Decent Into Debacle
0 views
Skip to first unread message
Bill Totten
May 30, 2023, 9:02:04 AM5/30/23
to GoogleGroups
Decent Into Debacle
Pyrrhic Victories, Lies, and Strategic Miscalculations
by Alastair Crooke
https://strategic-culture.org (May 08 2023)
https://strategic-culture.org/wp-content/uploads/2023/05/pchelovod-gegemon-600x600.jpg
(c) Photo: SCF
China and Russia are joining hands militarily. This will portend a
strategic paradigm change that may force a US re-consideration of the
way ahead.
The sense that things are bad, and getting worse, is palpable. There
is an undeniable eschatological tint to today's zeitgeist. Spiralling
geo-political factors all suggest extreme turbulence ahead.
Biden and the Democrats discover - to their surprise - that they are
in a 'bind': Having thought to run in 2024 on 'the Biden economic
record', Biden's Team finds prospects dissolving in the face of
accelerating events.
And Ukraine - which was to be a precursor to the toppling of Russia
per se - looks more likely to descend into debacle. With defeat on two
fronts (the financial 'war' and diplomatic) already established, and
with the Ukrainian entity now incrementally atrophying {1} under
Russian military attrition on yet another front, Washington frets
whether or not to run a Ukrainian offensive {2} at all - fearing it
might seal a Ukrainian catastrophe.
Kiev hears Washington's equivocation on the likely outcome of the
Ukrainian offensive; Kiev understands too that this could mean
'curtains' for the Zelensky 'project' - were Biden to decide that it
is time to draw a line under it, and to complete the pivot to China.
It would mean literally 'the end' for most of the Kiev leadership.
The change in strategy is already evident: John Kirby (Sullivan's
spokesperson) has been brandishing highly exaggerated Russian losses
in Bakhmut/Artyomovsk. At the same time that he suggests that though
Russia somehow may seem to be 'winning', in reality, it has been
defeated. Blinken followed up on this theme the following day with
'Russia has failed in its objective to erase Ukraine', and therefore,
has 'lost' - having failed to achieve its objectives.
Clearly, Team Biden is falling back onto a Pyrrhic victory for Russia
'narrative', with Ukraine's survival cast as 'mission accomplished'.
The consequence was predictable: with a US 'exit' apparently looming,
some major provocation (that is, the drone attack on the Kremlin) was
to be expected. 'Someone' clearly is desperate to trigger a Russian
overreaction that would, in turn, force the West to move to full war
against Russia.
At the time of writing, the details of who might be responsible for
the Kremlin attack are unknown. There is however deep, passionate
anger in Russia. The Kremlin must acknowledge this public sentiment.
And there will be a response but, at the same time, Moscow will not
want to play into the provocateurs' agenda. (9 May marks the Russian
victory in the war against Nazi Germany. They will not want the day
disrupted).
Faced with a prospective Ukraine imbroglio; with inflation spiking; a
recession looming; a run on the banking system; and low poll ratings,
'Team Biden' seemingly has a plan. It is the re-making of Biden as a
'War President', through mobilising America to take-down China, whilst
the Establishment believes America may still have the (conventional
military) edge. The Pentagon 'war-gaming' reportedly implies the US
has a chance before China becomes fully war-prepared.
Seems bizarre? Well, the other 'fronts' (inflation, the financial
bubble, recession, unaffordable medication and education) simply have
NO solution. They are deep structural problems. America today is a
place where most everyone recognizes the problems, but where veto
power, entrenched interests, and 'Uniparty' domination in Congress
forecloses on any attempted reform. Trump tried to break the stasis
but failed. Biden would fail, too, if he tried. So, if solving
America's problems is 'the problem', then becoming a 'War President'
conceivably could be seen as the 'solution'.
Of course, since Western societies today cannot look truth in the eye,
the West must emerge as the 'victim' of events and not the author of
its plight; thus paving the justification for war. And to ensure this
narrative sticks in the public domain, preparatory warning shots have
been fired towards the mass media to 'stay on team'.
"Great Power rivalry, and the competition for diminishing resources -
are but old realities reborn", Robert Kaplan warns {3}. "Their return
is the revenant of history that now defines a present of increasing
peril and uncertainty".
"The world situation is similar to that in the run-up to 1914. New
technologies have not overcome rivalry over scarce natural resources,
only shifted its focus", Philosopher John Gray writes {4}.
A new version of the late-19th-century Great Game is afoot. The two
world wars were in part driven by a need for oil. Western societies'
belief that options can always be expanded by human agency has been a
central feature of the western political project - and of progressive
liberalism too, writes {5} Professor Helen Thompson.
