LT: CCP’s 3-Battle Scheme: Eroding U.S. Power Before Taiwan Strait Clash
G. Lailari
CCP’s 3-Battle Scheme: Eroding U.S. Power Before Taiwan Strait Clash
龙凯锋：美国是大号的蒋介石，三大战役后美元将成废纸！
The United States is a larger version of Chiang Kai-shek; after the “Three Major Battles”, the U.S. dollar will become worthless
By Long Kaifeng, 2023-04-09, www.kunlunce.com
Yesterday, I wrote an article titled “Along with intense international struggles, recent events are numerous, and the U.S.’s downfall is inevitable.” This piece sparked controversy among many readers. Some think I’m boasting too much, and the idea of the U.S. disintegrating is unrealistic.
I’ve consistently argued that the U.S. is essentially a larger version of Chiang Kai-shek. Why? Because Chiang Kai-shek’s key advisors and decision-makers were Americans. The U.S. invested in and armed Chiang, controlling his economic decisions. So, when we fought against Chiang Kai-shek, we were also battling against American consultants.
01 U.S. Post-Cold War Strategy
In 1991, after the dissolution of the Warsaw Pact and the Soviet Union, the U.S. began NATO’s eastward expansion, establishing its unipolar global hegemony. It’s crucial to understand that NATO’s eastward push was not about territorial acquisition but to establish a base for the U.S. dollar hegemony.
Where is the foundation of the U.S. dollar’s dominance? It’s in three regions: Europe, where European goods are anchored to the U.S. dollar; the Middle East, where oil and gas are dependent on the U.S. dollar; and Asia, especially China, Japan, and South Korea, where goods are linked to the U.S. dollar.
So, we saw the U.S. leading NATO in its eastward expansion: first through the Kosovo war, moving American influence into Eastern Europe, previously under Soviet sway; second, through the Afghan war, pushing U.S. influence into Central Asia and posing a threat to China and Russia; third, through the Iraq war, marking U.S. expansion in the Middle East, and the Syrian war, continuing American dominance there. The fourth step involved the Island Chain Strategy, growing U.S. influence in Asia. Through all this, the U.S. set up its dollar hegemony, building a financial system based on dollar pricing and settlement.
02 Three Major Battles to End U.S. Dollar Dominance
We once ended the reign of the Chiang Kai-shek dynasty through three significant battles in China. After these battles, the Kuomintang-controlled territories experienced financial crises, with their currency depreciating to worthlessness.
On a global scale, three major battles are in Europe, the Middle East, and Asia respectively. The Ukrainian war represents the European front; the Middle Eastern battle will be a conflict between Israel and Palestine, and the Asian theater might be the second Korean war. After these battles, the U.S. military and dollar dominance established post-Cold War will fall. The U.S. dollar will depreciate, becoming worthless—a trend seen as inevitable.
Given the current situation, Russia seems poised to win in Ukraine. Reconciliation between Saudi Arabia and Iran and unity in the Arab world are crucial to counter U.S.-Israeli dominance. In East Asia, North Korea is ready, possessing nuclear capabilities and openly challenging U.S. dominance.
03 High Probability of U.S. Disintegration
To say the U.S. will disintegrate isn’t just boasting. It’s a deduction based on the Chiang Kai-shek reference. As these three major battles unfold, the U.S.’s dominance in Europe, the Middle East, and East Asia becomes more precarious. The U.S.’s prosperity hinges on the dollar’s supremacy. Without it, internal conflicts will rise, leading to disintegration. The U.S.’s continued overseas military dominance will determine the dollar’s power.
Due to these battles in Europe, the Middle East, and Asia, the U.S. is showing signs of weakening. The bankruptcy of the U.S. Silicon Valley Bank, the global move away from the dollar, and divestment from U.S. debts all point to the dollar’s decline. Once the U.S. dollar loses its dominance, the flood of printed dollars returning will make it worthless. This will heighten domestic conflicts, causing disintegration. Trump’s legal issues highlight the growing internal divisions in the United States.
As the U.S. military and dollar dominance wanes, allies will have to decide how much they rely on the U.S., which may result in the complete failure of the Biden administration’s alliance strategy.
Whether or not one believes in the U.S. disintegrating is irrelevant. Even if it does, it won’t be because of mere claims. We’ll wait and see.
