| Submit your comments on this article |
| Caucasus/Russia/Central Asia |
| America proposes a new grandiose foreign policy strategy |
| 2023-04-19 |
| Direct Translation via Google Translate. Edited. by Petr Akopov [RIA] "We need to make NATO global, and after the victory of Ukraine, we should seek to divide the Russia-China axis" - such a "new American grand strategy to counter Russia and China" offers former US national security adviser John Bolton in his article in The Wall Street Journal . He calls these the main tasks for the next US president, while he does not want to see either Biden or his former boss Trump. What John Bolton has on his tongue is what Uncle Sam has on his mind - is this a fair conclusion? Or, to put it more simply, can Bolton's public proposals be seen as the hidden desires of the American establishment or the "deep state", the Washington "swamp"? You can, of course, answer in the negative, especially since Bolton has long had a reputation as a "super hawk": in the 2000s he was one of those who promoted the idea of ​​a US attack on Iran (which would lead to consequences an order of magnitude worse than even an invasion of Iraq), and for a year and a half of work in the White House (in 2018-2019) earned Trump the title of warmonger. *Ahem* Ima call bullshit right there. Trump did more to disentangle us from foreign wars than anyone else. Bolton is really as aggressive as possible, but he is also one of the best American specialists in international affairs. And the fact that he is now advocating a radical agenda is explained not only by his character, but also by what he sees: the United States is losing its global position. Bolton is one of those who believe that the United States can maintain its hegemony, it just needs to act much more firmly, assertively and consistently to do this. What does he offer? In his previous article in The Wall Street Journal (mid-March), he criticized Biden for being inconsistent and cautious, saying that he wants Russia to lose, but does not want Ukraine to "really win." Fear of an escalation of the conflict, a clash between Russia and NATO, and even a nuclear war, Bolton resolutely brushes aside, considering all this a Russian bluff and part of our deterrence strategy (which, in his opinion, eventually works). Bolton is in favor of allowing Ukraine to use American weapons to strike Russian territory and, in general, "focus on deterring Putin in various scenarios, up to the threat of his overthrow." That is, to work towards the liquidation of Russia - and he talks about this in his next article. In which it is no longer about the Ukrainian conflict, but about a new "grand" American strategy, because "the United States and allies cannot afford to drift aimlessly as the tectonic plates shift in history." A new era has begun in which America is being challenged and must watch first for threats from a rising Russia-China axis, as well as "rogue states like Iran and North Korea." Bolton lists three critical elements of the new strategy. For starters, Washington and its allies should immediately increase defense budgets to Reagan-era levels (about six percent of GDP) and maintain such spending for the foreseeable future, without stopping at the fact that it will require cuts in other spending items. There is even nothing to comment on here: a threefold increase in spending is impossible in any of the European NATO countries without changing the very model of their development. Simply put, European societies will not agree to this - and no amount of fanning of the "Russian threat" will help here. Polish leaders can scare the French and Germans with Putin's tanks in Berlin and Paris , but no one believes them. Bolton's second proposal concerns American collective defense alliances - they need to be "improved and expanded": "We must make NATO a global organization by inviting Japan , Australia , Israel and other countries committed to the goals of NATO defense spending. <…> An Asian NATO is not inevitable, but there is huge room for innovative alliances with like-minded states, including increased cooperation between South Korea , Japan and the United States." Worldwide NATO to contain Russia and China ? Yes, this is it - only its participants were not asked. Europeans are categorically against the spread of the principle of Atlantic solidarity to the Pacific Ocean - only Great Britain is playing this , well, Bolton's idea in itself is fully consistent with the principles of Anglo-Saxon geopolitics. Britain, USA, Canada , Australia - seniority in this family may change, but the goal, that is, global domination, remains unchanged. It will not work to mobilize Europe on the Asian fronts, and the Asians themselves are not ready to line up in the anti-Chinese line. Moreover, Bolton believes: "The United States, together with partners in Europe and Asia , should build Taiwan into a collective security system and increase the amount of military assistance," that is, be ready for a direct conflict with Beijing . After all, "inclusion of Taiwan in the system of collective security" will automatically immediately lead to a complete rupture of relations with China - even Japan and South Korea will not subscribe to this. And the idea of ​​including Israel in a new global NATO is really "grand" in terms of possible consequences for the United States. The point is not even that European countries will never agree to this: there is hardly a better way to accelerate the already catastrophic decline in the influence of the Anglo-Saxons in the Greater Middle East and in the Islamic world as a whole, how to start the procedure for joining the Jewish state to the Atlantic alliance. But the unrealistic nature of the first two elements of the strategy pales in comparison to the third, final one: “After Ukraine wins the military conflict with Russia, we should strive to split the Russia-China axis. Moscow’s defeat could overthrow the Putin regime . "Russia, especially east of the Urals , cannot be considered unthinkable. Beijing certainly has its eyes on this vast territory. The uncontrolled collapse of Russia could give China direct access to the Arctic , including even the Bering Strait bordering Alaska." Here Bolton only partly echoes Henry Kissinger , who also fears the collapse of a nuclear-armed Russia. But if the former Secretary of State proposes to avoid this after the end of the war, to find a worthy place for Russia in the new world order (that is, to give some kind of security guarantees), then Bolton does not just believe in the victory of Ukraine (that is, the West) - for him, the collapse of Russia is only dangerous due to the fact that it can strengthen China. To prevent this, it will be necessary to somehow drag the defeated, weakened post-Putin Russia away from China, probably by intimidating it with a Chinese invasion and promising to restore contacts and trade with Europe and with the West in general. The plan is grandiose - in its madness. Because he considers Russia only as the subject of someone else's will and external strategies, denying her the presence of her own strategy and subjectivity. Russia began its pivot to the East (of which relations with China are an important part) even before Crimea—yes, it was slower than it wanted to be, but it was a conscious strategic choice. Russia staked on breaking the Atlantic model of globalization (that is, the era of American hegemony) more than a decade and a half ago. In the same years, Russia took up the reintegration of the post-Soviet space through the construction of the Eurasian Union (which was created with an eye on the further inclusion of Ukraine). That is, Russia's strategy is consistent and unchanged - despite the gravity of the open conflict with the West, led by the Anglo-Saxons. Russia cannot lose to the West in Ukraine, Russia cannot disintegrate, Russia cannot become part of China, Russia is not going to abandon its favorable course towards a strategic alliance with China, Russia does not and will not trust the West. And most importantly, Russia is absolutely sure that the absolute majority of mankind is counting on its work to accelerate the decline of the Anglo-Saxon world order. |
| Posted by:badanov |
| #2 You can, of course, answer in the negative, especially since Bolton has long had a reputation as a "super hawk": in the 2000s he was one of those who promoted the idea of ​​a US attack on Iran (which would lead to consequences an order of magnitude worse than even an invasion of Iraq), and for a year and a half of work in the White House (in 2018-2019) earned Trump the title of warmonger. Trump used Bolton to scare people but eventually had to jettison the mad man. My fear now is that Biden and his handlers are just as crazy as Bolton. Warmonger is a good word for them. |
| Posted by: Abu Uluque 2023-04-19 12:56 |
| #1 Bolton aside, the author admits without saying so directly that Russia is an oriental despotism only peripherally involved with Western Civilization. As for the Russia/China axis; it was tried previously and lasted but six years before China tried a failed policy of 'Thousand flowers.' After decades the alliance has now reformed. However, it seems that Russia makes for a poor ally and we shall see how long it lasts. |
| Posted by: Slavising Unineting5672 2023-04-19 07:49 |