She continues:
... missing is the fact that technology cannot create energy [at least
of the type that modern society needs]. This human agency conviction
has long proved overly sanguine. Those who assume that the political
world can be reconstructed by the efforts of human Will, have never
before had to bet so heavily on technology over [fossil] energy - as
the driver of our material advancement.
Aahh - Professor Thompson lets the cat out of the bag. This hugely
risky 'war bet' - that is, that our complex societies can be
increasingly run on Green Technology, rather than '19th Century
natural resources' - is a gamble, brought on, Thompson suggests, "by
an underlying mood of existential dread, a nagging suspicion that our
civilisation may destroy itself, as so many others have done in the
past". (Hence the impulse to reassert domination - even at the price
of accelerating a possible Western self-suicide).
Her point is that the general cultural zeitgeist is trending toward
the hopeless and nihilistic. Yes - but who was responsible for the
West needing to place this bet for its future on technology over
energy? Europe had a cheap, reliable supply of energy until it threw
in its hand with the US and European neo-cons' plans.
The Western 'golden age' was tied to zero interest rates and zero
inflation. There were decades of near-zero inflation precisely because
of cheap manufactures coming from China and cheap energy from Russia.
Now the West faces the demon of inflation and higher interest rates
ravaging its financial system. It was its choice.
Oh yes; the 'narrative', as Robert Kaplan explains {6}, is that "fate
is ultimately in the hands of human agency. But human agency need not
have positive outcomes. Individuals such as Putin and Xi are human
agents, who have caused a vast and bloody war in Ukraine - and are
driving Asia toward a high-end military conflict over Taiwan". Oh - so
Ukraine and Taiwan have nothing to do with the neo-con project to
extend US hegemony into a new era?
Unable to address issues honestly, this collective {7} of Western
intellectuals base the justification for a future China war on the
premise that Putin, without due cause, simply chose to invade Ukraine
on 24 February 2022 and that Xi is guilty of the intent to invade
Taiwan - for which the West must properly respond by 'maximally'
stockpiling weapons in Taiwan.
This justification is as mendacious as was the justification for the Iraq War.
Preparations for this war are ramping up: More weapons in Taiwan; US
Special Forces conducting exercises for their infiltration into Taiwan
in the wake of any Chinese take-over (presumably to launch a guerrilla
insurgency). And as Andrew Korybko relates {8}, the US is rounding up
allies in the Asia Pacific: South Korea has authorised nuclear-armed
US submarines to dock at its ports; AUKUS is being strengthened; Japan
is unofficially aboard; and Indonesia and the Philippines are under US
pressure to do their part.
In counterpoint to the usual playbook of rounding up allies ahead of a
possible conflict, the EU High Representative, Josep Borrell, is
proposing that the EU bloc's navies patrol the Taiwan Strait {9}. This
came just several weeks after Nato Secretary-General Stoltenberg
declared {10} that "We are now stepping up our cooperation with our
partners in the Indo-Pacific: Japan, South Korea, New Zealand, and
Australia".
"The indisputable trend is that the US' European partners are poised
to play a larger military role in the region, including a provocative
one if they end up patrolling the Taiwan Strait", Korybko writes.
The EU's Von der Leyen and the EU is involved too - her name was
mentioned three times in Jake Sullivan's 'New Washington Consensus'
speech {11} in which the entire trend of policy, since the Reagan
years, is scheduled to be reversed - from a return to protectionism;
to central government intervention in support of industrial policy; to
a bold investment in capacity-building; 'resilience' and the
re-appropriation of internal supply chains.
This is not however a true blueprint for reforming the US economy -
though it is billed as such. True reform would require huge structural
change. It is all about re-orientating the economy for a possible
conventional war with China. (One lesson from the Ukraine conflict has
been that industrial capacity matters). It is likely too, a pretext
for increased fiscal spending (money printing) in the run-up to the
2024 Election.
Inevitably, those in the EU who are allied with the German 'Greens'
and Von der Leyen are in ecstasy. Officials in Brussels were talking
about the "Biden-Von der Leyen ticket" (as if she were a US
Vice-Presidential candidate on the Democratic 'ticket'!), and gushing
about a US-EU power alliance extending up to 2028!
What to make of these shifts? To repeat: Biden is in a 'bind' and his
Team is floundering. It is hugely premature for the White House to
call 'mission accomplished' on Ukraine - but what else can they do?
