"
- The Raging Twenties started with a
bang with the targeted assassination of Iran’s
General Qasem Soleimani.
Yet a bigger bang awaits us throughout the decade:
the myriad declinations of the New Great Game in
Eurasia, which pits the US against Russia, China and
Iran, the three major nodes of Eurasia integration.
Every game-changing act in geopolitics and
geoeconomics in the coming decade will have to be
analyzed in connection to this epic clash.The
Deep State and crucial sectors of the US ruling
class are absolutely terrified that China is already
outpacing the “indispensable nation” economically
and that Russia has
outpaced it militarily. The Pentagon officially
designates the three Eurasian nodes as “threats.”
Hybrid War techniques – carrying inbuilt 24/7
demonization – will proliferate with the aim of
containing China’s “threat,” Russian “aggression”
and Iran’s “sponsorship of terrorism.” The myth of
the “free market” will continue to drown under the
imposition of a barrage of illegal sanctions,
euphemistically defined as new trade “rules.”
Yet that will be hardly enough to derail the
Russia-China strategic partnership. To unlock the
deeper meaning of this partnership, we need to
understand that Beijing defines it as rolling
towards a “new era.” That implies strategic
long-term planning – with the key date being 2049,
the centennial of New China.
The horizon for the multiple projects of the Belt
and Road Initiative – as in the China-driven New
Silk Roads – is indeed the 2040s, when Beijing
expects to have fully woven a new, multipolar
paradigm of sovereign nations/partners across
Eurasia and beyond, all connected by an interlocking
maze of belts and roads.
The Russian project –
Greater Eurasia – somewhat
mirrors Belt & Road and will be integrated with it.
Belt & Road, the Eurasia Economic Union, the
Shanghai Cooperation Organization and the Asia
Infrastructure Investment Bank are all converging
towards the same vision.
Realpolitik
So this “new era”, as defined by the Chinese,
relies heavily on close Russia-China coordination,
in every sector. Made in China 2025 is encompassing
a series of techno/scientific breakthroughs. At the
same time, Russia has established itself as an
unparalleled technological resource for weapons and
systems that the Chinese still cannot match.
At the latest BRICS summit in Brasilia, President
Xi Jinping told Vladimir Putin that “the current
international situation with rising instability and
uncertainty urge China and Russia to establish
closer strategic coordination.” Putin’s response:
“Under the current situation, the two sides should
continue to maintain close strategic communication.”
Are You Tired Of
The Lies And
Non-Stop Propaganda?
|
Russia is showing China how the West respects
realpolitik power in any form, and Beijing is
finally starting to use theirs. The result is
that after five centuries of Western domination –
which, incidentally, led to the decline of the
Ancient Silk Roads – the Heartland is back, with a
bang, asserting its preeminence.
On a personal note, my travels these past two
years, from West Asia to Central Asia, and my
conversations these past two months with analysts in
Nur-Sultan, Moscow and Italy, have allowed me to get
deeper into the intricacies of what sharp minds
define as the Double Helix. We are all aware of the
immense challenges ahead – while barely managing to
track the stunning re-emergence of the Heartland in
real-time.
In soft power terms, the sterling role of Russian
diplomacy will become even more paramount – backed
up by a Ministry of Defense led by Sergei Shoigu, a
Tuvan from Siberia, and an intel arm that is capable
of constructive dialogue with everybody:
India/Pakistan, North/South Korea, Iran/Saudi
Arabia, Afghanistan.
This apparatus does smooth (complex) geopolitical
issues over in a manner that still eludes Beijing.
In parallel, virtually the whole Asia-Pacific –
from the Eastern Mediterranean to the Indian Ocean –
now takes into full consideration Russia-China as a
counter-force to US naval and financial overreach.
Stakes in Southwest Asia
The targeted assassination of Soleimani, for all
its long-term fallout, is just one move in the
Southwest Asia chessboard. What’s ultimately at
stake is a macro geoeconomic prize: a land
bridge from the Persian Gulf to the Eastern
Mediterranean.
Last summer, an Iran-Iraq-Syria trilateral
established that “the goal of negotiations is to
activate the Iranian-Iraqi-Syria load and transport
corridor as part of a wider plan for reviving the
Silk Road.”
There could not be a more strategic connectivity
corridor, capable of simultaneously interlinking
with the International North-South Transportation
Corridor; the Iran-Central Asia-China connection all
the way to the Pacific; and projecting Latakia
towards the Mediterranean and the Atlantic.
What’s on the horizon is, in fact, a sub-sect of
Belt & Road in Southwest Asia. Iran is a key node of
Belt & Road; China will be heavily involved in the
rebuilding of Syria; and Beijing-Baghdad signed
multiple deals and set up an Iraqi-Chinese
Reconstruction Fund (income from 300,000 barrels of
oil a day in exchange for Chinese credit for Chinese
companies rebuilding Iraqi infrastructure).
