Plot For A New American Century

The following is speculative. Bear with me. (The pun will become obvious.)

If the Dems are right, the Russians meddled.
If the Reps are right, the Russians meddled.

Whoever is right wins the senate.
If it’s the Dems, Trump is impeached and the Russian collusion story lives on.
If it’s the Reps, the Dems are discredited and the Russian collusion story lives on.

If Bernie the socialist had become the Dems candidate, would the Russian collusion narrative have been put forth by the Reps? Is this why they would have preferred Bernie over HRC? Either way, it is a minor point and a moot point.

  • Russian-backed rebels are said to have shot down MH-17.
  • Russians are said to have been behind the Maidan and to have invaded Crimea (Crimean elections notwithstanding.)
  • Russians were implicated with Carter Page, which is why the FBI used him as an informant.
  • Russians are said to have spied on the US and hacked into critical systems (Panda was mentioned twice as a non-sequitor in a recent Dutch MH-17 report.) Guccifer was Romanian. [There is no doubt that all countries do engage in offensive cyber attacks and probes, including Russia.]
  • Russians were accused of hacking into the DNC (later proved to be false) and passing information to Julian Assange who was accused of being a Russian agent.
  • The lawyer Donald Trump Jr. met with (Natalia Vilenskaya) under false pretenses was Russian. It was a set-up.
  • Russians are said to have offered the NSA dirt on Trump as well as the NSA hacking tools (which could leave subtle fingerprints making it look like the hack originated from any state or individual actor.)
  • Russians are said to be involved in Uranium one (private businessmen.)
  • Russians are said to have pranked Adam Schiff (actually Ukrainians.)

Who are all these Russians? All the Russians who are known or have been named are private citizens. Do any of them officially represent Russia? Are they spies? Are they even Russian? What’s the difference? Russia… Russia… Russia… and the band played on.

Who wants to make Russia (an ally of Iran) the enemy? The neocons and their supporters do. There are neocons on both sides of the aisle. Obama was a neocon, as were the Bushs’.
Who haven’t we heard from since the elections? The neocons and their supporters (they’ve let their media do their talking.) The media, it seems, have been talking about nothing but Russia.

Victoria Nuland is now (since Jan. 19th, 2018) the CEO of CNAS.
She engineered the coup in Ukraine and has, more than anyone, spoiled Ukraine/Russian relations.
CNAS has advocated for Russian sanctions, and has played a very large part in middle-east policy, as well as policy towards China.

In June 2009 The Washington Post suggested, “In the era of Obama… the Center for a New American Security may emerge as Washington’s go-to think tank on military affairs.”

Since its inception, CNAS has released 12 reports on topics including, U.S.-Russia Relations, Transatlantic security cooperation in the Asia-Pacific, and U.S. strategy in the Middle East.

‘Center for a New American Security’ kinda’ sounds like the neo-con plan named ‘Project for a New American Century’, doesn’t it? Security is not often referred to as ‘a security’.

(The following linked article is clearly biased, but the facts below are common to both sides.)

Kiev has just passed a law which “declares the self-proclaimed republics in eastern Ukraine “temporarily occupied territories” and gives the Ukrainian president the right to deploy the armed forces for the sake of “ensuring [Ukraine’s] sovereignty”…”

“Ukrainian politician Viktor Medvedchuk, who represents Kiev in the humanitarian subgroup at the negotiations in Minsk, said that the legislation “puts an end to the attempts to peacefully resolve” the conflict in eastern Ukraine.”

So the neo-cons want to take out seven countries ending with Iran.
They also want to provoke Russia through sanctions and, with the help of NATO, build up military strength on its borders. But to what ends?

Hunter Biden, Joe’s son, was made a director on Ukraine’s largest private gas company’s board (Burisma Holdings) as head of legal affairs. All of Russia’s gas exports to northern Europe used to go through pipelines crossing Ukraine. Since the coup, pipelines have been diverted to pass through Turkey, giving Turkey full control of both middle-east oil and Russian gas being piped (over land) into Europe.
Turkey was denied entry into the EU, but remains a NATO member, although that may soon change. This makes Europe vulnerable to Asia, and would help push their alliance towards the east.

Although this hurts Ukraine economically, more importantly, it puts US gas producers at a disadvantage in Europe. If Russia could be goaded into a war with Ukraine (a US proxy,) the US could stave off the threat posed by China and Russia (and Iran) in forming a multi-polar world by increasing its European energy exports and setting up a new petro-dollar with Europe, except this time, Europe would be forced to buy US energy with US dollars. Europe would then be dependant on the US instead of Turkey, and China’s One-Belt-One-Road plan would be damaged beyond repair. Russia would be decimated on all fronts.