War with China will not be with China alone, but likely will be with
Russia too. This surely was the essence {12} of the Chinese Defence
Minister's four-day visit to Moscow (including a personal session with
Putin). The message was clear enough: China and Russia are 'joining
hands militarily'. This will portend a strategic paradigm change that
may well force a US re-consideration of the way ahead - or not.
Links:
{1} https://www.military.com/daily-news/2023/04/26/russian-military-still-formidable-threat-despite-damaged-ground-forces-defense-officials-say.html
{2} https://www.politico.eu/article/ukraine-war-russia-coming-counteroffensive-hinge/
{3} https://magazine.newstatesman.com/2023/04/26/the-new-age-of-tragedy/content.html
{4} https://www.newstatesman.com/ideas/2023/04/new-age-tragedy-china-food-europe-energy-robert-kaplan-helen-thompson-john-gray
{5} https://www.newstatesman.com/ideas/2023/04/new-age-tragedy-china-food-europe-energy-robert-kaplan-helen-thompson-john-gray
{6} https://www.newstatesman.com/ideas/2023/04/new-age-tragedy-china-food-europe-energy-robert-kaplan-helen-thompson-john-gray
{7} https://magazine.newstatesman.com/2023/04/26/the-new-age-of-tragedy/content.html
{8} https://korybko.substack.com/p/the-us-is-rounding-up-allies-ahead
{9} https://www.rt.com/news/575217-borrell-eu-naval-patrol/
{10} https://asia.nikkei.com/Politics/International-relations/NATO-pledges-involvement-in-Indo-Pacific-with-eye-on-China
{11} https://asia.nikkei.com/Politics/International-relations/NATO-pledges-involvement-in-Indo-Pacific-with-eye-on-China
{12} https://www.globaltimes.cn/page/202304/1289213.shtml
_____
Alastair Crooke is a former British diplomat, founder and director of
the Beirut-based Conflicts Forum. Also see
https://strategic-culture.org/contributors/alastair-crooke/#articles.
The views of individual contributors do not necessarily represent
those of the Strategic Culture Foundation.
https://strategic-culture.org/news/2023/05/08/decent-into-debacle-pyrrhic-victories-lies-and-strategic-miscalculations/
TO POST A COMMENT, OR TO READ COMMENTS POSTED BY OTHERS, please click
the appropriate link at the top or bottom of
https://billtotten.wpcomstaging.com/2023/05/30/decent-into-debacle/
Pyrrhic Victories, Lies, and Strategic Miscalculations
by Alastair Crooke
https://strategic-culture.org (May 08 2023)
https://strategic-culture.org/wp-content/uploads/2023/05/pchelovod-gegemon-600x600.jpg
(c) Photo: SCF
China and Russia are joining hands militarily. This will portend a
strategic paradigm change that may force a US re-consideration of the
way ahead.
The sense that things are bad, and getting worse, is palpable. There
is an undeniable eschatological tint to today's zeitgeist. Spiralling
geo-political factors all suggest extreme turbulence ahead.
Biden and the Democrats discover - to their surprise - that they are
in a 'bind': Having thought to run in 2024 on 'the Biden economic
record', Biden's Team finds prospects dissolving in the face of
accelerating events.
And Ukraine - which was to be a precursor to the toppling of Russia
per se - looks more likely to descend into debacle. With defeat on two
fronts (the financial 'war' and diplomatic) already established, and
with the Ukrainian entity now incrementally atrophying {1} under
Russian military attrition on yet another front, Washington frets
whether or not to run a Ukrainian offensive {2} at all - fearing it
might seal a Ukrainian catastrophe.
Kiev hears Washington's equivocation on the likely outcome of the
Ukrainian offensive; Kiev understands too that this could mean
'curtains' for the Zelensky 'project' - were Biden to decide that it
is time to draw a line under it, and to complete the pivot to China.
It would mean literally 'the end' for most of the Kiev leadership.
The change in strategy is already evident: John Kirby (Sullivan's
spokesperson) has been brandishing highly exaggerated Russian losses
in Bakhmut/Artyomovsk. At the same time that he suggests that though
Russia somehow may seem to be 'winning', in reality, it has been
defeated. Blinken followed up on this theme the following day with
'Russia has failed in its objective to erase Ukraine', and therefore,
has 'lost' - having failed to achieve its objectives.
Clearly, Team Biden is falling back onto a Pyrrhic victory for Russia
'narrative', with Ukraine's survival cast as 'mission accomplished'.
The consequence was predictable: with a US 'exit' apparently looming,
some major provocation (that is, the drone attack on the Kremlin) was
to be expected. 'Someone' clearly is desperate to trigger a Russian
overreaction that would, in turn, force the West to move to full war
against Russia.