A quick look at the map reveals the “secret” of
the US refusing to pack up and leave Iraq, as
demanded by the Iraqi Parliament and Prime Minister:
to prevent the emergence of this corridor by any
means necessary. Especially when we see that all the
roads that China is building across Central Asia – I
navigated many of them in November and December –
ultimately link China with Iran.
The final objective: to unite Shanghai to the
Eastern Mediterranean – overland, across the
Heartland.
As much as Gwadar port in the Arabian Sea is an
essential node of the China-Pakistan Economic
Corridor, and part of China’s multi-pronged “escape
from Malacca” strategy, India also courted Iran to
match Gwadar via the port of Chabahar in the Gulf of
Oman.
So as much as Beijing wants to connect the
Arabian Sea with Xinjiang, via the economic
corridor, India wants to connect with Afghanistan
and Central Asia via Iran.
Yet India’s investments in Chabahar may come to
nothing, with New Delhi still mulling whether to
become an active part of the US “Indo-Pacific”
strategy, which would imply dropping Tehran.
The Russia-China-Iran joint naval exercise in
late December, starting exactly from Chabahar, was a
timely wake-up for New Delhi. India simply cannot
afford to ignore Iran and end up losing its key
connectivity node, Chabahar.
The immutable fact: everyone needs and wants Iran
connectivity. For obvious reasons, since the Persian
empire, this is the privileged hub for all Central
Asian trade routes.
On top of it, Iran for China is a matter of
national security. China is heavily invested in
Iran’s energy industry. All bilateral trade will be
settled in yuan or in a basket of currencies
bypassing the US dollar.
US neocons, meanwhile, still dream of what the
Cheney regime was aiming at in the past decade:
regime change in Iran leading to the US dominating
the Caspian Sea as a springboard to Central Asia,
only one step away from Xinjiang and weaponization
of anti-China sentiment. It could be seen as a New
Silk Road in reverse to disrupt the Chinese vision.
Battle of the Ages
A new book,
The Impact of China’s Belt and Road Initiative,
by Jeremy Garlick of the University of Economics in
Prague, carries the merit of admitting that, “making
sense” of Belt & Road “is extremely difficult.”
This is an extremely serious attempt to theorize
Belt & Road’s immense complexity – especially
considering China’s flexible, syncretic approach to
policymaking, quite bewildering for Westerners. To
reach his goal, Garlick gets into Tang Shiping’s
social evolution paradigm, delves into neo-Gramscian
hegemony, and dissects the concept of “offensive
mercantilism” – all that as part of an effort in
“complex eclecticism.”
The contrast with the pedestrian Belt & Road
demonization narrative emanating from US “analysts”
is glaring. The book tackles in detail the
multifaceted nature of Belt & Road’s
trans-regionalism as an evolving, organic process.
Imperial policymakers won’t bother to understand
how and why Belt & Road is setting a new global
paradigm. The NATO summit in London last month
offered a few pointers. NATO uncritically adopted
three US priorities: even more aggressive policy
towards Russia; containment of China (including
military surveillance); and militarization of space
– a spin-off from the 2002 Full Spectrum Dominance
doctrine.
So NATO will be drawn into the “Indo-Pacific”
strategy – which means containment of China. And as
NATO is the EU’s weaponized arm, that implies the US
interfering on how Europe does business with China –
at every level.
Retired US Army Colonel Lawrence Wilkerson, Colin
Powell’s chief of staff from 2001 to 2005, cuts to
the chase: “America exists today to make war. How
else do we interpret 19 straight years of war and no
end in sight? It’s part of who we are. It’s part of
what the American Empire is. We are going to lie,
cheat and steal, as Pompeo is doing right now, as
Trump is doing right now, as Esper is doing right
now … and a host of other members of my political
party, the Republicans, are doing right now. We are
going to lie, cheat and steal to do whatever it is
we have to do to continue this war complex. That’s
the truth of it. And that’s the agony of it.”
Moscow, Beijing and Tehran are fully aware of the
stakes. Diplomats and analysts are working on the
trend, for the trio, to evolve a concerted effort to
protect one another from all forms of hybrid war –
sanctions included – launched against each of them.
For the US, this is indeed an existential battle
– against the whole Eurasia integration process, the
New Silk Roads, the Russia-China strategic
partnership, those Russian hypersonic weapons mixed
with supple diplomacy, the profound disgust and
revolt against US policies all across the Global
South, the nearly inevitable collapse of the US
dollar. What’s certain is that the Empire won’t go
quietly into the night. We should all be ready for
the battle of the ages.
This article was
originally published by "Asia
Times" -
Do you agree or disagree? Post
your comment here
==See Also==