Syria remains tense. The proxy war between Russia and the US still continues. However, from a historical point of view, the turning point has already occurred, and exactly in the same way that it did in the last century. In the 80’s, during the Soviet campaign in Afghanistan, the US and Britain already used the platforms and camps of the Persian Gulf countries to create a wide contingent of anti-Soviet forces. At the peak of the war there were about 170,000 mercenaries (the Mujahideen).

The same happened in Syria since 2015. Even weapons in the Syrian Arab Republic were delivered according to the Afghan scheme. The Mujahideen were provided with arms mainly of Soviet production, purchasing them in the countries of the Soviet axis, and the terrorists in Syria were supplied with Russian weapons and equipment, purchasing them via firms and the US intelligence agencies in the CIS countries and in the warehouses of the destroyed countries of the Middle East. The CIS is, first and foremost, Ukraine and Bulgaria; the Middle East is Libya and Iraq.

Absolutely nothing changed also from the point of view of the American mentality. By 1985, when the USSR, contrary to the expectations of the US, nevertheless turned the tide with the help of combat aviation, the US then supplied the Mujahideen with the latest “Stinger” systems, Britain and NATO countries established new camps on the territory of Afghanistan, and France began the construction of Afghan fortified areas. Exactly the same thing happened in 2017 in Syria.

This is yet another underestimation of Moscow in 2015, this same panic from Russia’s success in 2016, and these same camps, opened after the defeat of the main forces of ISIS in 2017. In 2018, new weapons deliveries and new terrorist formations under different names will unambiguously remain a part of this war. But, fortunately, Russia and its leadership are ready for this.

Ukraine and Donbass

Ukraine in the world geopolitics of 2017 is remembered by the fact that it managed to be identified not only in the supply of missile technology to the “threat of democracy” — North Korea, but also in the sales documents of the “Kh-55” Soviet missiles to the Iranian regime – hated by the US and Israel. Today it is precisely copies of these missiles under the name “Soumar” that fly from the territory of the belligerent Yemen to the US’ main ally in the region — Saudi Arabia.

Also, in the past year, the United States again tried to “kindle” the Ukrainian theatre of the Russian-American standoff with the help of supplies of “Javelin” systems to Ukraine. However, it quickly became clear that the TOWs – analogous to the “Javelin” – that are actively supplied by the US to the “moderate” opposition in Syria didn’t give a good account of themselves. In Iraq, with their help, the terrorists managed to destroy 49 American “Abrams”, but in Syria at the same time — no “T-90”. It became clear that the results of such work will not bring a noticeable advantage to the UAF, especially since the forces of the independent republics will receive from their allies active tank armor in advance.

The same applies to sniper rifles of US production. These rifles, which are supplied by America to Ukraine to defend the future operators of “javelins”, are inferior to similar models produced in Russia. In 2017, it was using these rifles that a new world record for the longest sniper shot was set [by Russia – ed].

Thus, next year Moscow will continue to fend off the attempts of Ukraine and Washington to transform the simmering conflict in Donbass into the phase of full-scale hostilities, but the very possibility of resolving the conflict is unlikely to emerge before there will be parliamentary and presidential elections in Ukraine.

Copyright © 2022. All Rights Reserved.