At the time of writing, the details of who might be responsible for
the Kremlin attack are unknown. There is however deep, passionate
anger in Russia. The Kremlin must acknowledge this public sentiment.
And there will be a response but, at the same time, Moscow will not
want to play into the provocateurs' agenda. (9 May marks the Russian
victory in the war against Nazi Germany. They will not want the day
disrupted).
Faced with a prospective Ukraine imbroglio; with inflation spiking; a
recession looming; a run on the banking system; and low poll ratings,
'Team Biden' seemingly has a plan. It is the re-making of Biden as a
'War President', through mobilising America to take-down China, whilst
the Establishment believes America may still have the (conventional
military) edge. The Pentagon 'war-gaming' reportedly implies the US
has a chance before China becomes fully war-prepared.
Seems bizarre? Well, the other 'fronts' (inflation, the financial
bubble, recession, unaffordable medication and education) simply have
NO solution. They are deep structural problems. America today is a
place where most everyone recognizes the problems, but where veto
power, entrenched interests, and 'Uniparty' domination in Congress
forecloses on any attempted reform. Trump tried to break the stasis
but failed. Biden would fail, too, if he tried. So, if solving
America's problems is 'the problem', then becoming a 'War President'
conceivably could be seen as the 'solution'.
Of course, since Western societies today cannot look truth in the eye,
the West must emerge as the 'victim' of events and not the author of
its plight; thus paving the justification for war. And to ensure this
narrative sticks in the public domain, preparatory warning shots have
been fired towards the mass media to 'stay on team'.
"Great Power rivalry, and the competition for diminishing resources -
are but old realities reborn", Robert Kaplan warns {3}. "Their return
is the revenant of history that now defines a present of increasing
peril and uncertainty".
"The world situation is similar to that in the run-up to 1914. New
technologies have not overcome rivalry over scarce natural resources,
only shifted its focus", Philosopher John Gray writes {4}.
A new version of the late-19th-century Great Game is afoot. The two
world wars were in part driven by a need for oil. Western societies'
belief that options can always be expanded by human agency has been a
central feature of the western political project - and of progressive
liberalism too, writes {5} Professor Helen Thompson.
She continues:
... missing is the fact that technology cannot create energy [at least
of the type that modern society needs]. This human agency conviction
has long proved overly sanguine. Those who assume that the political
world can be reconstructed by the efforts of human Will, have never
before had to bet so heavily on technology over [fossil] energy - as
the driver of our material advancement.
Aahh - Professor Thompson lets the cat out of the bag. This hugely
risky 'war bet' - that is, that our complex societies can be
increasingly run on Green Technology, rather than '19th Century
natural resources' - is a gamble, brought on, Thompson suggests, "by
an underlying mood of existential dread, a nagging suspicion that our
civilisation may destroy itself, as so many others have done in the
past". (Hence the impulse to reassert domination - even at the price
of accelerating a possible Western self-suicide).
Her point is that the general cultural zeitgeist is trending toward
the hopeless and nihilistic. Yes - but who was responsible for the
West needing to place this bet for its future on technology over
energy? Europe had a cheap, reliable supply of energy until it threw
in its hand with the US and European neo-cons' plans.
The Western 'golden age' was tied to zero interest rates and zero
inflation. There were decades of near-zero inflation precisely because
of cheap manufactures coming from China and cheap energy from Russia.
Now the West faces the demon of inflation and higher interest rates
ravaging its financial system. It was its choice.
Oh yes; the 'narrative', as Robert Kaplan explains {6}, is that "fate
is ultimately in the hands of human agency. But human agency need not
have positive outcomes. Individuals such as Putin and Xi are human
agents, who have caused a vast and bloody war in Ukraine - and are
driving Asia toward a high-end military conflict over Taiwan". Oh - so
Ukraine and Taiwan have nothing to do with the neo-con project to
extend US hegemony into a new era?
Unable to address issues honestly, this collective {7} of Western
intellectuals base the justification for a future China war on the
premise that Putin, without due cause, simply chose to invade Ukraine
on 24 February 2022 and that Xi is guilty of the intent to invade
Taiwan - for which the West must properly respond by 'maximally'
stockpiling weapons in Taiwan.
This justification is as mendacious as was the justification for the Iraq War.