Didn’t this all start with Syria? The timing seems right. And just recently, the top officials from Russia’s intelligence services just showed up in D.C., after which Israel started attacking Syria (officially,) Turkey had a scuffle with American-led Kurds, and Russia lost two soldiers in a firefight with American-led rebel forces in Syria.

The role Poland is playing should not be underestimated. American missiles on Polish soil pushing NATO right up to the Russian border, populist Poland’s tough stance against the globalist EU (the Polish leader Andrzej Sebastian Duda has been likened to a Polish Donald Trump,) not to mention to plane crash which took out almost the entire Polish government in Russia, in 2010. Could the CIA have been involved? [More on this later.]

The coming Russia-Ukraine War: update and analysis

This could be what Janet Yellen meant with her, ‘not in our lifetime’ statement. /s

While the Russian-collusion narrative and the FISA memo might be the biggest stories in recent American history, that which is hidden below, as is usually the case, seems to be far more meaningful to American interests. It could all be a ploy, no matter who won the election, to continue US hegemonic expansion and the new cold war well into this new American century. Trump may have even messed up the plans to frame HRC as the Russian colluder, as all the evidence is against her. If it were President Clinton in office, Russian collusion would have been easy to prove. Instead, we have the grotesque and acrimonious spectacle now under way.

Advertisements

Saddam, Saud, and Sino-Petrol

The Kingdom of Saudi Arabia is hurting. Their move of increasing oil production with the goal of lowering prices in order to gain a larger market share (Saud denies this but they are trying to put US shale out of business – low interest rates in the US have contributed to staving off the death blow, for now) has hurt all net oil exporting economies worldwide, including Saud, itself. The secondary effect was to pressure Russia into leaving Assad to the jackals. Russia bit the bullet and did not yield. Strike two. The war in Yemen as well as the financing of Syrian rebels costs the kingdom a lot of money they just don’t have. Steeeerike three.

Oil represents about 80% of Saud’s revenue. With ISIS competing for market share by selling oil to Turkey at $20/barrel – thereby undercutting the market by half, their economy can simply not withstand this price point for much longer. So what can they do?

They could find other sources of income, they could cut output of oil, they could de-peg from the US dollar, or they could start selling oil in yuan. Remember what happened to Saddam Hussein when he tried to sell his oil in Euros. Everybody was a loser in that affair.

Today, the renminbi (yuan – for all intents and purposes) will likely be included in the IMF’s SDR basket of funds. There is an OPEC meeting this Friday.

*Update*

Saudi Aramco is rumoured to be going public, that is to say, privatized. An IPO is being considered. Of course the Saudis wouldn’t let this corporation fall into the wrong hands (5% for now,) so is this simply a variation on a stock-buyback scheme of epic proportion? This way they can raise their stock price without raising the price of oil. Since doing so would hurt the stock price, this would more or less guarantee low oil prices for a while. This would be a bad thing for all oil net exporters; Canada will be especially hard hit.

One wonders if they will allow Yuan transactions for their shares.

Welcome Back Qatar

The recent drop in the price of oil has had widespread negative consequences for Canada and many other net oil-exporting countries. It has also had dire consequences for the United States. The fracking industry has seen lay-offs, rig closures, and the beginnings of consolidation; the smaller outfits are becoming more and more attractive to large corporate buy-outs as their over-leveraged business models are being slaughtered by dwindling margins. We have been told that lower gas prices are good for the average consumer, but how good can it be if it takes out their entire economy? The petro-dollar scheme, it would appear, is showing signs of stress.

Meanwhile, strategic reserves and storage facilities are filling up fast. It has been estimated that all the extra storage space left in the USA will be full by the end of May. According to the American Petroleum Institute (API) last month saw the biggest build-up of US oil reserves in 34 years (at least.) Most countries that can afford to buy more oil are also adding to their reserves; and who can’t at these prices? Stockpiles are at an all-time high, and not just in the USA; China is also buying a lot of oil while the prices are near record lows. When all the storage capacity is used up, oil will be dumped onto the market driving the price down even further. Yet, the algos aren’t crashing; nobody is putting much pressure on the Saudis to cut production, the markets are not in a panic, and there seems to be a laissez-faire attitude towards the whole debacle. Surely this must be temporary. Maybe things will turn out for the best, but how? We’ll get back to this in a moment.

The Arab spring has brought about many changes in the middle-east. Egypt, Bahrain, and Yemen have seen meaningful change since 2011, and they are not alone. There has been a political awakening in some parts of the region, and there are now new actors taking the stage. ISIS has become a force thanks to the backing (either direct or indirect) of the Saudi and American governments; a renewed call for a caliphate has re-awoken a new generation of Arabs who want to assert themselves internationally. There are grass-roots political movements springing up all around the region and even spilling into northern Africa. It seems that change is all around.

Continue reading “Welcome Back Qatar”