龙凯锋：三大战役战略目标，是废北约、废美元和废岛链三大霸权
Strategic Objectives of “Three Major Battles”:
Abolish NATO, US Dollar, and Island-Chain Dominance
By Long Kaifeng, 2023-06-23, www.kunlunce.com
Finally, Blinken has visited China. I use the term “finally” because, as the U.S. Secretary of State, how challenging must it have been for Blinken to decide to visit China? The challenges stem from the U.S.’s belief in its unmatched superpower status, hence it doesn’t see a need to visit China. Secondly, the U.S. is rallying its so-called allies to suppress and threaten China. Thirdly, China’s stance towards the U.S. is clear: if a wolf approaches, we have a shotgun ready; if a friend comes, fine wine awaits. Given Blinken’s posture as seeming to play a wolf, a friendly visit to China seems out of place.
So, why did Blinken eventually decide on visiting China? Circumstances forced him. What were these circumstances? The three major battles.
The three major battles refer to the European, Middle Eastern, and East Asian battles, each targeting the U.S.’s strategic focuses: Europe, the Middle East, and East Asia. The U.S.’s European dominance hinges on NATO, so the goal of the European Battle is to dismantle NATO; the Middle East underpins the U.S. dollar, so the Middle Eastern Battle seeks to dethrone the U.S. dollar; and the Island Chain Strategy is central to U.S.’s grip on Asia, making the East Asian Battle’s aim to shatter this strategy.
The Ukrainian war is nearing its conclusion. Ukraine’s significant counteroffensive marks its last stand. This prompted Zelensky to warn: if they falter, either NATO crumbles, or the U.S. engages with Russia. A U.S.-Russia confrontation is unlikely as the U.S. values its survival and wouldn’t stake its existence for Ukraine. As I’ve pointed out, if the U.S. can abandon Afghanistan, why not Ukraine? Should the U.S. forsake Ukraine and Russia and Europe shape a new security framework, NATO would inevitably unravel.
Losing NATO, its principal hatchetman, would see the U.S.’s global dominance crumble dramatically. This provides the backdrop to Blinken’s visit to China. On one side, the U.S. hopes to sow discord between China and Russia through diplomacy, relieving NATO’s strategic pressure. Concurrently, it’s pre-empting a resolution with China before its European influence wanes, aiming to avert the collapse of its Island Chain Strategy. Otherwise, the U.S. might be cornered into retreating to the Americas, facing hard times.
The second reason for Blinken’s visit to China is the looming crisis of U.S. control in the Middle East, pushing the U.S. to make concessions. The Middle East has witnessed three significant shifts: Saudi Arabia and Iran reconciling, which spurred a broader Arab nation unity; Syria’s reintegration into the Arab League, stabilizing the nation; and the realization of Palestinian statehood. The next chapter involves Israel’s relations with Arab countries, possibly necessitating a military resolution.
Globally, the U.S. relies on three key allies: the UK in Europe, Israel in the Middle East, and Japan in Asia. Neutralizing these allies is pivotal to dismantling U.S. global dominance, crucial for world peace. Strategies to counter the UK include invoking the Falklands War, supporting Spain’s claim over the Strait of Gibraltar, and endorsing the independence of Scotland and Northern Ireland. For Israel, it’s about backing Palestine and its rights. Regarding Japan, it entails enforcing post-WWII accords and championing the Ryukyu Islands’ independence.
The Middle East, the linchpin of the U.S. dollar and its hegemony, is gradually moving away from the dollar. This shift threatens the U.S. dollar’s foundation, which is tied to its control over oil trade and pricing. If countries abandon the dollar and bypass U.S. oil futures, the dollar’s pricing power diminishes, undermining U.S. dominance. Blinken’s visit hopes to stabilize U.S.-China relations, seeking through diplomacy to curtail China’s close ties with Middle Eastern nations, but this is almost impossible.
The third reason for Blinken’s visit to China revolves around stabilizing Asian relations, staving off a potential U.S.-China strategic clash. With two major battles already unfolding, a third front in Asia would overextend the United States. Hence, stabilizing relations with China now might give the U.S. room to focus on Europe and the Middle East. However, I am afraid this is the United States’ wishful thinking.
In summary, ‘You fight yours, I fight mine’ is the essence of our strategy and the key to seizing the strategic initiative. We know very well that the abolishing of the island chains in the Pacific, the abolishing of NATO in Europe, and the abolishing of the dollar hegemony in the Middle East are one and the same. As to how we prioritize them, it depends on the situation on the battlefield. If NATO is dismantled, wouldn’t it be easy to neutralize the Island Chain Strategy? And if the U.S. dollar’s reign ends, how long can the U.S. hold on?
(作者昆仑策特约评论员)
(The author is Special Commentator of Kunlunce Strategy Research Institute)