Preparations for this war are ramping up: More weapons in Taiwan; US
Special Forces conducting exercises for their infiltration into Taiwan
in the wake of any Chinese take-over (presumably to launch a guerrilla
insurgency). And as Andrew Korybko relates {8}, the US is rounding up
allies in the Asia Pacific: South Korea has authorised nuclear-armed
US submarines to dock at its ports; AUKUS is being strengthened; Japan
is unofficially aboard; and Indonesia and the Philippines are under US
pressure to do their part.
In counterpoint to the usual playbook of rounding up allies ahead of a
possible conflict, the EU High Representative, Josep Borrell, is
proposing that the EU bloc's navies patrol the Taiwan Strait {9}. This
came just several weeks after Nato Secretary-General Stoltenberg
declared {10} that "We are now stepping up our cooperation with our
partners in the Indo-Pacific: Japan, South Korea, New Zealand, and
Australia".
"The indisputable trend is that the US' European partners are poised
to play a larger military role in the region, including a provocative
one if they end up patrolling the Taiwan Strait", Korybko writes.
The EU's Von der Leyen and the EU is involved too - her name was
mentioned three times in Jake Sullivan's 'New Washington Consensus'
speech {11} in which the entire trend of policy, since the Reagan
years, is scheduled to be reversed - from a return to protectionism;
to central government intervention in support of industrial policy; to
a bold investment in capacity-building; 'resilience' and the
re-appropriation of internal supply chains.
This is not however a true blueprint for reforming the US economy -
though it is billed as such. True reform would require huge structural
change. It is all about re-orientating the economy for a possible
conventional war with China. (One lesson from the Ukraine conflict has
been that industrial capacity matters). It is likely too, a pretext
for increased fiscal spending (money printing) in the run-up to the
2024 Election.
Inevitably, those in the EU who are allied with the German 'Greens'
and Von der Leyen are in ecstasy. Officials in Brussels were talking
about the "Biden-Von der Leyen ticket" (as if she were a US
Vice-Presidential candidate on the Democratic 'ticket'!), and gushing
about a US-EU power alliance extending up to 2028!
What to make of these shifts? To repeat: Biden is in a 'bind' and his
Team is floundering. It is hugely premature for the White House to
call 'mission accomplished' on Ukraine - but what else can they do?
War with China will not be with China alone, but likely will be with
Russia too. This surely was the essence {12} of the Chinese Defence
Minister's four-day visit to Moscow (including a personal session with
Putin). The message was clear enough: China and Russia are 'joining
hands militarily'. This will portend a strategic paradigm change that
may well force a US re-consideration of the way ahead - or not.
Links:
{1} https://www.military.com/daily-news/2023/04/26/russian-military-still-formidable-threat-despite-damaged-ground-forces-defense-officials-say.html
{2} https://www.politico.eu/article/ukraine-war-russia-coming-counteroffensive-hinge/
{3} https://magazine.newstatesman.com/2023/04/26/the-new-age-of-tragedy/content.html
{4} https://www.newstatesman.com/ideas/2023/04/new-age-tragedy-china-food-europe-energy-robert-kaplan-helen-thompson-john-gray
{5} https://www.newstatesman.com/ideas/2023/04/new-age-tragedy-china-food-europe-energy-robert-kaplan-helen-thompson-john-gray
{6} https://www.newstatesman.com/ideas/2023/04/new-age-tragedy-china-food-europe-energy-robert-kaplan-helen-thompson-john-gray
{7} https://magazine.newstatesman.com/2023/04/26/the-new-age-of-tragedy/content.html
{8} https://korybko.substack.com/p/the-us-is-rounding-up-allies-ahead
{9} https://www.rt.com/news/575217-borrell-eu-naval-patrol/
{10} https://asia.nikkei.com/Politics/International-relations/NATO-pledges-involvement-in-Indo-Pacific-with-eye-on-China
{11} https://asia.nikkei.com/Politics/International-relations/NATO-pledges-involvement-in-Indo-Pacific-with-eye-on-China
{12} https://www.globaltimes.cn/page/202304/1289213.shtml
_____
Alastair Crooke is a former British diplomat, founder and director of
the Beirut-based Conflicts Forum. Also see
https://strategic-culture.org/contributors/alastair-crooke/#articles.
The views of individual contributors do not necessarily represent
those of the Strategic Culture Foundation.
https://strategic-culture.org/news/2023/05/08/decent-into-debacle-pyrrhic-victories-lies-and-strategic-miscalculations/
TO POST A COMMENT, OR TO READ COMMENTS POSTED BY OTHERS, please click
the appropriate link at the top or bottom of
https://billtotten.wpcomstaging.com/2023/05/30/decent-into-debacle/
Reply all
Reply to author
Forward
0 new messages